Effective supervisory behaviour and safety at the building site

Mattila, Markku; Hyttinen, Marita; Rantanen, Eeva

doi:10.1016/0169-8141(94)90075-2

Cited by 79 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have found that the most effective supervisors had a more supportive style of leadership, initiated discussions about safety, and provided positive feedback on safety issues. [35][36][37] More participative relationships enable workers to help shape safety interventions rather than simply playing a passive role as recipients. http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/ Cohen and Cleveland 38 compared 42 manufacturing and heavy industry worksites in North America with different accident rates.…”

Section: Supervisorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership for safety: industrial experience

Flin

2004

Quality and Safety in Health Care

165

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Supervisorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership for safety: industrial experience

Flin

2004

Quality and Safety in Health Care

165

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…• Investigation of accidents (Adams, Barlow, & Hiddlestone, 1981;Carter & Menckel, 1987; • Internal safety inspections and safety analyses (Chew, 1988;Hämäläinen, 1994;Smith, Cohen, Cohen, & Cleveland, 1978) • Analysis of production disruptions (Hakala, 1989;Saari, 1977;Tallberg, Lepistö, Mattila, & Vuori, 1992;Occupational deaths 1985Occupational deaths -1993Occupational deaths , 1995 • Design (Hakala, 1989;Saarela, Salminen, Räsänen, & Saari, 1992;Saari, 1977) • Safety rules and signs (Chew, 1988;Laner & Sell, 1960;Saarela, Aaltonen, Seppälä, Saari, & Salminen, 1986;Simonds & Shafai-Sahrai, 1977) • Safety indoctrination and safety training (Luskin, Somers, Wooding, & Levenstein, 1992;Michaels, Zoloth, Bernstein, Kass, & Schrier, 1992;Robins, Hugentobler, Kaminski, & Klitzman, 1990;Robins & Klitzman, 1988) • Supervision (Chew, 1988;Mattila, Hyttinen, & Rantanen, 1994;Petersen, 1984) • Safety of the work environment (Näsänen & Saari, 1986;Springfeldt, 1993;Suokas, 1993;Varonen, 1995Varonen, , 1997 When certain types of safety campaigns have been implemented, accident rates have often decreased clearly (Komaki, Heinzmann, & Lawson, 1980;Krause, Hidley, & Lareau, 1984;Näsänen & Saari, 1986). In such campaigns, safe working methods have been defined and the employees have been instructed in their use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of the work environment and safety activities on occupational accidents in eight wood‐processing companies

Varonen¹,

Mattila²

2001

Hum Ftrs & Erg Mfg Svc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study was conducted at 16 wood-processing companies in southern Finland. The companies involved were selected according to the following criteria: (a) 8 companies were to have an accident rate that was clearly below the average rate for the wood-processing industry in the period [1985][1986][1987][1988][1989], and 8 companies a rate clearly higher than the average; and (b) the companies were to form pairs engaged in the same type of activity and exhibiting different rates.Companies were divided into 2 groups. Two sawmills, 1 parquet, and 1 plywood factory with a low accident rate and 4 similar factories with a high rate were selected as "experiment companies" and received advice aimed at improving their work environment and safety activities. Eight similar companies were selected as a control group and received no advice. This study attempted to ascertain the effects of such advice on the work environment, safety activities, and occupational accidents. In addition, differences in the safety of the work environment, in safety activities, and in occupational accidents were studied in companies with a low accident rate as compared with the situation in companies with a high rate.Work environment and safety activities showed a statistically significant correlation with accident rate. The better the situation, the lower the accident rate. In the companies with a low accident rate, the work environment and safety activities were also better than in the companies with a high rate.In the period 1989-1994, the drop in the accident rate at the experiment companies was greater-to a statistically significant extent-than it was in the control group or in the wood-processing industry as a whole. In cases where advice was given to the experiment companies with the aim of preventing particular occupational accidents, the rate of such accidents declined; there was no such trend in the control companies. By contrast, trends for other types of accidents were similar in the experiment and control companies. Changes in the accident rates of the experiment or control companies could not be explained by economic cycles or by changes either in the employees' work experience or in the duration of absences.It is highly probable that the positive trend with regard to occupational accidents in the experiment companies was related to improvement in the work environment and safety activities and that this in turn was a result of the advice given to these companies in 1990.

show abstract

“…Additionally, management might have to encourage an organizational climate that stresses the importance of safety and a rewardscheme that encourages safe work practices, give workers enough freedom and authority, and provide them with information and assistance on how to do their jobs properly. It is on record that the more positive top management, supervisors, and co-workers are towards safety programmes, the more workers are motivated to accept those programmes [45]. Drawing from the Social Exchange Theory [46] and the Reciprocity Theory 1 [47], such positive managerial attitudes and investment in workers' safety create a sense of obligation for workers to reciprocate in a way that benefits their organizations and management.…”

Section: Implications Of Findings For the Work Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%