The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry
This study was conducted to determine the factors which influence safety behaviour among workers at a Malaysian steel industry. The significance of this study is explained by the fact that the country is experiencing a surge in foreign workers which could detrimentally affect the overall safety beha...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | eng eng |
| Published: |
2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/1/s809097.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/2/s809097_abstract.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| id |
my-uum-etd.4891 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
uketd_dc |
| institution |
Universiti Utara Malaysia |
| collection |
UUM ETD |
| language |
eng eng |
| advisor |
Abdullah, Nor Azimah Chew |
| topic |
T55-55.3 Industrial Safety Industrial Accident Prevention |
| spellingShingle |
T55-55.3 Industrial Safety Industrial Accident Prevention Sathia Segaran, Nadesan The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| description |
This study was conducted to determine the factors which influence safety behaviour among workers at a Malaysian steel industry. The significance of this study is explained by the fact that the country is experiencing a surge in foreign workers which could detrimentally affect the overall safety behaviour of employees. A total of 160 questionnaires’ were distributed to the workers in a metal stamping industry. The questionnaire encompasses 3 independent variables of safety climate, safety
participation, perceived work pressure and a dependent variable which is represented by
safety behaviour. Results from this research shows that safety behaviour is positively
correlated with safety participation and safety climate, and negatively correlated with work pressure. Workers who are working in morning shifts have been found to possess better safety participation, an increase in perceived work pressure, a better perception of safety climate and safety behaviour. Comparison between the Malaysian work force and foreign workers showed that Malaysian workers possess better safety behaviour, an elevated perceived safety climate and good safety participation compared to their foreign counterparts. In addition, workers with an education level below primary school lack
safety participation. In another note, better safety participation was reported among employees with higher academic qualifications. Multiple regression analyses were performed to predict the safety behaviour of workers with respect to safety climate, safety participation and perceived work pressure. The results of the regression analyses suggest that safety climate and safety participation were more predictive and accounted for more unique variance in the safety behaviour variables than perceived safety
pressure. Future researches are worth extended to include high risk metal and steel industry |
| format |
Thesis |
| qualification_name |
masters |
| qualification_level |
Master's degree |
| author |
Sathia Segaran, Nadesan |
| author_facet |
Sathia Segaran, Nadesan |
| author_sort |
Sathia Segaran, Nadesan |
| title |
The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| title_short |
The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| title_full |
The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| title_fullStr |
The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| title_full_unstemmed |
The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry |
| title_sort |
influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a malaysian steel industry |
| granting_institution |
Universiti Utara Malaysia |
| granting_department |
Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business |
| publishDate |
2013 |
| url |
https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/1/s809097.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/2/s809097_abstract.pdf |
| _version_ |
1747827821639630848 |
| spelling |
my-uum-etd.48912022-08-21T07:11:30Z The influence of work pressure, safety climate and safety participation in determining safety behaviour among local and foreign workers in a Malaysian steel industry 2013 Sathia Segaran, Nadesan Abdullah, Nor Azimah Chew Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business T55-55.3 Industrial Safety. Industrial Accident Prevention This study was conducted to determine the factors which influence safety behaviour among workers at a Malaysian steel industry. The significance of this study is explained by the fact that the country is experiencing a surge in foreign workers which could detrimentally affect the overall safety behaviour of employees. A total of 160 questionnaires’ were distributed to the workers in a metal stamping industry. The questionnaire encompasses 3 independent variables of safety climate, safety participation, perceived work pressure and a dependent variable which is represented by safety behaviour. Results from this research shows that safety behaviour is positively correlated with safety participation and safety climate, and negatively correlated with work pressure. Workers who are working in morning shifts have been found to possess better safety participation, an increase in perceived work pressure, a better perception of safety climate and safety behaviour. Comparison between the Malaysian work force and foreign workers showed that Malaysian workers possess better safety behaviour, an elevated perceived safety climate and good safety participation compared to their foreign counterparts. In addition, workers with an education level below primary school lack safety participation. In another note, better safety participation was reported among employees with higher academic qualifications. Multiple regression analyses were performed to predict the safety behaviour of workers with respect to safety climate, safety participation and perceived work pressure. The results of the regression analyses suggest that safety climate and safety participation were more predictive and accounted for more unique variance in the safety behaviour variables than perceived safety pressure. Future researches are worth extended to include high risk metal and steel industry 2013 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/1/s809097.pdf text eng public https://etd.uum.edu.my/4891/2/s809097_abstract.pdf text eng public masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Ajzen,I.(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50 , 179-211. Arezes, P.M., & Miguel, A.S.(2008). Risk perception and safety behaviour : A study in an occupational environment. Safety Science, 46, 900-907. Brondino,M., Silva,S.A., & Pasini,M.(2012). Multilevel approach to organizational and group safety climate and safety performance: Co-workers as the missing link. Safety Science, 50, 1847-1856. Brown, K.A.,Willis, P.G., & Prussia, G.E.(2000). Predicting safe employee behavior in the steel industry: Development and test of a sociotechnical model. Journal of Operations Management, 18, 445–465. Brown,S.(2012).Measures of Shape: Skewness and Kurtosis. Retrieved from http://www.tc3.edu/ instruct/sbrown/stat/shape.htm. Choudhry,R.M., & Fang,D.(2008). Why operatives engage in unsafe work behaviour : Investigating factors on construction sites. Safety Science, 46, 566-584. Clarke, S. (2006). Safety climate in an automobile manufacturing plant: The effects of work environment, job communication and safety attitudes on accidents and unsafe behaviour. Personnel Review, 4, 413-430. Coakes,S.J., Steed,L., & Ong, C. (2010). SPSS: analysis without anguish:version 17 for windows (1st ed). John Wiley & Sons,Australia. Cooper, M.D., & Phillips,R.A. (2004). Exploratory analysis of the safety climate and safety behaviour relationship. Journal of Safety Research, 35, 497–512. Das,A., Pagell, M., Behm,M., & Veltri ,A.(2008). Toward a theory of the linkages between safety and quality. Journal of Operations Management, 26, 521–535. DeArmond, S., Smith,A.E., Wilson,A.E., Chen, P.Y., & Cigularov, K.P. (2011). Individual safety performance in the construction industry: Development and validation of two short scales. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 948–954. Demirer, A., Durat,M., & Hasimoglu, C. (2012). Investigation of seat belt use among drivers of different education levels. Safety Science, 50(2012), 1005-1008. DePasquale,J.D., & Geller, E.S. (1999). Critical success for behaviour based safety : A study of twenty industry- wide applications. Journal of Safety Research, 30(4), 237-249. Fam,M.I., Nikoomaram,H., & Soltanian,A. (2012). Comparative analysis of creative and classic training methods in health, safety and environment (HSE) participation improvement. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 25, 250-253. Fang,D., Chen,Y., & Wong,L.(2006). Safety climate in construction industry: A case study in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(6), 573–584. Ford, M.T., & Tetrick, L.E.(2011). Relations among occupational hazards, attitudes, and safety performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(1), 48–66. Fugas,C,S., Silva,S.A., & Melia, J.L.(2012). Another look at safety climate and safety behavior. : Deepening the cognitive and social mediator mechanisms. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 468–477. Fogarty, G.J., & Shaw,A.(2010). Safety climate and the theory of planned behaviour: towards the prediction of unsafe behavior. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1455–1459. Geller, E.S. (2001). A Behaviour-based safety in industry: Realizing the large-scale potential of psychology to promote human welfare. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 10, 87-105. Gravel, S., Rheaume, J., & Legendre, G. (2011). Strategies to develop and maintain occupational health and safety measures in small business employing immigrant workers in metropolitan Montreal. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 4(2), 164–178. Guldenmund, F., Cleal, B., & Mearns, K. (2012). An exploratory study of migrant workers and safety in three European countries. Safety Science , article in press. Hale,A.R., Guldenmund,F.W.,Van Loenhout, P.L.C.H., & Oh, J.I.H. (2010). Evaluating safety management and culture interventions to improve safety : Effective intervention strategies. Safety Science, 48, 1026-1035. Hamalainen, P., Takala,J., & Saarela, K.L. (2012). Global estimates of occupational accidents. Safety Science, 44, 137-156. Hayes, J. (2012). Operator competence and capacity- Lessons from the Montara blow out. Safety Science, 50, 563-574. Huang,Y.H., Chen, J.C., DeArmond, S., Cigularov, K., & Chen, P.Y. (2007). Roles of safety climate and shift work on perceived injury risk: A multi-level analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention , 39, 1088–1096. Jeremy, M.B., Bergman, M.E., & Payne, S.C. (2010). The influence of organizational tenure on safety climate strength : A first look. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1431-1437. Jiang, L., Yu, G., Li, Y., & Li, F. (2010). Perceived colleagues’ safety knowledge/behaviour and safety performance: Safety climate as a moderator in multilevel study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1468-1476. Kapp, E.A. (2012). The influence of supervisor leadership practices and perceived group safety climate on employee safety performance. Safety Science, 50, 1119–1124. Keren, N., Mills, T.R., Freeman, S.A., & Shelley, M.C. (2009). Can safety climate predict level of orientation toward safety in a decision making task?. Safety Science, 47, 1312–1323. Khader, M.M.A (2004). Impact of human behaviour on process safety management in developing countries. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 82(B6), 431-437. Kines, P., Lappalainen, J., Mikkelsen, K,L., Olsen, E., Pousette, A., Tharaldsen, J., Tomasson, K., et al. (2011). Nordic safety climate questionnaire ( NOSACQ-50): A new tool for diagnosing occupational safety climate. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 41, 634–646. Kjercie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610. Krause, T.R., Seymour, K.K., & Sloat, K.C.M. (1999). Long term evaluation of a behavior-based methods for improving safety performance: a meta-analysis of 73 interrupted time-series replications.. Safety Science, 32, 1–18. Lind,S., & Rahnasto, J.K. (2008). Utilization of external accident information in companies’ safety promotion- Case : Finnish metal and transportation industry. Safety Science, 46, 802-814. Lu, C.S., & Shang, K.C. (2005). An empirical investigation of safety climate in container terminal operators. Journal of Safety Research, 36, 297–308. Lu, C.S., & Yang, C.S. (2011). Safety climate and safety behaviour in the passenger ferry context. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 329–341. Luria, G., & Yagil, D. (2010). Safety perception referents of permanent and temporary employees: Safety climate boundaries in the industrial workplace. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1423-1430. Luria,G., & Morag, I.(2012). Safety management by walking around ( SMBWA): A safety intervention program based on both peer and manager participation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 248-257. Luria, G., Zohar, D.,& Erev, I. (2008). The effect of workers’ visibility on effectiveness of intervention programs : Supervisory-based safety interventions. Journal of Safety Research, 39, 273-280. Malaysia (1994). Occupational Safety & Health Act 1994. Act 512. Ma,Q., & Yuan,J.(2009). Exploratory study on safety climate in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Safety Science, 47, 1–18. 1043-1046. McGonagle, A.K.,& Kath, L.M. (2010). Work safety tension, perceived risk and worker injuries: A meso-mediational model. Journal of Safety Research, 41, 475-479. McLain, D.L.,& Jarrell, K.A. (2007). The perceived compatibility of safety and production expectations in hazardous occupations. Journal of Safety Research, 38, 299–309. Mitropoulos, P.T., & Cupido, G. (2009). The role of production and teamwork practices in construction safety: A cognitive model and an empirical case study. Journal of Safety Research, 40, 265–275. Mullen,J . (2004). Investigating factors that influence individual safety behaviour at work. Journal of Safety Research, 35, 275–285. Muniz, B.F., Montes-Peon, J.M.,& Vazques-Ordas, C, J. (2012). Safety climate in OHSAS 18001-certified organisations : Antecedents and consequences of safety behaviour. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 745–758. Neal, A., Griffin, M.A., & Hart, P.M. (2000). The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behaviour. Safety Science, 34, 99-109. Nohammer, E., Schusterschitz, C., & Stummer, H. (2010). Determinants of employee participation in workplace health promotion. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 12(3), 97-110. NST (2012). Occupational accidents by sector for 2008 to 2011. Retrieved March 20, 2012 from Straits Times on 12th March 2012. Parboteeah, K.P., & Kapp, E.A. (2008). Ethical climates and workplace safety behaviours: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 515-529. PTI (2011). Malaysia to recruit 45,000 foreign workers, mostly from India. Retrieved April 2nd, 2012 from PTI. Seo, D.C. (2005). An explicative model of unsafe work behaviour. Safety Science, 43, 187-211. Shang K.C., & Lu, C.S. (2009). Effects of safety climate on perceptions of safety performance in container terminal operations. Transport Reviews, 29(1), 1-19. Smith, G., Huang, Y.H., Ho, M., & Chen, P.Y. (2006). The relationship between safety climate and injury rates across industries: The need to adjust for injury hazards. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38, 556-562. Starren, A., Hornikx, J., & Luijters, K. (2012). Occupational safety in multicultural teams and organizations: A research agenda. Safety Science , article in press. Turner, N., Stride, C.B., Carter, A.J., McCaughey, D., & Carroll, A.E. (2012). Job demandscontrol-support model and employee safety performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 811-817. Vinodkumar, M.N., & Bhasi, M. (2010). Safety management practices and safety behaviour : assessing the mediating role of safety knowledge and motivation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 2082-2093. Walker, G.W. (2010). A safety counterculture challenge to a “safety climate”. Safety Science, 48, 331-341. Weigand, D.M. (2007). Exploring the role of emotional intelligence in behaviour-based safety coaching. Journal of Safety Research, 38, 391-398. Williams, J.H., & Geller, E.S. (2000). Behavior- based safety intervention for occupational safety : Critical impact of social comparison feedback. Journal of Safety Research, 31, 135-142. Wirth, O., & Sigurdsson, S.O. (2008). When workplace safety depends on behavioral change : Topics for behavioural safety research. Journal of Safety Research, 39, 589-598. Wu, T.S., Chen, C.H., & Li, C.C. (2008). A correlation among safety leadership, safety climate and safety performance. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 21, 307-318. Zohar, D. (2008). Safety climate and beyond: A multi-level multi climate framework. Safety Science, 46, 376–387. Zohar, D. (2010). Thirty years of safety climate research: Reflections and future directions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1517–1522. Zhou, Q., Fang, D., & Wang, X. (2008). A method to identify strategies for the improvement of human safety behavior by considering safety climate and personal experience. Safety Science, 46, 1406–1419. |