問題：
該用什麼樣的角度或分類來架構 framing這些構面與因素比較有條理？
Disclaimer：僅為雜亂的筆記與感想紀錄
安全文化與氣候構面的分類
引用：謝書賢 安全文化在國內推廣之展望
Geller認為構成文化的三項最重要構面的是個人(person)、環境(environment)和行為(behavior)；Cooper認為這三項則是個人、組織(organization)和工作(job)的安全行為。他們兩個文化模式最大的差異在於，Geller 的環境構面著重在作業環境裡的設備、工具、機械、維修保養、操作程序等；而Cooper的組織構面則著重在組織裡的安全管理系統。從文字看似乎 Geller比較重視硬體的工程，而Cooper重視管理。
感覺也可以用於品管問題分析的5M 1E來區分
Man：包含員工內心的認知、能力與態度，還有外顯的抉擇、行為和表現
Environment：包含工廠環境與相關Machine、Material、Method，製程先天為危害風險與後天的Detection/Protection水準
Management：管理，包含管理制度、教育訓練、主管的承諾與領導風格等
如果只談管理面的話(不考慮員工的心理和行為、也不考慮不同行業製程與環境的差異)，一般最常引用的架構會是管理系統PDCA的架構與分類
But：好的工安管理必須考量員工的成熟度與製程作業特性的風險，不可能單獨切割來談…
就重要性與影響大小而言：
Organization-related factors(=安全氣候，Higher management, coworker and supervisory support, higher commitment towards safety, safer perception of system status, and smaller workgroup sizes (less than 15), are found to be associated with low injury risks.)> Job-related factors(occupation, location of work, hazards in work system , activity , shift of working , and workplace factors ) > Individual-related factors（Age, work experience, education and EQ）
備註：學術實證上比較確定Job-related factors的effect size> Individual-related factors，至於安全氣候的effect size(藥效大小)，由於安全文化氣候本身由許多構面(Construct)組成，本身就是一坨觀念的大雜燴，自然很難評估藥效(還有爭議)
以下為老外的博士論文，整理了相關研究的構面與因素(構面因素不同，想Meta都有困難….)
Yule, S. (2003). Senior Management Influence on safety performance in the 
相關文獻的構面一致性不高(學術自由/各說各話、只研究片段因果關係的後遺症？)
成功安全管理的關鍵因素
Organizational safety: Which management practices are most effective in reducing employee injury rates?
Alison G. Vredenburgh* Journal of Safety Research 33 (2002) 259– 276
Six management practices have been consistently discussed in reports concerning
safety culture: (a) rewards, (b) training, (c) hiring, (d) communication/feedback, (e)
participation, and (f) management support.
Carder, B. and Ragan, P. (2003) ‘A survey-based system for safety measurement and improvement’, Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp.157–165. (方法：focus group interview)
1. Managements’ demonstration of commitment
2. education and knowledge of the work force
3. effectiveness of supervisory process.
4. employee’ involvement and commitment
5. Off-Job Safety(員工關懷)
Petersen, D. (2005) ‘Safety improvement’, Professional Safety, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.45–48.（方法：perception survey）
Safety Management System Led to excellence
1. ensure daily pro-action by supervisor and team which demonstrates that safety is core value.
2. Involve Middle managers as key players
3. Require visibly demonstrated executive actions, not merely commitment.
4. Ask for and obtain hourly involvement in meaningful daily activity.
5. Allow flexibility. Units and Personnel must have options regarding what actions they will take.
6. Be perceived as positive by the workforce.
Andrew R. Wills, Barry Watson, Herbert C. Biggs., Comparing safety climate factors as predictors of work-related driving behavior
出處：Journal of Safety Research 37 (2006) 375–383
構面有：Communication, Work pressures, Relationships, Training, Management commitment, Safety rules
A new conceptual framework to improve the application of occupational health and safety management systems
出處：Safety Science 46 (2008) 935–948
作者：A.M. Makin , C. Winder
School of Safety Science, The University of New South Wales (UNSW),http://www.safesci.unsw.edu.au/about.html 這個安全科學與風險學院關閉了(沒搞頭招不到學生？)...
作者用以下架構角度來看
人員(包含認知動機等心理層面)、環境(包含Machine/Material/Method)與管理系統
認為以上三構面的要素為
感覺與感想：
1. 這是篇品質不高、唬爛觀念的paper
2. 裡面有提到對於三大構面的風險認知初步評估，結果三者的重要性各約1/3(有說等於沒說)
3. 這三大構面不過是沿襲安全文化與氣候的觀點與分類，了無新意
4. 這篇文章比較有建設性的一句話： Unless the hazard profile of the organization has been accurately determined and appropriately addressed; and the type of business operation has been understood and analyzed to appreciate which factors have the greatest impact on health and safety; compliance auditing will have little impact on the organization’s overall safety performance. 可惜關於How卻沒有任何說明。
所以取其交集的話，或許可以用以下這篇文章的觀點
Source ：International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, Vol. 10, Nos. 1/2, 2008
Author ：Michael R. Elliott, Paul R. Kleindorfer, Joseph J. DuBois, Yanlin Wang, Isadore Rosenthal
A great deal of research has been done on safety culture and climate survey instruments aimed at predicting the effectiveness of management systems in regard to preventing occupational illnesses and accidents reportable to OSHA (OII) (Carder and Ragan, 2003; Donald, 1998; Petersen, 2005). Key elements required include:
management commitment to safety
workforce educated and knowledgeable with respect to worker safety
effectiveness of the supervisory process
employee involvement and commitment.
用政策、組織、執行與管考來架構與分類
更糟，沒有分類的調理與架構
An integrative model of organizational safety behavior
出處：Journal of Safety Research 45 (2013) 37–46
作者：Lin Cui , Di Fan*, Gui Fu , Cherrie Jiuhua Zhu
Introduction:
This study develops an integrative model of safety management based on social cognitive theory and the total safety culture triadic framework. The purpose of the model is to reveal the causal linkages between a hazardous environment, safety climate, and individual safety behaviors.
Method:
Based on primary survey data from 209 front-line workers in one of the largest state-owned coal mining corporations in China
Results:
An employee's perception of a hazardous environment is found to have a statistically significant impact on employee safety behaviors through a psychological process mediated by the perception of management commitment to safety and individual beliefs about safety.
Impact on industry: The integrative model developed here leads to a comprehensive solution that takes into consideration the environmental, organizational and employees' psychological and behavioral aspects of safety management.
感想感覺
1. 從作者組成來看，四個打群架的大陸人，三位留澳唸企管，第三位才是真的搞工安=>搞工安的不懂SEM與社會認知所以借重其他三位作者的專長與英文寫作？ Anyway，必須承認這篇文章有創意與貢獻
2. 產業先天的風險=>管理階層承諾=>員工對於安全的信念與認知=>員工參與/安全行為，呼應了先前敝人的猜想：http://eshmanager.blogspot.tw/2010/12/blog-post_12.html；換言之，如果公司的作業與產業先天的危害特性沒有那麼高的時候，其實不太可能讓老闆重視安全，相對的想推動安全文化其實是緣木求魚。
3. 很棒的理論實證研究，不知道同樣的推論邏輯在製造業會不會成立。
4. 作業的風險與產業先天的危害特性才是塑造與驅動安全管理的關鍵因素
沒有留言:
張貼留言