Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 2000 7 2, 133 – 140
Safety behaviour and safety management: its influence on
the attitudes of workers in the UK construction industry
D . L A N G F O R D*, S . R O W L I N S O N† & E . S A W A C H A‡
*
Department of Civil Engineering, Strathclyde University, Glasgow G4 0NG, UK; †Department of Surveying and Real
Estate, Hong Kong University, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong; ‡Formerly of Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK
Abstract This paper identifies the critical factors that
influence the attitudes of construction workers towards
safe behaviour on construction sites. It studies these
attitudes by using a research model that links three
themes: safety management implementation strategies,
attitudes of workers about safety and behavioural factors
displayed by construction workers. This model is used to
frame the responses of 126 directly employed construc-
tion workers in 10 companies. Some 56 variables were
identified as having a potential influence upon attitudes
to safety. The initial data analysis found that 12 technical
INTRODUCTION
This paper explores the factors that influence attitudes
towards safety of construction workers in the UK
construction industry. The issue of construction safety
assumed considerable importance with the introduc-
tion of the Health & Safety at Work Act of 1974
(HMSO, 1974), and more recently, the Construction,
Design & Management (CDM) Regulations of 1994
(HMSO, 1994) have reinforced the importance of
managing safety in the construction industry in a self-
regulatory context. Such a context requires the devel-
opment of a safety culture and, as a consequence, a
change of attitudes. Such attitudes will be shaped, in
part, by the regulatory framework governing safety in
construction. However, the greater influence will arise
from factors that are part of the work practices and
individual behaviour of construction workers. The pur-
pose of this research is to identify the major influences
upon the attitudes of workers to safety issues. Laws
and regulations will be important as part of the in-
frastructure of safety management, but beliefs and
actions will have a stronger influence upon the safety
climate of construction sites.
The scale of the construction safety problem has
been of considerable concern to the industry and calls
for improvements in performance have been heard
from trade unions, employers’ associations and the
Health and Safety Executive. This concern has been
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd
factors significantly correlated to the development of
strong positive attitudes towards safety management.
Second-order analysis, using factor analysis, isolated five
variables that had a major influence on safety attitudes.
The five factors were: organizing for safety supervis-
ion and equipment management, industry norms and
culture, attitudes to risk taking and management be-
haviour.
Keywords attitudes, construction site safety, safety cul-
ture, safety improvement, safety management, worker
behaviour factors
translated into a search for a better understanding the
safety problem and to install better safety regimes. Part
of this control is exercised by the CDM regulations
and personified by the planning supervisor who will
influence the performance, in respect of safety obser-
vance, of construction managers. Hopefully, the influ-
ence of the safety plan and the planning supervisor
trickles down to shape the values and culture of the
site operatives. For the purposes of this study, the
attitudes displayed by the operations are formed by
beliefs and values that are independent of the safety
plan. Nonetheless, the achievements of the regulatory
framework have been to identify methods of uniformly
classifying accidents, instrument safety measurement
methods, and instigate behavioural studies to educate
workers about safety risks (Duff et al. 1994).
These efforts and other initiatives have had an im-
pact; as Table 1 and Table 2 illustrate, the numbers of
fatal accidents and notifiable accidents is falling, but in
comparison with other industries, construction is still a
hazardous industry. However, the accident rate does
vary between contractors and between sites and this
variation may be seen to be a result of variables that
are present in the work environment and the individual
worker’s response to these hazards. Consequently, this
research considered the interplay between organiza-
tional factors associated with accidents and the human
factors involved in accidents. A research model that
links the attitudes of workers to safety and how safety
133
134 Langford D. et al.

Table 1 Accidents in construction 1987–1994

Year Injuries leading to absence from work for over 3 days Fatal accidents Nonfatal accidents All reported injuries

1987 16 316 100 2587 19 003

1988* 16 916 134 3416 20 466

1989 19 826 109 2998 19 826

1990 17 829 120 3830 21 879
1991 16 151 98 3276 19 525
1992 12 953 87 2740 15 780
1993 10 910 77 2531 13 518
1994 11 043 81 2574 13 698
1995 11 174 83 2627 13 884
1996 9695 79 2477 12 251
1997 9666 90 4054† 13 810
1998 9668 74 4171 13 913

* Reporting base changes to include subcontractors.

† The figures from 1997 are statistically discontinuous. The introduction of the reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences
regulations of 1995 widened the scope of the incident that had to be reported. Incidents as well as accidents were now to be recorded and
acts of physical violence came into scope. The Health and Safety executive estimates that the widened scope had led to a 70% increase in
reputable events.

matters are implemented and managed in construction
was developed and tested.
What is an accident and what causes it?
Other researchers (e.g. Leather 1983a; Duff et al.
1994; Lingard & Rowlinson 1994) see accidents
caused by environmental factors, latent hazards in the
nature of construction work and psychological factors
owned by the individual workers. The environmental
factors were seen as:
1. site conditions (e.g. access to work, etc.),
2. site tidiness,
3. availability of technical resources,
4. inter- and intragroup co-operation,
5. control and supervision of work,
6. effectiveness of long-term planning,
7. role and position of the safety officer and safety
representatives,
8. pay structure.
The psychological factors consisted of:
mechanistic regulations about guards, safety risks, per-
sonal protective clothing, protection at depths and
heights, collecting statistics, etc. The psychological
issues are a more recent addition to the safety research
agenda (Booth 1993). In this respect, the investigation
of attitudes about safe behaviour and its relationship to
the management of safety performance is timely, espe-
cially when one considers the worldwide trend towards
self-regulation of safety management.
ATTITUDES TO SAFETY
The goal of this research was to identify those attitudes
and beliefs that are linked to the effectiveness of be-
havioural management programmes. As such, the
study of workers attitudes to safety and safety manage-
ment and the safety infrastructure provided was the
specific focus of the study. All safety and health initia-
tives must be predicated on human involvement, thus
Table 2 Accident rates per 100 000 at risk in construction and
all industry 1992–1998

1. care and attention by the individual, Year Accident rate per 100 000 Accident rate for 100 000
2. skill and experience brought to the job, at risk in construction at risk in all industries
3. safety training,
4. origins of safety norms, 1992 1603 740
1993 1613 821
5. accuracy of subjective risk evaluations,
1994 1455 843
6. perceived responsibilities, 1995 1468 870
7. feeling of competent autonomy or fatalism. 1996 1328 797
1997 1598 749
Of these two themes, the environmental factors have 1998 1473 730
been, in the main, legislated for and are in the realm of

© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140

worker attitudes and behaviour are a crucial factor in
ensuring that strategies are devised, adopted and main-
tained. The aim was to explore worker attitudes and
their actions but its was implicitly accepted that atti-
tudes and behaviour are determined largely by group
norms and values. The issue of safety culture is impor-
tant in this respect.
Dester & Blockley (1995) use a definition of safety
culture as ‘‘the set of beliefs, norms, attitudes, roles
and social and technical practices which are concerned
with minimizing the exposure of individuals, within
and beyond an organization, to conditions considered
dangerous or injurious’’ (citing Pidgeon et al. 1991).
Referring to the work of Heinrich et al. (1980),
Dester & Blockley (1995) see the accident process as
an incubation period and cites behaviour, manage-
ment, safety culture and social factors as being possible
hazards. This leads to what Blockley describes as the
hazard content of the project or ‘‘proneness to failure’’
(Blockley 1992). They then go on to discuss the
tendency to focus on the behaviour of the manual
workforce as the ‘trigger’ for hazard events:
‘‘This is an implicit assumption that it is a they who
are at fault. However, working practices are influ-
enced by the requirements, demands and expecta-
tions of clients, designers, consultants, and
managers. It is also likely that the beliefs, attitudes
and behaviour of construction managers, designers,
consultants, educationalists, researchers and clients
are reflected in the beliefs, attitudes and behaviour
of construction workers.’’ (Dester & Blockley 1995,
p. 19).
If this is the case, then the study of attitudes and
behaviours of construction workers will enable a better
understanding of their underlying motivations and so
this understanding can be used to improve behavioural
management techniques.
Wilson (1989) deals with organizational behaviour
and safety management and the point he makes is that
the paradigms used for manufacturing industry are not
directly transferable to the construction industry,
which is based on organic organization rather than the
mechanistic systems of the manufacturing sector. As a
consequence, he makes the following points by way of
interpreting this view of the industry (p. 311):
‘‘There is no doubt that decision making and discre-
tionary power are delegated widely throughout con-
struction industry organizations. Much of this is due
to professionalism of the workforce, on the one
hand, and to the fragmentation of work within
organizations on the other.’’
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
Safety behaviour and safety management 135
‘‘Knowledge was acquired on the site by the learn-
ing process of ‘sitting by Nellie’. Inevitably, this
involves considerable ‘trial and error’…the resultant
knowledge and experience is the means by which
safe and unsafe acts or conditions are assessed. In
the absence of other means of assessing danger,
experience becomes the most powerful tool for mo-
tivating or demotivating safe behaviour.’’
Herein lies a series of problems. The amount of
delegated decision making, discretionary power, infor-
mal training and loyalty to peer group on the construc-
tion site provides a context within which accidents can
easily happen unless a sufficiently robust system of
self-regulation exists. This system could well be em-
bodied in the concepts of culture as described by
Dester & Blockley (1995) but, as found by Lingard &
Rowlinson (1998), this system cannot function with-
out an adequate safety infrastructure being provided
by management.
These issues are also discussed by Seymour & Hill
(1996). They discuss the role of the first line supervi-
sor and point out that a culture has evolved in the
construction industry to compensate for the deficien-
cies of formal management provision. This reflects the
views of the Tavistock Institute in the 1960s, which
addressed the issue of management of the procure-
ment system and indicated that the informal system of
side dealing was necessary to make up for the deficien-
cies in the formal control system. It seems that
3 decades later, this same problem still exists and is
particularly acute in the realm of construction site
safety. In order to deal with this, they comment that
foremen opine:
‘‘Because of the uncertainty and interdependence,
because of the difficulty of supervising a constantly
changing site, an operative’s ability to act without
detailed instructions and to have the right attitude is
important to them.’’ (p. 5).
‘‘..they value the ability to ‘get stuck in’, sort out
problems, to be flexible and reliable in the face of
the uncertainty and unpredictability which is in-
evitable. The means of obtaining compliance are
primitive: the threat of dismissal or cultivating net-
works of personal loyalty.’’ (p. 9).
This approach is understandable but the right atti-
tude may not be a safe attitude and the incentives to
‘get stuck in’ may well be counter productive in terms
of safety performance. Hence, it is these issues that
this paper explores and the exploration is based on a
detailed analysis of data collected by Sawacha (1994).
136 Langford D. et al.
Figure 1 The research model.
The work undertaken by Duff et al. (1994) and
Lingard & Rowlinson (1997) was predicated on such
concepts; behavioural safety management aims to
change attitudes by providing a framework within
which existing attitudes can be explored and modified
with the ultimate goal being safer performance.
THE EMPIRICAL WORK
The empirical work in this study sought to link the
attitudes of construction workers to safety, the be-
havioural factors governing the working environment
and attitudes about safety management. In so doing, a
better understanding of how behavioural safety tech-
niques work and might be improved can be developed.
The research model is shown in Fig. 1.
The behavioural factors were considered to generate
attitudes and behaviour about safety. These be-
havioural factors emerged from pilot interviews con-
ducted with workers and the factors identified are
those that affect the attitudes held by the operatives.
The behavioural factors are discussed below.
Behavioural factors
These were identified from the pilot interviews and
literature review as factors that were strongly influen-
tial on construction worker behaviour and safety per-
formance, described by Lingard & Rowlinson (1997)
as the behavioural element of the ‘‘basic safety
infrastructure’’.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
Historical factors
These factors consist of personal details such as age
and experience, occupation (trade) and training, Trade
Union membership, etc.
Economic factors
These are such factors as payment systems and reward
methods: ‘danger money’, productivity bonus, etc.
Human psychological factors
These are such factors as the effect of the Health &
Safety at Work Act of 1974, influence of training
levels, propensity to accept danger or risk taking, skill
levels, supervisor carefulness, worker carelessness, etc.
Technical development factors
These included items such as plant and equipment,
asbestos, etc., which are known to cause accident
damage to persons and property in the construction
industry in the course of their use. Such items are
likely to cause accidents if they are not correctly used,
and with care, in accordance with set procedures.
Procedural factors
These are factors that fall into areas considered as
‘custom and practice’ as far as safety provision is
concerned. They include protective clothing and
equipment that ought to be used as part of construc-
tion safety norms in order to reduce accidents. Use of
safety equipment/clothing and safety instruction is
good safety procedure likely to prevent the occurrence
of — or reduce the impact of — accidents.
Organizational factors
Organizational factors were considered by the sample
as items such as group interactions/interrelationships,
trade union involvement, safety policy and safety pro-
paganda, etc. These have been labelled as ‘organiza-
tional and risk management systems’, whereas Leather
(1983b) considered them as ‘‘organizational changes
within a feed-back loop’’.
Environmental factors
These are the factors that relate to the site conditions.
The interrelationships between the construction
groups, such as inter- and intragroup co-operation,

control and supervision of work activities, site tidiness,
influence of site planning and worker safety observance
are also part of this.
Attitudes towards safety management
Workers attitudes to safety management were investi-
gated by exploring workers’ beliefs about safety manage-
ment issues. This included evaluations of how well and
how frequently safety inspections take place, how infor-
mation about risks and safety is transmitted and how
safety of subcontractors is managed.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology selected used a two-phase data collec-
tion process. In the first phase, data were collected from
three sites run by three different companies and the
intention was to select the variables to be tested in a more
extensive study. Unstructured interviews were held and
the results were used to develop a semi-structured
questionnaire that was used as a pilot for the design of
the research instrument in the second phase of the data
collection. In this second phase, operatives from 10
companies were involved. The population surveyed
consisted of 126 directly employed operatives and a wide
range of trades were included. Major crafts such as
bricklayers, roofers, scaffolders, carpenters, plumbers,
fitters and steel fixers were all included in the sample.
The questionnaire responses were measured using Lik-
ert’s five-point scale.
The data were subjected to factor analysis to identify
factors that could be linked to attitudes to safety
management. The aim was to identify factors that
prompted the strongest effect upon attitudes to safety
management. The data were subjected to factor analysis
to distinguish between those variables that were of
primary importance and those of only secondary interest.
RESULTS
The initial analysis showed some strong correlation
between behavioural variables and attitudes to safety
management. Those factors exhibiting significant corre-
lations are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 Factors significantly correlated with attitudes to safety management (P =0.001)
Danger money Safety bonus Risk taking Productivity pay
Experience Job skills and Well planned and Supervision care
and skills knowledge organized sites
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
Safety behaviour and safety management 137
The economic factors were shown to feature strongly
in attitudes towards risk taking. The use of incentive
schemes and attempts to improve safety performance by
paying safety bonuses as an encouragement to safe sites
and working practices was a powerful promoter of good
attitudes to safety.
The second analysis was intended to further filter
factors that influenced attitudes to safety management.
The six factors (economic issues, psychological issues,
etc.) coupled with the personal data generated 56
variables that could have an effect upon attitudes to safety
management. Factor analysis was applied to these
variables using the principal component method for
factor extraction. Retained factors had eigen values of
greater than 1. Five constructs were indicated as being
significant in shaping attitudes to safety management.
Factor 1: organizational policy
This factor represented how companies went about
organizing for safety. The issues that were important in
this factor were controlled by senior management and
reflected management policy on safety-related issues.
The results demonstrated the following:
1. Where operatives believe that the company and
management care about their personal safety, they
are more willing to co-operate to improve safety
performance in the organization.
2. Companies with effective safety committees are
more likely to take steps that improve safety perfor-
mance. Safety committees play a positive role in
improving safety performance.
3. Companies need a clear policy allowing only trained
plant operators on site and operatives should have
the right to refuse instructions if they have not been
trained to operate a particular plant.
4. The importance of providing every worker with a
safety booklet or manual on joining a company was
highlighted. The implementation of safety induction
courses for new recruits positively influences site
safety.
5. A well trained and efficient safety representative can
improve safety performance by undertaking such
activities as hazard hunts and insisting on corrective
or remedial action.
Worker/management Worker/management Safety manual and
relationships co-operation induction
Provision of personal Worker co-operation Health & Safety at
protective equipment Work Act (1974)
138 Langford D. et al.
6. Operatives believe that clean and tidy sites improve
safety performance—housekeeping is important.
7. Joint training of operatives and safety supervisors is
important to safety awareness and improved
performance.
8. Provision of personal protective equipment and
clothing by the company is seen as significant by
operatives.
9. Less accidents occur when workers know their jobs
well and think about the consequences of their
actions. Knowledge and competence influence per-
sonal safety performance.
This organizational factor basically illustrates the
overriding need for the provision of a proper safety
infrastructure that deals with organizational issues re-
lating to policy, management and supervision, equip-
ment and personnel.
Factor 2: supervision and equipment
management
This factor dealt with the provision and use of plant
and equipment on the construction site. The emphasis
was on ensuring that whatever plant or equipment was
used was suitable for the job and that those using these
were adequately trained. The following variables were
found to constitute this factor:
1. Unsuitable and defective mechanical plant on site
is a recipe for a safety disaster.
2. The provision and use of the correct equipment for
the job and appropriate personal protective equip-
ment are prerequisites for improved safety
performance.
3. Responsibility for scaffolding being placed on a
single contractor on a multi-contractor site, along
with regular inspections and spot checks is impera-
tive for good safety performance.
Factor 3: industry norms
This factor highlighted the ingrained practices of the
industry that have to be overcome in order for safety
management to work effectively. Two elements were
identified as below:
1. Supervisors are likely to turn a blind eye to unsafe
practices on a site where productivity bonuses are
offered. This may be due to the pressure to achieve
targets set by agreed programmes.
2. The nature of the industry itself generates its own
form of risks that must be taken into account in
design, construction and training programmes.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
Factor 4: risk taking
This factor was termed risk taking in that it dealt with
the way in which training and provision of bonuses
lead to more or less risk taking by the operatives. Two
issues were identified as below:
1. Payment of safety bonuses influences operatives to
work more safely but, conversely, productivity
bonuses lead to risk taking due to the need to
increase the pace of construction to the detriment
of careful working.
2. Older operatives with more experience are more
likely to adopt safer working methods (provided
experience and training have been consistent
throughout the work life).
Factor 5: management behaviour
This factor emphasized the relationship between su-
pervisors and operatives and indicates that the more
relationship oriented supervisors are, the more likely it
is that operatives will perform safely. Similar findings
were found when leadership style and project perfor-
mance were compared (Rowlinson et al. 1993).
1. Supervisors having positive safety behaviour on site
influences operatives’ attitudes. If the supervisor is
careful about safety, the signal goes out that safety
is a serious issue and unsafe actions and behaviour
will not be tolerated.
2. Site managers and supervisors engaging in regular
safety talks with operatives can expect better safety
performance.
DISCUSSION
It is obvious from the results of this study that safety
system management alone cannot ensure safety on
site. The establishment of good relationships with op-
eratives, unions, safety officers and subcontractors is
essential if safety is to be improved. The research has
indicated that co-operation between team members,
co-ordination of safety systems, particularly on multi-
occupied sites, is important. The concept of safety by
group effort is one that should play a vital role in safety
improvements.
Pay and reward systems are seen to be a major
factor in risk taking. Hence, productivity bonus sys-
tems must be carefully thought out so that supervisors
and managers are not tempted to turn a blind eye to
safety hazards. Safe working and productivity must go

hand in hand and rewards systems that compensate
the worker for safe working whilst achieving
desired levels of productivity must be devised. Two
countervailing forces apply here: the economic
force of bonus payment which, if for productivity,
is positive towards risk taking and the positive
force of experience, which militates against risk tak-
ing.
By recognizing the value of human resources, con-
struction companies can motivate and assist opera-
tives to work more safely. In order to do this,
companies must maintain and update their workers’
skills and knowledge by training, skill updates and
effective on site communication. This investment in
human resources must be attained despite the preva-
lence of subcontracting systems. The industry norm
factor indicates that the construction site generates
its own specific risks, which are exacerbated by cur-
rent industry practice that often turns a blind eye to
unsafe practice.
In terms of organizational policy, the key issues
emerging from the research were the need for a
‘safety champion’ at the top of the company and a
positive attitude by management to involving workers
with management in safety system development— the
idea of each worker having an involvement and own-
ership in the safety management system.
An important finding that came from discussions
on site was that safety conscious contractors believe
they are disadvantaged in the current tendering sys-
tem. The concept of providing a percentage sum for
safety organization at the tender stage can force all
tenderers to price realistically for safety and give the
client the opportunity to enforce safety measures in
the contract (see Rowlinson 1997, p. 151). In order
to do this, safety practitioners would need to be
drawn into the tendering team and their role should
be to ensure all aspects of safety are considered and
priced.
In discussions with operatives, it was found that
one of the important factors in motivating workers to
work safely was the knowledge that safety manage-
ment was being seen to be done. By the constant
attention of management and supervisors to safety
issues and by the provision of the necessary safety
infrastructure, it was obvious to operatives that safe
working was desired and required. In no other in-
dustry is the lack of a proper safety infrastructure so
obvious as in the construction industry, but by mak-
ing the infrastructure apparent, workers are moti-
vated to work safely.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
Safety behaviour and safety management 139
CONCLUSIONS
The outcome of this piece of research is that five
factors have been identified that influence operatives’
attitudes to safety management. These five factors
have been termed:
“ organizational policy,
“ supervision and equipment management,
“ industry norms,
“ risk taking,
“ management behaviour.
The importance of these findings are that they have
identified the aspects of company safety management
that lead to positive attitudes to safety by workers. By
paying attention to these factors, it should be possible
for employers to engender positive safety attitudes in
their employees. If techniques such as behavioural
safety management are to be successful in the con-
struction industry, then a positive safety attitude is an
essential prerequisite.
The important issue arising from this research is the
way that the five influential factors may be loosely
classified as ‘cultural issues’. All five, to a greater or
lesser degree, relate to the ‘way in which safety is
managed around here’. Perhaps the most central gen-
eral issue is the influence of industry norms. An indus-
try breeds its own culture and this fashions behaviour
and attitudes to a wide set of industry practices that
members of the industry carry with them from firm to
firm and site to site. Overlaying these industry norms
is the level of risk taking that is expected as being
acceptable in the industry. The construction industry
is attuned to risk; it extends to financial risk in devel-
opments, risks relating to timely and completions
within budgets, risks arising during the construction
phase, etc. In such a pervasive culture, is it any wonder
that operatives see themselves as part of this risk taking
culture. Certainly, it seems to be an influential factor
in shaping their attitudes to safety management.
The results would suggest that national safety cam-
paigns, driven by industry-wide agencies are important
agitators for changes in safety attitudes. Certainly, the
CDM regulations can be seen as one such instrument
to change the safety norms.
At the level of the firm, positive attitudes can be
encouraged by organizational policy of a firm to safety,
the behaviour of management and supervision, and
equipment management in stimulating good practice.
Again, the issue of culture, this time at the level of the
firm, is driving behaviour. If a firm has a strong culture
that sees safety as intrinsically important rather than a
140 Langford D. et al.
defensive necessity, then performance is likely to be
better.
The policy issue is of itself unlikely to shape this
culture, but a policy complied with an active concern
by managers to implement this policy is likely to realise
an organizational culture that sees safety as important.
These values are transmitted to the supervisors respon-
sible for the day to day management of safety of the
workforce.
These arguments do not say that a strong safety
culture at the industry level and within firms absolves
the individual worker from holding to safe working
practices, but without a strong culture shaped by the
five factors that have been isolated, their behaviour is
more likely to be errant. Obviously, there are many
other factors that can influence site safety and many of
these relate to the provision of an adequate safety
infrastructure, which each employee feels at home and
can use and rely on.
Unsafe behaviour is recognized as being involved in
accidents but, following Heinrich’s (1980) studies, the
unsafe behaviour is a trigger event, not the cause of the
accident. Hence, prevention measures aimed solely at
the worker are not necessarily well directed. The re-
sults of this study indicate that many project partici-
pants and factors influence working behaviour and
most of these are actually beyond the control of the
worker. Given the influence of others on the perfor-
mance of workers, it is essential that management
commitment to safety improvement be manifested in
the provision of an effective safety management sys-
tem; that is, a complete safety infrastructure must be
provided that empowers the individual worker.
REFERENCES
Blockley, D.I. (1992) Engineering from reflective practice.
Research in Engineering Design, 4, 13–22.
Booth, R.T. (1993) The role of human factors and safety
culture in safety management. In: Successful Management for
Safety. Mechanical Engineering Publications Limited,
London.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 7 2, 133 – 140
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
Dester, W.S. & Blockley, I. (1995) Safety-behaviour and
culture in construction. Journal of Engineering, Construction
and Architectural Management, 2, 17 – 26.
Duff, A.R., Robertson, I.T., Phillips, R.A. & Cooper, M.D.
(1994) Improving safety by the modification of behaviour.
Journal of Construction Management and Economics, 12, 67–
78.
Heinrich, H.W., Peterson, D & Ross, N. (1980) Industrial
Accident Prevention: A Safety Management Approach. Mc-
Graw Hill Book Co., New York.
HMSO (1974) The Health & Safety at Work Act. HMSO,
London.
HMSO (1994) The Construction, Design & Management Regu-
lations. HMSO, London.
Leather, P. (1983a) Self and the organisation in the percep-
tion of safety and danger in the construction industry. In:
Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Aston Health and
Safety Society, 29th October.
Leather, P. (1983b) Safety attitudes on the construction site.
Construction News, pp. 12, Dec 15th, University of Aston,
Birmingham.
Lingard, H. & Rowlinson, S (1994) Construction site safety
in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Management and
Economics, 12, 501 – 510.
Lingard, H. & Rowlinson, S. (1997) Behaviour-based safety
management in Hong Kong’s construction industry. Jour-
nal of Safety Research, 28, 243 – 256.
Lingard, H. & Rowlinson, S. (1998) Behaviour-based safety
management in Hong Kong’s construction industry: the
results of a field study. Journal of Construction Management
and Economics, 16, 481 – 488.
Pidgeon, N.F., Turner, B., Blockley, D.I. & Toft, B. (1991)
Corporate safety culture: improving the management con-
tribution to system reliability. In: Proceedings of European
Reliability Conference (ed. R. H. Matthews), pp. 682 – 690.
Elsevier Applied Science, London.
Rowlinson, S. (1997) Hong Kong Construction-Site Safety
Management, pp. 330. Sweet & Maxwell, London.
Rowlinson, S., To, T. & Yuen, P.H. (1993) Leadership style
of construction managers in Hong Kong. Journal of Con-
struction Management and Economics, 11, 455 – 465.
Sawacha, E (1994) An investigation into safety attitudes and
safety performance in the construction industry. PhD thesis,
Brunel University.
Seymour, D. & Hill, C. (1996) The first line supervisor in
construction. In: A Key to Change, Proceedings of the AR-
COM (Association of Researchers in Construction Manage-
ment) Conference (ed. P. Stephenson), pp. 655 – 667.
Wilson, H.A (1989) Organizational behavour and safety man-
agement in the construction industry. Journal of Construc-
tion Management and Economics, 7, 303 – 319.