Philosophy

Generally, the aim of the study is to determine the relationship between the overall workforce perception of safety climate and safety outcomes. Specifically, the aim objective is to examine the role of managers and supervisors in influencing risk-taking behaviors in the workplace. Yule et al. defined safety climate as a snapshot of workforce perception about safety (in the workplace). An individual-group level of analysis is used in the study.

Since the units of analysis are individuals and groups within the organization, several variables are extracted from previous studies. In their review of related literature, they explicated on the various theoretical models posited by industrial psychologists on the extent of roles the management play on influencing or structuring the so-called safety climate. Two other variables are included in the study supervisor involvement in safety and risk factor. The authors recognize the fact that managers can influence perceptions on safety within an organization. Risk factor is defined as uncertainty from obtaining high appraisals.

The study is divided into two parts. The first part is a quantitative study on safety climates. The second part is a qualitative (case study) study on risk factor. Because only 5 of employees are exposed to high risks (uncertainty), it is necessary to use in-depth interviews. The researchers can generate data from these interviews to create a generalized framework (for simulation). Now, this generalized framework may be used to assess the results of the quantitative study.

The apparent weakness of this study is its sole reliance on in-depth interviews to generate quality data. The researchers failed to examine safety documents to evaluate the results of their findings. In short, relying only in oral sources cannot fully substantiate necessitated claims. Needless to say, the researchers are able to locate important factors which determine perceptions on safety.