This paper describes aspects of the findings of a three-year research project, Construction Accident Causality, funded by the UK Health and Safety Executive. The project developed a causality model, through a combination of focus groups and detailed study of 100 construction accidents, using an ergonomics systems approach, to identify where safety is compromised and why. It concludes that stakeholders responsible for the immediate accident circumstances, shaping factors and originating influences must all work hard to remove flaws in their safety systems to ensure that accidents are reduced.

A review and synthesis of behavioural safety literature identified three behaviour change perspectives: cognitive (goal setting); behaviourist (behaviour modification); and eclectic (social learning). Bandura's social learning theory usefully integrates the divergent philosophies of Locke's goal setting and Luthan's behaviour modification. Social learning theory assumes that behaviour is controlled by internal processes and environmental stimuli, and so human action can be explained by the combined effect of goals and feedback. The effectiveness of behavioural safety has been demonstrated consistently, but, despite some success, token reward programmes are controversial because they are close to 'paying for safety'. Researchers have overwhelmingly favoured initiatives based on goals and performance feedback without material reward. Goals and feedback produced good results in the varying cultures of North American, European and Middle-East manufacturing environments, including mines, chemical plants, laboratories, paper mills and shipyards. Goals and feedback, aimed principally at operatives, have been used to improve safety in Finnish, British and Hong Kong construction industries. It is also clear that their effectiveness is strongly related to management commitment; and that they must be supported by a developed safety infrastructure. This suggests that goals should also embrace management safety behaviours, in order to improve management commitment.Safety, organizational psychology, organizational behaviour,

This paper presents tools and equipment aspects of the results from a three-year United Kingdom Government-funded research project investigating accident causality (ConCA). The project has used focus groups and studied in detail 100 construction accidents site audits, interviews with involved persons and follow-up along the causal chain. This paper concentrates on the influence of construction tools and equipment which were found to be important contributory factors identified by the research. They have largely been overlooked by previous studies and are not typically acknowledged as accident contributors. This paper argues for further work to confirm these links and for the inclusion of tools and equipment in the list of categories in statutory reporting procedures. This would also require an increased acknowledgement by construction managers of their influence, leading to better design and management of their supply and care on site.

An action learning project was undertaken to empower small- and medium-sized construction companies to define the agenda for performance improvement and to take a leading role in the process of industry change. Whilst achievement of zero defects was an ultimate aim, smaller construction firms identified the shorter-term need to deal effectively with defects during the post-construction phase. Project activities explored problems and identified ways of improving the management of the defects liability period. Proposed solutions ranged from simple modifications to management procedures, through innovative methods of working with tenants to more fundamental changes in design and construction processes. Construction firms and housing associations recognized the importance of working together to improve procedures. Small- and medium-sized construction firms can address performance issues in practical ways and have a potentially valuable role to play in promoting industry improvement. Action learning can support the process of change being instigated by Egan in 1998 and solutions generated by action learning have the potential for wider dissemination and use

Purpose -Present findings from a UK study, funded by the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH), on the relationship between safety advisor roles and safety performance. Design/methodology/approach -Roles and organisational factors for contractors' safety advisors (independent variables) were derived from existing literature. The dependent variable was "safety performance", measured by accident incidence rate (AIR). Data were provided by 101 contractors and variance of means analysis was conducted. Findings -Contractors using only external safety consultants had an average AIR approximately three times those with internal safety staff. However, simply increasing internal safety personnel did not lead to increased safety performance. Contractors, where at least one safety advisor had authority to give orders had a lower mean AIR than those who did not. Other significant variables were: delivering safety training to employees; vetting sub-contractors; and the inclusion of an environmental management role. Practical implications -Employing at least one full-time internal safety person is better than relying solely on a safety consultant. If these safety advisers report to senior management then they have a greater chance of influencing others to act safely or commit resources to manage safety. Delivery of training, vetting sub-contractors and including environmental duties should feature in safety advisor roles. Originality/value -The assumption that merely increasing safety personnel improves safety has been challenged. It is apparent from these findings that what the safety personnel actually do is more important than how many are employed. This is a major finding in relation to theory and practice which challenges previous research.