Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction (한국건축시공학회지)

The Korean Institute of Building Construction (한국건축시공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of Safety Climate Metrics in Construction Safety Management

건설 안전관리를 위한 Safety Climate 평가요인별 중요도 분석 연구

  • Han, Bum-Jin (Division of Policy Research-Center for Technology Analysis, National Institute of Green Technology) ;
  • Kim, Taehui (Department of Architectural Engineering, Mokpo National University) ;
  • Son, Seunghyun (Department of Architectural Engineering, Mokpo National University)
  • Received : 2023.07.23
  • Accepted : 2023.08.18
  • Published : 2023.10.20
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Pervasive research underscores the direct correlation between an enhanced safety climate and a marked reduction in accidents. The intricacies of safety climate are governed by three pivotal strata: organizational management, on-site operations, and the broader enterprise framework. Within an organizational context, sustaining optimal performance across these layers poses a considerable challenge, often attributable to the constraints of available managerial bandwidth. It becomes imperative, then, to conceive a phased enhancement blueprint for the safety climate. To orchestrate this blueprint with precision, a discerning understanding of the hierarchy of safety climate metrics is essential, which subsequently guides judicious managerial resource allocation. This investigation is anchored in elucidating the hierarchical significance of safety climate metrics through the Analytical Hierarchy Process(AHP). Implementing the AHP framework, both a questionnaire was disseminated and a subsequent analysis undertaken, culminating in the extraction of relative priorities of safety climate determinants. Consequent to this analysis, "workers' safety prioritization and risk aversion" emerged as the foremost dimension, holding a significance weight of 0.1900. Furthermore, within the detailed elements, "unwavering adherence to safety mandates amidst demanding operational constraints" ranked supreme, manifesting a weight of 0.6663. The findings encapsulated in this study are poised to be foundational in sculpting improvements at an institutional level and devising policies, all with the end goal of fostering an exemplar safety climate within construction arenas.

최근 건설 프로젝트에서는 안전사고 발생 저감을 위해 근로자간의 안전분위기 조성 및 확산이라는 측면에서 새롭게 접근하고 있다. 다양한 연구에서 현장의 안전분위기 수준이 높아지면, 안전사고 발생 저감에 효과가 있다는 것이 확인되었다. 안전분위기 수준은 경영, 현장과 기업 영역에서 복합적으로 영향을 받는다. 회사차원에서는 한정된 경영자원으로 인하여 모든 영역을 동시에 높은 수준으로 관리하는 것은 어렵다. 따라서 단계적으로 안전분위기를 향상시키는 전략이 필요하다. 수립된 전략의 효율적 수행을 위해 안전분위기 평가 요인별 상대적 중요도를 분석한 후 그에 맞는 경영자원을 배분할 필요가 있다. 그러나 안전분위기 수준은 주관적인 의견이 반영되므로 정량적으로 단순히 평가될 수 없으며, 안전전문가와 같은 숙련된 평가자가 아니면 일관성이 유지되기 어렵다. 따라서 본 연구의 목적은 AHP 기법을 이용한 안전분위기 평가요인들의 상대적 중요도 분석이다. 본 연구를 위해 건설현장의 안전전문가를 대상으로 AHP 설문과 분석을 진행하고, 안전분위기 평가요인들의 상대적 우선순위를 도출한다. 분석된 결과를 이용하여 안전분위기 향상을 위한 개선방안을 제시한다. 본 연구의 결과는 건설 현장의 고수준(high quality) 안전분위기를 위한 제도개선 및 정책수립에 기초자료로 활용될 것이다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by a grant(NRF-2021R1C1C2091677 and NRF-2021R1F1A1046321) from the National Research Foundation of Korea by Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning.

References

  1. Jeong WI, Jeon YI. Working Conditions and Industrial Accidents in Accordance with Safety and Health Environment in the Workplace. Journal of Crisisonomy. 2014 Nov;10(11):323-44. 
  2. Woo C, Oh TK. A study on the analysis and improvement of the basic occupational safety and health training for the construction industry. Journal of the Korean Society of Safety. 2014 Jun;29(3):46-55. https://doi.org/10.14346/JKOSOS.2014.29.3.046 
  3. Korea Occupational Safety & Health Agency. Analysis of Industrial Accident Status in 2018. Ulsan (Korea): Korea Occupational Safety & Health Agency; 2018. 702 p. 
  4. Korea Occupational Safety & Health Agency. Industrial Accident Status in 2019. Ulsan (Korea): Korea Occupational Safety & Health Agency; 2019. 26 p. 
  5. Na CJ. The Study on Legal maintenance for safety culture Settlement. Sejong (Korea): Korea Legislation Research Institute; 2013 Aug. 128 p. Report No.: 2013-08. 
  6. Moon KS, Chang YC. An Empirical analysis on safety climate constructs within korean companies. Journal of Korea Labor Institute. 2014 Feb;14(1):131-54. 
  7. Zohar D. A group-level model of safety climate: testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. Journal of applied psychology. 2000 Jan;85(4):587-96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.4.587 
  8. Bronkhorst B. Behaving safely under pressure: The effects of job demands, resources, and safety climate on employee physical and psychosocial safety behavior. Journal of safety research. 2015 Dec;55:63-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2015.09.002 
  9. Kines P, Lappalainen J, Mikkelsen KL, Olsen E, Pousette A, Tharaldsen J, Tomasson K, Torner M. Nordic Safety Climate Questionnaire (NOSACQ-50): A new tool for diagnosing occupational safety climate. International Journal of industrial Ergonomics. 2011 Nov;41(6):634-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2011.08.004 
  10. Neitzel RL, Seixas NS, Harris MJ, Camp J. Exposure to fall hazards and safety climate in the aircraft maintenance industry. Journal of Safety Research. 2008 Jul;39(4):391-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2008.02.033 
  11. Neal A, Griffin MA, Hart PM. The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior. Safety science. 2000 Feb;34(1-3):99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00008-4 
  12. Melia JL, Mearns K, Silva SA, Lima ML. Safety climate responses and the perceived risk of accidents in the construction industry. Journal of Safety science. 2008 Jul;46(6):949-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2007.11.004 
  13. Moon KS, Lee JH, Oah SZ. The Effects of Safety Leadership of Manager and Safety Climate in the Organization on the Workers' Safety Behaviors. Journal of Korean Society of Safety. 2013 Apr;28(2):66-72. https://doi.org/10.14346/JKOSOS.2013.28.2.066 
  14. Zohar D. Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied implications. Journal of applied psychology. 1980 Jan;65(1):96-102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.96 
  15. Neal A, Griffin MA. A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. Journal of applied psychology. 2006 Jan;91(4):946-53. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.946 
  16. Cooper MD. Towards a model of safety culture. Journal of Safety science. 2000 Nov;36(2):111-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00035-7 
  17. Mohamed S. Scorecard approach to benchmarking organizational safety culture in construction. Journal of construction engineering and management. 2003 Jan;129(1):80-8. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:1(80) 
  18. Clarke S. The relationship between safety climate and safety performance: a meta-analytic review. Journal of occupational health psychology. 2006 Jan;11(4):315-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.11.4.315 
  19. Dester WS, Blockley DI. Safety-behaviour and culture in construction. Engineering, Journal of Construction and Architectural Management. 1995 Jan;2(1);17-26. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb021000 
  20. Choi SI, Kim H. A study on the safety climate and worker's safe work behavior in construction site. Journal of Korean Society of Safety. 2006 Oct;21(5):60-71. 
  21. Fang D, Chen Y, Wong L. Safety climate in construction industry: A case study in Hong Kong. Journal of construction engineering and management. 2006 Jun;132(6):573-84. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:6(573) 
  22. Badri A, Nadeau S, Gbodossou A. Proposal of a risk-factor-based analytical approach for integrating occupational health and safety into project risk evaluation. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2012 Sep;48:223-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.009 
  23. Cho HS, Suh HJ. AHP analysis techniques for the weighted evaluation of cultural heritage disaster safety management systems. Journal of the Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation. 2018 Aug;18(5):43-53. https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2018.18.5.43 
  24. Jae M, Han K. Development of a new methodology for evaluating nuclear safety culture. Journal of the Korean Society of Safety. 2015 Aug;30(4):174-80. https://doi.org/10.14346/JKOSOS.2015.30.4.174 
  25. Hong JM. An AHP Approach for the Importance Weight of Renewable Energy Investment Criterion in the Private Sector. Journal of Korean Energy Economic Review. 2011 Oct;10(1):115-42. 
  26. Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. NY: McGraw-Hill; 1980. 287 p. 
  27. Yun EG. An analysis of the relative importance of the assessed factors of quality of life using the method of analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Korean Public Administration Review. 2012 Jun;46(2):395-419. 
  28. Lee SB, Pyo YM. A study on the analysis of factors decreasing construction labor-productivity using ahp method. Journal of the Regional Association of Architectural Institute of Korea. 2007 Feb;9(1):179-87. 
  29. Han KY, Back YS. A study on the priority making of human error prevention business using AHP. Journal of the Korea Safety Management and Science. 2012 Sep;14(3):111-7. https://doi.org/10.12812/ksms.2012.14.3.111 
  30. Wu C, Luo X, Wang T, Wang Y, Sapkota B. Safety challenges and improvement strategies of ethnic minority construction workers: a case study in Hong Kong. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2018 Jul;26(1):80-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1466508 
  31. Guldenmund F, Cleal B, Mearns K. An exploratory study of migrant workers and safety in three european countries. Safety science. 2013 Feb;52:92-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.05.004 
  32. Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Informs Journal On Applied Analytics. 1994 Dec;24(6):19-43. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.24.6.19 
  33. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review. 1956 Jan;63(2):81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158 
  34. Lee JS, Son S, Kim S, Son K. Correlation analysis of safety climate and construction productivity in south Korea. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. 2020 May;27(2):589-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2020.1741279 
  35. Son S, Ha SG, Choi SC, Kim S, Son K. Comparison analysis for the safety climate level of construction company according to business size in south korea. Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction. 2019 Aug;19(4):373-82. https://doi.org/10.5345/JKIBC.2019.19.4.373 
  36. Ha SY, Kim S, Son S, Ha SG, Son K. Safety perception level of workers in construction site according to NOSACQ-5. Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction. 2017 Dec;17(6):567-76. https://doi.org/10.5345/JKIBC.2017.17.6.567