Exploring patterns of multiple climates and their effects on safety performance at the department level

Abstract

Introduction: This paper represents a first attempt to fill a gap in research about different specific climates and safety outcomes, by empirically identifying patterns of climates and exploring the possible effect of different climates at the department level on some specific safety outcomes. The first objective was to explore how different specific climates (safety, communication, diversity and inclusion) can be associated to each other, considering the department level of analysis. The second objective was to examine the relationships between those patterns of climates with safety performance (compliance and participation behaviors). Method: A total of 429 blue-collar workers in 35 departments answered a questionnaire covering safety, diversity, inclusion, and communication climate measures. Cluster analysis was performed to identify clusters of departments with different climate patterns and their impact on safety compliance and safety participation behaviors. Subsequently, a hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted at the individual-level to test the effect of climate patterns, by controlling for some sociodemographic variables. Results: Results showed the existence of four differentiated clusters of departments. Three of those clusters showed homogenous patterns (coherent association among perceptions of low, medium and high climates) and one heterogeneous (low and medium perceptions). The findings also revealed that the higher the climates perceptions, the higher the levels of safety participation and safety compliance, with safety participation being more affected than compliance. Conclusions: The present research showed the associated effects of some organizational climate factors, such as fair treatment, inclusion, safety and communication within the organization, which had not been previously studied in their combined relationships, on safety behaviors. Practical applications: Several other organizational climate factors, such as fair treatment, inclusiveness and communication, may play an important role in safety, showing the importance of broadening the focus on safety climate as one of the main predictors of safety behaviors.

Protocol Development: Level of Preventive Action Method, Considering the Preventive Environments in Construction Works

“…It is fundamental to learn to observe people, from the perspective of different construction environments, in their places of work, and to identify unsafe or deficient actions (Cuchí, 2010;Silva et al, 2013), since the prevention of accidents and management of risk is a social priority in the construction industry. Workplace accidents generate economic losses for companies, the authorities, workers and society in general (Paolillo et al, 2020;Gomes de Oliveira, 2010), which is why accidents at work require analysis that focuses upon the overall construction environment (Lucchi, 2020;Sanni-Anibire et al, 2020;Avdiu et al, 2020;Lucchi, 2016;Lucchini & London, 2014; Úbeda de Mingo, 2002; Gomes de Oliveira; Claudino Véras, 2012).…”

The Italian Validation of OSCI: The Organizational and Safety Climate Inventory

“…Following the most recent research, safety climate is now considered as a facetspecific type of organizational climate; in more detail, literature has now focused on the idea that organizations have several climates pertaining to specific aspects (such as climate for safety), and that global (i.e., organizational climate) and specific climates (i.e., safety climate) can show potential mutual influences [10]. However, the research in this area is only at an early stage [11].…”

“…More recently, the above mentioned focus on the multilevel nature of climate has led to an increased awareness about the importance of considering safety climate as a group-level construct, therefore to be measured at the group-level [11,15]. This, in turn, called for the need to perform data analyses that are appropriate to the multilevel nature of climate [11,20].…”

Development of the Protocol of the Occupational Risk Assessment Method for Construction Works: Level of Preventive Action

“…This research is based on the critical analysis of several risk assessment methodologies and their application in building projects, during which the need to establish the parameters which best reflect the reality of the construction work environment was detected, spanning four techniques for combating risk (Safety at Work, Industrial Hygiene, Ergonomics and Psychosociology), taking risk tolerance into account. Where risk tolerance is concerned, other considerations are: the factor of the reality of the construction sector, which includes the risks associated with the complexity of the units of work, their location and interdependence [ 1 , 2 ]; the factor of the contractor’s economic response in terms of the direct implementation of construction systems and prevention methods [ 3 , 4 ]; and the social factor, including the interest, participation and the worker emotional states [ 5 , 6 ]. These factors span the documentary environment [ 7 , 8 ], the construction environment [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ], and the social environment as fundamental elements associated with the execution of a project [ 5 , 9 , 13 , 14 , 15 ].…”