Safety Performance of the Organization - Essay Example

SAFETY AND HEALTH Student’s name Code & Course Professor’s name University City Date Safety and Health Successful organizations that significantly manage its health and safety offer a practical framework that enhances the contribution of the groups and individuals. Evidently, health and safety objectives are viewed the same way as business objectives. This is seen as part of the organizational culture, and it is realized by making health and safety an imperative management responsibility. Organizations need to comprehend how human factors affect safety and health safety performance. These include aspects of policy, the organization as a whole, planning and implementation and reviewing performance. Policy It is advised that policies are subjected to adequate policy checks that oversee the organization’s conformance to safety and health regulations. It is imperative for the organization to countercheck whether the policies are in line with the safety and health regulation of the governing body. Evidently, the board should ensure that all affiliated members are functioning towards the enhancement of the policies. This can be done through continued audits. In this regard, various guidelines and codes have been implemented in helping organizations report the safety performance of the organization. Policies should therefore be developed towards the successful implementation of specific attributes that affect the organisation in various functions. Organization Audits that pertain to the organization need to be conducted since it significantly highlights organizational problem that may have developed with time. Evidently, it will identify weak areas that have not conformed to the regulatory practice of health and safety. Additionally, audit on the organisation dispel divergent attributes that need to be aligned towards the set guidelines by the governing body. Missing such key aspects would imply that the organisation is otherwise functioning against the outlined laws of a region. Moreover, an organisation consolidates various stakeholders, who are tasked with overseeing the overall effectiveness of the organisation across different issues. Planning and implementation Planning is an important factor of any organization. All organizational planning should consolidate objectives that are garnered towards dispensing safety and health needs across different platforms. This is the most crucial aspects of any organisation. An organisation’s plan dispels its objectives, which guides the organisation’s operation. Moreover, a robust planning process suggests that the company is able to favourably undertake its functions effectively and towards the attainment of its goals (Williams, 2010). Audit on the implementation process is paramount given that the organisation ought to align its functions towards the attainment of specific objectives. In the case that an organisation deviates from the set goals, it is destined to fail ion the environment it functions (Williams, 2010). Measuring Performance As instrumental aspects of organizational development, measuring performance can be channelled towards the goal achievement against the set health and safety initiatives. Ensuring that the performance is aligned towards such goals is instrumental to overall the overall development. Measuring performance is an imperative aspect on any process. It not only gauges the performance of the employees but also sidelines its objectives against the set timelines. This approach guarantees the high quality standards for the audit strategy, reporting and execution. Hult (2008) suggest that it is of paramount importance that an organisation sets performance standards for health and safety. Tentatively, this process needs to be effective such as key aspects that pertains to health and safety and fully addressed (Hult, 2008). Reviewing performance Evaluation of performance highlights areas of weaknesses and will significantly improve poorly performed sectors within the organization. Ensuring that such evaluation process has been created effectively can sustain development across various levels. Contrariwise reviewing performance will enable the affected organisation to better manage its resources garnered towards the achievement of specific key attributes of the organisational process (Hult, 2008). More often than not, its inclusion enables a robust approach to reviewing all aspects affecting the organisation. This can range from employee empowerment to the effectiveness of systems set to address the organisation’s environment (Hult, 2008). Additionally, reviewing focuses on disseminating information that can otherwise be used in presenting proffered organisational analysis. Human Factors Human factors have a profound effect on individual and the group behaviour, yet it is in most cases overlooked when designing the work, with respect environmental, health and safety management. As such, organizations need to develop a safety and positive culture that enhances employee commitment and involvement at divergent levels. Personal factors are attributes linked to what the employees brings to the work environment- this may be strength and weaknesses pertaining to a particular task. Organizational safety culture is the product aspects that define a group and individuals attitudes, values, competencies and pattern; if the behaviours highlight commitment towards health and safety management. It is widely accepted in effectively controlling risks that are realized through individual behaviour of employees across a divergent aspect within the organization. Simply put, procedure and good systems control are not sufficient; it is how well the organization lives its system. Employee attitude and behaviour are significant aspects of organizational planning that considerably influences the way the organization addresses key issues affecting the organization. Simply put, Dunham (1984) suggests the multifaceted attitudes can be easily understood through the recognition of attitudes that have three distinct components namely cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects. This attitude towards process and systems implementation may induce a person to support or oppose the change. Nevertheless, in order for any system to be effective, it is imperative to clarify individual assumptions, attitude, and the beliefs. This is linked to the fact that potent leverage for sustainable and significant change rest on the human system at the center of any business system. Humans are unpredictable and have specific perspectives and attitudes that need to be consolidated in the system. Their consolidation in the work environment brings with it experiences and attitudes that shape various aspects of the organizational process. As a result, it creates an instant quandary that may be considerably contagious to other affected parties (Colquitt, 2011). Controlling such problems may be problematic. Culture consolidates artefacts, beliefs and values and underlying assumptions that organizational members share regarding appropriate behaviour (Reason, 1998). Despite numerous definition of culture; organizational culture is conceived from a holistic and social construct (Shah, 2003). Culture consolidates behaviours and beliefs present at various levels and is showcased throughout the organization’s life process. Attitude towards the implementation of process plays a mediating role in implementing change or affiliated approach (Quinlan, 2010). Attitude comprises of three aspects namely; behavioural, affective and cognitive; where these three types of attitude are crucial. An obstacle that ultimately affects the dispensation and development of initiated change is an obstacle of the “fear of the unknown “or “unfamiliarity.” This is attributed to the fact that once an individual has knowledge and information of potential alteration to be made, his feeling towards the intended change may be altered (Gatenby, 2009). It should be noted that handling cognitive functions regarding attitude change is a significantly multifaceted tasks if not well communicated to the affected individuals. This will be showcased by the behavioural model of the individuals responding to the system. An engaged employee is inclined to the business contests and functions with colleagues in improving the performance within the work environment that benefits the whole organization. In turn, the organization must effectively function to nurture and develop the employees (Storey, 2008). Hence, a set of the behaviours and attitudes that facilitate high job performance enables a high performance attuned to the organization’s mission (Gatenby, 2009). For instance, picture a situation where a new program addressing the need to include safety and health in all processing departments through reporting every 2 hours to the supervisor is included. The employees may perceive such actions as a means of measuring their performance. This perspective will define their attitude towards the initiative. Employees that develop such attitude may not oversee the successful integration of the program. Human factors effecting the implementation of Environment Management System System policy setters should recognize and identify human factors that affect its functionality in health and safety. Employee attitude towards the consolidation of environmental management systems consolidates various aspects. Employee empowerment, management commitment, rewards and the feedbacks may be significant predictors for attitude development and behaviours. Estrada (2010) studied the impact of employee perception pertaining implementation of EMS. It was evident from the findings that the management support for the EMS, employee’s psychological empowerment had a profound effect on the perceived environmental performance and a potential significant towards the failure and implementation of EMS. Top management functioning in an environmentally proactive organization ought to struggle towards the cultivation of a robust culture that facilitates the freedom of facilitating environmental improvement that lacks the excess management intervention (Estrada, 2010). The environment and safety will highlight what they will do or not do. The affected individuals need to accept the conditions that constraints of the implemented system. Thereafter the action employees take relies on their awareness of what is needed and how it is aligned to the overall organizational system. Case Study In 2010, Medina, Rost, McSween and Alvero published an article that offered a 20-year behavioural intervention, which highlighted the success of the initiative and durability of the behavioural change. The intervention occurred at an oil refinery where the plant managers had showcased a clear interest that effectively reduced injuries and facilitated a safety culture. A previous assessment highlighted that unsafe employee’s act contributed significantly towards the injuries. The intervention was introduced to one aspect of the refinery which showcased highest risks in most part of the injuries. In creating the plan, employee’s attitude was first addressed. This was realized through informing the employee on the basis for the intervention. Evidently, this approach was adequately structured to increase awareness from the team. It was imperative to consider the employee’s attitude towards the enhancement and development of the plan. A thorough safety assessment was conducted to specific past intervention. A design team that consisted of 10 workers volunteered; a committee leader and a manager were involved. A three-day workshop was initiated showcasing different behaviour analysis and a subsequent behavioural safety process. The team significantly identified basic safety values, where the behaviors showcasing the values were identified. A safety process was then created for each of the units which highlighted the values and practices for the affected units (Health and Safety Authority, 2012). Safety culture is represented as an assembly of attitude and characteristics in an individual and organization, which creates safety in the engagement of activities (Parker, 2006). Evidently, safety culture is imperative since it offers the context where the organizations form the platform where the safety attitudes are developed. On the other hand, health and safety are theorized as a manifestation of the safety culture in the behaviour that is showcased through the employee’s attitude (Johnstone, 2008). Impact of Attitude and Behaviour on HSE The success of the HSE sorely depends on the employee motivation towards the achievements of certain objectives stipulated under the system. A negative attitude towards the systems implies that affected individuals will not offer the proffered attitude garnered towards the attainment of the specific health and safety goal (Nja, 2010). In purely quantitative assertions, the importance of a positive attitude is instrumental in the realizing success within the organizational systems (Njaa, 2010). It is desirable to attain a positive user attitude that may have a significant beneficial impact on user’s behaviour, which contributes to the acceptance of the HSE implementation. Evidently, it has been suggested that positive individual attitude are an instrumental predicator of the system’s usage. More often than not, system implementers suggests for “user participation," which by definition is a set of activities, behaviour and assignment that engage the user throughout the process development (Reason, 1998). This participation consolidates various dimensions namely; hands on project related tasks, overall responsibility that pertains to the program and the relationship between the individuals and the HSE. In this regard, increasing user participation in various dimensions of the system increases the post development user attitude and development. The effectiveness of involvement of the system is enhanced in the case when the implementers realize that the users consider the system to be both significantly and personally important (Pidgeon, 1998). Tentatively , if the individual asserts that the systems is personally relevant , he is mostly likely to form a positive attitude towards the system since the attitude are significantly cemented on the basis of belief (Nja, 2010). An individual’s strength in is directly linked to the extremity of his attitudes towards the systems. Contrariwise, a high involvement could compel an extremely negative or positive attitude. It is advocated that a negative or positive attitude will directly affect the success of the project (Nja, 2010). On the other hand, a low involvement level leaves the individual susceptible to further influences such as factual arguments or persuasive forces. With an augmented user involvement and an increasingly positive attitude, the users will be inclined in the participating in the development of the system (Lee, 1993). On the other hand, a negative attitude towards the systems will suggest the employees are not attuned towards the support of the system. Resistance is a resultant effect that presupposes the individual’s lack of support for the intended project (Safe Work Australia, 2010). The lack of support would mean that the program will not be a success in divergent ways. Lack of support can be witnessed through the individual behaviour towards the implementation of the program. Resistive forces may be realized through various behavioural attributes (Nja, 2010). The individuals may be unwilling to implement the system throughout during its implementation. Additionally, they may respond through lacking support for developing the system’s framework. People resist technically, as a result of inadequate systems or rather if the systems have undesirable effects. Tentatively, the effective consolidation of the system necessitates the examination of pertinent aspects. This includes; i. The individual predisposition towards HSE (often relate to involvement with attitude regarding the present program) ii. Individual’s beliefs that pertain to the ability to contribute effectively during the development stages. It is evident that a low self-efficacy perception may result in an inhibition of the individual’s desire to participate in the system. It is imperative to offer opportunities where the individuals can judge their experiences in order to be successful. A failure in EMS implementation, suggests the individuals involved in the system have divergent behaviour and attitude. Evidently, dissimilar attitude that pertains to the systems is highlighted in different aspects. This showcases the relationship between attitude and behaviour; as such a negative attitude towards the system will suggest a behavioural response that does not support the systems. Contrariwise, a positive attitude will direct the individual’s behaviour towards the accomplishment of the desired goal. Limitation of Attitude and behaviours Work attitude and the behaviours are not closely linked to health and safety across divergent paradigms. Evidently, health and safety are multidimensional approaches that relates to health and safety. Some aspects pertaining an effective management app[roach could affect the way a system is adopted by employees. For example, picture a case where top management introduces a system that disrupts the functionality of the employees. This can be realized through ineffective decision making approach where an ineffective system is created. Conclusion Attitude and behaviours in the health and safety aspect has a profound effect with respect to the implementation of affiliated initiatives. It is evident that attitude plays an imperative role in the creation of the environment for the practitioners. This is largely due to divergent aspects that pertain to the individual’s perception. Work attitudes are not completely correct with respect to health and safety. It can be concluded therefore that attitude and behaviours have a compelling effect on an individual’s perception regarding the dispensation of health and safety systems. Reference List Colquitt, J. A., Lepine, J. A., & Wesson, M. J. 2011. Organizational Behavior. New York: McGrawHill/Irwin. Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E. and Truss, C., 2009. Employee engagement in context. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development Lee, T.R., Macdonald, S., & Coote, J.A., 1993. Perception of Risk and Attitudes to Safety at a Nuclear Reprocessing Plant. Paper presented at Society for Risk Assessment, Europe. Johnstone, R., & King, M., 2008. A responsive sanction to promote systematic compliance? Enforceable undertakings in occupational health and safety regulation. Australian Journal of Labour Law. 21(3) 280 - 315. Health and Safety Authority, 2012, Accessed from . Hult, G., Ketchen, D., Griffith, D., Cavusgil, S., 2008. An assessment of the Measurement of Performance in International Business Research. Journal of International Business Studies. 39: 1064-1080. Reason, J., 1998. Achieving a safe culture: theory and practice’ in Work & Stress. 12(3): 293 – 306. Pidgeon, N., 1998. Safety culture: key theoretical issues in Work & Stress. 12(3): 202-216. Shah, S., Silverstein, B., and Foley, M., 2003. Workplace Health and Safety Regulations: Impact of Enforcement and Consultation on Workers Compensation Claims Rates in Washington State With Two Years Follow-Up. SHARP Technical Report Number 70-2-2003, Safety and Health Assessment and Research for Prevention Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Washington, 2003. Storey, J., Wright, P., Ulrich, D., 2008. The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management. Nja, O., and Fjelltun, S., 2010. Managers’ attitudes towards safety measures in the commercial road transport sector. Safety Science, 48: 1073-1080. Probst, T., and Estrada, A., 2010. Accident under-reporting among employees: testing the moderating influence of psychological safety climate and supervisor enforcement of safety practices. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42(5): 1438-1444. Parker D, Lawrie, M., and Hudson, P., 2006. A framework for understanding the development of organizational safety culture’, Safety Science, 44(6), 551-562. Quinlan, M., Bohle, P., and Lamm, F., 2010. Managing Occupational Health and Safety (3rd ed.), Palgrave Macmillan, Melbourne. Safe Work Australia, 2010. Main Report for Safe Work Australia. Motivations, Attitudes, Perceptions and Skills (MAPS), unpublished report, Safe Work Australia, Canberra, Williams, C, and McWilliams, A, 2010, MGMT, 1stAsia-Pacific edition, Cengage Learning Australia Limited, South Melbourne. Read More