Occupational safety behavior in workplace of production company in ha noi basic for accident prevention and reduction

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY BEHAVIOR IN WORKPLACE OF PRODUCTON COMPANY IN HANOI: BASIS FOR ACCIDENT PREVENTION AND REDUCTION _ A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School Southern Luzon State University, Lucban, Quezon, Philippines in Collaboration with Thai Nguyen University, Socialist Republic of Vietnam _ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Business Administration _ By PHAM THI NINH (SUE) December 2013 i APPROVAL SHEET The Dissertation of PHAM THI NINH entitled OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY BEHAVIOR IN WORKPLACE OF PRODUCTON COMPANY IN HANOI: BASIS FOR ACCIDENT PREVENTION AND REDUCTION Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION A program offered by Southern Luzon State University, Republic of the Philippines in collaboration with Thai Nguyen University, Socialist Republic of Vietnam has been approved by Oral Examination Committee JOANNA PAULA A ELLAGA, DBA Expert EDWIN P BERNAL, DBA Expert NELLY I MENDOZA, DBA Expert ALICE T VALERIO, PhD External Panel CECILIA N GASCON, PhD Chairman Endorsed by: Recommended by: MELCHOR MELO O PLACINO, PhD Adviser APOLONIA A ESPINOSA, PhD Dean Accepted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Business Administration _ Date WALBERTO A MACARAAN, EdD Vice President for Academic Affairs ii CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY This is to certify that the dissertation entitle “ OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY BEHAVIOR IN WORPLACE OF PRODUCTION COMPANY IN HANOI: BASIS FOR ACCIDENT PREVENTION REDUCTION”, orally defended/ presented under the DBA Program jointly offered by Southern Luzon State University of the Republic of the Philippines and Thai Nguyen university of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, embodies the result of original and scholarly work carried out by the undersigned This dissertation does not contain works or ideas taken from published sources or written works by other persons which have been accepted as basis for the award of any degree from other higher education institution, except where proper referencing and acknowledgement were made Researcher/ Candidate Pham Thi Ninh Date Orally Defended: October 2014 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express my most sincere thanks to the Management Board of the Southern Luzon State University, Thai Nguyen University, and the teachers in the said schools for helping me in the learning process throughout I would like to express my sincere gratitude and profound appreciation to Professor Melchor Melo Placino, my enthusiastic teacher for his guidance and encouragement, and the time he spent for this research I would also like to express my sincere thanks to the Department of Employment - Ministry of Labor - Invalids and Social Affairs, the LILAMA 69-2 company that has helped me for my research material, through a questionnaire survey I sincerely thank the Board of the University of Labor and Social affair (ULSA), colleagues in ULSA, and classmates in DBA1 who offered enthusiastic help and shared help complete the thesis Finally, I would like to send my thanks from the heart, to my family for their enthusiasm and encouragement to complete my thesis PTN iv DEDICATION I wish to dedicate this dissertation to my family and friends PTN v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………… i APPROVAL SHEET ……………………………………………………… ii CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY ……………………………………… iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ………………………………………………… iv DEDICATION ……………………………………………………………… v TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………… vi LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………… viii LIST OF FIGURES ……………………………………………………… ix LIST OF APPENDICES ………………………………………………… x ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………… xi CHAPTER I II III INTRODUCTION ………………………………………… Background of the Study ………………………………… Statement of the Problem ……………………………… Objectives of the Study ………………………………… Significance of the Study ………………………………… Scope and Limitations of the Study …………………… Definition of Terms ……………………………………… REVIEW OF LITERATURE ……………………………… Conceptual Framework …………………………………… 36 METHODOLOGY Research Design ……………………………….………… 37 Locale of the Study …………………………………… … 39 Data Gathering Procedure ………………………………… 40 Population, Sample and Sampling Technique ……… 40 Research Instrument …………………………………… 41 Statistical Analysis……………… 41 Statistical Treatment …………………………………… 43 vi IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ………………………… V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND 43 RECOMMENDATIONS Summary ……………….…………………………………… 69 Conclusions ………………………………………………… 71 Recommendations ………………………………………… 72 REFERENCES …………………………………………………………… 73 APPENDICES …………………………………………………………… 75 CURRICULUM VITAE …………………………………………………… 83 vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE Report of Labor Accident in 2011 35 Safety Behavior Marking from Workers’ Responses 44 T-test Paired Two Sample for Mean 45 Result Survey of Managers and Supervisors 45 Workers’ Personal Profile 46 Types of Accident in Years 47 The Causes that Lead to Accident in LILAMA 48 Summary Result of Area D, PATS, SATS, SATW 49 Summary of Result of Areas: D, PATS, SATS, HSE 51 10 The Example of Critical Behaviors 63 11 The Example of BSV Checklist and Analysis 65 12 How to BBS observation (BSV) 66 viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE Perception and it’s Important for Organizational Behavior 10 Attribution Theory 13 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 17 Conceptual Framework of the Study 36 Paradigm of the Study 36 Graph on Respondent’s Answer 44 Comparison of the Responses of Managers-Supervisors and Worker 53 BBS Process 63 ix LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX PAGE A Survey Questionnaire 76 B Table of T-test 79 C Summary Response of Workers 82 ` x 69 Chapter V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations based on the study Summary The study was aimed to determine the effectiveness of the safety program and recommend safety training program on the safety behavior of workers and the reduction or prevention of accident in a production company in Hanoi, Vietnam Specifically it sought to answer the following questions: What is the profile of workers in LILAMA 69-2 company What is the frequency and types/classification of work-related accidents in LILAMA 69-2 company? What is the leading causes of work-related accident in LILAMA company? What is attitude of workers on safety and the safety climate in LILAMA 69-2? What is the behavior of the management of LILAMA 69-2 towards safety program in the company? What safety program is appropriate to improve the safety behavior of workers and safety climate in LILAMA 69-2? In this research, the descriptive method was used, with the use of survey to 394 respondents The questionnaire, used to gauge their 70 understanding about Safety, was designed, keeping in view of ease of response for the employees of production companies Findings From data analysis in Chapter 4, below are the significant findings: LILAMA 69-2 is big company and solid in experience on its field of expertise Its workforce is educated and experienced The company management is willing to change to cope with new condition of development Current safety training program of Lilama includes: Regulatory occupational safety which covers on-job general safety requirement, equipment safety, personnel safety equipment; and Specific job safety requirement which covers specific jobs such as welding, machining, heavy lifting The program is very formal and is repeated once every three years with one day on class training The outcome of this training is a safety training certificate issued Despite some effort on safety management such as regulatory training or effort to meet the authority requirement for safety, the company still face with high rate of fatal accidents and loss time accidents in the past few years Still some accidents are not yet formally reported (typical for conservative local company) Irrelevant workplace safety behavior and perception could be the main reason leading to incident in LILAMA The root cause of safety issues in the company are irrelevant safety management system and lack of 71 safety approach within the organization to promote behavior-based safety The safety attitude of the workforce within LILAMA 69-2 is on low side The safety climate is not good as many people have no sense and interest on safety at workplace The perception of managers and supervisors are different with the workers as the communication of safety management process is not effective Management might not correctly evaluate the safety status within the company, therefore the efforts to improve the company's safety did not bring expected result Beside that, the QHSE methodology and staff in-charge may not be friendly enough to encourage good safety climate There is a need to apply a new safety program within the company Conclusions Based on the findings, the following conclusions are hereby offered: LILAMA 69-2 is big company that boasts experience on its field of expertise LILAMA 69-2’s current safety training program is inefficient The company faced high rate of fatal accidents in the past few years Accidents in the company are because people have no sense and interest on safety at workplace The perception of managers and supervisors on safety measures are different with the workers because management process is not effective communication of safety 72 A Behavior-Based Safety program may be relevant to improve both safety behavior in workplace and communication between managers and workers Recommendations In the context mentioned in the conclusions, the researcher would recommend: The company, LILAMA, should deploy the methodology of Behavioral Based Safety (BBS) on safety management in workplace as it was successfully and effectively implemented in developed countries in past 15 years, but still very new for Vietnam The implementation of BBS in the company will bring about new safety climate and culture in the company with mutual agreeable decision making and interactions (from top and from bottom); safety behavior and attitude to the workforce by systematically monitoring and discussing workplace safety behaviors; as well as management commitment to higher level Mutual trust between management and workforce as safety decision is made with mutual agreeable Unsafe behaviors which are associated with human and financial costs should be targeted to be reduced in the company Companies like the one in this study should adopt a proactive approach to safety than the common reactive approach to improve safety in the workplace 73 REPERENCES Cooper, M.D Evidence from Safety Culture Risk Perception is Culturally Determined (1997), The International Journal of Project and Business Risk Management, Vol 1(2) Cooper, M.D., (1998) Improving Safety Culture: A practical Guide J Wiley and Sons, Chichester Cooper, M.D and Phillips, R.A., (2004) Exploratory Analysis of the Safety Climate and Safety Behavior Relationship Journal of Safety Research,35,497-512 Cooper MD, Phillips RA (1994) Validation of a safety Climate measure The British Psychological Society, Annual Occupational Psychology Conference: 3-5 Jan, Birmingham Dov Zohar, On the difficulty of promoting worker’s safety behavior: overcoming the underweighting of routine risks Int J Risk Assessment and Management Vol 7, No, 2, 2007 M5G2E9 Canada Duncan, Jack Organizational Behavior (1978), Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company Feyer AM, Williamson A (1997) The involvement of human behavior in occupational accidents: errors in context Safety Science, 25: 55-65 Fleming M, Lardner R (2002) Strategies to promote safe behavior as part of a health and safety management system Contact Research Report, 43038 Frazil, Z.U Kirmani, M.Hanif, A.Saeed, (2009) “Human behavioral corollary on industrial workplace “ , The Nucleus,46(3) : Inpress H Sanaei Nasab, F Ghfranipour (2009) “Evaluation of Knowledge, Attitude and Behavior of Workers towards Occupational Health and Safety” , Iranian J Publ Heath, Vol,38, No.2, 2009, pp, 125-129 J, Krause TR (1997) Selecting safe employees: a behavioral science perspective Professional safety Am J Health System Pharmacology, 42 (4): 24-8 Kripa RH, Raman S, Murli LM, Habibulla NS (2005) Knowledge, attitude and practice related to occupational health problems among salt workers working in the desert of Rajasthan Indian J Occupational Health, 47: 85-8 M Buckingham and C Coffman Schuster business books First, break all the rules – Simon and 74 Mearns K, Whitaker S, Flin R, Gordon R, O' Connor P (2000) Benchmarking human and organizational factors in off shore safety HSE OTO 2000 061 Report; pp.: 3-10 Niven K (1999) Accident costs in the NHS The Safety and Health Practice, 17(9): 34-8 Raouf A, Dhillon BS (1995) Safety assessment Luis Publisher, London, 1-10 Report of labor accident in 2011, 2012 Number: 303 / TB-MOLISA Rung – Aaron Jitprasert Workplace attitude and factors behind job satisfaction – a case study of circuit electronic industries public company limited Schermehorn, J., Hunt, J., Osborn, R Organizational Behavior (1997), New York: John Wiley and Son’s Inc Stephen p Robbins, (1998) Organizational Behavior, A Simon and Schuster Company, Edit Sue C, Bethman J, Helen R (2004) Behavioral approach to safety management within reactor plants Safety Science, 42: 825-39 75 APPENDICES 76 Appendix A Questionnaire Dear respondents, I am a student at the DBA1 class of Thai Nguyen University The purpose of this survey is to study the safety behavior of workers and commitment of management in LILAMA 69-2 company This research is also being conducted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for my degree of Doctor at the Southern Luzon Philippines I would be very grateful if you could express your cooperation by taking a few minutes to fill this questionnaire Your feedback is very important and your answers will be kept in strict confidential Thank you for your assistance Please tick the appropriate number, for some questions, you can tick as many numbers as necessary Biographical information Male A Gender Female B Age Under 30 50-60 30-40 > 60 40-50 C Education Vocational school Secondary school University Master’s or Doctoral degree Others D Your position in your company is: Chairman/ general director/ chief manager Worker Supervisor E Number of years with LILAMA 69-2: 0-5 5-10 >10 77 St.# Question Has anyone from your department talked to you about your safety? How often does your department talk about your safety? Once in a Did anyone from your department talk about workplace safety? Are you satisfied with your working conditions? Do you enjoy your work? Your work-load is When you make mistake what is your immediate fear Is workplace safety important or your life? When you see a fellow workers doing unsafe work what will you do? If you become In charge of your section what steps you will take to improve safety of your section? Do you wear Personal protective equipment’s to avoid punishment? Do you feel easy to work without Personal protective equipment’s? Does your peer worker ask you to wear Personal Protective equipment’ s? Do you think that you work more efficiently without Personal protective equipment’s? 10 11 12 13 14 Response Yes No Occasional Month Year Never Yes No Occasional Yes No Yes Too much Production loss No Manageable In charge’s Anger My Ignore Workplace safety Stop him Improve existing system Happy with existing system Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 15 After noticing that something unusual was happening in process which you have not experienced earlier, what did you next? Inform supervisor Take action yourself 16 If your supervisor asks you to a job for which you are not properly trained what will you do? Whose responsibility is the Area Safety? Refuse Agree to work Mine Supervisor 17 Job security Don’t know Inform Supervisor Take advice from co worker Top Mangt 78 St.# Question 18 Whose responsibility is Factory Safety? Whose responsibility is Personal Safety? Do you intend to finish the job early at any cost to make your Incharge happy? Do you intend to finish the job early at any cost in overall interest of company? Before starting a job you think about its safety aspects? When your supervisor wants to a job which you think is unsafe, what will you do? Do you like to wear Personal protective equipment’s? You have not personally done a job; however you have assisted or seen that job being done by your peer worker In case your peer worker is absent what will you do? How does your Incharge react when you cannot finish job in time? When you make mistakes you feel Have you got any training related to your work? Do you think that you need work related training? How does HSE department behave in case of incident? Do you think that HSE department is friendly? What in your opinion is the role of HSE ? 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Response Mine Supervisor Top Mangt Mine Supervisor Top Mangt Yes No Yes No Yes No To finish the job to meet production target, or To finish the job for benefit of company, or To delay the job due to unsafe condition Yes No Refuse Start work Consult Supervisor Quiet Bullying Helping Embarrassed Humiliated Indifferent Yes No Yes No Advice Counseling Yes No Authoritative Friendly Monitoring 79 Appendix B Table of T-Test t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means D BM Variable Variable 0.996666667 0.028022135 300 300 -2.676351391 0.0046817088 4.30265273 Mean Variance Observations Hypothesized Mean Difference Df t Stat P(T