BENCHMARKING STUDIES ON SAFETY MANAGEMENT IN CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRIES

Project by

S.NANDAKUMAR

M.E Construction Engineering and Management

Under the guidance of

Dr. E.ARUMUGAM

Professor of Civil Engineering

Introduction-need for safety

• Safety plays an important role in almost all the aspect of Civil Engineering.

• The construction industry, employing the largest labour force, has accounted for about 11% of all occupational injuries and 20% deaths resulting from occupational accidents.

• International Labour Organisation (ILO) has estimated that at least 60,000 fatalities occur at construction sites around the world every year.

• Safety procedures in construction site are well established, but the culture of a project site and workers attitudes often result in procedures not being followed to achieve the best safety outcome.

• The importance of safety as a cost controlling measure is often overlooked.

Definition of safety

• Safety can be defined as “The absence of danger at work, which is possible by elimination of hazards that create the danger”.

• More practically, “A thing is provisionally categorized as safe if its risks are deemed known and in the light of that knowledge, judge to be acceptable”.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study is to find the construction safety factors affecting contractors and to improve their safety performance.

The objectives of this study are to: find the safety factors affecting the contractors. identify the relationship between managements

commitment to safety and the safety record of a company.

identify what are the factors affecting construction safety.

identify what attributes are presenting a successful commitment.

METHODOLOGY

• The methodology adopted in this work is the collection of data by the method of survey.

The work can be divided into four phases namely: Preliminary study phase Data collection phase Data analysis phase Implementation phase.

Preliminary study phase

• In this phase the initial step was to identify factors that might influence construction safety.

The criteria to select such factors include Validity: the factors must be closely related to

safety management practice on site;Quantifiable: the factors should be objectively

defined and can be expressed as an numeric value;

Realistic: the factors must accurately reflect actual situation on construction projects, based on the consideration of both the cultural and economic aspects of the projects.

• The questionnaire was designed based on the following eight factors.

Project natureHistoric factorsOrganizational structureManagement measuresIndividual involvementEconomic investmentLabour management relationCauses and remedy for accident

• The questionnaire consists of 10 general questions 21 open ended questions 16 optional question and 31 questions based on Likert scale. In case of Likert scale a five point scale was

used.

Pilot survey

The effectiveness of the designed questionnaire was checked with the help of a pilot survey carried out in the first phase of the project work.

The pilot survey was carried out with four construction companies in Chennai.

The questionnaire was modified based on the feedback of the survey.

Data collection phase

In the date collection phase the data was obtained from ninety construction companies mostly around Chennai and other major cities in Tamilnadu.

The construction sites were visited in person and the questionnaire was distributed to the concerned person.

The respondents were mostly project managers and site engineers.

Data analysis phase

In the data analysis phase the mean and standard deviation for each response was made for the optional questions and Likert scaled questions.

In case of other questions the total response of the questionnaire is counted.

Implementation phase

In this phase, based on the results of the survey conclusion was made and the results are presented.

A booklet of minimum safety precautions to be followed in construction sites was prepared based on the available codes and guidelines.

The booklet was prepared keeping in mind the medium and small level contractors who are lagging behind in construction safety standards.

The booklet was distributed to the companies for possible implementation in their construction site.

The questionnaire was distributed among 200 companies mostly around Chennai and other important cities.

Totally 90 questionnaire returned as on date. The response rate was (45%).

CONDUCT OF SURVEY

RESULT ANALYSIS

• The percentage of companies that had participated in the survey are

Promoters - 40Contractors - 33Sub contractors - 20Consultants – 7

• The projects currently handled by the surveyed companies are residential complexes, information technology parks and commercial complexes.

• The average experience of the respondents was 6 years and varies from a minimum of 1 year to a maximum of 16 years.

• The respondents were from various departments.

Administration - 23

Design department - 53

Project management - 18

Others - 6

Percentage of workers in construction site

0-50 workers

42%

100-150 workers

36%

50-100 workers

22%

Number of crews

48

37

15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

<10 crews 10 - 20 crews > 20 crews

Number of crews

Per

cen

tag

e o

f w

ork

ers

The number of workers in each crew varies from 7 to 22 with an average of 11.

• In most of the project there is no separate safety supervisor.

• The safety of construction workers is taken care by the supervisor of the crew itself.

• No separate safety inspection was carried out in site.

• The percentage of safety investment that was made by the companies is less and not defined clearly

Types of accident

The general types of accident that commonly occur in construction site as observed by the respondents are stated below:

Falling from height. Failure of temporary structures. Fall of objects. Hit by object. Electrocution. Slippage. Caught in between. Collapse.

Cause for the accidents

Unsafe condition

25%

Unsafe act9%Coworker

6%

Worker was at fault53%

Unexpected/Natural

7%

• Out of the companies surveyed only 32 companies (35 percent) have a separate safety department.

• In the remaining companies the safety measures are taken care by the execution department.

• 74 companies (82 percent) admitted that the top management has involvement in safety measures at site.

• The site safety is checked frequently by the top managements of these companies.

• In most of the companies the supervisors are given authority to stop work for identified hazards.

• 40 companies (44 percent) accepted that they do not provide adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) to their workers.

• In most of the companies even though the company provide adequate PPE , due to non availability of strict rules and regulation the workers are not using them properly.

• Project managers of 22 companies (24 percent) attend safety meeting regularly.

• Almost all the companies surveyed have first aid facility in site and pays for the medical expenses of the injured workers,

• 6 companies (7 percent) have medical practitioner available in site during the working hours.

• Totally 52 companies (58 percent) provide safety training to their workers

• 78 companies (87 percent) accepted that the training given to workers are effective.

• 50 companies (56 percent) keep daily safety records of the project.

• Very few companies provide workers compensation insurance for their injured workers.

• All the companies accepted that the schedule pressure in completing the project was passed directly to construction workers.

• 6 companies (8 percent) have won safety award.

• Most of the companies that take part in the survey have a separate environment health and safety (EHS) document.

• But the safety provisions that are recommended in the EHS document are not implemented in construction sites.

Results of the Likert scaled questions

• The mean value of all the factors that affect construction site safety vary between 2.22 to 4.78.

• Out of the 31 factors considered 3 factors were ranked as very high, 10 factors as high, 14 factors as medium and 4 factors as low effect with respect to safety.

The top three factors are: The coordination and control of sub contractor 4.78 control on sub contractor’s safety behaviour 4.72 the provision of personal protective equipment 4.56

• The standard deviation (σ) of the respondents varies around 1, revealing that the response is same for all the companies.

• The maximum deviation of 1.19 and 1.18 was observed in case of usage of heavy equipment and application of new technology in the project respectively.

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY• The work environments in construction activities

are generally more hazardous than other industries due to the use of heavy equipment, dangerous tools, and hazardous materials, all of which increase the potential for serious accidents and injuries.

• Therefore, it is evident that a focused dedication towards safety is needed from construction at all levels.

• It can be inferred from the survey data that safety managers have the opportunity to influence and enhance the sense of safety and the quality of the work environment.

• Owners of large projects can more actively participate in construction safety management in each stage of project execution, including project design, contract selection, contract development, the construction phase, selecting safe contractors, and developing the safety culture on the projects through safety training and safety recognition programs.

• The important finding of this study is that site safety is affected by company safety policy; construction process; personnel management with regard to safety.

• If these factors are addressed and monitored closely, accident reduction may be realized in construction sites.

• The construction companies shall also be willing to give safety training/awareness to the construction workers to reduce and eliminate the future lost time injuries, time and cost.

• Certain ground rules need to framed by the construction companies for effective and efficient use of personnel protective equipment.

• The results also show that the influence of management on the safety and health standards on site is very crucial.

• The responsibilities and roles that management plays will determine the over all safety performance of the entire site.

• Safety culture has to be adopted in all organisations through strong support and encouragement by senior management.

• By management’s endorsement, safety promotion will boost the morale and motivate site personnel to think and works safely.

• A booklet was prepared based on the “Building and other construction workers (regulation of employment and conditions of service) rules, 1996”.

• The booklet was distributed to small and medium level construction companies for possible implementation on their construction sites.

CONCLUSION

• As a means of reducing the risks associated with construction, safety can significantly impact the overall cost.

• A dedicated commitment to safety by both the owner and contractor helps to ensure the success of the project and can impact the bottom-line considerably.

• The booklet prepared will be useful to small construction companies and if followed will minimise the occurrence of accident.

Conferences / Publications

• Presented a paper titled “Safety Management in construction Industries” in a National conference on Recent trends in Infrastructure development held at PSG College of Technology.

• Presented a paper titled “Benchmarking studied on Safety Management in construction Industries” in a National conference on Modern trends in Structural design and Construction Practices held at College of Engineering-Guindy.

• A paper was submitted to “Industrial Safety Chronicle” and it is under review.

REFERENCES• Christopher Auld.M, J. C. Herbert Emery and Daniel V. Gordon (2001),

“The Efficacy of Construction Site Safety Inspections”, Journal of Labor Economics, volume 19, The University of Chicago, 900–921.

• Dayana. B. Costa; Carlos T. Formoso; Michail Kagio glou; Luis F. Alarcón; and Carlos. H.Caldas,M (2006) “Benchmarking Initiatives in the Construction Industry: Lessons Learned and Improvement Opportunities” Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 4, October 1,2006.ASCE,158–167.

• Dominic Cooper, “Improving Safety Culture-A Practical Guide”, John Wiley and son’s ltd, 1998.

• Edwin Sawacha ,Shamil Naoum and Daniel Fong (1999) “Factors affecting safety performance on construction sited” International Journal of Project Management, Volume 17, 307-315.

• Evelyn Ai Lin Teo , Florence Yean Ling, Adrian Fook (2005) “Framework for project managers to manage construction safety” International Journal of Project Management ,volume 23 september 2005, 329–341.

• Fang D. P; X. Y. Huang; and Jimmie Hinze, M. (2004) “Benchmarking Studies on Construction Safety Management in China” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No. 3, June 1, 2004. ASCE. 424–432.

• Gregory Carter and Simon D. Smith (2006) “Safety Hazard Identification on Construction Projects” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.132, No. 2, February 1, 2006. ASCE, 197-205.

• Guidelines for safety management plans”, Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, workplace standards Tasmania.

• Helen Lingard, Steve Rowlinson (1998), “Behaviour-based safety management in Hong Kong's construction industry”,Construction Management & Economics, Volume 16, July 1, 1998, 481 – 488.

• Joe M. Wilson Jr. and Enno Koehn,(2000) “Safety management : problems encountered and recommended solutions” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 126, No. 1, January 2000. ASCE, 77-79.

• John A. Gambatese, Michael Behm, and Jimmie W. Hinze, (2005) “Viability of Designing for Construction Worker Safety” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 131, No. 9,September 1, 2005,ASCE , 80-88.

• Michael Toole.P.E (2005) “Increasing Engineers Role in Construction Safety: Opportunities and Barriers” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 3, July 1, 2005. ASCE, 199–207.

• OsamaAbudayyeh , Tycho K. Fredericks , Steven E. Butt , Areen Shaar(2006) “An investigation of managements commitment to construction safety” International Journal of Project Management , volume 20,167–174.

• Ricardo Ramírez R. , Luis Fernando Alarcón C. and Peter Knights (2002) “Benchmarking management practices in the construction industry” International Journal of Project Management , volume 12,158-166.

• Ron Sharpe; (1995)“safety plus improving construction worker safety”. Journal of construction Industry Institute, Australia Inc.

• Satish B. Mohan and Bryan D. Niles (2002) “ Effectiveness of Occupational safety and Health Administration Citations”, Practical periodical on structural design and construction,Vol.7, No.2, May 1, 2002,ASCE,85-89.

• Sherif Mohamed (2003) “Scorecard Approach to Benchmarking Organizational Safety Culture in Construction”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 129, No. 1, February 1, 2003,ASCE, 80-88.

• Todd W. Loushine, Peter Hoonakker , Pascal Carayon , Michael J. Smith , and E. Andrew Kapp (2005) “Safety and quality management systems in construction some insight from contractors” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 152, No. 1, April, 2006,ASCE,52-61.

• Xinyu Huang and Jimmie Hinze (2006) “Owner’s Role in Construction Safety” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.132, No. 2, February 1, 2006. ASCE, 164–173.

• w w w.ogc.gov.uk/sdtoolkit/deliveryteam/index.html.• w w w.constructingexcellence.org/zones/kpizone/benchmarking/default.jsp