Creating safer workplaces: assessing the determinants and role of safety climate

PROBLEM: Although there has been considerable interest in safety climate, relatively little attention has been given to the factors that determine safety climate or to testing the hypothesized mediating role of safety climate with respect to safety-related outcomes. METHOD: Questionnaire responses were obtained from 2,208 employees of a large national retail chain in 21 different locations. RESULTS: After controlling for demographic variables, three factors: environmental conditions, safety-related policies and programs, and general organizational climate, accounted for 55% of the variance in perceived safety climate. Interestingly, organizational climate made a significant contribution to safety climate, even after controlling for the other more safety-relevant variables. Partial correlations showed that safety policies and programs had the largest observed correlation with safety climate, followed by two of the dimensions of organizational climate (communication and organizational support). Using Baron and Kenny's (J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51 (1986) 1173) procedures, the principal effects of the various work situation factors on perceived safety at work were found to be direct rather than mediated by safety climate. Safety climate influenced perceived safety at work, but its role as a mediator was limited. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: These results are discussed in terms of other recent findings on safety climate and the growing interest in understanding management and organizational factors in the context of workplace safety.     

The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior

Relatively little previous research has investigated the meechanisms by which safety climate affects safety behavior. The current study examined the effects of general organizational climate on safety climate and safety performance. As expected, general organizational climate exerted a significant impact on safety climate, and safety climate in turn was related to self-reports of compliance with safety regulations and procedures as well as participation in safety-related activities within the workplace. The effect of general organizational climate on safety performance was mediated by safety climate, while the effect of safety climate on safety performance was partially mediated by safety knowledge and motivation.     

Exploratory analysis of the safety climate and safety behavior relationship

Problem: Safety climate refers to the degree to which employees believe true priority is given to organizational safety performance, and its measurement is thought to provide an “early warning” of potential safety system failure(s). However, researchers have struggled over the last 25 years to find empirical evidence to demonstrate actual links between safety climate and safety performance.Method: A safety climate measure was distributed to manufacturing employees at the beginning of a behavioral safety initiative and redistributed one year later.Results: Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that perceptions of the importance of safety training were predictive of actual levels of safety behavior. The results also demonstrate that the magnitude of change in perceptual safety climate scores will not necessarily match actual changes (r=0.56, n.s.) in employee's safety behavior.Discussion: This study obtained empirical links between safety climate scores and actual safety behavior. Confirming and contradicting findings within the extant safety climate literature, the results strongly suggest that the hypothesized climate-behavior-accident path is not as clear cut as commonly assumed.Summary: A statistical link between safety climate perceptions and safety behavior will be obtained when sufficient behavioral data is collected.Impact on Industry: The study further supports the use of safety climate measures as useful diagnostic tools in ascertaining employee's perceptions of the way that safety is being operationalized.     

A short scale for measuring safety climate

A 6-item measure that assesses global work safety climate was validated using multiple samples each from a hospital and a nuclear energy population. Across all 14 samples the 6-item measure had acceptable internal consistency. The measure was associated with better adherence to safe work practices, reduced exposure to environmental stressors, the presence of more safety policies and procedures, a positive general organizational climate, and decreased accidents. As evidence for discriminant validity, safety climate was unrelated to most demographic measures and had relatively small relationships with sleeping problems and negative mood. Evidence suggests that this measure is a reliable and valid way to assess global safety climate.     

Safety leadership and safety performance in petrochemical industries: The mediating role of safety climate

This study examines the relationship among three latent variables: safety leadership, safety climate, and safety performance. Employees from 23 plants in seven departments of a petrochemical company in central Taiwan completed a questionnaire survey. From this, a sample of 521 responses was randomly selected. Structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis using the AMOS 5.0 was employed to test the hypothesized model relating the above-mentioned variables. The results indicate that the model was supported, and that safety climate mediated the relationship between safety leadership and performance. Practical implications of these results for process safety management in the petrochemical industries are discussed.     

The predictive validity of safety climate

PROBLEM: Safety professionals have increasingly turned their attention to social science for insight into the causation of industrial accidents. One social construct, safety climate, has been examined by several researchers [Cooper, M. D., & Phillips, R. A. (2004). Exploratory analysis of the safety climate and safety behavior relationship. Journal of Safety Research, 35(5), 497-512; Gillen, M., Baltz, D., Gassel, M., Kirsch, L., & Vacarro, D. (2002). Perceived safety climate, job Demands, and coworker support among union and nonunion injured construction workers. Journal of Safety Research, 33(1), 33-51; Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. (2002). Safety climate and safety behaviour. Australian Journal of Management, 27, 66-76; Zohar, D. (2000). A group-level model of safety climate: Testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 587-596; Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships between organization and group-level climates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 616-628] who have documented its importance as a factor explaining the variation of safety-related outcomes (e.g., behavior, accidents). Researchers have developed instruments for measuring safety climate and have established some degree of psychometric reliability and validity. The problem, however, is that predictive validity has not been firmly established, which reduces the credibility of safety climate as a meaningful social construct. The research described in this article addresses this problem and provides additional support for safety climate as a viable construct and as a predictive indicator of safety-related outcomes. METHODS: This study used 292 employees at three locations of a heavy manufacturing organization to complete the 16 item Zohar Safety Climate Questionnaire (ZSCQ) [Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships between organization and group-level climates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 616-628]. In addition, safety behavior and accident experience data were collected for 5 months following the survey and were statistically analyzed (structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory factor analysis, etc.) to identify correlations, associations, internal consistency, and factorial structures. RESULTS: Results revealed that the ZSCQ: (a) was psychometrically reliable and valid, (b) served as an effective predictor of safety-related outcomes (behavior and accident experience), and (c) could be trimmed to an 11 item survey with little loss of explanatory power. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: Practitioners and researchers can use the ZSCQ with reasonable certainty of the questionnaire's reliability and validity. This provides a solid foundation for the development of meaningful organizational interventions and/or continued research into social factors affecting industrial accident experience.     

The influence of supervisor leadership practices and perceived group safety climate on employee safety performance

The current study investigates the influence of the leadership practices of first-line supervisors on the safety compliance and safety participation of the employees who work for them. Contingent reward and transformational leadership are examined under conditions of positive and non-positive group safety climate in both the manufacturing and constructions sectors. Using moderated regression models (Aguinis, 2004) results indicate that greater levels of transformational and contingent reward leadership are both associated with greater levels of safety compliance and safety participation behavior, however group safety climate moderates the leadership-safety compliance relationships. Under positive group safety climate conditions employee safety compliance behavior improves as supervisor’s leadership practices increase; under non-positive group safety compliance conditions there is no improvement in safety compliance with improvements in supervisor’s leadership practices. The results provide further support to the growing literature on the value of strong group safety climates for improving safety compliance behavior, as well as the value in improving the leadership practices of first-line supervisors.     

Attitude to safety rules and reflexivity as determinants of safety climate

IntroductionWe present two studies that focus on the relationship between safety rules and the safety climate. It is expected that a reasoned acceptance, namely one based on an understanding of the bases for the rules and a collective management of the rules, should benefit the climate. Method: In an initial study (N = 202) employees replied to a questionnaire that measured the safety climate, the level of the relationship with the safety rules, and the understanding of their bases. The results highlighted the fact that a reasoned acceptance of the rules is associated with an understanding of their bases and predicts the level of safety. In a second study (N = 258) employees replied to a questionnaire measuring team reflexivity, the safety climate, and the level of relationship with the safety rules. We observed that collective management of the rules mediated the relation between team reflexivity and the safety climate. Results: The results are discussed from the point of view of their practical implications. Developing safety climate requires that operators are trained to understand the basis of safety rules and team reflexivity.     

Comparing safety climate factors as predictors of work-related driving behavior

INTRODUCTION: Research suggests safety climate (SC) is a strong predictor of safety-related outcomes in organizations. This study explores the relationship between six SC dimensions and four aspects of work-related driving. METHOD: The SC factors measured were "communication and procedures," "work pressures," "relationships," "safety rules," "driver training," and "management commitment." The aspects of self-reported occupational driving measured were traffic violations, driver error, driving while distracted, and pre-trip vehicle maintenance. RESULTS: Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that the SC factors accounted for significant amounts of variance in all four aspects of work-related driving, over and above the control factors of age, sex, and work-related driving exposure. However, further investigation indicated certain SC factors (particularly safety rules, communication, and management commitment) were more strongly related to specific aspects of work-related driving behavior than others. Together, the SC factors were better able to predict self-reported distraction from the road than the other aspects of driving behavior measured. Implications for occupational safety, particularly for the management of work-related drivers are discussed.     

The association between subcontractor safety management programs and worker perceived safety climate in commercial construction projects

Problem: Safety management programs (SMPs) are designed to mitigate risk of workplace injuries and create a safe working climate. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the relationship between contractors’ SMPs and workers’ perceived safety climate and safety behaviors among small and medium-sized construction subcontractors. Methods: Subcontractor SMP scores on 18 organizational and project-level safety items were coded from subcontractors’ written safety programs and interviews. Workers completed surveys to report perceptions of their contractor’s safety climate and the safety behaviors of coworkers, crews, and themselves. The associations between SMP scores and safety climate and behavior scales were examined using Spearman correlation and hierarchical linear regression models (HLM). Results: Among 78 subcontractors working on large commercial construction projects, we found striking differences in SMP scores between small, medium, and large subcontractors (p < 0.001), related to a number of specific safety management practices. We observed only weak relationships between SMP scales and safety climate scores reported by 746 workers of these subcontractors (β = 0.09, p = 0.04 by HLM). We saw no differences in worker reported safety climate and safety behaviors by contractor size. Discussion: SMP only weakly predicted safety climate scales of subcontractors, yet there were large differences in the quality and content of SMPs by size of employers. Summary: Future work should determine the best way to measure safety performance of construction companies and determine the factors that can lead to improved safety performance of construction firms. Practical applications: Our simple assessment of common elements of safety management programs used document review and interviews with knowledgeable representatives. These methods identified specific safety management practices that differed between large and small employers. In order to improve construction safety, it is important to understand how best to measure safety performance in construction companies to gain knowledge for creating safer work environments.     

Predicting safety culture: the roles of employer, operations manager and safety professional

Introduction: This study explores predictive factors in safety culture. Method: In 2008, a sample 939 employees was drawn from 22 departments of a telecoms firm in five regions in central Taiwan. The sample completed a questionnaire containing four scales: the employer safety leadership scale, the operations manager safety leadership scale, the safety professional safety leadership scale, and the safety culture scale. The sample was then randomly split into two subsamples. One subsample was used for measures development, one for the empirical study. Results: A stepwise regression analysis found four factors with a significant impact on safety culture (R² = 0.337): safety informing by operations managers; safety caring by employers; and safety coordination and safety regulation by safety professionals. Safety informing by operations managers (ß = 0.213) was by far the most significant predictive factor. Impact on industry: The findings of this study provide a framework for promoting a positive safety culture at the group level.     

An empirical investigation of safety climate in container terminal operators

INTRODUCTION: This study empirically evaluates the crucial dimensions of safety climate from a container terminal operator's perspective, specifically in the Port of Kaohsiung. METHOD: Seven safety climate dimensions are identified based on factor analysis: (a) supervisor safety, (b) job safety, (c) coworkers' safety, (d) safety management, (e) safety training, (f) safety rules and special safety training, and (g) job pressure. Cluster analysis is subsequently performed to form worker groups. Respondents are categorized into four groups on the basis of their factor scores in safety climate dimensions: (a) safety management oriented terminal operators, (b) safety training and management oriented terminal operators, (c) job safety and supervisor safety oriented terminal operators, and (d) coworkers' safety oriented terminal operators. RESULTS: Results indicate that safety training and management oriented terminal operators have the best safety performance, followed by safety management oriented terminal operators, job safety and supervisor safety oriented terminal operators, and coworkers' safety oriented terminal operators. Theoretical and practical implications of the research findings are discussed.     

Psychosocial safety climate: Conceptual distinctiveness and effect on job demands and worker psychological health

Psychosocial safety climate is an emerging construct that refers to shared perceptions regarding policies, practices, and procedures for the protection of worker psychological health and safety. The purpose of the research was to: (1) demonstrate that psychosocial safety climate is a construct distinct from related climate measures (i.e., physical safety climate, team psychological safety, and perceived organizational support); and (2) test the proposition that organizational psychosocial safety climate determines work conditions (i.e., job demands) and subsequently worker psychological health. We used samples from two different cultures; an Australian sample (N = 126 workers in 16 teams within a primary health care organization) and a Malaysian sample (N = 180 workers in 31 teams from different organizations and diverse industries). In both samples confirmatory factor analysis verified that psychosocial safety climate is a construct distinct from related climate measures. Using hierarchical linear modeling, psychosocial safety climate was superior to other team level climate measures in its negative relationship to both job demands and psychological health problems. Results supported a mediation process, psychosocial safety climate → job demands → psychological health problems, corroborating psychosocial safety climate as a preeminent stress risk factor, and an efficient target for intervention. We found both physical and psychosocial safety climates were stronger in the Australian, compared with the Malaysian work context. Levels of psychosocial safety climate were significantly lower than those of physical safety climate in both countries indicating a ‘universal’ lack of attention to workplace psychological health.     

Safety climate factors, group differences and safety behaviour in road construction

This study determines the factor structure of safety climate within a road construction organization using a modified version of the safety climate questionnaire (SCQ). It also investigates the relationship between safety climate and safety performance. The SCQ was administered to 192 employees from two districts and in two job categories — construction and maintenance. A behavioural observation measure of safety performance was also developed. Factor analysis derived six factors, which were similar to those obtained in an earlier study using the SCQ. Differences in the safety climate of job sub-groups were found on two of the factors. No differences between the two districts were found. No relationship was found between safety climate and the safety performance measure. While identical safety climate factors cannot apply to all organizations, some general safety climate factors may emerge. Discussion focuses upon the measurement of safety climate.     

Evaluation of a healthcare safety climate measurement tool

Problem

Psychometrically validated measurement tools are needed to evaluate an organization's safety climate. In 2000, Gershon and colleagues published a new healthcare safety climate measurement tool to determine its relationship to safe work behavior (Gershon, R., Karkashian, C., Grosch, J., Murphy, L., Escamilla-Cejudo, A., Flanagan, P., et al. (2000). Hospital safety climate and its relationship with safe work practices and workplace exposure incidents. American Journal of Infection Control, 28, 211-21). The present study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Gershon tool when modified to address respiratory rather than bloodborne pathogen exposures.

Method

Medical practitioners, nurses, and nurse aides (n = 460) were surveyed using the modified Gershon tool. Data were analyzed by factor analysis and psychometric properties of the tool evaluated.

Results

Eight safety climate dimensions were extracted from 25 items (Cronbach's alpha range: 0.62 - 0.88). Factor extractions and psychometric properties were reasonably consistent with those of the Gershon tool.

Impact on Industry

The Gershon safety climate tool appears to have sufficient reliability and validity for use by healthcare decision makers as an indicator of employee perceptions of safety in their institution.     

A cross-validation of safety climate scale using confirmatory factor analytic approach

PROBLEM: Given the lack of a consistent factor structure of safety climate, this study tested the stability of a factor structure of a safety climate scale developed through an extensive literature review using confirmatory factor analytic approach and cross-validation. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of 722 U.S. grain industry workers participated in the questionnaire survey. RESULTS: The safety climate scale developed through the generation of an item pool based on a table of specifications, subsequent scientific item reduction procedures, reviews from experts, and pilot test yielded adequate reliabilities for each dimension. Each item showed proper discriminative power based on both internal and external criteria. Criterion validity was manifested by the significant positive correlation of the scale with five criteria. Evidence of construct validity was provided by both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Both calibration and validation samples supported a consistent factor structure. Management commitment and supervisor support were found to influence other dimensions of safety climate. DISCUSSION: This study provides an insight into the primary reason why previous attempts have failed to find a consistent factor structure of safety climate: No specification of the influence of management commitment and supervisor support on other dimensions of safety in their models. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The findings of this study provide a framework upon which accident prevention efforts can be effectively organized and underscore the importance of management commitment and supervisor support as they affect employee safety perceptions.     

The acceptance of personal protective equipment among Hong Kong construction workers: An integration of technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior with risk perception and safety climate

Introduction: The phenomenon that construction workers do not use personal protective equipment (PPE) is a major reason for the high occurrence frequency of accidents in the construction industry. However, little efforts have been made to quantitatively examine the factors influencing construction workers’ acceptance of PPE. Method: In the current study, a PPE acceptance model for construction workers (PAMCW) was proposed to address the noted need. The PAMCW incorporates the technology acceptance model, theory of planned behavior, risk perception, and safety climate for explaining construction worker acceptance of PPE. 413 construction workers participated in this study to fill out a structured questionnaire. The PAMCW was analyzed using structural equation modeling. Results: Results provide evidence of the applicability of the technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior to the PPE acceptance among construction workers. The positive influence of safety climate and risk perception-severity on attitude toward using PPE was significant. Safety climate positively influences perceived usefulness. Risk perception-worry and unsafe was found to positively affect intention to use PPE. Practical Applications: Practical suggestions for increasing construction workers’ use of PPE are also discussed.     

Safety climate at agricultural cooperatives

Introduction: This study identifies determinants of safety climate at agricultural cooperatives. Methods: An extensive survey was designed to build upon past research done in collaboration with DuPont (Risch et al., 2014). In 2014 and 2015, the survey was administered to 1930 employees at 14 different agricultural cooperatives with 154 locations. Injury incidence data were also collected from each location to better understand the overall health and safety environment in this sector. An ordered probit model is used to identify variables that are associated with better safety climates. Results: Safety system components such as discipline programs, inspection programs, modified duty programs, off-the-job safety training programs, and recognition programs are positively related to individual safety climate for both managerial employees and nonmanagerial employees. Variables representing an employee’s agricultural background, distance between their workplace and childhood home, and formal education are not associated with managerial safety climate. However, agricultural background and childhood home distance are associated with nonmanagerial safety climate. Conclusions: Improving occupational health and safety is a priority for many agricultural cooperatives. Lower safety climate emerges as nonmanagerial employees have more experience with production agriculture and work nearer to their home community. Practical applications: Employees of agricultural cooperatives face a host of health and safety challenges that are likely to persist into the future. The safety system components associated with safety climate indicate that continuous feedback is important for improving occupational health and safety. Occupational health and safety programming should also acknowledge that many employees have experiences that influence their attitudes and behaviors.     

Safety climate, attitudes and risk perception in Norsk Hydro

The aims of this paper are to test mental images of risk and to present some results of a survey of safety climate, employee attitudes, risk perception and behaviour among employees within the industrial company Norsk Hydro. Two mental images were tested. They are both based on the assumption that it is possible to make a distinction between cognitive and affective processes involved in risk perception. The first model was the ‘rationalistic’ approach, which assumes that the affective component of risk perception is influenced by cognitive judgements. The justification for the second model is found in Zajonc's [Zajonc, R.B., 1980. Feeling and thinking. Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35 (2), 151–175] conclusion that emotions are precognitive. In this model, entitled the ‘mental imagery’ approach, emotion is seen as the driving force affecting cognition of risk and safety. Employees at 13 plants have answered a self-completion questionnaire. The plants belonged to the agricultural, aluminium, magnesium and petrochemical divisions within Norsk Hydro. A total of 731 respondents replied to the questionnaire. The mental imagery approach was somewhat better fitted to the data than a rationalistic approach. Safety climate and employee attitudes towards safety and accident prevention contributed significantly to the variance in employee occupational risk behaviour. Worry and the extent to which the employee felt safe/unsafe was the most important predictor for the cognitive judgement of risk. Acceptability of rule violations seemed to be the most important predictor of behaviour, probably because acceptability also affected how often the respondents took chances and broke safety rules.