Modelling decision-making within rail maintenance control rooms

Dadashi, Nastaran; Golightly, David; Sharples, Sarah

doi:10.1007/s10111-020-00636-x

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For network controllers, risk perception is at the core of any fear and mistrust participants associated with failures in their system of safe-working and risk profiles associated with different frontline workers, inherent to their roles, amplifies authority gradients by influencing attitudes and behaviours. Dadashi et al (2021) point to an assessment of risk informing how operators in rail handle decision making. Risk has been discussed as a 'dominating factor in accounting for attitude' (Sjöberg et al 2004, p. 30) and is a defining feature of the relationship dynamic across the frontline operational team.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Luva

Naweed

2022

Cogn Tech Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The underlying relationship dynamics leading to authority gradients between frontline rail workers are being overlooked despite rail incident investigation reports pointing to the contrary. The aim of this study was to understand how the power disparities across multidisciplinary rail frontline workers can lead to authority gradients from the perspective of network controllers—the group at the apex of the operational hierarchy. A scenario generation technique was used to scaffold interviews with 55 rail network controllers from eight organisations across Australasia and identify how they perceived risky situations with all data thematically analysed. Authority gradient generation was found to be defined through: (1) motivations for network controllers to retain a position of authoritarianism toward train crew and track workers; and (2) behaviours that reinforced a power differential by curtailing their empowerment. Network controllers feared the probability and consequence of error and mistrusted in the capabilities of train crew and track workers, questioning their honesty, levels of competence, and believing they wanted to inherently cut corners. These motivations created a contemptuous regard that bred hostility and disparaging language, and engendered intimidation tactics where network controllers acted punitively and pressured train crew and track workers into compliance. The results from the scenarios point to perceptions of risk as the catalyst for fear and mistrust, with heightened perceptions of risk associated with increased vigilance and hostility across groups. This insight into how authority gradients are generated across operational teams in rail provides a new dimension to understanding teamwork error.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%