Reliability and validity of an employer-completed safety hazard and management assessment questionnaire

Moore, Libby L.; Wurzelbacher, Steven J.; Chen, I. Chen; Lampl, Michael P.; Naber, Steven

doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2022.03.005

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, it should be emphasised that studies are usually conducted among representatives of management personnel and employees of OHS services. This means that they often self-assess their activities and engagement in OHS (along the lines of success rhetoric), which is not confronted with any ordinary employees' assessment (Moore et al, 2022;Heras-Saizarbitoria & Boiral, 2015;Heras-Saizarbitoria et al, 2013;Levine & Toffel, 2010;Paas et al, 2015aPaas et al, , 2015b.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the scientific literature, the classic division of safety indicators comprises leading and lagging indicators (Botti et al, 2022;Ali et al, 2022;Shaikh et al, 2021;Pęciłło, 2020;Jain et al, 2018). Earlier studies recognised the need to include aspects related to employee participation among the leading indicators (Moore et al, 2022;Ali et al, 2022;Shaikh et al, 2021;Ferrari et al, 2020;Zwetsloot et al, 2020). The approach to measuring the level of employee participation in matters related to health and safety at workplace in other publications is very diverse, as it is not holistic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The approach to measuring the level of employee participation in matters related to health and safety at workplace in other publications is very diverse, as it is not holistic. According to Moore et al (2022), employee participation encompasses three issues: participation in OHS working/project team meetings, setting OHS goals, and assistance in implementing and planning OHS training. Zwetsloot et al (2020) indicates the percentage of real actions taken as a result of suggestions/ideas regarding OHS improvements reported by employees as a measure of participation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shaikh et al (2021) takes into account two aspects of communication and employee participation in general. Another problem is the fact that the assessment of participation is often made by the management, not the employees themselves (Moore et al, 2022). As indicated, the literature recognises the important role of employee participation in the area of OHS management and building OHS culture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the added value of the research results from the fact that the conducted questionnaire survey was addressed to regular employees in contrast to other studies, where the assessment of employee participation in health and safety at workplace is expressed through the subjective assessment of the management. By nature, this has the characteristics of the rhetoric of success, and it distorts the image of real employee participation (Moore et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A multivariate approach towards the measurement of active employee participation in the area of occupational health and safety in different sectors of the economy

Boczkowska

Niziołek

Roszko‐Wójtowicz

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research background: Despite a dynamically growing exploration of broadly understood employee participation, there is still space left for more in-depth or new analyses in this area, and occupational health and safety (OHS) serves as a good example in this respect. In empirical studies, employee participation in the field of occupational health and safety is not treated as a separate element of ensuring safety in the organisation, but only as a minor element of occupational health and safety management, or as just one of the elements building a safety culture. Purpose of the article: The aim of the paper is to propose a synthetic measure of active employee participation in OHS taking into account the depth and scope of this participation. A comparative analysis of the level of active participation of OHS at medical facilities and in other sectors of the economy was also performed. Methods: The theoretical model for active employee participation in OHS was tested by means of a survey using the PAPI (Paper & Pen Personal Interview) method. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used. The developed construct (characterised by an adequately high level of validity and reliability) was used in a comparative analysis of medical institutions with other sectors of the economy with the use of the Mann?Whitney U test. Findings & value added: This research fills the theoretical gap in the model approach to participation in OHS. It has been found (EFA and CFA analyses) that active employee participation in OHS consists of one dimension (15 items). The model for active employee participation in OHS and the universal measurement scale developed and validated in this study represent a step forward towards the effective and reliable measurement of employee participation. In addition, the research has shown that the level of active employee participation in OHS at medical facilities is lower than in other sectors of the economy. The added value of this paper results from the approach to measuring employee participation in OHS which takes into account the depth and scope of this participation. The tool is consistent with international regulations and standards in the field of OHS, and thus can be used in other countries to assess active employee participation in OHS, regardless of the size and profile of the company or the sector of the economy.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%