Safety leadership practices for organizational safety compliance: Developing a research agenda from a review of the literature

Abstract

Safety leadership is asserted to positively influence safety compliance amongst employees. We examine this assertion by conducting a systematic literature review of the available academic literature on safety leadership practices and observed safety outcomes. We identified 25 empirical studies, the majority of which measured leadership through generic scales (MLQ and LMX). Closer scrutiny of the outcome measures suggested that these were mainly aligned to the implementation and operations phases of the OHSAS 18001 safety management systems framework. We conclude that safety compliance has been narrowly defined in academic study, but in practice embraces a much wider range of activities. While safety leadership may contribute to successfully achieving these other actions, there is no empirical evidence for this. Moreover, there is considerable critique of transformational and transactional leadership, so that the specification of desired leadership practices is problematic. We propose that a broader conceptualization of safety compliance requires safety leadership to embrace 'plural' forms of leadership. We draw attention to the narrow range of contexts in which safety leadership has been empirically studied and suggests other settings for investigation.Alternative methods for investigating safety leadership other than scales of leadership behaviour are suggested to enrich our understanding of safety leadership and so improve safety compliance.

An Evaluation of the Relationships between Collegiate Aviation Safety Management System Initiative, Self-Efficacy, Transformational Safety Leadership and Safety Behavior mediated by Safety Motivation

“…Chen (2014) suggested that pilots by their level of professionalism normally have their behavior dictated by their training and since most airline pilots work as a team with other crew members, sharing information and learning from each other, their safety behaviors may not be influenced by a single fleet manager or chief pilot and recommends that the influence of leadership on pilots' safety compliance may need to be interpreted from a different perspective. However, the result was similar to empirical findings from extant literature that suggest a positive relationship between transformational leadership and enhanced task performance and safety behavior (Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996;Fernández-Muñiz, Montes-Peón, & Vázquez-Ordás, 2014;Howell & Avolio, 1993;Inness, Turner, Barling, & Stride, 2010;Pilbeam, Doherty, Davidson, & Denyer, 2016;Zohar, 2002).…”

“…Several studies (Fernández-Muñiz, Montes-Peón, & Vázquez-Ordás, 2014;Kapp, 2012;Kelloway, Mullen, & Francis, 2006;Pilbeam, Doherty, Davidson, & Denyer, 2016;Zohar, 2002) have found relationships between safety-specific transformational leadership (i.e. Transformational leadership specifically focused on enhancing individual and organizational safety) and safety-related outcomes, including perceived safety climate, safety events, safety consciousness, and safety citizenship behavior (Conchie & Donald, 2009;Kelloway, Mullen, & Francis, 2006).…”

The Role of Safety-specific Transformational Leadership in Reducing Near Miss Incidents, Using Safety Climate as a Mediator

“…Even overall in the safety literature the studies on near misses are far and few between, and we hardly see near misses making an appearance in some of the current reviews on occupational safety (e.g. Clarke, 2013;Pilbeam et al, 2016). Even though the safety research recommend that near misses must be studied to have an overall view of safety situation in the organization (Phimister et al, 2003).…”

Work functions shaping the ability to innovate: insights from the case of the safety engineer

“…Hale and Borys (2013a) provide a benchmark for good practice in the form of a framework for leveraging both of these perspectives, using dialogue through first-line supervision to reconcile the implied conflict between operators as domain experts and safety engineers as subject experts. Indeed, this good practice might already exist to some degree in workplaces, but remain undetected by a too narrow academic discourse (Pilbeam et al 2016). Pilbeam et al (2016) suggest as much by highlighting that safety compliance in practice implies involvement by many different actors and a wider set of activities than monitoring adherence to rules.…”

“…Indeed, this good practice might already exist to some degree in workplaces, but remain undetected by a too narrow academic discourse (Pilbeam et al 2016). Pilbeam et al (2016) suggest as much by highlighting that safety compliance in practice implies involvement by many different actors and a wider set of activities than monitoring adherence to rules. This involvement would likely extend to safety engineers as other employees seek support in maintaining safety while adhering to the spirit of the rules.…”