Unintended consequences of management strategies for improving labor productivity in construction industry.

INTRODUCTION: Labor productivity and safety are important topics in the construction industry. Even so, the literature provides little information for project managers trying to determine how management strategies designed to improve labor productivity impact safety. METHOD: This research addresses the gap by measuring the impact of two groups of management strategies that involve human resource related management strategies and construction related management strategies related to safety performance in construction projects. Data were collected from 111 general construction projects through the survey. RESULTS: The results show that the relationship between the implemented management strategies and safety performance is nuanced with 'Communication' harming safety performance while implementation of 'Labor Management,' 'Supervision and Leadership,' 'Planning' and 'Management of Construction' strategies improve the level of safety performance. This study took a further step by measuring the impact of the interactions between the two groups of management strategies on safety performance. The results show that the interactions of construction and human related management strategies are not always in the favor of safety. Practical Applications: This paper adds to the literature on the relationship between productivity and safety in the construction industry. The research findings can assist project managers to improve labor productivity without harming the safety of laborers unintentionally.

Does company size matter? Validation of an integrative model of safety behavior across small and large construction companies.

INTRODUCTION: Previous safety climate studies primarily focused on either large construction companies or the construction industry as a whole, while little is known about whether company size has significant effects on workers' understanding of safety climate measures and relationships between safety climate factors and safety behavior. Thus, this study aims to: (a) test the measurement equivalence (ME) of a safety climate measure across workers from small and large companies; (b) investigate if company size alters the causal structure of the integrative model developed by Guo, Yiu, and González (2016). METHOD: Data were collected from 253 construction workers in New Zealand using a safety climate measure. This study used multi-group confirmatory factor analyses (MCFA) to test the measurement equivalence of the safety climate measure and structure invariance of the integrative model. RESULTS: Results indicate that workers from small and large companies understood the safety climate measure in a similar manner. In addition, it was suggested that company size does not change the causal structure and mediational processes of the integrative model. CONCLUSIONS: Both measurement equivalence of the safety climate measure and structural invariance of the integrative model were supported by this study. Practical applications: Findings of this study provided strong support for a meaningful use of the safety climate measure across construction companies in different sizes. Safety behavior promotion strategies designed based on the integrative model may be well suited for both large and small companies.

Identifying behaviour patterns of construction safety using system archetypes.

Construction safety management involves complex issues (e.g., different trades, multi-organizational project structure, constantly changing work environment, and transient workforce). Systems thinking is widely considered as an effective approach to understanding and managing the complexity. This paper aims to better understand dynamic complexity of construction safety management by exploring archetypes of construction safety. To achieve this, this paper adopted the ground theory method (GTM) and 22 interviews were conducted with participants in various positions (government safety inspector, client, health and safety manager, safety consultant, safety auditor, and safety researcher). Eight archetypes were emerged from the collected data: (1) safety regulations, (2) incentive programs, (3) procurement and safety, (4) safety management in small businesses (5) production and safety, (6) workers' conflicting goals, (7) blame on workers, and (8) reactive and proactive learning. These archetypes capture the interactions between a wide range of factors within various hierarchical levels and subsystems. As a free-standing tool, they advance the understanding of dynamic complexity of construction safety management and provide systemic insights into dealing with the complexity. They also can facilitate system dynamics modelling of construction safety process.