OHS performance refers to the OHS-related actions and behaviours that employees exhibit in all kinds of work in order to promote the health and safety of themselves and others (Burke & Signal 2010). Hence, employees’ behaviour is often seen as a predictor of injuries (Hofmann & Stetzer 1996; Martínez-Córcoles et al. 2011; Neal & Griffin 2006), while employees’ safety compliance and safety participation are often considered to be distinct aspects of safety (or OHS) performance (Griffin & Neal 2000). Safety compliance refers to the core safety-related activities that employees must perform to maintain their safety in the workplace, whereas safety participation refers to their voluntary participation in safety-related activities and the development of safety in the workplace (Borman & Motowidlo 1993; Griffin & Neal 2000). Consequently, OHS performance may be seen as a result of an organisation’s ability to manage its OHS risks (BS 18004:2008) and develop OHS in the workplace.
OHS performance is typically evaluated through occupational injuries and ill health, as well as predictive measures (e.g. behavioural observations, safety climate surveys, audit scores and expert judgement) and how well the OHS management system is functioning (Barling et al. 2002; Basso et al. 2004; Hale et al. 2010; Neal et al. 2000; Reiman & Pietikäinen 2012). In the study by Hoffmeister et al. (2014), safety climate scores were
considered to be the most important safety performance indicators. As for the safety climate, it is influenced by the managers’ actions and leadership style (e.g. Eid et al. 2012; Hoffmeister et al. 2014; Kapp 2012; Wu et al. 2008). Safety leadership and the safety climate are important predictors of both safety and OHS performance, and they should both be improved with regards to OHS performance (Barling et al. 2002; Blair 2003; Clarke 2013; Killimett 2006; Wu et al. 2008; Zohar 2010).
In this study, the organisational and management practices that contribute to OHS performance are of interest. The importance of top management support for successful OHS performance and change is almost universally recognised (e.g. Hale & Hovden 1998; Shannon et al. 1997). Organisations with a strong management commitment to OHS may reduce OHS-related events, as well as increasing other outcomes, including job satisfaction, organisational commitment and job-related performance (Michael et al. 2005). The major organisational practices that support OHS performance, based on the previous research, are presented in Table 3. In numerous studies (e.g. Geldart et al. 2010; Hale & Hovden 1998; Hale et al. 2010; Mearns et al. 2003; O’Toole 2002; Shannon et al. 1997; Vredenburgh 2002; Zacharatos et al. 2005; Yorio & Wachter 2013), management practices (e.g. management commitment, rewards, communication and feedback, employee involvement and collaboration) are related to OHS performance, typically injury rates. According to Yorio and Wachter’s (2013) research, all the studied OHS management practices were negatively associated with the rate of injuries and illnesses, although the wide use of such practices was more effective than any one of the individual practices (see also Hale et al. 2010).
Table 3. Examples of studies providing evidence on the major organisational practices that support OHS performance
Reference Industry Major organisational OHS practices
Chen et al. 2009
Printed circuit board manufacturer in Taiwan
Top management’s commitment and support Collaboration among company personnel
Completion rate of corrective and preventive measures DeJoy et al.
2004
Large retailer in the USA
Safety policies and programmes Communication Organisational support Geldart et al. 2010 Manufacturing companies in Canada
Managerial policies, for example,
- encouraging career commitment on the part of workers
- expression of concern regarding safety Collaboration
Attitude and values of top management and the manifestation of that attitude
Griffin & Neal 2000
Manufacturing Mining
Management values Safety communication
Reference Industry Major organisational OHS practices
Hale et al. 2010
Several Number of independent interventions Top management’s active role
Active role of the safety professional(s)
Dialogue between workforce and frontline management, for example,
- active encouragement of the reporting of dangerous situations
Top management training Mearns et al.
2003
O shore oil and gas installations in the UK
Proficiency in safety management practices, for example,
- management commitment - employee involvement - safety audits
O’Toole 2002 Concrete producer in the USA
Management commitment Leadership
Shannon et al. 1997
Several Empowerment of the workforce Delegation of safety activities Active role of top management
Level and use of discipline for safety violations Vinodkumar & Bhasi 2011 Chemical companies in India Management commitment Safety communication Safety training
Safety rules and procedures Workers’ involvement in safety Vredenburgh
2002
Hospitals in the USA
Management practices, for example, - management commitment - communication and feedback - participation
Yorio & Wachter 2014
Employee involvement Safety training
Pre- and post-task safety reviews
According to Petersen (2000), various barriers may prevent companies from attaining better results and excellence in safety-related matters despite the existence of ample research in this regard. However, excellence in safety is possible, regardless of any barriers. Based on the safety research, Petersen (2000) suggests the following criteria for safety excellence, which reflect management’s commitment to safety at different organisational levels:
1. A safety system mandating supervisory performance. 2. Middle managers involved in their threefold role of:
a. Ensuring supervisory performance;
b. Ensuring the quality of that supervisory performance; and c. Doing something that shows commitment.
3. Top executives visibly demonstrating that safety is a value. 4. A system in place to activate employee involvement.
5. A safety system that is flexible in that units, managers and supervisors have some choice as to their defined activities.
6. A safety system perceived as positive by all.
Achieving sustainable OHS performance requires attention to be paid to both OHS management and leadership practices and cultural change within organisations. Some organisations have achieved very high levels of OHS performance, while many organisations fail to effectively manage OHS. Although the situation is quite complicated, it is vital that the right issues are emphasised and effective interventions are managed (Fitzgerald 2005; Killimett 2006). Moreover, there is still little evidence concerning how OHS management and leadership should be approached in order to have a positive impact on employees' health (Dellve et al. 2008).
Management commitment, accountability and leadership are often seen as important in delivering breakthrough OHS performance (Bryden 2002; Hale et al. 2010; Jitwasinkul et al. 2016; Killimett 2006). Killimett (2006) argues that managers who can get their subordinates to do the right work in the right way and maintain a successful relationship with employees are effective at fostering high levels of safety performance. According to Petersen (2000), management performance is determined by the accountability system within the organisation, expectations in terms of performance at each level of the organisation, adequate competencies to fulfil these expectations, measuring whether the expectations are fulfilled, and ensuring performance is rewarded. Once a management accountability system is in place, the rest is easy to achieve. Recently, some development has taken place regarding these points (Tappura et al. 2015b), although there is still room for the further development of the prerequisites of excellence.