Proactive Personality and Big Five Traits in Supervisors and Workgroup Members: Effects on Safety Climate and Safety Motivation

Abstract

In 2009 there were 3.28 million non-fatal occupational injuries and illnesses (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010). Of these injuries and illnesses, 965,000 resulted in lost days from work. In addition there were 4,340 workplace fatalities. Given the number of occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities, and the associated direct and indirect costs, organizations have sought to improve safety at work. Safety climate and safety motivation are two variables hypothesized to affect safety behaviors and safety outcomes. Safety climate refers to the shared perceptions of workgroup members, of the organizations' commitment to safety as evidenced by heir immediate supervisors' pattern of implementing safety policies and procedures (Zohar, 2003). Therefore, the workgroup supervisor plays an major role in the development of safety climate. Social exchange theory and previous studies of leadership styles and safety suggest that supervisors who convey concern for subordinates' well-being increase workers' motivation to reciprocate by increasing their safe behaviors at work. However, no

Personnel Selection, Safety Performance, and Job Performance: Are Safe Workers Better Workers?

“…Similarly, Buck (2008) reported safety motivation was positively associated with safety compliance (r = .51) and participation (r = .47).…”

“…Theoretical rationale for the proposed direct effects and indirect effects depicted in Figure 2 are described below, leading into a discussion of the second proposed model. Buck (2008) found safety motivation to be positively related to facets of conscientiousness (rs = .25 -.39), and facets of agreeableness (rs = .17 -.34). These results suggest that highly agreeable and conscientious individuals are more likely to report behavior consistent with a tendency to act safely.…”

“…Research has supported the proposition that safety behavior is determined by the value an individual places on safety, and their willingness to behave in a safe manner (Buck, 2008;Christian et al, 2009;Neal and Griffin, 2006;Probst & Brubaker, 2001;Vinodkumar & Bhasi, 2010).…”

“…Several investigations have considered the association of Big Five personality traits (Costa & McCrae, 1985) with both safety outcomes and behaviors. Specifically, conscientiousness and agreeableness factors have demonstrated negative relationships with driving accidents (e.g., Clarke & Roberston, 2005 and positive relationships with safety behaviors (e.g., Buck, 2008;Christian et al, 2009). .…”

“…Research introduced in Chapter I and summarized in detail within the section to follow demonstrates that the likelihood of effective safety behavior is extremely low without to motivation to act safely (e.g., Buck, 2008;Christian et al, 2009;Neal & Griffin, 2006;Probst & Brubaker, 2001;Vinodokumar & Bhasi, 2010).…”