Author
Listed:
- Michelle SH Lim
- Yang Miang Goh
Abstract
Design-for-Safety (DfS) is a promising intervention to address safety and health risks in construction. At the same time, past research on construction safety and health consistently emphasized the importance of measuring safety climate in ensuring good safety performance. However, existing construction safety climate measurement tools are focused on measuring construction workers’ perception of safety management within their projects or organizations. Therefore, existing construction safety climate construct and measurement tools cannot be directly applied in the DfS context, which is focused on the upstream project team comprising designers and developers. Thus, the DfS climate construct and a corresponding measurement instrument were created. DfS climate is defined as project team members’ shared perceptions of the DfS policies, practices, and procedures that arise from the behaviours they observe getting rewarded, supported, and expected. With a sample of 242 responses, the questionnaire was subjected to exploratory factor analysis. The instrument consisted of 19 questions. These questions were split into five dimensions: participation of leader, member cooperation, member participation, project resources, and expectations for stakeholder representation. The study found that DfS climate was linked to outcome variables such as whether design changes arising from DfS review would be incorporated into the design. The research makes an academic contribution by creating the concept of DfS climate, accounting for the cognitive aspect of performing DfS. In addition, practical contributions are made as organizations can measure the DfS climate for their projects and find areas to improve.
Suggested Citation
Michelle SH Lim & Yang Miang Goh, 2023.
"Development and validation of the Design-for-Safety (DfS) climate measurement tool,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(12), pages 1331-1352, December.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:26:y:2023:i:12:p:1331-1352
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2023.2288003
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:jriskr:v:26:y:2023:i:12:p:1331-1352. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.