IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i10p6172-d819163.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Construction Managers from Mars and Workers from Venus? Exploring Differences in Construction Safety Perception of Two Key Field Stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Mostafa Namian

    (Department of Construction Management, College of Engineering and Technology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USA)

  • Mohammadsoroush Tafazzoli

    (School of Design and Construction, Voiland College of Engineering and Architecture, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA)

  • Ahmed Jalil Al-Bayati

    (Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Lawrence Technological University, Southfield, MI 48075, USA)

  • Sharareh Kermanshachi

    (Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

Abstract

Persisting high rates of worksite accidents and injuries in construction projects indicate the urge to investigate the root causes and revisit safety practices in this industry. Consonance in perceptions and safety approaches has been identified as a fundamental factor in boosting projects’ safety. Discrepancies between how different elements of construction safety are perceived and handled by the key stakeholders, namely managers and workers, could be detrimental to worksite safety. This research studied how, if at all, the perception of four key construction safety components, including 33 sets of pairwise questions, is different in the lens of managers from workers. To explore safety perceptions, 133 construction professionals in the United States participated in the study and expressed their perceptions toward their own and counterparts’ (1) safety knowledge, (2) safety culture and commitment, (3) safety performance, and (4) safety support and communication. The results indicated that massive gaps in safety perceptions do exist between the construction managers and workers (26 out of 33 areas), and the magnitude varies for different safety elements. In all four categories, both managers and workers perceived a superior safety position for themselves and inferior for their counterparts. Further investigations revealed that the common ground between managers and workers is their consensus on proper communication and safety training as the key solutions to address such discrepancies. Construction safety professionals and practitioners can benefit from the results of this study to establish and implement strategies to foster communication and provide more effective safety training to bridge the existing gaps in the perception of safety by managers and workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Mostafa Namian & Mohammadsoroush Tafazzoli & Ahmed Jalil Al-Bayati & Sharareh Kermanshachi, 2022. "Are Construction Managers from Mars and Workers from Venus? Exploring Differences in Construction Safety Perception of Two Key Field Stakeholders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:10:p:6172-:d:819163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6172/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6172/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rafael Sacks & Amotz Perlman & Ronen Barak, 2013. "Construction safety training using immersive virtual reality," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(9), pages 1005-1017, September.
    2. Rayyan Alsamadani & Matthew Hallowell & Amy Nicole Javernick-Will, 2013. "Measuring and modelling safety communication in small work crews in the US using social network analysis," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 568-579, June.
    3. Antonio José Carpio-de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González-García & Ligia Cristina Pentelhão & J. Santos Baptista, 2021. "Zero-Risk Interpretation in the Level of Preventive Action Method Implementation for Health and Safety in Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Muhammad Dawood Idrees & Maria Hafeez & Jung-Yong Kim, 2017. "Workers’ Age and the Impact of Psychological Factors on the Perception of Safety at Construction Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-15, May.
    5. L.P. Andersen & I.L. Karlsen & P. Kines & T. Joensson & K.J. Nielsen, 2015. "Social identity in the construction industry: implications for safety perception and behaviour," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 640-652, August.
    6. Yılmaz, Fatih & Çelebi, Uğur Buğra, 2015. "The Importance of Safety in Construction Sector: Costs of Occupational Accidents in Construction Sites," Business and Economics Research Journal, Uludag University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 25-37, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xun Liu & Xiaobo Li, 2022. "Exploring the Formation Mechanism of Unsafe Construction Behavior and Testing Efficient Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Programs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Chaohua Xiong & Kongzheng Liang & HanBin Luo & Ivan W. H. Fung, 2018. "Identification of Safety-Related Opinion Leaders among Construction Workers: Evidence from Scaffolders of Metro Construction in Wuhan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Huakang Liang & Ken-Yu Lin & Shoujian Zhang & Yikun Su, 2018. "The Impact of Coworkers’ Safety Violations on an Individual Worker: A Social Contagion Effect within the Construction Crew," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Lars Peter Andersen & Line Nørdam & Thomas Joensson & Pete Kines & Kent J. Nielsen, 2018. "Social identity, safety climate and self-reported accidents among construction workers," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 22-31, January.
    5. Fatma Lestari & Riza Yosia Sunindijo & Martin Loosemore & Yuni Kusminanti & Baiduri Widanarko, 2020. "A Safety Climate Framework for Improving Health and Safety in the Indonesian Construction Industry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Antonio José Carpio de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González García & José Antonio Soriano & Benito Yáñez Araque, 2021. "Development of the Level of Preventive Action Method by Observation of the Characteristic Value for the Assessment of Occupational Risks on Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-27, August.
    7. Li-Ting Yeh, 2020. "Using Weighted Data Envelopment Analysis to Measure Occupational Safety and Healthy Economic Performance of Taiwan’s Industrial Sectors," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Changquan He & Zhen Hu & Yuzhong Shen & Chunlin Wu, 2023. "Effects of Demographic Characteristics on Safety Climate and Construction Worker Safety Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-20, July.
    9. Gondia, Ahmed & Moussa, Ahmed & Ezzeldin, Mohamed & El-Dakhakhni, Wael, 2023. "Machine learning-based construction site dynamic risk models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    10. Guodong Ni & Yuanyuan Zhu & Ziyao Zhang & Yaning Qiao & Huaikun Li & Na Xu & Yongliang Deng & Zhenmin Yuan & Wenshun Wang, 2020. "Influencing Mechanism of Job Satisfaction on Safety Behavior of New Generation of Construction Workers Based on Chinese Context: The Mediating Roles of Work Engagement and Safety Knowledge Sharing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Alessio Paolucci & Sergio Sangiorgi & Marco Giovanni Mariani, 2021. "Non-Technical Skills in Social Networks: The Spread of Safety Communication and Teamwork in a Warehouse," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-13, January.
    12. Jose Antonio Diego-Mas & Jorge Alcaide-Marzal & Rocio Poveda-Bautista, 2020. "Effects of Using Immersive Media on the Effectiveness of Training to Prevent Ergonomics Risks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Xiangcheng Meng & Alan H. S. Chan, 2022. "Cross-Regional Research in Demographic Impact on Safety Consciousness and Safety Citizenship Behavior of Construction Workers: A Comparative Study between Mainland China and Hong Kong," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Mihić Matej & Vukomanović Mladen & Završki Ivica, 2019. "Review of previous applications of innovative information technologies in construction health and safety," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 1952-1967, January.
    15. Yuan Fu & Gui Ye & Xiaoyu Tang & Qinjun Liu, 2019. "Theoretical Framework for Informal Groups of Construction Workers: A Grounded Theory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-28, November.
    16. Aminu Darda’u Rafindadi & Nasir Shafiq & Idris Othman, 2022. "A Conceptual Framework for BIM Process Flow to Mitigate the Causes of Fall-Related Accidents at the Design Stage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-37, October.
    17. Sook Shuen Yeong & Abdul Wahab Shah Rollah, 2016. "The Mediating Effect of Safety Culture on Safety Communication and Human Factor Accident at the Workplace," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(12), pages 127-127, December.
    18. Li-Ting Yeh, 2017. "Incorporating Workplace Injury to Measure the Safety Performance of Industrial Sectors in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Ricardo Eiris & Masoud Gheisari & Behzad Esmaeili, 2018. "PARS: Using Augmented 360-Degree Panoramas of Reality for Construction Safety Training," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-21, November.
    20. Adela Rueda Márquez de la Plata & Pablo Alejandro Cruz Franco & Jorge Alberto Ramos Sánchez, 2023. "Applications of Virtual and Augmented Reality Technology to Teaching and Research in Construction and Its Graphic Expression," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-19, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:10:p:6172-:d:819163. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.