A1988 Leader-based interventions in construction contractors safety priority

Wednesday, March 21, 2012: 15:15
Costa Maya 3 (Cancun Center)
Johnny Dyreborg, Unit for Safety Research, National Research Centre For The Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
Pete Kines, Unit for Safety Research, National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
Betina Holbęk Pedersen, Unit for Safety Research, National Research Centre For The Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
Harald Hannerz, Unit for Safety Research, National Research Centre For The Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
Handouts
  • 2012_dyreborg_LIESE_ICOH2012_Cancun.pdf (893.4 kB)
  • Introduction
    Safety communication between managers and workers has shown to be a useful measure to increase safety priority in the work place. This research tests the effect on construction contractors’ safety priority and the onsite safety of coaching construction site safety coordinators (SC) to increase safety communication in a construction project.

    Methods
    A group quasi-randomized double-blinded case study design involving six construction sites is carried out. The site safety level (n=40,788 observations) and leader-member safety communications (n=2,401) are measured (blinded) over a five to six-month period. All the SCs receive weekly reports on the level of safety at their site. The SCs at three intervention sites of the six sites participates in coaching sessions to support them in solving on site safety problems and to improve their safety communication between the various partners on-site. In addition, the three SCs are given feedback about the level of leader-member verbal safety communications. Confirmatory statistical analysis is used to test the safety level and safety communication data. The data are supplemented by pre-post semi-structured interviews with the various partners involved in the construction projects in looking at changes in leaders’ role perception and safety priority during the intervention project.

    Results
    The results showed no significant changes in leader-member safety communications (1.18; [0.53;2.63]) nor in site safety level in the intervention group compared to the control group (0.97; [0.81;1.18])

    Discussion
    The safety coordinators at the intervention sites did not succeed in improving the priority of site safety priority during the project. One explanation might be that safety coordinators’ role perception to a higher degree are linked to their focus on project economy and time schedules, as members of the onsite management team, than it is to the onsite safety they handle on the behalf of the client.