Authority gradients between team workers in the rail environment: a critical research gap

Abstract

Communication errors feature prevalently as causal and contributory factors in accident analysis within rail. While matters of phraseology and protocol in communication have been used to categorise communication error, formal inquiries into major rail accidents point to an underlying "authority gradient" as an influencing factor. The aim of this paper was to understand how the influence of authority gradients on communication error has been explored by communities of research and practice in rail. To achieve a holistic understanding and identification of key research gaps, this paper also reviewed prevalent tools and frameworks applied in rail human factors, as well as other sectors impacted by power disparities between teams. The review found that while evidence from industry reports is suggestive of an authority gradient in rail, no research has been conducted to support or refute this conclusion. Moreover, an absence of authority gradients in applied research draws attention to current methodological capabilities vs research foci. The relationship between the authority/power and status/ value of core rail operational functions is conceptualised, and application of Hofstede's theory of power distance to rail is considered. A number of research gaps are identified which indicate future research opportunities. Relevance statement Industry reports and Inquiries into major rail accidents draw attention to an underlying "authority gradient" as an influencing factor in communication error, resulting in near misses and fatalities. A number of human factors tools, methodologies and frameworks have been applied in the context of communication error in rail, but there is little to indicate that the influence of authority gradients has been uncovered or has been the focus of research activity to date. Consequently, power disparities between team workers are being addressed using individual-level training approaches, which means the nature of communication error is not being accurately represented. The prevailing theory for authority gradients, Hofstede's power distance dimension of cultural relativity theory, has not been applied to rail previously and is considered in relation to research gaps for understanding

Understanding authority gradient: tips for speaking up for patient safety (and how to enhance the listening response)

“…Inquiries into major rail accidents emphasise an underlying authority gradient as an influencing factor in communication errors that resulted in near misses and fatalities. 26 A recent review of 235 railway incidents in Great Britain revealed that 21% of accidents were identified with communication error and escalation failure as a contributing factor. 27 Similar themes are also highlighted in major maritime incidents, where advice from lower ranking officers has been ignored, leading to disaster.…”

Authority gradients between rail network controllers, train crew and track workers in Australia and New Zealand: motivations and behaviours

“…This is suggestive of a hierarchical cultural contribution to the generation of an authority gradient that warrants future research focus. As a key dimension of cultural relativity, power distance theory, devised by Hofstede (1983) and applied in similar systems such as aviation, is a relevant theoretical tool for providing further understanding on these relationships (Luva & Naweed 2021). Further research into team interdependencies with a focus on track worker and train crew groups and the cultural factors that serve to construct relationships across teams is a key direction for future research.…”

“…They provide direction to other workers, which includes provision of authority to train drivers for rail vehicle movements, and track maintenance workers for access and length of time permitted on track (Baldry & Ellison 2006). These dynamics, while critical for safe working, also have potential to create an authority gradient between the network controller and other workers (Luva & Naweed 2021).…”

“…Australian Transport Safety Bureau 2015Office of Transport Safety Investigations 2012). In a recent review of existing literature and examination of tools, frameworks, methods and theories, Luva and Naweed (2021) identified a critical research gap around authority gradients within rail, with a need to better understand authority gradient generation in this industry.…”

Human, Organisational and Societal Factors in Robotic Rail Infrastructure Maintenance

“…This work occurs in a potentially hazardous environment, where track workers need protection from nearby service or engineering trains [1,2]. It can take place in remote or difficult to access locations such as tunnels, at night and in poor weather [3][4][5] and requires complex communications that are prone to error [6]. It may also require physically demanding work such as the manual handling and mounting of catenary equipment [7,8].…”