Safety climate and injuries: An examination of theoretical and empirical relationships.

Abstract

Our purpose in this study was to meta-analytically address several theoretical and empirical issues regarding the relationships between safety climate and injuries. First, we distinguished between extant safety climate-->injury and injury-->safety climate relationships for both organizational and psychological safety climates. Second, we examined several potential moderators of these relationships. Meta-analyses revealed that injuries were more predictive of organizational safety climate than safety climate was predictive of injuries. Additionally, the injury-->safety climate relationship was stronger for organizational climate than for psychological climate. Moderator analyses revealed that the degree of content contamination in safety climate measures inflated effects, whereas measurement deficiency attenuated effects. Additionally, moderator analyses showed that as the time period over which injuries were assessed lengthened, the safety climate-->injury relationship was attenuated. Supplemental meta-analyses of specific safety climate dimensions also revealed that perceived management commitment to safety is the most robust predictor of occupational injuries. Contrary to expectations, the operationalization of injuries did not meaningfully moderate safety climate-injury relationships. Implications and recommendations for future research and practice are discussed.

Crew Resource Management in the Intensive Care Unit: a prospective 3‐year cohort study

“…Perceived safety climate is positively related to safety outcomes both in hospital settings and other high‐hazard fields 21, 32, 33. Previous studies on the impact of safety climate on safety outcome have focused on either the effect of team training on perceived safety climate,34, 35 or assessed patient outcome 36.…”

Safety climate dimensions as predictors for risk behavior

“…Although there is a large body of research on the safety climate-safety outcome relationship (for an overview, see Beus et al, 2010), the interrelationships among specific safety climate dimensions and their impact on safety performance are regarded as contradictory and unclear and therefore require additional research Beus et al, 2010). The present study adopts a multi-dimensional approach to safety climate (Cooper and Philips, 2004;Zohar and Luria, 2005) and demonstrates (1) the differential direct impact of these safety climate dimensions (management commitment to safety, priority of safety, pressure for production) on risk behavior and (2) a complex relationship between these three safety climate dimensions in influencing unsafe behavior at work.…”

“…Although there is strong evidence to support the direct relationship between each of the above dimensions of safety climate and safety behavior, research to date has largely ignored the possible relationships that exist between these safety climate dimensions in their impact on safety performance Beus et al, 2010). Few researchers Naveh et al, 2005) have recently demonstrated the intricate relationships between safety climate dimensions in their prediction of safety performance.…”

“…Zohar (2010) describes this as a social learning process whereby employees interpret the organizational environment by repeatedly observing (and exchanging information with) their leader (Dragoni, 2005). The extent to which employees' scrutinize managerial actions with regard to safety can be emphasised using managerial safety training, which emphasize the manager's role as a safety referent (Beus et al, 2010). As employees look to managerial behavior in situations of productivity-safety tensions, managers should demonstrate their commitment to safety through both communications and actions (i.e.…”

“…For example a number of review, field and meta-analytic studies examining a range of safety climate dimensions have demonstrated management commitment to safety as the strongest predictor of safety performance (e.g. Cox and Flin, 1998;Flin et al, 2000;Christian et al, 2009;Beus et al, 2010). Priority of safety and pressure for production, despite having received less attention than management commitment to safety, are commonly used dimensions of safety climate which have been consistently found to predict safety outcomes such as unsafe behavior (e.g.…”