The architecture of employee attitudes to safety in the manufacturing sector
| Published date | 01 December 2002 |
| Pages | 649-670 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480210445953 |
| Date | 01 December 2002 |
| Author | A. Cheyne,A. Oliver,J.M. Tomás,S. Cox |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Employee
attitudes to
safety
649
Personnel Review,
Vol. 31 No. 6, 2002, pp. 649-670.
#MCB UP Limited, 0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/00483480210445953
Received July 2000
Revised January 2002
Accepted April 2002
The architecture of employee
attitudes to safety in the
manufacturing sector
A. Cheyne
The Business School, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
A. Oliver
Departamento MetodologõÂa CC del Comportamiento,
Universitat de ValeÁncia, Valencia, Spain
J.M. TomaÂs
Departamento MetodologõÂa CC del Comportamiento,
Universitat de ValeÁ ncia, Valencia, Spain, and
S. Cox
The Management School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Keywords Modelling, Employee attitudes, Safety, Manufacturing industry
Abstract This study examines the relationships between components of organisational safety
climate, including: employee attitudes to organisational and individual safety issues; perceptions
of the physical work environment and perceptions of workplace hazards; and relates these to self-
reported levels of safety activity. It also attempts to replicate the explicative model derived by
Cheyne et al. in a similar study within the manufacturing sector. Data were collected from a large
manufacturing organisation using a questionnaire. A total of 708 valid questionnaires were
returned and formed the basis for the subsequent analyses. These data showed that a common
structure of attitudes to safety issues and perceptions of the work environment can be constructed
in line with the previous model, with a few differences, providing some evidence of a sector-wide
safety culture. The strength of employees' attitudes with regard to safety management and
individual responsibility once again played central roles in the model and are consistent with
earlier findings. Comparisons are made between the two organisations and mean scores on each
of the model components show that there are differences between the two organisations in terms
of individual responsibility and personal involvement, as well as levels of safety activity and
perceived levels of workplace hazards. The results are discussed in terms of generating general
models of attitudes to safety, which in turn may facilitate climate change.
Introduction
The study reported in this paper considers an explicative model of employee
attitudes to, and perceptions of safety issues in two large organisations within
the manufacturing sector. It builds upon previous work on the measurement
and modelling of safety climate in the UK and European manufacturing sectors
(Cox et al., 1998; Cheyne et al., 1999; Toma s and Oliver, 1995). The focus of the
The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
This work was partially supported by a grant from the Spanish Government (DGES BSO 2001-
2904). The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those
of any other person or organisation. Requests for the full survey instrument used in this study
should be directed to Alistair Cheyne. Tel: +44 (0)1509 222162; Fax: +44 (0)1509 223961; E-mail:
A.J.T.Cheyne@lboro.ac.uk
Personnel
Review
31,6
650
research described here, is the comparison of a model of safety climate,
developed in one manufacturing organisation (Cheyne et al., 1998) with data
from another similar organisation, with a view to identifying the elements of a
common sectoral culture.
Many researchers in the field consider the concept of organisational culture
to be a learned phenomenon which varies from one population group to another
(Schein, 1985; Smircich, 1983). Furnham (1997) explains some of this variation
in terms of the societal, environmental and historical influences on the
organisation or group; for example the evolution of an organisation might have
some effect on its culture. Ott (1989) also suggests that the nature of an
organisation's business or its business environment influences the
organisational system and helps define its overall culture. Klein et al. (1995)
found some evidence of similarities within organisations operating in
comparable environments (high reliability organisations), and differences
between these and other types of organisations. In high reliability
organisations, characteristics stemming from the inherent hazards and risks of
their technologies are shared. This may, in turn, result in similar cultures, and,
in particular, similar safety cultures (Cox and Flin, 1998).
Interest in the organisation's culture for safety has grown in the wake of a
number of high profile incidents, including the Clapham Junction rail disaster
(Hidden, 1989) and the Piper Alpha disaster in the North Sea (Cullen, 1990). As
a consequence of the enquiry into the Chernobyl incident, the International
Nuclear Safety Advisory Group (INSAG, 1991) prepared a working definition
of safety culture in nuclear plants. INSAG defines safety culture as:
That assembly of characteristics and attitudes in organisations, which establishes that, as an
over-riding priority, nuclear plant safety issues receives the attention warranted by their
significance (INSAG, 1991, p. 1).
They also distinguished the characteristics of safety culture at management
and individual levels and postulated that legal, governmental and policy
frameworks, organisational management and the individuals who work in the
organisation all exert influence on the safety culture (INSAG, 1991). The exact
nature of organisational safety culture has been debated in the literature
several times since its application to the Chernobyl incident, resulting in a
number of definitions (including Turner et al., 1989; Confederation of British
Industry, 1990; Pidgeon, 1991; Health and Safety Commission (HSC), 1993;
Booth and Lee, 1995). More detailed discussions of the concept of safety culture
and its definition are provided by, amongst others, Cox and Flin (1998) and
Clarke (2000). Many of the relevant definitions of safety culture emphasise
shared attitudes, values and beliefs and stress the interactions with the
organisation's safety structures and control systems and appropriate
behavioural norms (Reason, 1998; Uttal, 1983). Indeed the notion that safety
culture is a shared, or social, phenomenon is central to many of its definitions,
although Turner (1991) noted that safety culture also has a technical aspect and
is perhaps better considered as sociotechnical, rather than purely social.
To continue reading
Request your trial