Managing Cultural Diversity at U.S.

Construction Sites:
Hispanic Workers’ Perspectives
Ahmed Jalil Al-Bayati, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE 1; Osama Abudayyeh, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE 2;
Tycho Fredericks, Ph.D. 3; and Steven E. Butt, Ph.D. 4

Abstract: Communication on construction sites is crucial for improving overall construction performance. Cultural barriers influence the
clarity of communication between construction supervisors and Hispanic workers on U.S. construction sites, which affects safety perfor-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

mance. In this study, Hispanic workers’ perspectives regarding active cultural differences (ACD) were collected, analyzed, and compared to
supervisors’ perspectives and responses that were reported earlier. The results confirmed the existence of three active cultural differences:
high power distance, collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. Although the goal of the study was primarily to investigate active cultural
differences, the results revealed additional important factors that affect Hispanic construction workers, such as daily work conditions, the
effectiveness of government agencies’ regulations, workers’ legal status, and reporting nonsevere injuries. Very few, if any, empirical studies
have focused on cultural diversity on U.S. construction sites. Therefore this study provides a meaningful understanding of the nature and
influence of cultural differences, which in turn helps construction supervisors manage their diverse workforce as well as aids future research
studies that are focused on cultural diversity. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001359. © 2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author Keywords: Labor and personnel issues; Active culture difference; Hispanic workers; The construction industry; Safety
management; Leading indicator.

Introduction Johnson and Ostendorf (2010) determined that although fatal

The construction industry continues to be one of the most hazard-
ous industries in the United States, one in which fatal accidents
strike more than 800 workers yearly. In addition, fatal construction
injuries have increased considerably in the last three years, a
fact which can be attributed to the increase in the construction
workforce or which may be due to other factors that must be in-
vestigated. Hispanic workers continually face higher rates of work-
related fatal injuries when compared with other ethnic workers
(Brunette 2004; Dong et al. 2010; Hurley and Lebbon 2012;
Flynn 2014; Morrison 2015). Additionally, the nature of work is
regularly risky, leading to a high incidence of nonfatal injuries
among Hispanic workers (Dong et al. 2010; Hurley and Lebbon
2012). Moreover, the representation of the Hispanic workforce on
U.S. construction sites continues to increase annually (Al-Bayati
et al. 2016; USDOL 2016b; Dong et al. 2010).
1
OSHA Authorized Trainer and Assistant Professor, Kimmel School of
Construction Management, Western Carolina Univ., Cullowhee, NC 28723
(corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0244-0638.
E-mail: aalbayati1981@gmail.com
2
Professor and Chair, Dept. of Civil and Construction Engineering,
Western Michigan Univ., Kalamazoo, MI 49008. E-mail: Osama.abudayyeh@
wmich.edu
3
Professor and Director, Human Performance Institute, Dept. of
Industrial and Entrepreneurial Engineering and Engineering Management,
Western Michigan Univ., Kalamazoo, MI 49008. E-mail: tycho.fredericks@
wmich.edu
4
Professor and Chair, Dept. of Industrial and Entrepreneurial Engineer-
ing and Engineering Management, Western Michigan Univ., Kalamazoo,
MI 49008. E-mail: steven.butt@wmich.edu
Note. This manuscript was submitted on November 10, 2016; approved
on March 24, 2017; published online on June 26, 2017. Discussion period
open until November 26, 2017; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9364.
injuries among non-Hispanic workers at U.S. worksites decreased,
the number of fatal injuries among Hispanic workers continued to
increase. In fact, the construction industry has the largest number of
fatal injuries among Hispanic workers. Fig. 1 shows the numbers
of Hispanic workers’ fatal injuries in major U.S. industries
(USDOL 2016a). Yet very few studies have focused on the safety
of the Hispanic workforce in the construction industry (Brunette
2004; Flynn 2014; Al-Bayati et al. 2016). Currently, the U.S. con-
struction industry hires a higher percentage of Hispanic workers
than any other industry. Fig. 2 shows the percentages of the His-
panic workforce in major U.S. industries (USDOL 2016b). Clearly,
the number of fatalities among Hispanic workers in the construc-
tion industry is higher than in other industries and poses safety
challenges in the industry that hire the largest percentage of His-
panic workers. Therefore it is crucial that the construction industry
takes the lead in providing accident prevention techniques to reduce
the high number of fatalities among Hispanic workers.
Several root causes lead to the higher rate of fatalities among
Hispanic workers, such as language and cultural barriers and edu-
cational level, as suggested by previous studies (Al-Bayati et al.
2016; Anderson et al. 2000; Kouyoumdijan et al. 2003; Dong
and Platner 2004; Nash 2004; Smith et al. 2006; Jaselskis et al.
2008; McGlothlin et al. 2009; Hurley and Lebbon 2012; Flynn
2014; Morrison 2015). Al-Bayati et al. (2016) also classified the
root causes as treatable and nontreatable within the scope of the
construction industry (Fig. 3).
Although it has been emphasized that cultural barriers are one
of the treatable root causes, there is no current regulation or training
agenda enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Adminis-
tration (OSHA) to consider the cultural diversity of the U.S. con-
struction workforce. The absence of cultural remedies can be
equated, in part, to the lack of research efforts focused on the nature
and influence of cultural diversity in the construction environment
(Al-Bayati and Abudayyeh 2016). Although Lavy et al. (2010)

© ASCE 04017064-1 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064

 400 Manufacturing Agriculture Construction
which was expected because few, if any, have attempted to inves-
354
350 tigate the nature and meaning of cultural issues. Chan et al. (2016)
315 316
312
reviewed the studies that suggested a unique strategy for the
300
migrant workforce. The suggested strategies included providing
Number of Fatalities

252
241
250
216 220
233 safety training in the workers’ native languages, providing leader-
200 181
193 ship opportunities, providing government support, and managing
cultural diversity. Chan et al. (2016) summarized 15 international
150
studies that focused on managing cultural diversity at construction
101 94 92
100 76
8590
73 75 82 81
70
sites, of which two were published in the U.S. (Flynn 2014;
60 62 66
56 61 6468
54 54
50
50 45 Organista et al. 2010). Not surprisingly, Flynn’s study suggested
that an employer who seeks to create a safe work environment must
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 consider Hispanic workers’ cultural background. On the other
Year hand, Organista et al. (2010) provided a general review of critical
issues that need to be understood when studying the behavior of
Fig. 1. Hispanic workforce fatalities in major U.S. industries (data people based on their background. Thus there is an established need
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

from USDOL 2016a) for more studies that address the nature and influence of cultural
issues that compromise the safety of the fastest-growing segment of
the U.S. construction workforce and affect the overall construction
Manufacturing Agriculture Construction
30% outcomes.
25%

20% Cultural Barriers at U.S. Construction Sites

Percent

15% Understanding the nature of cultural barriers is important for the

10%
5%
0%
2005 2006 2007 2008
Fig. 2. Hispanic workforce percentage in major U.S. industries (data
from USDOL 2016b)
discussed the safety initiatives that addressed cultural and language
barriers and presented seven recommendations based on several
studies to construction companies that hire diverse workforces,
only one recommendation called for focusing on cultural issues.
However, there are not enough details in the literature regarding
the nature of these cultural issues, their influence, and how exactly
construction companies can focus on them.
Lavy et al. (2010) revealed that 37.3% of the top U.S. construc-
tion companies that participated in the study did not have any strat-
egy to understand the culture of their Hispanic workers, an outcome
effective management of the Hispanic workforce at U.S. construc-
tion sites. Ling et al. (2013) determined that it is crucial for project
managers to have knowledge of differences in culture to effectively
lead a multicultural workforce. Furthermore, Phua et al. (2011) and
Loosemore et al. (2012) pointed out that if cultural diversity is man-
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 aged properly, it can improve workplace relationships, productivity,
Year and safety and positively impact creativity and innovation. Based
on that, the U.S. construction industry has two paths with opposing
consequences—one that may lead to poor management of the
construction operation coupled with a deficiency in construction
outcomes, and one that can lead to improved management of the
construction process and a better quality of the final product. There-
fore it is crucial for frontline construction supervisors to be aware of
their workers’ cultural values and to, therefore, improve commu-
nication and management (Al-Bayati et al. 2016).
Al-Bayati and Abudayyeh (2016) reported on the creation of the
concept of active cultural differences (ACD), which refers to cul-
tural differences that influence construction outcomes (e.g., produc-
tivity, quality, completion time, and safety). The culture, in this
context, is a built-in program that may indicate what responses
are probable and reasonable given one’s social environment
(Hofstede et al. 2010). Organista et al. (2010) suggested a strong

Fig. 3. Summary of treatable and untreatable characteristics of Hispanic workforce

© ASCE 04017064-2 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064

 relationship between nationality and culture as a result of the ex-
posure to everyday behavior and shared practices. Focusing on
ACD instead of cultural differences generally will improve a con-
struction company’s efforts to manage its human assets. For in-
stance, Lavy et al. (2010) revealed that more than half of the
construction companies which participated in their study organized
social events to break cultural barriers. Even though this practice is
valuable, utilizing the knowledge of existing active cultural differ-
ences to break cultural barriers would be more effective, as is dis-
cussed subsequently.
This paper is based on Hofstede’s theory, which defines a simple
and useable framework for cross-cultural communication that of-
fers practical knowledge for incorporating culture into psychology,
sociology, marketing, and management studies (Hofstede et al.
2010; Soares et al. 2007). Moreover, Canales (2009) suggested that
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Hofstede’s theory would be useful in representing the differences in
cultural background of Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers. A pre-
vious investigation of Hofstede’s framework resulted in identifying
only three of Hofstede’s six cultural differences as potential ACDs:
high power distance, collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance
(Al-Bayati et al. 2016). The following is a brief discussion of the
possible influence of the three potential ACDs on U.S. construc-
tion sites:
• High power distance refers to the degree of dependency on
supervisors that may be assumed by construction workers. It
is hypothesized that Hispanic workers have higher power dis-
tance than non-Hispanic workers, which means Hispanic work-
ers may prefer not to express their needs and concerns directly to
their supervisors and follow their supervisors’ directions with-
out discussion. This preference leads to a communication gap.
• Collectivism refers to the importance of personal relationships
within a community. It also refers to how members may act
toward someone outside their group. It is hypothesized that
Hispanic workers have higher collectivism culture than non-
Hispanic workers, which means Hispanic workers prefer to
work with their family members and close friends and may
not trust outsiders.
• Uncertainty avoidance refers to how members of a society deal
with incomprehensive tasks and whether they feel comfortable
or uncomfortable dealing with a task that does not have a clear
step-by-step map for execution. It is hypothesized that Hispanic
workers have high uncertainty avoidance when compared to
non-Hispanics, which means that they need as many details
as possible while executing a task.
Al-Bayati et al. (2016) conducted an empirical study to inves-
tigate the existence and influence of the three possible ACDs in the
U.S. construction industry. They administered a survey instrument
nationally to solicit construction supervisors’ opinions and obser-
vations. Based on 197 construction supervisors’ responses, the
study suggested the existence of two active cultural differences:
high power distance and collectivism. Unexpectedly, the responses
did not provide strong evidence in support of the existence of un-
certainty avoidance as an ACD, which meant either that Hofstede’s
framework was not valid in terms of this specific value or that the
observations of construction supervisors were inaccurate. The
probability of inaccurate observations was due to the high power
distance in the culture, which prevents Hispanic workers from
expressing their needs and opinions to their supervisors (Al-
Bayati et al. 2016). Accordingly, one of the objectives of the
present paper is to further investigate uncertainty avoidance as a
possible ACD and to assess the existence of cultural differences
in terms of high power distance and collectivism. Therefore an in-
strument was designed to examine the existence and influence of
following aspects: the general difference in culture, power distance,
© ASCE 04017064-3
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064
collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. The question of general
difference in culture and its influence on site safety was examined
because the authors noted that some construction professionals
denied this concept. Whereas the previous study solicited the
feedback of construction supervisors, this study focused on the
Hispanic workers’ perspectives and observations, because their
views are crucial to understanding active cultural differences.
Research Methods
Both quantitative and qualitative techniques were employed to
assess the existence and influence of cultural differences at
U.S. construction sites based on Hispanic workers’ perspectives.
Hofstede et al. (2010) stated that measuring individuals’ values
and beliefs by observing their actions is uncertain, but the use
of surveys provides more accurate evidence. Therefore a survey
was prepared to solicit the Hispanic workers’ points of view.
The survey questions were similar to the supervisors’ survey used
in the previous study to assess the agreement in observations and
perspectives between Hispanic workers and their supervisors. The
survey was translated into Spanish to overcome the language
barrier.
Baram and Schoebel (2007) suggested that there are other meth-
ods, such as interviews, to measure the safety culture. In addition,
Liamputtong (2011) reported that focus group studies are consid-
ered a good approach for studying the cultural diversity and inves-
tigating cultural differences. As a result, a focus group study also
was designed to solicit Hispanic workers’ perspectives. Because
language is crucial in such interviews, the documents that were
used were translated into Spanish as recommended by Liamputtong
(2011). Studies also have recommended using an insider, a person
from the same group, when conducting cross-cultural research. As
a result, focus groups studies were conducted in Latino/Hispanic
social and professional organizations whenever possible, and a
Spanish translator was recruited in all meetings to create an open
environment where participants answered the questions comfort-
ably. The authors found this recommendation of Liamputtong
(2011) realistic because Hispanic workers refused to talk when
the research team approached them at their workplaces. Western
Michigan University’s Human Subject Institutional Review Board
(HSIRB) reviewed and approved both research instruments and
protocol.
The research method was designed with the aim of obtaining
more knowledge about the three potential ACDs and their influence
and to address the two limitations of the earlier study (Al-Bayati
et al. 2016): the absence of Hispanic workers’ perspectives and the
lack of in-depth interviews through a focus group study.
Survey and Focus Group Study Results
The survey and focus group studies were administered over a
period of 8 months, and 114 survey responses were collected. How-
ever, the number of responses varied from question to question due
to unanswered questions. The anonymous surveys were collected
from three states: North Carolina, Michigan, and Illinois. The
majority of responses were collected with the help of the Latino
Workers Safety Resource Center in Hillside, Illinois. Four focus
groups were conducted with an average of seven participants in
each (n ¼ 28): two in Charlotte, North Carolina; one in Chicago;
and one in Kalamazoo, Michigan. At the end of each focus group
study, the participants completed a survey form. During one of the
Charlotte focus group studies, the construction supervisor was
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
 Table 1. Quantitative Survey Questions
Aspect Questions
Differences 1. An employee’s culture refers to such personal aspects as the set of attitudes and traditions that are built over time. In your opinion,
in culture do Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers have different cultures?
2. How likely or unlikely do cultural differences impact site safety?
Power distance 1. In your opinion, in comparison to non-Hispanic workers, are Hispanic workers less or more likely to ask their supervisor questions
when they are assigned an unsafe task?
2. In your opinion, in comparison to non-Hispanic workers, are Hispanic workers less or more likely to ask their superintendents
questions when they are assigned an unclear task?
Collectivistic/ 1. Do prefer to work within a group of workers or as an individual?
individualistic 2. Do you prefer working with a group of your family members and close friends or not?
Uncertainty 1. Do you prefer to work with a company that has rules to manage employees’ activities or a company that asks employees to
avoidance do their job using their experiences?
2. When your supervisor directs you to do a task, do you prefer detailed directions or general directions?
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

invited to provide his opinions and observations regarding the dis-
cussions and the Hispanic workers’ values and perspectives.
Demographics and General Trends
Of the 114 respondents, 104 provided information about their
country of origin. The information provided indicated that
74 (71.1%) were from Mexico; 8 (7.7%) were from Ecuador;
6 (5.8%) were native-born (i.e., United States); and the remaining
16 (15.4%) respondents came from Caribbean and Central
American countries such as Colombia, El Salvador, and Peru.
The percentage of Mexican workers who participated in this study
(71.1%) confirms the indicators that they represent the majority of
Hispanic workers at U.S. construction sites (Dong and Platner
2004; CPWR 2013; Bucknor 2016).
Ninety-nine respondents provided information about their edu-
cational background: 48.5% had some education; 31.3% had com-
pleted a foreign high school diploma; 7.1% had completed a
U.S. high school diploma; 11.1% had attended some college,
and 2% had no education at all. The years of experience working
at U.S. construction sites for 101 participants were as follows:
88.1% had more than 5 years of experience, 8.9% had 1–5 years
of experience, and 3% had less than 1 year of experience. In addi-
tion, the ages of 101 respondents were: 8.9% less than 20 years,
36.6% between 20 and 30 years, 29.7% between 30 and 40 years,
and 24.8% more than 40 years. The demographics and general
trends indicate that some characteristics of the study sample
(i.e., age and experience in U.S.) do not agree with what has been
suggested in the literature, which is that young age and lack of ex-
perience are two of the main causes of high fatality rates among
Hispanic workers (Al-Bayati et al. 2016). However, the ages of
Hispanic workers who participated in this study spanned a wide
range, and the majority of the workers had more than 5 years of
experience at U.S. construction sites.
The demographics and general trends matched the previous
studies’ findings, which validates this study. The age range was
similar to that found by Dong and Platner (2004). Therefore the
current range of Hispanic workers’ ages was 5 years lower than
that of non-Hispanic workers as reported by Dong and Platner
(2004). The education level of participants was similar to the level
of education reported by Dong and Platner (2004) and slightly
higher than that found by McGlothlin et al. (2009). However,
the participants’ work experiences at U.S. construction sites dif-
fered; McGlothlin et al. (2009) reported that 59% of Hispanic
workers had more than 5 years of construction experience, whereas
the percentage in this study was 88.1%, which might be a result of
the seven-year period between the two studies. Lack of experience,
young age, and lower education level have been identified as po-
tential reasons behind the higher rates of injuries among Hispanic
workers (Dong and Platner 2004; McGlothlin et al. 2009; Roelofs
et al. 2011). The results of the demographics and general trends
suggest that the U.S. work experience levels among Hispanic work-
ers have increased.
Quantitative Data Analysis
Table 1 illustrates the survey questions designed to measure the
existence of the three ACDs: high power distance, collectivism,
and uncertainty avoidance. A statistical description of workers’ re-
sponses was provided for each question and was compared to
supervisors’ responses from the previous study to assess the agree-
ment in observations between both groups when questions were
similar; note that not all questions from Table 1 are included in
Table 2. Table 2 provides a comparison of the results of similar
questions from the previous and the current study. The subsections
below discuss the results shown in Table 2.
Differences in Culture
Hispanic workers’ responses confirm the results from the previous
study, which suggests the existence of cultural differences at U.S.
construction sites (Table 2). It is also clear that more Hispanic
workers confirmed the existence of cultural differences than did
construction supervisors (i.e., 85.1% versus 71.6%). The percent-
age of Hispanic workers who generally agreed that safety of con-
struction sites is impacted by differences in culture was almost the
same as that of the construction supervisors (i.e., 83.7% versus
84.7%), and suggests a strong existence of cultural differences
in U.S. construction sites.
High Power Distance
Two questions were designed to assess the existence of high power
distance based on Hispanic workers’ perspectives. They are similar
to the questions in the previous study and were based on the
assumption that people with high power distance (e.g., Hispanic
worker) are less likely to ask their supervisors a question when
the task is unsafe or unclear because they believe that they have
no right to ask and that they are expected to follow orders. The
results show that 55.7% of participants believed that Hispanic
workers are less likely to ask a question when the task is unsafe
when compared with non-Hispanic workers. In addition, almost
49% of the participants thought that Hispanic workers are less
likely to ask when the task is unclear. The Hispanic workers’

© ASCE 04017064-4 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064

 Table 2. Summary of the Results for the Comparable Survey Questions
Aspect Question Answer Supervisors (%) Hispanic workers (%)
Differences 1. Do Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers have a different Yes 71.6 85.1
in culture culture? No 28.4 14.9
2. Do cultural differences influence the site safety? Very likely 34.3 47.7
Likely 50.4 36
Unlikely 13.1 11.7
Very unlikely 2.2 4.6
High power 1. Are Hispanic workers less or more likely to ask their More likely 7.9 28.8
distance supervisor questions when they are assigned an unsafe Less likely 59.0 55.7
task? Same 33 15.5
2. Are Hispanic workers less or more likely to ask their More likely 12.92 28.2
supervisor questions when they are assigned an unclear Less likely 54.49 49
task? Same 32.58 22.8
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Collectivism 1. Do Hispanic prefer working with a group of their family Yes 82.8 58.5
members and close friends or not? No 17.2 41.5
Uncertainty 1. Do Hispanic worker prefer detailed directions or general General instructions 86.7 18.7
avoidance directions? Detailed instructions 13.3 81.3

responses closely aligned with those of the construction supervisors
in the previous study (Table 2).
In order to assess the statistical significance of the results, a one-
sample chi-square (goodness of fit) test was conducted at an alpha
level of 0.05. The data met the assumption of this test: categorical
variables, independence of observations, and a frequency of at least
5 in each group. The null hypothesis was that the frequencies were
alike. The chi-square test of the unsafe task question indicated
that the frequencies of the three answers (i.e., more likely, less
likely, almost the same) were statistically significantly different
[χ2 ðn ¼ 97Þ ¼ 24.392, df ¼ 2, p < 0.001], with more than half
the participants believing that Hispanic workers are less likely to
ask. The result indicates less than a 0.001 chance that the difference
in answers among the question’s options could be attributed to
random effects. Similarly, the chi-square test of the unclear task
question indicated that the frequencies of the three answers
were statistically significantly different [χ2 ðn ¼ 92Þ ¼ 10.457,
df ¼ 2, p ¼ 0.005], with almost half the participants believing
that Hispanic workers are less likely to ask. This result indicates
a 0.005 chance that the difference in answers among the question’s
options could be the result of chance. Therefore the overall results
suggest the existence of high power distance among Hispanic
workers as an ACD due to its influence on overall site safety.
Collectivism
Two questions were designed based on Hofstede et al. (2010) to
assess collectivism as a potential active difference in culture.
The results indicate that 82.8% of workers surveyed preferred to
work with a group of workers instead of working individually
and 17.2% preferred the opposite. In addition, the results of the
second question show that 58.5% of Hispanic workers who partici-
pated in the study preferred to work with their family members or
close friends, versus 41.5% who did not. Table 2 compares the re-
sults for the second question with the results from the construction
supervisors’ study. The results of this section suggest the existence
of collectivism culture as an ACD and confirm the observations of
construction supervisors from the previous study.
Uncertainty Avoidance
Two questions were designed to assess the existence of uncertainty
avoidance based on Hispanic workers’ preferences. The recorded
data of the first question show that 79.6% of Hispanic workers who
participated in the study preferred ruled management, whereas only
20.4% of them preferred to follow their experience in the execution
of tasks. Hofstede et al. (2010) suggested that employees who have
uncertainty avoidance emotionally need a ruled management style.
The results of the second question show that 81.3% of Hispanic
workers preferred detailed instructions, whereas only 18.7% pre-
ferred general instructions. People who have uncertainty avoidance
normally prefer detailed instructions, in which execution steps are
communicated through frontline supervisors. The results of instruc-
tion preferences for the Hispanic workers were different than those
previously reported based on construction supervisors’ observations.
For similar conditions, 86.7% of construction supervisors believed
that Hispanic workers prefer general instructions (Table 2).
Al-Bayati et al. (2016) noted that the observations of construc-
tion supervisors regarding uncertainty avoidance conflicted with
the Hofstede theory and recommended further investigation. The
results of this part of the study suggest the existence of uncertainty
avoidance as an ACD, a finding which is in agreement with
Hofstede’s theory but which contradicts the results from the pre-
vious study. This contradiction will be discussed in greater detail
in the qualitative data analysis.
A Mann–Whitney U test assessed the statistical significance of
the difference between Hispanic workers’ preference and construc-
tion supervisors’ observation in terms of the type of instructions.
The test results indicated that construction supervisors’ observa-
tions (mean rank = 93.53, n ¼ 165) and Hispanic workers’ prefer-
ences (mean rank ¼ 168.17, n ¼ 96) were significantly different
(U ¼ 2623.5, Z ¼ −10.716, p < 0.001). The result demonstrated
less than a 0.001 chance that the difference between Hispanic
preferences and construction supervisors’ observations regarding
Hispanic preferences could be attributed to chance or random ef-
fects. This statistically significant difference indicates a serious
miscommunication between Hispanic workers and their supervi-
sors on U.S. construction sites. Whereas Hispanic workers prefer
detailed instructions due to their uncertainty avoidance culture,
construction supervisors do not notice this need.
Qualitative Data Analysis
This section discusses the data collected from the focus groups and
the surveys’ open-ended questions. All focus group sessions started
with a presentation illustrating construction workforce fatalities
over a period of 10 years, the potential root causes, and two fatality

© ASCE 04017064-5 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064

 Table 3. A Sample of the Focus Groups’ Feedback
Aspect Feedback—reported as written in the survey
Unfamiliarity with • I assume that OSHA always inspects big size projects not the small ones.
U.S. laws and OSHA • I did not know about this organization (i.e., OSHA), and I have been here for 18 years.
• I knew about OSHA but did not know we have the right to make a claim.
Language barrier • Translating instructions to Spanish would not solve the problem because the language barrier would still be present.
• We feel less than others because we cannot express our feelings and concerns as a result to language barrier.
• The problem is that some of us do not speak any English, and we will do the job even if we do not know exactly what we are doing.
Immigration status • The problem is that sometimes I am afraid because of my immigration status. Also, if I got fired because I speak up against unsafe
condition, there is nothing to fight for since I have no social security number.
• When I asked about my rights, my supervisor said “None, you do not have any rights because you are undocumented.”
• Immigration status would definitely affect our mindset in the workplace.
The behavior of • “You do not have any rights because you are undocumented.”
some employers • The problem is that they do not provide us with safety equipment because we are only hired for a day.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

• I have rejected an unsafe task before and the supervisor told me If I do not want to do it, then leave and go home.
High power distance • When examiner asked what they will do when they think the instructions are not enough, one said “I would talk to someone that
and collectivism has experience doing that type of work.” He will not ask his supervisor for clarification.
• We are used to never saying no, we always try to do everything.
• I think that working with family helps to keep an eye on each other.
• Working with family can cause more accidents because you can get asked to do more work or faster, this will eventually cause
more accident.
Uncertainty avoidance • I prefer detailed instructions, that way I can do the job correctly.
• General instructions do not work because they can miss important details.
• I do not want to do the job wrong, so I prefer if my supervisor shows me how to do the work step by step first. After that they can let
me work on my own.

reports that involved Hispanic workers. These reports were de-
signed to increase the awareness of the participants and to demon-
strate the goals and objectives of the study to inspire critical and
deep discussion.
The two fatality reports were extracted from the Fatality Assess-
ment and Control Evaluation program database (FACE 2016). The
presentation was in English and Spanish. The workers’ supervisor
was invited to participate in one of the focus groups to assess his
perspective regarding Hispanic workers’ opinions. The qualitative
data of this study indicate that Hispanic workers feel insecure while
working in the U.S. construction industry due to the following
reasons:
• Unfamiliarity with U.S. laws and regulations: This was noted by
participants, especially regarding OSHA regulations and its role.
A large proportion of the workers who participated in the focus
groups studies (n ¼ 28) was neither familiar with OSHA com-
pliance requirements nor had taken OSHA training, despite the
fact that some of them had been working in the industry for
more than 15 years. One of the participants from the Illinois
focus group said, “I never had OSHA safety training during
my 30 years of working in the U.S. construction industry.” Refer
to Table 3 for additional information about this subject.
• Language barrier: Hispanic workers who participated in the
study expressed their frustration regarding the language barrier.
They explained that the language barrier prevented them from
discussing their needs and opinions with their supervisors and
impeded their understanding of their supervisor’s instructions.
Thus, translating the training material and safety signs to Span-
ish may not solve daily communication issues; hiring a bilingual
supervisor would be a better approach than depending only on
translations. In addition, the interviews revealed the illiteracy
status among the workers, which limits the OSHA translating
efforts. One of the answers to the question about why Hispanic
workers typically ask fewer questions than their non-Hispanic
coworkers was the following statement: “This is one of the
challenges that we face because of the language barrier. We fear
that, because of our lack of knowledge, we can lose our job.”
Refer to Table 3 for additional information about this subject.
• Immigration status: This was a common theme among all par-
ticipants in this study. Almost half of all construction Hispanic
workers were undocumented in 2010 (Al-Bayati et al. 2016;
USDOL 2016b; Johnson and Ostendorf 2010). Participants
talked about how their immigration status creates the fear of
speaking up against unsafe conditions and practices. One of
the important rights that Hispanic workers believe they do
not have, due to their legal status, is the right to file a complaint
with OSHA and receive financial support if they were fired as a
result of their complaint. It is not a secret that a large number of
Hispanic workers who have been working on U.S. construction
sites for years are unauthorized to work. This fact poses several
undesirable outcomes for their health, safety, and social life.
Having this mass of construction workers without rights while
they are working hard and supporting the economy by fulfilling
the demand for construction workers is a serious problem that
must be addressed. Refer to Table 3 for additional information
about this subject.
• Behavior of some employers: Few participants provided exam-
ples from their daily lives where they had been fired or were
threatened with termination just because they asked for safety
equipment. In general, this cognitive knowledge of the probabil-
ity of employment termination just because of speaking up for
better safety conditions was shared by all participants even
though they had not experienced it. Every focus group meeting
reported comments such as “It is very easy for them [employers]
just to fire us,” and “It is like we are disposable, they can use us
when they need.” However, it must be noted that the situation
varies from company to company. The participants emphasized
that the situation was different when working for larger con-
struction companies In addition, the intimidation is expected
to continue as long as the current legal status of Hispanic

© ASCE 04017064-6 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064

 workers remains unresolved. The supervisor who attended one
of the focus group studies indicated his frustration by stating
that Hispanic workers would not express their needs, a state-
ment that clearly demonstrated the difference in perceptions
between Hispanic workers’ and their supervisor at one of the
U.S. construction sites. This difference in perception is expected
to be present at many other U.S. construction sites. Table 3 pro-
vides more information about this subject.
• Economic status: This was mentioned many times as a reason
why Hispanic workers may accept unsafe tasks. Furthermore,
focus group studies revealed that the majority of Hispanic con-
struction workers who participated in the study did not have
health insurance as a result of their economic status and work
type (i.e., temporary workers). One of the participants said the
following: “Hispanic workers do not go to the hospital; the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
reason is that they do not have insurance.” The construction
supervisor who participated in one of the focus groups stated
that “If they get hurt, they continue to work either way because
they do not have the money to cover medical bills.” As a result,
this status leads to a lack of reporting of nonsevere injuries,
which explains why the rates of nonfatal injuries among
Hispanic workers are constantly lower than among Caucasian
workers as reported by the Center for Construction Research
and Training (CPWR 2013).
Differences in Culture
It is important to note that the awareness of active cultural differ-
ences is still limited. Thus, although people may act in a certain
way due to their cultural values, they may provide different reasons
for why they act in certain ways. Following are the participants’
answers to questions that are related to the three potential ACDs:
1. High power distance: Participants from the four focus groups
agreed that Hispanic workers would not ask questions if the task
was unsafe or unclear (i.e., high power distance), thus confirm-
ing the existence of high power distance as an ACD. The fol-
lowing recommendations have been suggested to overcome the
high power distance barrier (Al-Bayati et al. 2016):
a. Construction supervisors must not consider the silence of
Hispanic workers as an indication of a full knowledge of
work orders;
b. The number of safety inspections must increase to ensure that
all workers, including Hispanics, have a comprehensive un-
derstanding of safety hazards related to ongoing tasks; and
c. Construction supervisors must continuously communicate
with Hispanic workers who may not show full awareness
of safe actions and behaviors.
2. Collectivism: Participants confirmed that Hispanic workers
often work in a group, typically with their family members
or close friends, and that they trust Hispanic coworkers and
Hispanic supervisors more than they trust others (i.e., collecti-
vism). One possible solution regarding collectivistic culture is
appointing a safety leader from within the Hispanic workers,
and it is important to be sure that he/she has an acceptable safety
knowledge as well as ACD awareness (Al-Bayati et al. 2016).
However, the focus group study revealed an interesting point of
view from one focus group, in which the participants stated that
they might not follow the orders of their family member if
he/she becomes a safety person because “When one works with
their family members they will be more flexible and do not fol-
low instructions.” Another said, “If the family member is a nice
person then workers may not follow him.” While these observa-
tions are very interesting, it is still important to appoint a group
member as a safety leader with special attention and support
© ASCE 04017064-7
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064
from management regarding his/her role, in serving as a team
leader. Refer to Table 3 for additional feedback from Hispanic
participants.
3. Uncertainty avoidance: The majority of participants preferred
detailed instructions as a way to successfully complete a task.
They also expressed frustration because they do not get the type
of instructions they prefer. One of the participants said, “We pre-
fer detailed directions, but we do not always get that from our
supervisors.” However, when asked about their reaction when
they do not get clear or sufficient information, one of the parti-
cipants said that he would not show his need for detailed instruc-
tions because “We do not want to show inexperience and
weakness.” This conversation helped in understanding the rea-
son for conflict between the construction supervisors’ observa-
tions and Hispanic workers’ preferences in terms of the type of
instructions (i.e., detailed versus general). As a result, this study
provides strong evidence of the existence of uncertainty avoid-
ance at U.S. construction sites and reveals a clear misunder-
standing between Hispanic workers and their supervisors
regarding the required instructions at U.S. construction sites.
See Table 3 for more feedback about this cultural value.
Discussion
Human factors theory proposes three factors that may cause
work-related accidents: overload, inappropriate response, and
inappropriate activities (Goetsch 2013). Overload is a result of
an environmental, internal, or situational element. This study
revealed two overload elements that are highly probable among
Hispanic construction workers: (1) internal (i.e., personal problems
such as immigration status); and (2) situational (i.e., unclear in-
structions and high-risk tasks). The existence of these two elements
among Hispanic workers will result in human errors which, in turn,
will lead to a higher probability of work-related accidents. Thus
there is a necessity to eliminate the causes of overload to reduce
the higher probability of accidents among Hispanic workers.
Although the majority of the investigations into the safety of
Hispanic workers at U.S. construction sites have mentioned lan-
guage and cultural barriers as major root causes, Roelof et al.’s
(2011) study minimized their influence. The results of the present
study align well with the majority of studies of Hispanic workers
and contradict Roelof et al.’s conclusion regarding cultural and lan-
guage barriers. One of the possible reasons for Roelof et al.’s con-
tradicting results is that the study sample may not have been
representative. The participants in Roelof et al.’s study came from
the Dominican Republican and Puerto Rico, whereas the majority
of Hispanic workers are from Mexico, as was found in this study
and in McGlothlin et al.’s (2009) case study. The data investigation
also indicated that Mexican workers are the majority (Dong and
Platner 2004; CPWR 2013; Bucknor 2016). However, the present
study partially agrees with Roelof et al.’s assertion regarding super-
visors’ intimidation. Even though supervisors’ intimidation hap-
pens at U.S. construction sites, the focus group results indicate
that occurrences of such behavior are limited to certain small
contractors.
Finally, the findings strongly suggest that uncertainty avoidance
exists at U.S. construction sites and confirm the existence of the
other two ACDs (i.e., high power distance and collectivism).
Knowing the nature and influence of these three ACDs will help
construction companies in the U.S. focus on cultural aspects that
matter and will allow them to develop better strategies to improve
communication at their worksites. Thus this study provides the re-
quired knowledge as well as the practical recommendations that
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
 can help improve the safety record of Hispanic workers at U.S. con-
struction sites.
The findings of this study indicate the dire need for the follow-
ing actions to improve overall site safety of U.S. construction sites:
• Construction supervisors should improve communication by
providing detailed instructions even though Hispanic workers
do not often ask for them, and reduce task risks by providing
safe work procedures, personal protective equipment, and safety
training.
• It is important to hire bilingual safety personnel to act as a con-
nection channel between construction supervisors and Hispanic
workers on the other site. These safety personnel should have
the knowledge, authority, and leadership skills that will allow
them to enforce safety regulations, identify unsafe conditions
and practices, and take prompt corrective actions when required.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
This approach will help reduce the undesirable effect of collec-
tivism culture and will benefit from the high power distant cul-
tural background (i.e., they respect and follow the orders of high
authority).
• Because Hispanic workers have less of a tendency to speak up,
construction supervisors must clearly explain and continuously
show them that it is okay to express their needs and concerns.
Supervisors also should provide incentives for Hispanic workers
who report their concerns and needs during safety meetings or
daily morning talks. Furthermore, it may be beneficial to have
social events for Hispanic workers and their supervisors to
discuss communication issues and safety concerns to increase
the workers’ comfort level and allow them to bring concerns
forward.
• OSHA must develop new methods to reach out to this growing
segment of U.S. construction workforce and to protect them
from employers who break OHSA regulations. A large segment
of the Hispanic workforce is undocumented, and it is clear that
some employers are taking advantage of them.
Conclusions
The Hispanic construction workforce is a crucial segment of the
U.S. construction industry. The needs of this group must be evalu-
ated to provide a safer work environment. It is imperative that
construction companies strive to understand the cultural values
of their Hispanic workers and improve the overall safety record
on construction sites. Construction supervisors and Hispanic work-
ers agree that cultural differences negatively influence overall site
safety. However, the meaning of cultural differences is not clear.
Furthermore, it is uncertain how cultural differences affect overall
site safety. The main contribution of this study is providing a clear
understanding of existing cultural differences and their influence.
This understanding will enhance future studies and provide strat-
egies for best practices in construction site management. Cultural
values of Hispanic construction workers must be known by their
supervisors to improve communication, which will positively influ-
ence construction project flow and outcomes such as quality, safety,
and team integration. In addition, the findings of the study will con-
tribute to the creation of educational materials that will aid in man-
aging cultural diversity at U.S. construction sites. The daily work
conditions of Hispanic workers who work with small construction
companies require immediate attention from OSHA to prevent pos-
sible intimidation and to improve reporting of nonsevere injuries.
Finally, identifying or studying ACDs without understanding
and appreciating their role in accident causations may affect the
effectiveness of the suggested recommendations. Investigating cul-
tural theories other than Hofstede’s may help to identify additional
© ASCE 04017064-8
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064
ACDs that can be addressed to further explain the issues associated
with cultural differences in an attempt to improve safety on con-
struction sites.
Data Availability Statement
Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from
the corresponding author upon request. Information about the
Journal’s data sharing policy can be found here: http://ascelibrary
.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29CO.1943-7862.0001263.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Graduate College at Western
Michigan University for partially funding this study through a
Graduate Student Research Grant. The authors also appreciate
the editorial assistance of Dr. Marianne Di Pierro, Program Man-
ager for Graduate Research and Retention in the Graduate College
at Western Michigan University. Special thanks to Dan Ramir, the
director of Latino Workers Safety Resource Center in Chicago,
who helped with collecting surveys and organizing one of the focus
group studies. His support was crucial to the success of this phase
of the study. Additionally, the support and help of the following
Latino/Hispanic organizations and construction companies are
greatly appreciated:
• Mark Lee, owner of Better World Builders, Michigan;
• Travis Ball and Gaylor Electric, Inc., North Carolina;
• Hispanic Contractors Association of the Carolinas, North
Carolina;
• Home Builders Association of Kalamazoo, Michigan;
• Faith Josephs and Latin American Coalition, North Carolina;
and
• Milagritos Aguilar, owner of Red Rooster Contractors, North
Carolina.
References
Al-Bayati, A., and Abudayyeh, O. (2016). “Safety challenges in the U.S.
construction industry: The Hispanic workforce perspective.” Proc.,
Construction Research Congress, ASCE, San Juan, Puerto Rico,
2967–2971.
Al-Bayati, A., Abudayyeh, O., Fredericks, T., and Butt, S. (2016). “Reduc-
ing fatality rates of the Hispanic workforce in the U.S. construction
industry: Challenges and strategies.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061
/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001269, 04016105.
Anderson, J. T. L., Hunting, K. L., and Welch, L. S. (2000). “Injury and
employment patterns among Hispanic construction workers.” J. Occup.
Environ. Med., 42(2), 176–186.
Baram, M., and Schoebel, M. (2007). “Safety culture and behavioral
change at the workplace.” Saf. Sci., 45(6), 631–636.
Brunette, M. J. (2004). “Construction safety research in the United States:
Targeting the Hispanic workforce.” Inj. Prev., 10(4), 244–248.
Brunette, M. J. (2005). “Development of educational and training materials
on safety and health targeting hispanic workers in the construction
industry.” Family Community Health, 28(3), 253–266.
Bucknor, C. (2016). “The Hispanic workers in the United States.” 〈http://
cepr.net/images/stories/reports/hispanic-workers-2016-11.pdf〉 (Dec. 30,
2016).
Byler, C. G. (2013). “Hispanic/Latino fatal occupational injury rates.”
〈http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/02/art2full.pdf〉 (Apr. 30, 2015).
Canales, A., et al. (2009). “Exploring training needs and development of
construction language courses for American supervisors and Hispanic
craft workers.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364
(2009)135:5(387), 387–396.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
 Chan, A., Javed, A., Lyu, S., Hon, C., and Wong, F. (2016). “Strategies for
improving safety and health of ethnic minority construction workers.”
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001148,
05016007.
CPWR (The Center for Construction Research and Training). (2013). The
construction chart book: The U.S. construction industry and its
workers, 5th Ed., Silver Spring, MD.
Dong, S. X., Wang, X., and Goldenhar, L. M. (2016). “Workplace safety
and health perceptions of construction workers.” 〈http://www.cpwr.com
/sites/default/files/publications/3rd_Quarter_2016_0.pdf〉 (Oct. 23, 2016).
Dong, X., and Platner, J. W. (2004). “Occupational fatalities of Hispanic
construction workers from 1992 to 2000.” Am. J. Ind. Med., 45(1),
45–54.
Dong, X. S., Men, Y., and Ringen, K. (2010). “Work-related injuries among
Hispanic construction workers—Evidence from the medical expendi-
ture panel survey.” Am. J. Ind. Med., 53(6), 561–569.
FACE (Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation Program). (2016). “The
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Remote User on 04/05/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).”
〈https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/face〉 (Oct. 23, 2016).
Flynn, M. (2014). “Safety and the diverse workforce: Lessons from
NIOSH’s work with Latino immigrants.” Prof. Saf., 59(6), 52–57.
Goetsch, D. L. (2013). Construction safety and heath, 2nd Ed., Pearson
Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hofstede, G. H., Hofstede, G. J., and Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and
organizations: Software of the mind: intercultural cooperation and
its importance for survival, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hurley, D. T., and Lebbon, A. R. (2012). “A comparison of nonfatal oc-
cupational injuries and illnesses among Hispanic versus non-Hispanic
workers in the United States.” Hispanic J. Behav. Sci., 34(3), 474–490.
Jaselskis, E., Strong, K., Aveiga, F., Canales, A., and Jahren, C. (2008).
“Successful multi-national workforce integration program to improve
construction site performance.” Saf. Sci., 46(4), 603–618.
Johnson, S., and Ostendorf, J. (2010). “Hispanic employees in the work-
place: Higher rate of fatalities.” AAOHN J., 58 (1), 11–16.
Kouyoumdjian, H., Zamboanga, B. L., and Hansen, D. J. (2003). “Barriers
to community mental health services for Latinos: Treatment consider-
ations.” Clin. Psychol.: Sci. Pract., 10(4), 394–422.
Lavy, S., Aggarwal, C., and Porwal, V. (2010). “Fatalities of Hispanic
workers: Safety initiatives taken by U.S. construction companies to
address linguistic and cultural issues.” Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res., 6(4),
271–284.
© ASCE 04017064-9
J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 2017, 143(9): 04017064
Liamputtong, P. (2011). Focus group methodology principles and
practices, Sage, London.
Ling, Y., Dulaimi, M., and Chua, M. (2013). “Strategies for managing
migrant construction workers from China, India, and the Philippines.”
J. Prof. Eng. Educ. Pract., 10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000124,
19–26.
Loosemore, M., Phua, F., Teo, M., and Dunn, K. M. (2012). “Management
strategies to harness cultural diversity on Australian construction
sites—A social identity perspective.” Australas. J. Constr. Econ. Build.,
12(1), 1–11.
McGlothlin, J., Hubbard, B., Aghazadeh, F., and Hubbard, S. (2009).
“Ergonomics. Case study: Safety training issues for Hispanic construc-
tion workers.” J. Occup. Environ. Hyg., 6(9), D45–D50.
Morrison, K. (2015). “Why are workplace injuries and deaths increasing
among Latino employees?” Saf. Health, 192(2), 84–86.
Nash, J. L. (2004). “Construction safety: Best practices in training Hispanic
workers.” Occup. Hazard, 66(2), 35–38.
Organista, P. B., Marin, G., and Chun, K. M. (2010). The psychology of
ethnic groups in the United States, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Phua, F., Loosemore, M., Teo, M., and Dunn, K. (2011). “Diversity inter-
ventions for a socially sustainable construction industry.” Proc., Int.
Conf. on Management and Innovation for a Sustainable Built Environ-
ment, Delft Univ. of Technology, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Roelofs, C., Sprague-Martinez, L., Brunette, M., and Azaroff, L. (2011). “A
qualitative investigation of Hispanic construction worker perspectives
on factors impacting worksite safety and risk.” Environ. Health, 10(84),
1–9.
Smith, S. M., Perry, T., and Moyer, D. (2006). “Creating a safer workforce,
Training needs for Hispanic and foreign-born workers.” Prof. Saf.,
51(12), 20–25.
Soares, A. M., Farhangmehr, M., and Shoham, A. (2007). “Hofstede’s
dimensions of culture in international marketing studies.” J. Bus. Res.,
60(3), 277–284.
USDOL (U.S. Department of Labor). (2016a). “Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries.” 〈http://www.bls.gov/bls/naics
.htm〉 (Aug. 21, 2016).
USDOL (U.S. Department of Labor). (2016b). “Current population survey:
Employed persons by detailed industry, sex, race, and Hispanic or
Latino ethnicity.” 〈http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat18.htm〉 (Aug. 12,
2016).
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.