Moving beyond the organizational ceiling: Do construction accident investigations align with systems thinking?

Abstract

Serious accidents within the construction industry continue to represent an unacceptable global problem. The aim of this study was to consider the types of actors, factors, and relationships that are identified in construction investigations in a sample of Australian organizations. Based on a thematic analysis approach, we examined the actors, contributory factors, and corrective actions identified within 100 construction accident investigation reports. The extent to which these aligned with the principles of contemporary accident causation theory and the benefits associated with adopting a system-wide approach were then assessed. Overall, the results demonstrate that accident analysis in construction has not moved beyond a human error focus and does not presently identify multiple actors and contributory factors or the interactions between them.The findings of the study offer important implications for the industry and highlight the opportunity for the adoption of systems theory-based approaches to construction accident investigation and analysis.

Improving accident analysis in construction – Development of a contributing factor classification framework and evaluation of its validity and reliability

“…Ye et al (2018) covered a variety of system levels including the government and regulatory level, but the level of detail provided by the modified Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) method is limited and in need of further refinement and development. Woolley et al, (2018) also highlighted that SAA methods that identify contributing factors beyond what they term the 'organisation ceiling' have not as yet been developed within construction. One of the most wellknown models of accident causation in construction is the Construction Causal Accident (ConCa) model (Haslam et al, 2005;Harvey et al, 2018).…”

“…One of the most wellknown models of accident causation in construction is the Construction Causal Accident (ConCa) model (Haslam et al, 2005;Harvey et al, 2018). ConCa draws on the Swiss Cheese Model developed by Reason (1990) and is also limited to investigation of human error as far as organisational level (Woolley et al, 2018). Whilst other sectors systems models have investigated a more extensive range of system levels, methods with limited coverage remain predominant in construction (Harvey et al, 2018).…”

“…Construction sector, therefore, is consistently identified as priority for accident prevention actions and regulation (Xia et al, 2018;Zhang et al, 2019). Construction accidents range from falls from heights; to being struck by a moving object (e.g., a vehicle) and geo-technical failure (Winge and Albrechtsen, 2018;Siraj et al, 2019;Woolley et al, 2018). In addition, the diversity of construction sites, along with differences in occupations, technology, tools and materials used, make safety and health management very challenging (Haslam et al, 2005;Mitropolous et al, 2005;Hallowell and Gambatese, 2009).…”

Analysis of Factors Influencing Miners’ Unsafe Behaviors in Intelligent Mines using a Novel Hybrid MCDM Model

“…Moreover, work demands such as work environment, work stress, work intensity, risks and hazards, site safety management, work–family conflict, and work resources such as safety culture, safety climate, education and training, leadership support, communication feedback, and life well-being act together on miners’ safety behavior through attrition processes and motivational processes [ 18 , 19 ]. Based on the above findings, combining the accident causation theory of modern system theory [ 20 ], we further consider management and equipment characteristics and investigates the influencing factors of miners’ unsafe behaviors in intelligent mines from four dimensions: individual factors, device factors, management factors, and environmental factors.…”