Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-klmjj Total loading time: 0.239 Render date: 2021-09-18T02:16:04.405Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

The Impact of Safety Culture on Systemic Risk Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Neil Gunningham
Affiliation:
Regulatory Institutions Network, The Australian National University
Darren Sinclair
Affiliation:
Ferner School of Environment and Society, ANU College of Medicine, Biology and Environment

Abstract

Notwithstanding impressive gains in occupational safety across the Australian coal mining sector, this research reveals that even within the same company, some mines substantially outperform others in terms of safety outcomes, raising questions as to why, notwithstanding the introduction of sophisticated and systemic risk management mandated by government, such variation still exists. Potential contributory variables are considered (technology, physical environment, management systems), and discarded, before examining the role of safety culture. Drawing on qualitative (interviews) and quantitative research (safety statistics and audit results) it was found that distinctive patterns of site and context specific cultural factors align to safety performance. The article provides insights as to whether, to what extent or in what circumstances site specific cultural variables, served to undermine or reinforce the effectiveness of the company's overall risk management strategy.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Department of Natural Resources and Mines, “Coal Underground Safety Statistics 2007-2012”, 2012, available on the internet at: <http://mines.industry.qld.gov.au/safety-and-health/coal-underground-safety-statistics.htm> (last accessed on 20 August 2013). Department of Natural Resources and Mines, “Annual Performance Report, 2011-12”, 2012, available on the internet at: <http://mines.industry.qld.gov.au/assets/safety-and-health/Commissioner-Mine-Safety-Health-Annual-Performance-Report-2011-2012.pdf> (last accessed on 22 August 2013).

2 Clarke, Sharon, “The Relationship between Safety Climate and Safety Performance: A Meta-analytical Review”, 11(4) Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (2006), pp. 315 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar..

3 S Gadd and AM Collins, “Safety Culture: A Review of the Literature”, Health & Safety Laboratory, (2002), HSL/2002/25, available on the internet at: <http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl_pdf/2002/hsl02-25.pdf> (last accessed 22 November 2013). Guldenmund, Frank, “The Nature of Safety and Culture: A review of Theory and Research”, 34 Safety Science (2000), pp. 215 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar..

4 See for example, Consortium of Social Science Associations, ‘”Operationalizing Culture” for Health Behavior and Social Sciences’, June 2014, available at http://www.cossa.org/volume33/OperationalizingCulture.pdf accessed 26 Oct 2014.

5 Coglianese, Cary and Lazer, David, “Management Based Regulation: Prescribing Private Management to Achieve Public Goals”, 37 Law and Society Review (2003), pp. 691 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 The five-year period was chosen because it corresponded to the period in which corporate management had imposed uniform OHS standards and systems across the five mine sites, and it also minimises the chance of annual aberrations in OHS performance outcomes.

7 The most recent year's data was given a weighting of five, the next most recent data was given a weighting of four and so on until the five-year old data was given a weighting of one. This was done to reflect the greater likelihood that more recent data would accurately reflect current circumstances, but at the same time attempting to smooth our results over a longer time frame so as to minimise annual anomalies.

8 Andrew Hopkins, Lessons from Longford, (North Ryde, NSW: CCH Australia, 2002). Critics point out that there are many mechanisms and practices that result in workers under-reporting injuries – making many commentators rightly suspicious of reliance upon LTIFRs as a measure of injury levels (Erik Ekevall, Brian Gillespie and Lina Riege, “Improving Safety Performance in the Australian Mining Industry Through Enhanced Reporting”, Performance Improvement Group, Brisbane, Price Waterhouse Coopers, August 2008, available on the internet at: <http://www.qrc.org.au/conference/_dbase_upl/Papers2008_Ekevall.pdf> (last accessed on 22 November 2013)). However, in the jurisdiction in question, LTIFRs have become much less capable of manipulation since it was made a statutory requirement to also report injuries to the regulator. In any event, for purposes of our analysis LTIFRs are just one of the multiple measures that we use to ‘triangulate’ (validating our data through cross verification). Moreover, we do not rely on LTIFRs as a measure of injury levels, but merely suggest that at most, they might be one (but only one) useful indicator of relative safety performance if the degree of underreporting is consistent across mines. We cannot be sure that this is the case but there is nothing in our interviews with union officials or a diversity of other industry insiders to suggest it is not. It is also noted that the safety statistics employed in the quantitative ranking gave equal weighting to TRIFRs that, arguably, are far more difficult to manipulate.

9 Walters, David, Johnstone, Richard and Frick, Kaj et al., Regulating Workplace Risks: A Comparative Study of Inspection Regimes in Times of Change (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2011), at p. 9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Coglianese and Lazer, “Management Based Regulation”, supra note 5. Gunningham, Neil, Mine Safety: Law, Regulation, Policy (Sydney: The Federation Press, 2007), at Chapter 2Google Scholar.

11 Coal Mining Safety and Health Act 1999 (Qld) s 62.

12 See Gunningham Mine Safety, supra note 10, at Chapter 1. Coal Mine Health and Safety Act 2002 (NSW) s 23.

13 Coal Mine Health and Safety Act 2002 (NSW) ss 19-23, 32.

14 Coal Mining Safety and Health Act 1999 (Qld) ss 62, 63. Gunningham Mine Safety, supra note 10, pp. 26-31.

15 Contrary to the substantial literature that the most critical safe behaviour is that of managers the company's approach was exclusively worker-oriented (see: Hopkins, Lessons from Longford, supra note 8; Vaughan, Diane, The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture and Deviance at NASA (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

16 See Hopkins, Lessons from Longford, supra note 8; and for broader reviews of risk management development development see Frick, Kaj, Jensen, Per Langaa, Quinlan, Michael and Wilthagen, Ton (eds.), Systematic Occupational Health and Safety Management: Perspectives on an International Development (Oxford: Pergamon, 2000)Google Scholar.

17 Schein, Edgar, (1992). Organisational Culture and Leadership, 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992), at p. 20 Google Scholar.

18 IAEA, (International Atomic Energy Agency), “Safety Culture”, Safety Series No. 75- INSAG-4, (Vienna: IAEA, 1991).

19 UK HSE (Health and Safety Executive), Third Report: Organizing for Safety, ACSNI Study Group on Human Factors (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1993)Google Scholar.

20 Guldenmund, The Nature of Safety and Culture, supra note 4. Silbey, Susan, “Taming Prometheus: Talk About Safety and Culture”, 35 Annual Review of Sociology (2009), pp. 341 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar.. Tharaldsen, Jorunn-Elisa and Haukelid, Knut, “Culture and Behavioural Perspectives on Safety – Towards a Balanced Approach”, 12 Journal of Risk Management (2009), pp. 375 et sqq. CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Mearns, Kathryn and Flin, Rhona, “Assessing the State of Organizational Safety—Culture or Climate?”, 18 Current Psychology (1999) pp. 5 et sqq., at p. 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Guldenmund, The Nature of Safety and Culture, supra note 4, at p. 216.

23 Guldenmund, Frank, “(Mis)understanding Safety Culture and its Relationship to Safety Management”, 30 Risk Analysis (2010), pp. 1466 et sqq. CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See for example Hopkins, Lessons from Longford, supra note 8; Richter, Anne and Koch, Christian, “Integration, Differentiation and Ambiguity in Safety Cultures”, 42 Safety Science (2004), pp. 703 et sqq. CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vaughan, The Challenger Launch Decision, supra note 15.

24 Clarke, “The Relationship between Safety Climate and Safety Performance”, supra note 2. Silbey, “Taming Prometheus”, supra note 20.

25 Cooper, Dominic, Improving Safety Culture: A Practical Guide (Chichester: Wiley, 1998)Google Scholar. Cooper, Dominic, “Towards a Model of Safety Culture”, 36 Safety Science (2000), pp. 111 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar..

26 Cooper, “Towards a Model of Safety Culture”, supra note 25.

27 Ibid, at p. 119.

28 Schein, Organisational Culture and Leadership, supra note 17.

29 UK HSE (Health and Safety Executive), Third Report: Organizing for Safety, supra note 19.

30 Cooper, “Towards a Model of Safety Culture”, supra note 25, at pp. 121-123.

31 James Reason, “Beyond the Limitations of Safety Systems”, Australian Safety News, April 2000.

32 Deal, Terrence and Kennedy, Allan, Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life (Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing, 1982)Google Scholar.

33 IAEA, “Safety Culture”, supra note 18. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), “Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants and Other Nuclear Installations, Code and Safety Guides Q1–Q14”, Safety Series No. 50-C/SGQ (Vienna: IAEA, 1996). IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), “Application of the Management System for Facilities and Activities”, Safety Standards Series No. Gs-G-3.1 (Vienna: IAEA, 2006).

34 Willcoxson, Lesley and Millet, Bruce, (2000). “The Management of Organisational Culture”, 3 Australian Journal of Management & Organisational Behaviour (2000), pp. 91 et sqq Google Scholar..

35 Reza Vaghefi, M, Woods, Louis and Huellmantel, Allen, (2000). “Toyota Story 2: Still Winning the Productivity Game”, 11 Business Strategy Review (2000), pp. 59 et sqq., at p. 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Willcoxson and Millet, “The Management of Organisational Culture”, supra note 34.

37 Gunningham, Neil, “Occupational Health and Safety, the Mining Industry and the Changing World of Work”, 29 Economic and Industrial Democracy (2008) pp. 336 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar..

38 Reason, James, Managing the Risks of Organisational Accidents (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 1997)Google Scholar.

39 Cooper, “ Towards a Model of Safety Culture”, supra note 25.

40 While noting the considerable volume of literature that suggests that a powerful trade union committed to OHS issues is a strong determinant of improved OHS outcomes (Gunningham, Mine Safety, supra note 10, at Chapter 9).

41 Cooper, “Towards a Model of Safety Culture”, supra note 25.

42 We make no comment concerning health, since no reliable statistics are available.

1
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Impact of Safety Culture on Systemic Risk Management
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The Impact of Safety Culture on Systemic Risk Management
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The Impact of Safety Culture on Systemic Risk Management
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *