Benefactor or burden: Exploring the professional identity of safety professionals |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Safety Science Group, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands;2. Trainer, Consultant, Delft, the Netherlands;3. Cognitive Psychology Unit, Leiden University, TNO, the Netherlands;1. Griffith University, Australia;2. University of York, United Kingdom;1. Department of Industrial Education and Technology, National Changhua University of Education, 2, Shi-Da Rd., Changhua City, 50074, Taiwan, ROC;2. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd, 35, Lane Guoguang, Yuanli Township, Miaoli County, 358, Taiwan, ROC;1. Griffith University, University of Queensland and Royal Children’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia;2. Human Dymensions, Canberra, Australia;3. Australian Catholic University, Australia;4. Mines ParisTech, Sophia Antipolis, France;1. Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research TNO, Schipholweg 77-89, P.O. Box 3005, NL 2301 DA Leiden, Netherlands;2. National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark;3. European University Cyprus, 6 Diogenous, Egkomi 2404, Cyprus;4. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 a, P.O. Box 40, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland;5. Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research TNO, Van Mourik Broekmanweg 6, 2600 AA Delft, Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | IntroductionThe professional identity of safety professionals is rife with unresolved contradictions and tensions. Are they advisor or instructor, native or independent, enforcer of rules or facilitator of front-line agency, and ultimately, a benefactor for safety or an organizational burden? Perhaps they believe that they are all of these. This study investigated professional identity through understanding what safety professionals believe about safety, their role within organizations, and their professional selves. Understanding the professional identity of safety professionals provides an important foundation for exploring their professional practice, and by extension, understanding organizational safety more broadly.MethodAn embedded researcher interviewed 13 senior safety professionals within a single large organization. Data were analyzed using grounded theory methodology. The findings were related to a five-element professional identity model consisting of experiences, attributes, motives, beliefs, and values, and revealed deep tensions and contradictions. This research has implications for safety professionals, safety professional associations, safety educators, and organizations. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
