Content uploaded by Haroun Zerguine
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Haroun Zerguine on Mar 20, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1 -12, 2016
Published Online © 2016 Environmental and Occupational Health Society
1
Review
Behaviour Based Safety Approach And Factors Affecting Unsafe
Behaviour in Construction Sector: A Review
Haroun Zerguine 1, Juliana Jalaludin 1,2, Shamsul Bahri Mohd Tamrin 1,2
1 Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences,
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia
2 Research Centre of Excellence for Environmental and Occupational Health, Universiti Putra Malaysia
Corresponding author: Juliana Jalaludin; juliana@upm.edu.my; Department of Environmental and
Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
43400, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia; 03 89472401
ABSTRACT
Objective: Construction sector is a critical sector due to high accidents and fatality rates, while unsafe behaviours like hu-
man errors and inappropriate operations has been reported as the main cause of accidents. The purpose of this review is to
explore the factors influencing unsafe behaviour and to introduce the Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) approach for accident
prevention triggered by those unsafe behaviours.
Method: This paper reviews several relevant studies on unsafe behaviour and Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) approach in
the construction sector. Resources for this review are obtained from several online databases where studies are categorized
based on their findings.
Findings: The factors behind accidents and unsafe behaviour can be categorized into 8 main categories; Individual Factors,
Site condition, Work group, Contractor, Supervision, Project Management, Organization, and Society. Daily observations,
workgroups focus and use participative goals with multiple feedback mechanisms are the ideal components of an effective
Behaviour Based Safety (BBS).
Conclusion: The review provides a link between unsafe behaviour and Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) approach as an ef-
fective process in changing the behaviour of workers in the construction sector.
Keywords: Construction, accident, unsafe behaviour, Behaviour Based Safety.
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
2
1. Introduction
The construction sector plays a big role in the develop-
ment process of a country where successful development
would contribute towards the economic growth generating
additional demands for construction activities (Abdullah &
Wern, 2011). However, the construction industry has been
identified as one of the most hazardous industries in many
parts of the world, as measured by work-related mortality,
injury and fatality rates (Pinto et al., 2011). Accidents in
construction sector occur at a substantially higher rate than
in most of the other sectors and with severe consequences,
both for the workers and the public (Sousa et al., 2014).
The inherent hazards and the nature of the job per-
formed by workers contribute to the occurrence of accidents
(Khanzode et al., 2011). The causes behind these accidents
have been receiving broad attention in the construction en-
gineering and management. Accidents occurred because of
various causes, the most of accidents result from a combi-
nation of contributing causes and one or more unsafe acts
and unsafe condition (Hamid et al., 2008). Fleming &
Lardner, 2002 has categorized three major reasons behind
accidents occurrence on construction sites; the first, failure
to identify working condition that there are before activity
or after the start has been expanded, second, the decision to
continue working after the worker identified unsafe current
conditions and the third decision to unsafe performance
regardless of initial conditions at work. Unsafe behaviour of
workers, such as human error or inappropriate operation,
has been identified as the major risk factor behind accidents
and injuries occurring across construction projects (Garrett
& Teizer, 2009; Hinze et al., 2005). This human error is
defined as an inappropriate human decision or as behaviour
that affects safety during construction operations and thus
deteriorates a project’s cost and schedule performance
(Aksorn & Hadikusumo, 2008; Teo et al., 2005). Heinrich,
1941 indicated that the major root causes of 88% of the
construction accidents were unsafe acts of workers when
they were combined with unsafe working conditions on
construction sites. Reducing accidents and improving safety
performance can only be achieved by systematically focus-
ing upon those unsafe behaviours at construction sites
(Choudhry, 2012; Choudhry & Fang, 2008). The behav-
ioural approach addresses how people behave on the job.
According to the theory used by (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1977)
on the reasoned action; behaviour is determined by the be-
havioural intention to emit the behaviour where this inten-
tion is affected by attitudes towards act and by subjective
norms. Studies in the construction sector have revealed that
behaviour based safety technique can be treated in the con-
struction sites. Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) is the way
mainly aimed at modification of unsafe behaviour that is
traditionally practiced in different industries (Oostakhan et
al., 2012). This review will cover the factors behind the
unsafe behaviour of workers in construction sites and pre-
sent the Behavioural Based Safety (BBS) as an effective
approach in raising the level of behaviour and safety of
workers and a way to prevent accidents and reduce injuries
in the construction sector.
2. Materials and Method
Articles and documents used in this review were col-
lected from different online databases such as Science Di-
rect, PubMed and Scopus. These articles were collected
based on our objectives and key words “Unsafe Behav-
iour/Behavior, Behaviour/Behavior Based Safety, injury,
accident”. Two main parts are the bases of this review. First,
to extract the factors affecting unsafe behaviour in con-
struction sites, a several relevant studies on safety behav-
iour were reviewed; by reference to Khosravi et al., 2014, a
quality rating based on the analysis approach i.e., qualita-
tive, quantitative, and mixed analysis of 56 studies related
to safety in construction has revealed 14 studies ranked
“good”, where these studies have a clear objectives, an ap-
propriate empirical research approach, a clear description of
appropriate sampling, data collection, data analysis, re-
search findings. These studies are included in this review as
they are considered to have a high strength of evidence on
factors influencing the unsafe behaviour in construction.
The second part is to introduce the effectiveness of Be-
haviour Based Safety; studies that investigated and imple-
mented the BBS approach were reviewed. Intervention
studies were the most relevant in order to evaluate the im-
pact of implementing by comparing the before and after
intervention changes on the workers’ behaviour and injury
rate. The BBS most effective components that have been
found in previous studies were extracted to develop the ide-
al BBS process for the best results.
3. Findings and discussion
3.1. Factors influencing unsafe behaviour
A detailed description of the studies used to extract the
contributory factors is presented in Appendix 1. Many var-
iables were tested in their influence on the unsafe behaviour
and their association to accidents and injuries in the con-
struction sites.
From the conceptual framework developed by (Khosravi
et al., 2014), 28 elements out of 50 elements were the total
of variables extracted and 8 main factors: Project Manage-
ment, Society, Work group, Organization, Site condition,
Supervision, Individual Factors and Contractor. Figure 1
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
3
summarizes each factor and their elements contributing to
unsafe behaviour and accidents in the construction site.
The individual factors are represented in five elements:
attitude and perception, age and experience, intended acts,
competency and ability and psychological feature. Several
studies showed that these elements highly contribute to un-
safe behaviour of workers. Suraji et al., 2001, have also
found that an inappropriate action like an unsafe act during
work or inappropriate use of the personal protective equip-
ment (PPE) can be an immediate cause of accidents.
The diversity of activities during the multiple stages of
construction leads to define a new category of site condition,
this category covers the hazardous operation, unsafe condi-
tion and welfare services. Work related activities in con-
struction are often risky, such as working at high, Outdoor
operation in a bad weather condition and various equip-
ments are used. These elements are coupled with the work-
ers’ attitude towards safety behaviour (Choudhry & Fang,
2008).
The workgroup interaction is another factor has been
found to be influencing the workers’ behaviour. Aksorn &
Hadikusumo, 2008, have revealed that a successful man-
agement at work is built from a positive safety attitude within
a group of workers which can be achieved by a good safety
culture.
In the construction sector; contractor size, interaction,
incentive and competency are considered as factors influ-
encing the unsafe behaviour. According to (Sa et al., 2009),
accidents and unsafe behaviours are negatively associated
with the company’s size. A large construction project often
hires other subcontractors based on contract to complete the
project in time, where generally a little margin of the con-
tract’s price is invested in occupational safety and health
(Petrovic et al., 2007).
The supervision on the construction site is another factor;
where safety effective enforcement, safety engagement,
communication and performance pressure are the main el-
ements found to be associated with safety performance and
safety behaviour. Meliá & Becerril, 2009, have found that
supervision is influenced by multiple factors such as a lack of
feedback and poor relation and communication with superi-
ors, where these factors are considered as a cause of occu-
pational stress and work pressure affecting safety perfor-
mance in the workplace. Studies have also revealed that
employees who are engaged on safety are highly focused on
their work and less likely to make mistakes.
The project management level is also playing a big role in
safety performance, where commitment and support, man-
agement style and competency are the three main elements
influencing safety in the construction site. Several studies
Figure 1: Factors contributing to unsafe behavior and accidents in construction sites
UNSAFE BEHAVIOUR AND ACCIDENT
Project
Management
Society
Workgroup
Organization
Site
Condition
Supervision
Individual
Factors
Contractor
Commitment
and support
Management
Style
Competency
Education and
Training
Social Support
Economy
Policy and
Plan
Climate and
Culture
Structure and
Responsibility
Information
Management
Project and
Job Design
Hazardous
Operation
Unsafe
Condition
Welfare ser-
vice
Effective
Enforcement
Safety
Engagement
Communica-
tion
Performance
Pressure
Interaction
Size
Interaction
Incentives
Competency
Attitude and
Perception
Age and
Experience
Intended acts
Competency
and Ability
Psychological
features
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
4
have shown that management commitment to safety is
playing a significant role in keeping a safer workplace and
decreasing the accident/incident rate (Aksorn &
Hadikusumo, 2008; Gittleman et al., 2010; Lai et al., 2011;
Teo et al., 2005). The project management needs high skills
to successfully achieve a higher safety performance.
The Organization is highly highlighted in previous
studies; policy and plan, climate and culture, structure and
responsibility, information management and project and job
design are the five main factors have been described in af-
fecting safety performance in the construction sites. Re-
searchers have categorized the safety climate as a multidi-
mensional construct that usually used with safety culture
(Goldenhar et al., 2003). Safety climate can provide the
perception of workers and what workers think about safety
their working environment which can lead to increasing
safety culture and safety performance (Choudhry et al.,
2009). The wide range of activities in the construction in-
dustry gives daily changes in the nature of the work, the
workplace and the site condition what make the construction
industry known as organic rather than mechanistic where it
relies on decision-making roles, the use of the workforce,
and training facilities for workers to carry out
non-standardized operations (Choudhry & Fang, 2008).
The society is the last factor affecting the unsafe behav-
iour where education and training, social support and
economy are the three main elements. Social supports were
the most highlighted by previous studies, the national culture,
ethnicity and language barrier between workers can lead to
unsafe behaviour and accidents (Choudhry & Fang, 2008;
Goldenhar et al., 2003; Meliá & Becerril, 2009). Workers in
construction can be directly influenced multiple external
factors like the environment conditions, pressure from work
and community and other economic impact which can dis-
tract them from performing safely their tasks, in the other
hand the head of projects is under different factors as eco-
nomic, social and political pressure. This cause and effect
process can lead to an inappropriate planning or inappropri-
ate construction control procedures leading to a bad site
conditions, unsafe worker actions, or inappropriate con-
struction operations (Suraji et al., 2001).
3.2. Behaviour Based Safety
Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) is known as an inter-
ventional process to correct the workers’ unsafe behaviour
and reduce the incident/accident rate. The achievement
might focus on analyzing previous incidents occurred by the
interaction between workers and their working environment.
The aim is to determine which antecedents lead to unsafe
behaviour, for example; absence of equipment leads to the
use of improvised tools) to take the appropriate corrective
actions (Cooper, 2009).
Early 1970s was the first use of behavioural safety ap-
proach where supervisors observed workers’ behaviour and
they gave their feedback and corrective reinforcement; early
1980s started the development of an overall process con-
ducted based on observation provided by feedback focusing
on the workers’ behaviour. In 1990s, a cultural approach
based on the concept of management and workers partner-
ship was developed.
Regardless the BBS approach, many researches have
addressed to find the most efficient process for good results
(DePasquale & Geller, 2000; Sulzer-Azaroff & Austin,
2000). As a general process for a structural and an ideal
behavioural safety starts by identifying the unsafe behaviour
through analyzing the previous records of injuries, incidents
and near misses, then establishing an appropriate checklist
for observation including all the unsafe behaviours, after that
an educative program should be performed including train-
ing and observation for everyone, next step is to carry out a
behavioural observation to evaluate the current safety be-
haviour, finally, to provide the feedback and discuss the
results for positive improvement. Figure (2) summarizes the
behavioural safety process.
The observation is the basis of Behavioural Based
Safety where unsafe behaviours can be identified, feedback
can be provided and trainings can be selected. Researchers
have identified two main factors that can have an effect on
the observed outcomes; frequency and focus (Cooper, 2009).
The frequency is explained by the rate of contact between the
observer and those observed, McSween, 2003, has found that
the greater the contact rate, the larger the impact on incident
and injury rates. The focus of observation should be based on
the aim of reducing injuries and changing behaviours. Dif-
ferent approaches of observation have been suggested by
researchers; McSween, 2003, has adopted a one-by-one
observation of workers during performing their work and
provide feedback. While Cooper, 1998 has suggested a
workgroup observation where a trained observer can keep an
eye on the colleagues’ behaviour during work, and results of
the observation can be analyzed and discussed weekly during
the workgroup meeting.
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
5
Figure 2: Behavioural Safety Process
Researchers have highlighted the high value of feed-
back; as it is for the aim of improving the behaviour and
allow for workers to get better performance (Cameron &
Duff, 2007; Grindle et al., 2000). The most efficient ap-
proach regarding to (Coplen et al., 2007) is the verbal feed-
back between the observed and the observer. Graphs and
charts can be also displayed in the workplace to show how
the behaviour is safe based on the records of observations.
Other mechanisms use the writing feedback, which can be as
a result of observations and presented to the management for
further improvement to achieve better performance.
After observation and feedback, a design structure
represented as an intervention program should be made in
place, Cameron & Duff, 2007, have suggested goal-settings
or trainings as the two effective processes. Goal-setting is to
motivate the workers by focusing on their behaviour to turn
their vision on safety in any particular course of action; target
goals are set by the managers, workers’ behaviour is meas-
ured at the beginning of the process as a starting point to
achieve the goals and to make the safe behaviour habitual.
Safety trainings are focusing on the unsafe behaviour in
specific operations, taking an example of scaffolding and
handling materials, selected from analyzing the observation
data.
The diversity of steps in BBS approach makes sense of
the attempt of finding the best influential process in changing
the workers’ behaviour as an individual result or reducing
the incidence rate at the company level. Researchers have
found that Behavioural Safety works, and has a positive
effect on behaviour changing and incident reduction.
Cooper, 2009, has conducted a structural review on
Behavioural Safety; this study was based on reviewing pre-
vious academic and professional studies in different sectors
including the construction sector as our point of focus.
Cooper has found that:
- Behavioural safety works better with a stable work-
force and stable environment,
- Daily observation was revealed effective in injury re-
duction with a slightly larger impact on behaviour
changing,
- Workgroup based observations had a greater effect on
behaviour change and injury reduction rather than in-
dividuals or focus on outcomes,
- The most effective mechanism of feedback was found
is the combination of posts, verbal and written feedback,
presented and discussed in a weekly meeting.
- Goal settings, training and feedback as a design struc-
ture have a greater effect on injury reduction, and par-
ticipative goals were the best for behavioural change.
A successful intervention and implementation of the
BBS program in construction sites was revealed in the study
by Choudhry, 2014. Before the implementation process,
safety behaviour measurements have been taken place,
where five categories were measured using checklist: Per-
sonal Protective equipments, housekeeping, access to
heights, plant and equipment, and scaffolding. The
goal-setting sessions were organized with workers’ partici-
pation to target the desired level of performance that has
been presented as a feedback charts. The process has in-
cluded a recognition and support for workers who behave
safely during performing their job, a direct contact and dis-
cussion between the observers and the workers by providing
feedback and trainings was used in this process. Weekly
scores were taken and discussed in weekly meetings. The
results have shown an increase in safety performance from
86% (3rd week) to 92.9% (9th week) with a remarkable in-
crease in unsafe behaviour and high decrease in safe be-
haviour of workers which can be explained as a good and
effective BBS process.
4. Conclusion
This review had linked two parts; the factors influencing
unsafe behaviour leading to accidents and injuries at con-
struction sites, and the Behaviour Based Safety (BBS) ap-
proach as an effective process to improve the safety behav-
iour and reduce the accident rate. Findings have shown that
the causes of unsafe behaviour are multi-factorial, these
factors were classified into 8 main categories: Individual
Factors, Site condition, Work group, Contractor, Supervi-
sion, Project Management, Organization, and Society. The
results of this review have shown, in the second part, that an
effective BBS design includes daily observations, focus on
workgroups and use participative goals with multiple feed-
back mechanisms. This design has shown remarkable re-
sults in changing the behaviour and reducing the accident
rate more than any other designs.
Identify unsafe behaviours
Develop appropriate observation checklist
Educate everyone
Conduct behavioural observation
Provide feedback
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
6
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Research Management Centre (RMC),
University Putra Malaysia from funding this research project
under PUTRA Grant Scheme under the reference:
UPM/700-2/1/GP-IPS/2016/9489600 from 2016-2018.
Conflict of interest
There is no potential conflicts of interest persists in this
review paper.
Ethical issues
None
References
Abdullah, D., & Wern, G. C. M. (2011). An analysis of
accidents statistics in Malaysian construction sector.
In 2010 International Conference on E-Business,
Management and Economics. IPEDR (Vol. 3, pp. 1–
4).
Aksorn, T., & Hadikusumo, B. H. W. (2008). Critical
success factors influencing safety program
performance in Thai construction projects. Safety
Science, 46(4), 709–727.
Cameron, I., & Duff, R. (2007). A critical review of safety
initiatives using goal setting and feedback.
Construction Management and Economics, 25(5),
495–508.
Cheng, C.-W., Leu, S.-S., Cheng, Y.-M., Wu, T.-C., & Lin,
C.-C. (2012). Applying data mining techniques to
explore factors contributing to occupational injuries in
Taiwan’s construction industry. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 48, 214–222.
Cheng, E. W. L., Ryan, N., & Kelly, S. (2012). Exploring
the perceived influence of safety management
practices on project performance in the construction
industry. Safety Science, 50(2), 363–369.
Choudhry, R. M. (2012). Implementation of BBS and the
impact of site-level commitment. Journal of
Professional Issues in Engineering Education and
Practice, 138(4), 296–304.
Choudhry, R. M. (2014). Behavior-based safety on
construction sites: A case study. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 70, 14–23.
Choudhry, R. M., & Fang, D. (2008). Why operatives
engage in unsafe work behavior: Investigating factors
on construction sites. Safety Science, 46(4), 566–584.
Choudhry, R. M., Fang, D., & Lingard, H. (2009).
Measuring safety climate of a construction company.
Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 135(9), 890–899.
Cooper, M. D. (2009). Behavioral safety interventions: A
review of process design factors. Professional Safety,
54(2), 36.
Coplen, M., Ranney, J., & Zuschlag, M. (2007).
Behavior-Based Safety at Amtrak-Chicago Associated
with Reduced Injuries and Costs (RPRT).
DePasquale, J. P., & Geller, E. S. (2000). Critical success
factors for behavior-based safety: A study of twenty
industry-wide applications. Journal of Safety
Research, 30(4), 237–249.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention,
and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.
Fleming, M., & Lardner, R. (2002). Strategies to promote
safe behaviour as part of a health and safety
management system. BOOK, HSE Books.
Gambatese, J. A., Behm, M., & Rajendran, S. (2008).
Design’s role in construction accident causality and
prevention: Perspectives from an expert panel. Safety
Science, 46(4), 675–691.
Garrett, J. W., & Teizer, J. (2009). Human factors analysis
classification system relating to human error
awareness taxonomy in construction safety. Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management,
135(8), 754–763.
Gittleman, J. L., Gardner, P. C., Haile, E., Sampson, J. M.,
Cigularov, K. P., Ermann, E. D., … Chen, P. Y. (2010).
[Case Study] CityCenter and Cosmopolitan
Construction Projects, Las Vegas, Nevada: Lessons
learned from the use of multiple sources and mixed
methods in a safety needs assessment. Journal of
Safety Research, 41(3), 263–281.
Glendon, A. I., & Litherland, D. K. (2001). Safety climate
factors, group differences and safety behaviour in
road construction. Safety Science, 39(3), 157–188.
Grindle, A. C., Dickinson, A. M., & Boettcher, W. (2000).
Behavioral safety research in manufacturing settings:
A review of the literature. Journal of Organizational
Behavior Management, 20(1), 29–68.
Hamid, A. R. A., Majid, M. Z. A., & Singh, B. (2008).
Causes of accidents at construction sites. Malaysian
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
7
Journal of Civil Engineering, 20(2), 242–259.
Heinrich, H. W. (1941). Industrial Accident Prevention. A
Scientific Approach. Industrial Accident Prevention.
A Scientific Approach., (Second Edition).
Hinze, J., Huang, X., & Terry, L. (2005). The nature of
struck-by accidents. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 131(2), 262–268.
Khanzode, V. V, Maiti, J., & Ray, P. K. (2011). Injury count
model for quantification of risk of occupational injury.
International Journal of Injury Control and Safety
Promotion, 18(2), 151–162.
Khosravi, Y., Asilian-Mahabadi, H., Hajizadeh, E.,
Hassanzadeh-Rangi, N., Bastani, H., & Behzadan, A.
H. (2014). Factors influencing unsafe behaviors and
accidents on construction sites: a review.
International Journal of Occupational Safety and
Ergonomics, 20(1), 111–125.
Lai, D. N. C., Liu, M., & Ling, F. Y. Y. (2011). A
comparative study on adopting human resource
practices for safety management on construction
projects in the United States and Singapore.
International Journal of Project Management, 29(8),
1018–1032.
M. Goldenhar*, L., Williams, L. J., & G. Swanson, N.
(2003). Modelling relationships between job stressors
and injury and near-miss outcomes for construction
labourers. Work & Stress, 17(3), 218–240.
Meliá, J. L., & Becerril, M. (2009). Health behaviour and
safety in the construction sector. Psicothema, 21(3),
427–432.
Mohamed, S., Ali, T. H., & Tam, W. Y. V. (2009). National
culture and safe work behaviour of construction
workers in Pakistan. Safety Science, 47(1), 29–35.
Oostakhan, M., Mofidi, A., & Davudian Talab, A. (2012).
Behavior-based safety approach at a large
construction site in Iran. Iranian Rehabilitation
Journal, 10, 21–25.
Petrovic-Lazarevic, S., Perry, M., & Ranjan, R. (2007).
Improving the occupational health and safety
measures in the Australian construction industry.
Zagreb International Review of Economics and
Business, 10(2), 17–34.
Pinto, A., Nunes, I. L., & Ribeiro, R. A. (2011).
Occupational risk assessment in construction
industry–Overview and reflection. Safety Science,
49(5), 616–624.
Pousette, A., Larsson, S., & Törner, M. (2008). Safety
climate cross-validation, strength and prediction of
safety behaviour. Safety Science, 46(3), 398–404.
Sa, J., Seo, D.-C., & Choi, S. D. (2009). Comparison of risk
factors for falls from height between commercial and
residential roofers. Journal of Safety Research, 40(1),
1–6.
Sousa, V., Almeida, N. M., & Dias, L. A. (2014).
Risk-based management of occupational safety and
health in the construction industry–Part 1:
Background knowledge. Safety Science, 66, 75–86.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Austin, J. (2000). Does BBS work?
Professional Safety, 45(7), 19.
Suraji, A., Duff, A. R., & Peckitt, S. J. (2001). Development
of causal model of construction accident causation.
Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 127(4), 337–344.
Teo, E. A. L., Ling, F. Y. Y., & Chong, A. F. W. (2005).
Framework for project managers to manage
construction safety. International Journal of Project
Management, 23(4), 329–341.
Törner, M., & Pousette, A. (2009). Safety in construction–a
comprehensive description of the characteristics of
high safety standards in construction work, from the
combined perspective of supervisors and experienced
workers. Journal of Safety Research, 40(6), 399–409.
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(10), 1406–
1419.
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
8
Appendix 1: Factors affecting unsafe behaviour and accidents in construction sites:
Reference/
Country
Title
Study
Design
Study
Type
Method of data
collection
Analytical
Method
Results
(Cheng et
al., 2012),
Taiwan
Applying data
mining techniques
to explore factors
contributing to
occupational inju-
ries in Taiwan’s
construction in-
dustry.
Cross
sec-
tional
study
Quantita-
tive
study
Accident reports
(n=1542)
Data mining,
Chi-square test
To minimize falls/tumbles/collapse in private projects, the following should be
acknowledged:
Source of injury (structure and construction facilities)
Accident location (ladder, platform, or structural steel member)
Work content (site clean-up, work preparation, or repair work)
Unsafe conditions (absence of PPE, unsafe methods or procedures)
Unsafe behaviour (workers failed to use PPE or ignored hazard warning
signs).
Project contract amount
Project type (road and bridge projects)
Contractor size (30–99 workers).
(Cheng et
al., 2012),
Hong
Kong.
Exploring the
perceived influ-
ence of safety
management
practices on pro-
ject performance
in the construc-
tion industry.
Cross
sec-
tional
study
(15
con-
struc-
tion
sites)
Quantita-
tive
study
Worker
questionnaire
(n=232)
Exploratory factor
analysis,
Hierarchical
regression analy-
sis
Exploratory factor analysis extracted three safety management practice catego-
ries:
Safety management information,
Safety management process,
Safety management committees.
Project performance were associated with:
Information (+)
Committees (+).
(Choudhry
& Fang,
2008). Hong
Kong
Why operatives
engage in unsafe
work behavior:
investigating fac-
tors on construc-
tion sites.
Case
study
Qualita-
tive
study
Semi-structured
interviews with
7 workers who
had been acci-
dent victims, 2
site engineers, 2
safety managers
Grounded theory
Factors which can have an influence on worker’s safety behavior were:
Management such as involvement management, toolbox talks with managers,
implementation of safety management system and Provision personal protec-
tive equipment
Safety procedure such as safety policy, toolbox talks and orientation trainings
Psychological feature such as comfortable feel with supervisors and living
conditions of workers on site
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
9
Reference/
Country
Title
Study
Design
Study
Type
Method of data
collection
Analytical
Method
Results
and 1 project
manager.
Economic feature such as productivity bonuses
Self-esteem such as exhibition of being "Tough guys", co-worker encourage-
ment to undertaking risky tasks, exhibition of having more site experience,
avoidance from being teased by co-workers
Experience such as awareness of safety requirement, "learning by doing" and
formation of rigid routines
Performance pressure such as the boss is in the habit of saying "hurry up" and
take shortcuts
Perceived risk such as perceptions of risk differ from one person to another
and may differ time to time even within one person
Working environment such as access to heights, scaffolding, steel erection,
use of mechanical plant and equipment and working with chemicals such as
asbestos, epoxy and explosives
Job security and education such as local worker and cultural and language
problems and non directly-employed staffs
Incompatible training, absence of job specific training, uneducated persons
and training does not focus on changing attitudes of workers to safety.
(Choudhry
et al., 2009),
Hong Kong
Measuring safety
climate of a con-
struction
Company.
Cross
sec-
tional
study
Quantita-
tive
study
Questionnaire
(n=1120)
Factor analysis,
Multiple regres-
sion analysis
Multiple regression analysis confirmed that these Good following climate factors
were significant predictors of workers’ perceptions of safety performance:
Management commitment
Employee involvement
Inappropriate safety procedure
Work practices
(Gittleman
et al., 2010),
USA
[Case Study] City
Center and Cos-
mopolitan Con-
struction Projects,
Las Vegas, Ne-
vada: Lessons
learned from the
Cross
sec-
tional
study, 4
case
studies
Sequen-
tial
mixed
method
study
Questionnaire
study
with workers
(n=5268), fore-
men
(n=134), super-
visors
Content
Analysis,
T-tests,
Analysis of
variance,
Multivariate
analysis of
Content analysis revealed 10 distinct safety-related themes. These included:
Lack of management action,
Health hazards
Unsafe procedures
Lack of coordination/planning
Individual responsibility
Lack of appropriate safety equipment
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
10
Reference/
Country
Title
Study
Design
Study
Type
Method of data
collection
Analytical
Method
Results
use of multiple
sources and
mixed methods in
a safety needs
assessment.
(n=61) and Ex-
ecutive
managers
(n=17)
variance,
Multiple
regression
analysis.
Need for improved communication, training/hiring practices
Problems with housekeeping.
Safety-Related Outcomes were significantly related with:
Management commitment to safety
Safety practices.
(Glendon &
Litherland,
2001),
Australia
Safety climate
factors, group
differences and
safety
behaviour in road
construction.
Cross
sec-
tional
study
Quantita-
tive
study
Worker
questionnaire
and behavior
observation
study (n=192)
Factor
analysis,
Multiple
regression
analysis
Safety climate derived six factors:
Communication and support
Adequacy of procedures
Work pressure
Personal protective equipment
Relationships
Safety rules
(Mohamed
et al., 2009),
Pakistan.
National culture
and safe work
behaviour of con-
struction workers
in Pakistan
Case
series
Quantita-
tive
study
Interview based
questionnaire
survey with
Frontline work-
ers (n=140)
from 8 large
construction
sites.
Factor analysis
Logistic regres-
sion.
Pearson correla-
tion.
Attitude and perception of workers included three dimensions: "Awareness and
Beliefs", "Physical Work Environment" and "Supportive Environment".
Workers reported a medium-to-high perception of risk level for high risk situ-
ations
Higher the level of worker' awareness towards safety, the less likely they were
to continue working unsafely
"Awareness and Beliefs" factor was a strong predictor of workers' intention-
al behavior
"Physical Work Environment" and "Supportive Environment" factors were
partial predictors of workers' intentional behavior
National culture included three dimensions:"Collectivism and Femininity",
"Uncertainty Avoidance" and "Power Distance"
"Collectivism and Femininity" and "Uncertainty Avoidance" predict inten-
tional behavior
"Power Distance" did not predict any intentional behavior
(Pousette et
Safety climate
Cross
Quantita-
longitudinal
Confirmatory
Safety climate was found to significantly predict self-reported safety behavior 7
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
11
Reference/
Country
Title
Study
Design
Study
Type
Method of data
collection
Analytical
Method
Results
al., 2008),
Sweden.
cross validation,
strength and pre-
diction of safety
behaviour.
sec-
tional
study
tive
study
questionnaire
study
with worker
(n=801)
factor analysis;
Intra-class corre-
lation coefficient
(ICC)
months later.
(Gambatese
et al., 2008),
USA
Design’s role in
construction ac-
cident causality
and prevention:
perspectives from
an expert panel.
Case
series
Sequen-
tial
mixed
method
study
Experienced
safety and
health profes-
sionals
(n=12),
Sample projects
(n=25)
Delphi survey,
Total Recordable
Injury Rate
(TRIR),
Pearson’s correla-
tion
The most important elements (top 3) should be Good implemented through the
combined efforts of the project team were:
Clear project safety authority, Responsibility,
and accountability;
Employee empowerment to stop work authority;
Contractor selection based on safety
(Törner &
Pousette,
2009),
Sweden.
Safety in
construction—a
comprehensive
description
of the characteris-
tics of high safety
standards in con-
struction work,
from the com-
bined perspective
of supervisors and
experienced
workers.
Single
case
study
Qualita-
tive
study
Interview with
safety worker
representatives
(n=5)
and first-line
managers
(n=19)
Phenomeno-
graphic method-
ology
Four main categories of work safety preconditions and components were:
Project characteristics and nature of the work, which set the limits of safety
management
Organization and structures, with the subcategories planning, work roles,
procedures, and resources
Collective values, norms, and behaviors, with the subcategories climate and
culture, and interaction and cooperation
Individual competence and attitudes, with the subcategories knowledge, abil-
ity and experience, and individual attitudes.
(Zhou et al.,
2008), Chi-
na.
A method to
identify strategies
for the improve-
ment of human
Cross
sec-
tional
study
Quantita-
tive
study
Personnel
questionnaire
(n=4719)
Bayesian Network
(BN) based
modeling
BN-based analysis demonstrated that:
The safety climate factors may have a more significant influence on an em-
ployee’s safety behavior than personal experience factors
The simple strategy could be more effective when safety climate factors were
Haroun, Z. et al.,/ Asia Pacific Environmental and Occupational Health Journal (ISSN 2462-2214); Vol 2 (2): 1-12, 2016
12
Reference/
Country
Title
Study
Design
Study
Type
Method of data
collection
Analytical
Method
Results
safety behavior by
considering
safety climate and
personal experi-
ence
properly controlled
A strategy via controlling multiple factors (or joint strategies) may even better
improve the safety behavior
A joint control of both safety climate factors and personal experience factors
worked most effectively.
