Investigating the Relationships between Safety Climate and Safety Performance Indicators in Retrofitting Works

被引:33
作者
Nadhim, Evan A. [1 ]
Hon, Carol [1 ]
Xia, Bo [1 ]
Stewart, Ian [2 ]
Fang, Dongping [3 ]
机构
[1] QUT, Sch Civil Engn & Built Environm, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia
[2] QUT, Inst Hlth & Biomed Innovat, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia
[3] Tsinghua Univ, Dept Construct Management, Beijing 100084, Peoples R China
来源
CONSTRUCTION ECONOMICS AND BUILDING | 2018年 / 18卷 / 02期
关键词
Safety climate; safety performance; retrofitting works; construction industry; Australia;
D O I
10.5130/AJCEB.v18i2.5994
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Retrofitting works have become increasingly important in the construction industry as they play an effective role in providing solutions to maintain, upgrade or change the functions of existing or aged buildings. Very often, safety issues of retrofitting works are underestimated as such works are normally considered small projects/works, in which the accidents might not be reported in the short term. Therefore, qualitative indicators (i.e. safety climate and safety behaviour) have become significant contributors in evaluating the organisational safety performance. This article aimed to examine the relationship between the safety climate and safety performance in the retrofitting works context. The safety climate of retrofitting works was measured by adopting the NOSACQ-50 questionnaire, while the safety performance was examined by three indicators comprising safety compliance, safety participation, and occupational injuries. A total of 264 valid questionnaire responses were collected from the local retrofits work sites in Australia. PLS-SEM technique was used to examine the relationship and estimate the parameters of the structural model. The results indicate that there is a significant positive relationship (0.60) between safety climate and safety performance in retrofitting works.
引用
收藏
页码:110 / 129
页数:20
相关论文
共 64 条
[1]  
ABS, 2017, BUILD ACT AUSTR
[2]  
ANAO, 2010, HOM INS PROGR, P1
[3]  
Appleby P., 2013, SUSTAINABLE RETROFIT, DOI [10.1108/pm-01-2014-0004, DOI 10.1108/PM-01-2014-0004]
[4]  
BCC, 2017, BRISB SUB
[5]   Occupational Safety Climate and Shift Work [J].
Bergh, Maria ;
Shahriari, Mohammad ;
Kines, Pete .
LP2013 - 14TH SYMPOSIUM ON LOSS PREVENTION AND SAFETY PROMOTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, VOLS I AND II, 2013, 31 :403-408
[6]   THE USE OF A FACTOR-ANALYTIC PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING THE VALIDITY OF AN EMPLOYEE SAFETY CLIMATE MODEL [J].
BROWN, RL ;
HOLMES, H .
ACCIDENT ANALYSIS AND PREVENTION, 1986, 18 (06) :455-470
[7]   General safety performance: A test of a grounded theoretical model [J].
Burke, MJ ;
Sarpy, SA ;
Tesluk, PE ;
Smith-Crowe, K .
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 55 (02) :429-457
[8]   IMPROVING SAFETY THROUGH APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS [J].
CHHOKAR, JS ;
WALLIN, JA .
JOURNAL OF SAFETY RESEARCH, 1984, 15 (04) :141-151
[9]   Why operatives engage in unsafe work behavior: Investigating factors on construction sites [J].
Choudhry, Rafiq M. ;
Fang, Dongping .
SAFETY SCIENCE, 2008, 46 (04) :566-584
[10]   Measuring Safety Climate of a Construction Company [J].
Choudhry, Rafiq M. ;
Fang, Dongping ;
Lingard, Helen .
JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 2009, 135 (09) :890-899