Algunes propostes d’actuació en el tema de la mediació intercultural.

Figure 2-8 summarises the issues raised in this chapter starting with the understanding of culture (section 2.2) until section 2.15. From top of the Figure 2.8 going downwards, the most critical sections of the theoretical framework on Figure 2-8 start with the first tier of dichotomous relationship between perceptions of safety culture in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia compared with perceptions of safety culture at the international level. This issue has been examined using the Hofstede model of classification of culture and how this has been translated in organisations around the world. As a result it is vital to assess the perception of safety culture in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, hence this research.

The second tier of the most important issues from Figure 2-8 is to examine the safety culture at organisational level thereby examining the theory of shared participation as well as the

Page 105 of 334

theory of power distance, masculinity and responding to uncertainty (as alluded to under section 2.2. For example, Suliman (2007) argued that once various construction companies want to implement various forms of safety practices, there are expected challenges in the implementation process.

The third tier of the framework depicted in Figure 2—8 require an assessment of how human capital is being nurtured in order to promote a positive safety culture. The third tier also refers to other forms of resources such technology; growth and performance; however, development take different routes, with some routes leading to conflicts between safety and culture. Geller (2010) cites the construction industry as one of the industries guiding the growth and development of the country. This sector is responsible for the expansion of infrastructure in the country. It also has a major share in the employment of human labour, both skilled and unskilled (Kniesner and Leeth, 1995). It is therefore crucial that the research examines the perceptions of all sorts of workers regardless of their management position.

Page 106 of 334

Figure 2-8: A theoretical framework for this Research

The fourth tier of the theoretical framework is aimed at examining the influence of management decisions on safety policies and how they are implemented. Safety policy is

Safety Culture and on Safety Performance in the Construction

Industry

Motivated workers who follow safety protocol and

safety culture

Saudi Culture: Adherence to Saudi Traditional Values governing Construction

Involvement: Supervisors should involve employees in safety related decision-making.

Safety policy implementation Management Attitude: Management should embrace a positive attitude towards safety culture

Safer working conditions with reduced employee accidents and death

Industrial Culture: The industry should maintain high safety standards Construction Workers Protection Guidelines

Adherence to safety regulations International and national safety protection guidelines

Improved Safety Performance (how safety performance improved in terms of e.g. accidents, costs. Explain it according to the

discussion Influence on

Theoretical framework for the development of safety culture and

Page 107 of 334

linked to the way managers or leaders establish the safety climate using policies or regulatory framework in order to stimulate safety performance.

Based on the four tiers of the theoretical framework it could be argued that the research could potentially assess how safety culture impacts safety performance in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because the framework encompasses a holistic view of safety culture at organisational and industrial level.

Even though the framework encompasses several areas and aspects of culture and safety, it is argued that if implemented within any given organisation it has the potential to translate into improved safety performance (Robson et al. (2007). The focus of the theoretical framework would be centred on behavioural elements as well as supervisory and managerial behaviour.

2.16.1 Behavioural-Based Safety

Based on the behaviourist theory to change, Stare (2012) identifies safety to be a behavioural issue, which can best be approached using a behavioural approach. In the framework however, the use of the behavioural approach to safety is not differentiated as an independent intervention but can be used in connection with others. Petersen (2004) notes that a typical behavioural approach to safety is focused on responsibility. This means that behavioural-based safety takes into consideration the need for all stakeholders concerned with safety to have a culture of responsiveness to the roles they are supposed to play in bringing about safety. Using the results of a field survey, Sarkus (1996) indicated that almost all stakeholders within typical construction companies, including employees, managers,

Page 108 of 334

supervisors and even customers are well aware of the roles they need to play to ensure that there is safety. With this argument validated, it means that the core problem in the absence of safety is the fact that stakeholders have not had a behavioural attitude that motivates them to implement what they know. Once behavioural changes related to safety will be recorded in construction companies, Narcisse and Harcourt (2008) have said that safety performance will be enhanced almost immediately. This is because, times that are wasted in ensuring that each person is doing what is expected will be transferred into direct productivity time, and stakeholders will implement safety by themselves. Another area covered by the framework is the supervisory and managerial behaviours.

2.16.2 Supervisory and Managerial Behaviours

As much as the behavioural-based safety calls for stakeholder base that is concerned about its own safety and takes safety issues into its own hands, O'Toole (2002) had also observed that adding supervisory roles to this helps in consolidating the idea and making it more formalised. Petersen (2004) actually indicated that the modification of supervisory and managerial behaviours could be considered a component of behavioural based safety. In this instance however, supervisors and managers are seen as independent stakeholders; whose behavioural change must be towards the need to ensure that there is adequate application of behavioural change modules. Elaborating on the importance of supervision and management in the safety culture, Sarkus (1996) noted that the safety agenda forever remains short lived until such a time those supervisors are critical with their duties. This is because through supervision and management, Smith-Crowe, Burke and Landis (2003) mention that feedback information necessary for decision-making is acquired. This means

Page 109 of 334

that supervision and management roles can double as evaluation processes for the organisation’s culture and safety agenda. Meanwhile, Sarkus (1996) outlined the merits that come with evaluation in ensuring safety performance when it was stated that evaluation simply points to managers, how well or how badly they are doing with project outcomes. Robson et al., (2007) mentioned that this way, managers are empowered to change their course to directions that are focused on improved performance.