Safety-related behaviors, measuring

Behavioral safety involves measuring safety-related behaviors. Krause notes that the behavioral inventory is how we measure behavioral safety performance. Benefits of using a Critical Safety Behavior inventory for continuous safety improvement include ... 

In sports, individual performance is measured objectively and the wiimer is determined fairly. While behavior-based safety recognition is also objective, it is usually impossible to assess everyone s safety-related behaviors and obtain a fair ranking for individual recognition. However, such ranking sets up a win-lose atmosphere. This may be appropriate for sporting events, but it is certainly inappropriate in a work setting where the elimination of injuries is dependent upon everyone looking out for the safety of everyone else. 

While an interview can measure arange of safety-related dimensions (see Chap. 3, Tables 3.3 and 3.4 for questions that can be used to measure an applicant s experience and expectations, respectively, in an employment interview), they are not particularly well suited to the measurement of aspects of safety such as safety motivation, participation, and compliance. The key problem is the possibility that the applicant will respond in a socially desirable way, and their response may have little relationship to their future on-the-job behavior. Rather than questioning job applicants directly about their safety attitudes (e.g., asking questions like Should safety have a high priority ), a structured interview can make use of either situational or behavioral questions to gain a perspective on the applicant s safety attimdes. Both situational and behavioral questions are based on scenarios or critical incidents which come directly from the job which the individual is being recruited for. The primary difference is that when using the behavioral format, the individual is asked what they have done in the described simation in the past, while in the situational format the applicant is asked what they would do in the particular situation. 

As a final note on tools which might be used to select new employees, there are number of products on the market which claim to predict safely behaviors and safety-related outcomes. Providers of these assessment tools vary greatly in the claims that are made about their tools ability to predict employee safety behavior, and the degree of research based evidence which they provide to support these claims. Organizations using these products need to examine very carefully the nature of the instrument/measure, and the evidence that it is a valid predictor. As with other selection assessments, employees are likely to assume such measures will operate in a valid and reliable way. 

There are many scales that have been developed to measure safety-related variables. The majority of these focus on aspects of safety climate. It is not the intention of this chapter to examine these measures. Rather, the specific focus is on the factors which are direcdy related to new employee safety. Thus, the measures discussed in this chapter are restricted to those which measure attitudes and expectations which new employees bring to the workplace worker attitudes and behaviors which are particularly important for new employee adaption and behaviors, such as helping, which are associated with being a new employee. It is the opinion of this author that measurement provides evidence which can be presented to new employees, coworkers, and management in order to help explain the safety issues associated with new employees. Furthermore, the collection of data provides a degree of precision in terms of the issues faced by a specific organization, for a specific job, and related to the type of new employees being recruited. 

In summary, selection processes can help to ensure new employee safety if they clearly define the knowledge, skills, and abilities that are required to perform a job, and obtain or develop accurate predictors of these. Put simply if an organization selects an individual for a job that does not have the knowledge, skills, and abilities which are necessary to perform the job in a safe manner, there will be an increased chance that the individual (the new employee) will be involved in an accident. Of course, working safely is also partly dependent on the new employee s attitude toward safety and on their personality (see Chap. 5). Unfortunately, attitudes and personality are not easy to measure in an error-free way. In this regard, an organization should not assume that they have very much ability at all to predict safety-related attitudes or to determine much in the way of safety behavior based on personality profiling. 

As the information on how road nsers perceive mles, measures and behavior in traffic can give additional insight in the pubhc snpport for certain measures taken or to be taken and the self-reported behavior also gives some additional insight in road user behavior, related data on road nser attitnde and behavior were selected and gathered. The SARTRE studies provided an appropriate source for this information. The studies span a number of years (1996, 1999, 2003 and 2011) the data are harmonized between European countries and are updated. From the SARTRE studies, the following issues were selected because they are relevant for road safety driver behavior (self-reported) and attitudes towards risk taking. 

New Safety Measurement System (SMS). SMS replaces SafeStat in an effort to improve FMCSA s ability to identify demonstrated safety problems. FMCSA has transferred all safety-related data from SafeStat to SMS and is using the Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) scoring system rather than the Safety Evaluation Areas (SEAs) used previously under SafeStat. 

Strictly speaking, coefficients of friction obtained on wet surfaces cannot be called static coefficient of friction, as by accepted definition there should be nothing between the tested surfaces that might effect the friction, including water. However, as we aim at realistic slip behavior of deck surfaces, which are directly related to safety issues, in this context there is no real difference how to call the obtained values—static coefficients of friction or slip coefficients. In any case we operate with quantitative measurements of slip resistance directly applicable to realistic situations. 

ABSTRACT Miners unsafe behavior is due to human unsafe behavior and interaction of matter produced unsafe behavior. In this paper, the assignment method for column joint analysis of the questionnaire drawn the safety of workers and trade unions act age, educational level, personality traits, work experience and their sense of safety has correlation with the risk of the work environment to develop codes of conduct and corporate science-related, propose appropriate measures to tackle the problem. 

---