Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner 3RD International Conference WORKING ON SAFETY

1. Psychological Climate and Safety in the Construction Industry – Mediated Influence on Safety Behaviour Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner 3RD International Conference WORKINGONSAFETY 12-15 September 2006

2. 2 Aim • Examining mechanisms by which the psychological climate (PC) may influence self-reported safety behaviour (SB) ? ? PC SB ? ? Mediated relationsships

3. 3 Psychological climate Individual perceptions of the work environment encompass the psychological work characteristics: • Job/Role role clarity, work control, information access, possibilities for work development • Leadership quality of planning, solving conflicts, social support, feedback • Workgroup social support, sense of community, feedback (Jones and James, 1979)

4. 4 Data • Cross-sectional questionnaire data • - assembled in a study of safety in Swedish construction industry 2004 • questionnaire comprised dimensions of psychological climate(8), individual attitudes(4) and safety behaviour(3)

5. 5 Sample • Non-managerial construction workers (N=189) -mean age 45.3 - mean job tenure 23.4 - 1/3 at least high school education - 100% male • Response rate 85%

6. 6 Statistical Analysis • Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) • Hypothesis testing: • Is the hypothesised model a good representation of the empirical data ? • Comparison between different hypothesised models • -which model is the best representation of the empirical data?

7. 7 Structural Interactive Personal safety behaviour Mechanisms Four hypothetical models: The models A and B, C and D (Parker et al., 2003; Neal et al., 2000) (Parker et al., 2003);Neal et al., 2000; Pousette et al., 2004) Psychological climate Safety knowledge Workplace commitment Job satisfaction Safety motivation

8. 8 Analysis • Three steps: • Assessment of fit between each of the four hypothesised models and empirical data (c2, RMSEA, CFI, c2/df) • Comparisons between the four hypothesised models (c2- difference test, AIC) • Significant regression parameters • tested in competition (C.R.>1.96; p.<.05) • Non-significant regression parameters • were removed – parsimonius model

9. 9 Result Step 1. Assessment of fit - all four models acceptable fit Model AModel BModel CModel D c2 =1717.4 c2 =1706.0 c2 =1700.2 c2 =1707.3 RMSEA=.0067 RMSEA=.0067 RMSEA=.0067 RMSEA=.0067 CFI=.969 CFI=.969 CFI=.970 CFI=.969 c2/df=1.849 c2/df=1.842 c2/df=1.836 c2/df=1.842 RMSEA: .05-.08 acceptable fit ; <.05=closer fit CFI>.900 acceptable fit c2/df: values between 1-2 acceptable fit

10. 10 Result Step 2. Comparisons between the models A, B, C, D Model AModel BModel CModel D … Dc2(A)=11.4** Dc2(A)=17.2*** Dc2(A)=10.1** AIC=2019.372 AIC=2013.962 AIC=2008.243 AIC=2013.320 df=929 df=926 df=926 df=927 c2 =1706.0 c2 =1700.2c2 =1707.3 Dc2(D)=7.1*** **: significantly better than Model A (p<.05) ***significantly better than Model A, D (p<.01) AIC: lower values better fit

11. 11 Result Model C the best representation of empirical data Psychological climate Safety knowledge Workplace commitment Job satisfaction Safety motivation Personal safety behaviour Structural safety behaviour Interactive safety behaviour

12. 12 Result Step 3. Significant regression parameters from the models B and D, introduced in model C Non-significant parameters removed one by one

13. 13 Result Final model c2 =1700.4 RMSEA=.066 CFI=.970 AIC=1998.448 c2/df=1.826 Illustrations of significant paths (p<.05) Psychological climate Job satisfaction Work site commitment Safety knowledge Safety motivation Structural safety behaviour Interactive safety behaviour Personal safety behaviour

14. 14 Discussion • The psychological climate related to safety behaviour both directly and indirectly • an important area for safety at work • Testing four possible mediators in competition clear indication that: • - safety knowledge and safety motivation key mediators explaining how the influence between the psychological climate and safety behaviour may occur

15. 15 Discussion • In a favourable psychological climate the individual: • acquires better knowledge on safety • becomes more motivated to behave safely

16. 16 Discussion • Fostering a favourable psychological climate - within the management scope • Changing workers safety behaviour could be achieved through improvning managerial behaviour

17. 17 Discussion Different mechanisms explaining the three aspects of safety behaviour: • Personal safety behaviour • …using safety equipment, employing safety rules • safety motivation • - safety knowledge • Interactive safety behaviour • …raise safety issues in daily work, prevent co-workers and managements hazardous behaviour, provide suggestions for safety improvment • - safety motivation

18. 18 Discussion • Structural safety behaviour: • …participation in safety inspections, safety analyses, risk assessment, safety campaigns • direct influence from the psychological climate • none of the four hypothesised mediators at work • due to work role/assignment? • a supportive psychological climate important

19. 19 Conclusions • Psychological climate, safety motivation and safety knowledge • important areas for improving safety at work - safety knowledge and safety motivation key mediators explaining the influence between the psychological climate and safety behaviour - different mechanisms at work behind different aspects of safety behaviour