Values-in-action that support safe production.

INTRODUCTION: Safe production is a sustainable approach to managing an organization's operations that considers the interests of both management and workers as salient stakeholders in a productive and safe workplace. A supportive culture enacts values versus only espousing them. These values-in-action are beliefs shared by both management and workers that align what should happen in performing organizational routines to be safe and be productive with what actually is done. However, the operations and safety management literature provides little guidance on which values-in-action are most important to safe production and how they work together to create a supportive culture. METHOD: The researchers conducted exploratory case studies in 10 manufacturing plants of 9 firms. The researchers compared plant managers' top-down perspectives on safety in the performance of work and workers' bottom-up experiences of the safety climate and their rates of injury on the job. Each case study used data collected from interviewing multiple managers, the administration of a climate survey to workers and the examination of the plant's injury rates over time as reported to its third party health and safety insurer. RESULTS: The researchers found that plants with four values-in-action -a commitment to safety, discipline, prevention and participation-were capable of safe production, while plants without those values were neither safe nor productive. Where culture and climate aligned lower rates of injury were experienced. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The four value-in-actions must all be present and work together in a self-reinforcing manner to engage workers and managers in achieving safe production. Practical application: Managers of both operations and safety functions do impact safety outcomes such as reducing injuries by creating a participatory environment that encourage learning that improves both safety and production routines.

Managing Safety and Operations: The Effect of Joint Management System Practices on Safety and Operational Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether management system practices directed at both occupational health and safety (OHS) and operations (joint management system [JMS] practices) result in better outcomes in both areas than in alternative practices. METHODS: Separate regressions were estimated for OHS and operational outcomes using data from a survey along with administrative records on injuries and illnesses. RESULTS: Organizations with JMS practices had better operational and safety outcomes than organizations without these practices. They had similar OHS outcomes as those with operations-weak practices, and in some cases, better outcomes than organizations with safety-weak practices. They had similar operational outcomes as those with safety-weak practices, and better outcomes than those with operations-weak practices. CONCLUSIONS: Safety and operations appear complementary in organizations with JMS practices in that there is no penalty for either safety or operational outcomes.

Prevention of musculoskeletal disorders within management systems: A scoping review of practices, approaches, and techniques.

The purpose of this study was to identify and summarize the current research evidence on approaches to preventing musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) within Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems (OHSMS). Databases in business, engineering, and health and safety were searched and 718 potentially relevant publications were identified and examined for their relevance. Twenty-one papers met the selection criteria and were subjected to thematic analysis. There was very little literature describing the integration of MSD risk assessment and prevention into management systems. This lack of information may isolate MSD prevention, leading to difficulties in preventing these disorders at an organizational level. The findings of this review argue for further research to integrate MSD prevention into management systems and to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach.

How compatible are participatory ergonomics programs with occupational health and safety management systems?

OBJECTIVES: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are a major cause of pain, disability, and costs. Prevention of MSD at work is frequently described in terms of implementing an ergonomics program, often a participatory ergonomics (PE) program. Most other workplace injury prevention activities take place under the umbrella of a formal or informal occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS). This study assesses the similarities and differences between OHSMS and PE as such knowledge could help improve MSD prevention activities. Methods Using the internationally recognized Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series (OHSAS 18001), 21 OHSMS elements were extracted. In order to define PE operationally, we identified the 20 most frequently cited papers on PE and extracted content relevant to each of the OHSAS 18001 elements. RESULTS: The PE literature provided a substantial amount of detail on five elements: (i) hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls; (ii) resources, roles, responsibility, accountability, and authority; (iii) competence, training and awareness; (iv) participation and consultation; and (v) performance measurement and monitoring. However, of the 21 OHSAS elements, the PE literature was silent on 8 and provided few details on 8 others. CONCLUSIONS: The PE literature did not speak to many elements described in OHSMS and even when it did, the language used was often different. This may negatively affect the effectiveness and sustainability of PE initiatives within organizations. It is expected that paying attention to the approaches and language used in management system frameworks could make prevention of MSD activities more effective and sustainable.