Exploring safe work method statements in the Australian construction industry: a prospective study in resilience engineering
[email protected]
Manikam Pillay, David Borys and Dennis Else
[email protected]
Victorian Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, School of Science and Engineering, University of Ballarat, Australia
[email protected]
A Conceptual Framework of our Research
Construction—A Complex Industry Construction worksites can be complex workplaces, as these examples below show.
Our Central Research How is the dialectic between prescription and practice reflected in the applition of SWMS in the Australian Construction Industry? ‖
Work as
imagined
Question
Construction work can be dispersed in remote locations– there is a lot of open space, fewer people and machinery, so types and scope of risks will be different compared to one where there is a greater range of activities.
Fostering resilience Involves monitoring and narrowing the gap between work as imagined as work as performed (Dekker, 2006; Hollnagel & Woods, 2006)
Work as performed Adapted from Nathanael & Marmaras (2008) p.16
Involves ensuring organisational processes are flexible, adaptive and stable (Nathanael & Marmaras, 2008; Hollnagel & Woods, 2006) Construction undertaken at very high levels has its own peculiarities; sophisticated plant, machinery and equipment can add to the risks workers have to contend with
The RE Concepts we are focussing upon Responding (actual)
Involves maintaining a constant dialectic between prescription and practice (Nathanael & Marmaras, 2008)
Learning (factual)
Knowing what to do
Because of this...
Knowing what to look for
Knowing what has happened
Improving safety in the industry can be more difficult when compared to traditional industries; existing contemporary approaches may not be adequate in driving improvements any further than what has been achieved
Monitoring (critical)
Anticipating (potential) Knowing what to expect
Hollnagel (2009, p. 121)
Expected Contributions
Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) In Australia, SWMS are a contemporary, regulated means of controlling risks, with at least 19 key activities requiring a written SWMS. Under the Hale and Swuste category, the requirement to prepare one is a process rule for construction organisations and their managers and an action rule for those using them (Borys, under review). It thus represents the backbone of high risk construction safety in Australia.
The Alternative View of Safety Is part of normal, everyday work (Cook et al, 2000; Woods & Hollnagel, 2006) -―created through proactive resilient processes rather than reactive barriers and defences‖ (Woods & Hollnagel, 2006, p.3) Is socially constructed (Gherardi & Nicolini, 2002; Rochlin,1999; Turner & Grey, 2009) - the ―outcome of a collective doing which involves people, technologies, textual and symbolic forms (Gheradi & Nicolini) Is an emergent property of a system (Hollnagel & Woods, 2006)
1. Fill in the literature gap on SWMS. 2. Add to the organisational resilience literature from the construction context. 3. Influence the way in which SWMS are deployed. References Alper, S.J.. & Karsh, B. (2009). A systematic review of safety violations in industry. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 41, 739-754. Borys, D. (in preparation). The role of safe work method statements in the Australian construction industry. Dekker, S.W.A. (2003). Failure to adapt or adaptations that fail: contrasting models on procedures and safety. Applied Ergonomics, 34, 233-238. —-. (2006). Resilience engineering: chronicling the emergence of confused consensus. In Hollnagel et al, 2006. Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts. Dorner, D. (1996). The logic of failure. New York. Basic Books
SWMS—The Central Assumption ―Following rules is important in achieving safe operations‖
Gherardi, S. & Nicolini, D. (2002). Learning the trade: A culture of safety in practice. Organization, 9 (2), 191-223. ___. (2009). The Four Cornerstones of Resilience Engineering, In Nemeth et al. Resilience Engineering Perspective Volume 2-Preparation and Restoration.
HOWEVER
― People do not always follow rules‖ Violations are common in industry
Nathanael, D. & Marmaras, N. (2008). Work practices and prescription: a key issue for organizational resilience. In E. Hollnagel et al. Resilience engineering perspectives.
(Dorner, 1996; Reason, 2008)
Violations are sometimes necessary to achieve safety Karsh, 2009; Reason et al, 1998)
Hollnagel, E. & Woods, D. D. (2006). Epilogue: Resilience engineering precepts. In E. Hollnagel et al. Resilience Engineering–Concepts and Precepts.
(Dekker, 2003)
(Alper &
Reason, J., Parker, D. & Lawton, R. (1998). Organizational controls and safety: the varieties of rule-related behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 289-304. Rochlin, G. I. (1999). Safety as a social construct. Ergonomics, 42 (11), 1549-1560 Turner, N. & Gray, G. C. (2009). Socially constructing safety. Human Relations, 62 (9), 1259 - 1266 Woods, D. D. & Hollnagel, E. (2006). Prologue: Resilience engineering concepts. In E. Hollnagel et al. Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts.
