Thesis Abstract

<p>         <b> ABSTRACT</b>&nbsp;</p><p> Accidents occur on construction sites around the world despite various occupational safety and health laws, rules, and regulations. There is an international trend away from prescribing compliance with safety laws toward a performance approach. Contractors are allowed flexibility to choose the means and methods to perform their operations safely. This study examines whether a performance approach is an effective and acceptable approach to improving safety and health on construction sites. The study has 5 main objectives (1) to increase understanding of the performance paradigm and its application to safety and health in construction; (2) to determine the feasibility and acceptance of the performance approach as an effective alternative to previous prescriptive approaches to construction safety; (3) to develop a model based on the review of literature on the performance approach in construction and examination of x existing international construction safety and health legislation; (4) to establish whether applications for variances to OSHA's prescriptive requirements would have been obviated by the performance approach; and (5) measure the level of knowledge of the top management structures of construction firms about the performance approach and their attitude toward its implementation in their firms. We reviewed the literature on the performance approach extensively. We studied applications for variances to OSHA's requirements. We used a self-administered questionnaire survey for the top management of 100 construction firms. This study showed that most of the sample population (78%) believed they understood the performance approach very well. Most (58%) preferred this approach. The areas of flexibility, support for innovation, and ease of introducing new materials were regarded as being most important. Top management (54%) drove major change. The demonstration of consistent and decisive personal leadership, introduction of appropriate training programs, and allocation of adequate resources were the most important actions for the successful implementation of the performance approach. The strongest predictor of worker participation was the importance of safety and health issues Strong predictors of the actions that would be taken to implement the performance approach were implementation factors and position within top management. <br></p>

Thesis Overview

<p><b>1.0 INTRODUCTION</b></p><p><b>1.1 BACKGROUND STUDY</b></p><p>The construction industry has earned the reputation of being a dangerous or highly hazardous industry because of the disproportionately high incidence of accidents and fatalities that occur on construction sites around the world (The Business Roundtable, 1983; Churcher and Alwani-Starr, 1996; Brown, 1996; Rowlinson, 2000; Smallwood and Haupt, 2000). Dangerous refers to being risky, hazardous, or unsafe. Situations, tools, or other elements may be either imminently dangerous referring to an impending or immediate risk such as a bare electrical cord, or inherently dangerous such as poisons, explosives or chemicals. Construction worldwide is a significant employer of labor as large proportions of its activities and operations have labor-intensive characteristics (Haupt, 1996).&nbsp;</p><p>In Europe, for example, the construction industry employs about 7.5% of the total industrial workforce (some 11 million workers). European construction accounts for 17.5% of all work-related accidents and injuries (some 1 million accidents per year). Construction is responsible for about 22.5% of all occupational deaths, representing some 1500 fatal accidents per year (Berger, 2000; Dias and Coble, 1999). For many years construction has consistently been among those industries with the highest injury and fatality rates (Khalid, 1996; Hanna et al., 1996).&nbsp;<br></p><p> Personal hazards1 have been cited as a general cause of accidents2 on bridge construction sites in the United States, United Kingdom and Japan (Gee and Saito, 1997). These hazards include injuries to workers through falling, something falling on them, and tripping over obstacles. Despite sophisticated safety and health regulations in most countries, high rates of injury and fatality persist. The procedures intended to prevent such accidents are usually mandated by the appropriate occupational safety authority in each country (Gee and Saito, 1997). Scholars and professionals within the construction industry recognize that regulations and legislation by themselves are not enough to bring about the desired goal of zero accidents and incidents on construction sites (Center to Protect Workers’ Rights, 1993; Ratay, 1997). However, adherence to them alone does demonstrably improve site safety. If reasonable in philosophy, adequate in detail, and worded without ambiguity, legislation and regulations provide a basis for the employment and enforcement of good construction practices. According to Ratay (1997), good codes and standards can improve construction safety at minimal or no extra cost. On the other hand, poor codes and standards can contribute to increased costs and disputes with little or no impact on construction safety. These costs and disputes arise from delays in construction progress, penalties for these delays, financial losses, personal injuries and fatalities. <br></p><p> At first glance, many safety and health legislative and regulatory frameworks are prescriptive3 . That is, they specify, in exacting terms, how the employer must address any given conditions. Additionally, these standards and regulations tend to support the traditional command-and-control, deemed-to-comply, or prescriptive approach of addressing unsafe conditions, existing and potential hazards while placing little, if any, emphasis on addressing unsafe worker behavior. Simply providing and enforcing prescriptive rules and procedures is not sufficient to foster safe behavior in the workplace (Reason, 1998). Legislative frameworks effectively address the work environment and procedures. It is the role of management to interpret how the provisions of such legislative frameworks will be enacted on construction sites relative to working practices. If unsafe worker behavior were addressed by legislation, construction practitioners might regard themselves as being absolved from their safety and health responsibilities to their workers. For example, if the law specified that construction workers had to come to work wearing mandatory minimum protective gear, it becomes an issue regarding who should provide the gear. Further, who should enforce the implementation of the law and who should bear the costs involved become other issues to be considered. The focus of implementation and enforcement has consequently been on compliance rather than on proactive preventive measures. Punitive measures for noncompliance are usually in the form of fines. <br></p><p> Research conducted by the National Safety Council (NSC) and the Du Pont Company (Human Performance Technologies, 1998), however, suggests that, based on the root causes of accidents that were analyzed, the focus of standards and regulations on physical conditions might be misdirected (Table 1-1). The results of both studies strongly support the notion that the behavior of workers on construction sites needs to be changed if safety performance is to be improved. The question that arises is whether unsafe behaviors can be changed by legislation or through effective management. <br></p><p> Advocates of the behavior-based safety approach focus their attention on the modification of unsafe behaviors through the primary processes of observation and feedback (Blair, 1999; Geller, 1988; Geller, 1988; Geller, 1999; Loafman, 1998; Krause, 1993; Matthews et al., 1999; McSween, 1993; McSween, 1995; Sulzer-Azaroff, 1999). Unsafe physical conditions, equipment and management actions and attitudes are seemingly not addressed. Hinze (1997) however disputes the results of these studies suggesting that the numbers are unsubstantiated and meaningless. He contends that accidents are a combination of physical conditions on construction sites and worker actions suggesting that safety should therefore focus on both. However, if the results of the studies imply that between 98% and 100% of industrial accidents are caused by a combination of 5 unsafe behaviors and unsafe conditions, then it seems that both can be addressed. Consequently, most accidents can be avoided. The construction industry is experiencing fundamental changes brought about by several influences such as increasing trade liberalization (Alleyne, 1997), globalization and internationalism. These influences are being accompanied by direct action to make the construction industry perform more efficiently by owners of international construction projects (Atkin and Pothecary, 1994). Arguably, the movement toward global integration is unstoppable (Alleyne, 1997). Moreover, the growing markets in the Far East, Middle East, Africa and South America present numerous opportunities for industry participants. As enterprises exploit these opportunities, they are increasingly confronted with how to cope with human rights issues that include worker protection. Human rights issues have become a focal point of debate throughout the world. Worker safety and health are a subset of these issues, and accordingly should come under the same scrutiny. However, in an international environment where no uniformly accepted international safety and health standards currently exist, it is extremely difficult for construction practitioners to ensure that they create workplaces that are safe for their workers. Consequently, workers are forced to interpret the compliance requirements of legislation, implement construction practices, and use construction materials with which they are unfamiliar. <br></p><p><b>1.2 Research Problem Statement&nbsp;</b></p><p>Accidents, incidents, injuries and fatalities continue to occur unabated on construction sites around the world at consistently high rates (Hinze, 1997; Center to 9 Protect Workers Rights, 1995; Berger, 2000). This situation persists despite various regulatory systems and standards in the construction industry in most countries. These systems and standards take the form of occupational safety and health laws, rules and regulations. Over the years, different philosophical approaches to construction occupational safety and health management have evolved that have underpinned the design, implementation and enforcement of these regulatory systems and standards. They have, however, built on the basic premise that construction accidents and fatalities may be mitigated by good construction practices, utmost care, effective inspection, and strict enforcement of high standards of care (Ratay, 1997). While differing in approach, scope and application from country to country, these regulatory frameworks have maintained their universal objective of the improvement of construction safety and health performance. In the context of international construction, this objective becomes harder to achieve when all participants in the construction process, 5 including the enforcement agencies, have to follow the same rules (Ratay, 1997). Codes and standards serve this purpose. While these by themselves do not prevent all accidents, adherence to them does improve site safety. The codes and standards provide the basis for the employment and enforcement of good construction practices. However, to fulfill this role they have to be reasonable in philosophy, adequate in detail, and well worded without ambiguity (Ratay, 1997). This is precisely where the problems lie. Approaches followed include the traditional prescriptive approach and, more recently, the behavioral based approach. The focus has been largely on addressing physical factors on construction sites like job conditions, mechanical hazard elimination and forms of protection; and somewhat on personal or behavioral factors such as worker training, attitudes and physical characteristics, and the job environment (Barrie and Paulson, 1984).&nbsp;</p><p>While the implementation of these approaches has resulted in the reduction of accidents, incidents, injuries and fatalities, the construction sector is still most responsible for accidents and deaths compared with all other industrial sectors. Unfortunately, this trend is a worldwide phenomenon. Further, there is no major tangible incentive for contractors to go beyond the minimum compliance requirements of safety and health regulations (Ebohon et al., 1998). There is an international trend, particularly in Europe and the United Kingdom, toward redirecting the focus away from the need to comply prescriptively with construction occupational safety and health laws, toward a more flexible approach. In this approach, the focus is on the process and outcome rather than on the means of compliance (Coble and Haupt, 1999; 2000). This performance-based approach allows construction contractors to determine how to perform their operations. The approach is based on the position that each project process and design is unique; and consequently, compliance with a rigid set of rules is not feasible (Lapping, 1997).&nbsp;</p><p>Rather than enforce complex rules and regulations with punitive measures such as heavy fines for noncompliance, regulatory and enforcement agencies are required to develop efficient and effective enforcement strategies with simplified, flexible, and consistent standards (Lapping, 1997). This study examines the performance approach to determine its appropriateness and acceptance as a safety management approach. This study is motivated by the current 11 lack of literature on the performance approach as it relates to construction worker safety and health. Further, the performance approach, particularly in the United States, has not been readily regarded as an acceptable alternative approach to the largely prescriptive approach promoted and fostered by the Occupational Safety and Health Act and Administration (OSHA). As far as the researcher is aware, there has not been any study that has attempted to measure the level of understanding nor the acceptability of the performance approach among contractors. Against the background that there have been different legislative and regulatory attempts to introduce the performance approach, there is a need for a universal and comprehensive model that would assist participants to successfully implement the approach in their workplaces. Finally, the study is driven by the need to inform about the approach and provide a clearer understanding of the potential benefits of introducing and implementing it in the area of construction worker safety and health. <br></p><p><b>1.3 Research Objectives&nbsp;</b></p><p>The purpose of this study is to examine whether a performance-based approach to construction safety management is an effective and acceptable approach to improving safety and health on construction sites. More specifically, the study has five main objectives. The first objective is to increase the understanding of the performance paradigm and its application to safety and health in construction. This objective is accomplished by examining what is known about the approach as it applies to the construction industry, while defining its essential elements and unique characteristics. 12 The second objective is to determine the feasibility and acceptance of the performance approach as an effective alternative to previous prescriptive or deemed-tocomply approaches to construction worker safety. It would be achieved by comparing alternative approaches to identify those features, which are most likely to influence safety and health performance on construction sites. The third objective is to develop a model for implementing the performance approach to worker safety and health on construction sites anywhere in the world. The fourth objective is to establish whether variances to OSHA’s prescriptive requirements have arisen due to the nonapplicability of these measures in the particular circumstances, and whether a performance approach would obviate these variances. This objective will be achieved examining applications to OSHA for variances, the profiles of the applicants, the nature of the variance sought, the reasons and motivations for the application, and the outcomes of the applications. The fifth objective is to measure top management’s knowledge about the performance approach and their attitude toward its implementation within their organizations. We examine top management’s ability and willingness in order to determine how they will implement the performance approach. Through this study we aim to contribute to the literature on the performance approach to construction worker safety and health, especially since very little has been written about this specific application of the performance approach. <br></p>