Supervisor Accountability Jim Arendas Construction Advancement Foundation

Levels of Responsibility Executive Management High level commitment = lower accident rates (Cheyne et al., 1998; Zohar, 1980) Supervision Work group encouragement and support (Donald, 1995). Worker Participation/ownership What motivates workers to take responsibility? (Lee, 1995)

OSHA Elements of Management Duty Establish policies, procedures and rules Safety Training Providing the right tool and equipment Enforcing the rules

Supervisory Challenges Characteristics of the work (Physical Hazards) Psychological and behavioral characteristics of the individual Organizational environments (Culture) (Cheyne, 2002)

Competing Organizational Influences Organizational values Short-term profits Customer needs Organizational Culture

Organizational Culture Ela Oney-Yazici, Heyecan Giritli, Gulfer Topcu-Oraz, Emrah Acar, (2007) "Organizational culture: the case of Turkish construction industry", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 14 Iss: 6, pp.519 - 531

Safety Leadership in the Context of Organizational Culture Safety Culture? Safety Leadership in the Context of Organizational Culture Responsibility Commitment Involvement Communication & Trust Learning & Reporting Training

Management Commitment Management Resources Leadership from Executive Management Time Involvement Support Evaluation Leading Indicators Measure positive behaviors Measure coaching and correcting Close calls Root cause of negative behaviors Measure history not TRIR Employee surveys Lagging Indicators Enforcement Throughout all levels of management and supervision The food chain Recognition

Worker Duty Not required by OSHA Duty to employer Follow rules or get wacked Duty to self is a personal choice

Relational Leadership Support Leader-member exchange Leaders have limited time Cross organizational support Relational support from supervisor Self-developed relational support Culture supported relational support No relational support (Uhl-Bean, 2006)

Team Dysfunctions of Safety Leadership Absence of Trust Absence of Conflict Lack of Commitment Avoidance of Accountability Inattention to Results (Lencioni, 2002)

Evaluating Safety Culture Maturity (RSSB UK) Level 1: Emerging Level 2: Managing Level 3: Involving Level 4: Cooperating Level 5: Continually Improving

Level 1: Emerging Safety is focused on Safety not a key business risk Technical Procedural Compliance Safety not a key business risk Safety department responsibly for safety Accidents seen as unavoidable Most front line staff not interested in Safety used as a lever on other issues

Level 2: Managing Safety recognized as a business risk Management devoted to accident prevention Safety focus is on rules, procedures and engineering controls Accidents seen as preventable Management believes most accidents are due to behaviors of front-line staff Measures performance with lagging indicators Incentives based on reducing loss time incidents Senior managers only become involved in health and safety if accidents increase; punishment likely to be used Accident rates are near the industry sector average – but tend to have more serious accidents

Level 3: Involving Accident rates are low, but have reached a plateau Organization realizes employee involvement is essential for improvement. Management recognize that a range of factors lead to accidents – such as management decisions. Most front-line employees will work with management to improve safety. The majority of staff accept personal responsibility for their own health and safety. Safety performance is monitored and the data used

Level 4: Cooperating The majority of staff believe that health and safety is important – from both a moral & economic reasons Management recognizes that a range of factors lead to accidents – and the root causes stem from management decisions Front-line staff accept responsibility for their own and others’ health and safety Employees are valued and treated fairly Organization proactive measures indicators to prevent accidents Organizations addresses healthy lifestyle and non-workplace accidents

Level 5: Continually Improving Injury prevention is a core company value Organization has several years without a recordable accident or high potential incident – but there is no feeling of complacency Leading and lagging indicators used to monitor performance but it is not performance driven – it has confidence in its safety processes Organization strives to be better and finds improved hazard control approaches Employees believe safety is a critical aspect of their job and accept that prevention of non-work injuries is important Company invests considerable effort in promoting health and safety at home

References Cheyne, A., Cox, S., Oliver, A., & Tomas, J. M. (1998). Modelling safety climate in the prediction of levels of safety activity. Work and Stress, 12, 255-271. http://ergonomie.com.au/our-services/safety-and-management-systems/safety-culture/ RSSB.UK.co Construction Industry Institute Donald, I. (1995). Safety attitudes as a basis for promoting safety culture: An example of an intervention. In Work and well-being: An agenda for Europe conference, Nottingham, 7-9 December. Ela Oney-Yazici, Heyecan Giritli, Gulfer Topcu-Oraz, Emrah Acar, (2007) "Organizational culture: the case of Turkish construction industry", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 14 Iss: 6, pp.519 - 531 Lee, T. R. (1995). The role of attitudes in the safety culture and how to change them. In Conference on `Understanding Risk Perception; Offshore Management Centre, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, 2 February. Oliver, A., Cheyne, A., Jose, M. T., & Cox, S. (2002). The effects of organizational and individual factors on occupational accidents. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 473-488. Lencioni, P., (2002), The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, A leadership Fable, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Uhl-Bean, M., (2006). Relational leadership theory: exploring the social processes of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654-676.