24-7 Safety Climate: Developing a Brief 24-ltem, Seven Dimension Measure of Work Safety Climate for Monitoring and Remediating Safety Concerns

Abstract

This thesis aimed to develop a brief multi-dimensional, cross-industry work safety climate measure that could be used for regular monitoring, but that was also comprehensive enough for identifying and remediating safety concerns. Use of such a brief measure could contribute to reducing the human and financial costs of safety accidents, with the extensive length of many safety climate measures considered a barrier to regular use. A literature review suggested that the most efficient way to develop a brief measure involved shortening an existing reliable, valid and comprehensive cross-industry work safety climate measure. After a rigorous review of measures, the 50-item, 7-dimension Nordic Occupational Safety Climate Questionnaire (NOSACQ-50; Kines et al., 2011) was selected as a basis for the brief measure. Study one examined the NOSACQ-50 reduction using statistical and additional practical usefulness methods (i.e., item readability, item importance rankings from safety researchers and practitioners). NOSACQ-50 data from disability support (N = 366) and hospitality workers (N = 111) were used for statistical reduction methods. Expert opinions and importance rankings were collected from safety researchers (N = 5) and practitioners (N = 14). Statistical and practical usefulness findings were combined to derive a 24-item NOSACQ (NOSACQ-24). The NOSACQ-50 diagnostic value and dimensional structure were maintained to enable use of existing safety climate benchmarks and for use of the NOSACQ-50 when more comprehensive evaluation was indicated. Study two investigated the NOSACQ-24 construct, external, and concurrent validity; measurement equivalence; and benchmarking capabilities. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to confirm model fit using disability support and hospitality workers (N = 474) NOSACQ responses. External validity was established using responses from casual workers (N = 120) and vocational education and training (VET) workers (N = 53). Results further supported the NOSACQ-24 validity. Study three extended the NOSACQ-24 validity investigations and examined acuity for identifying safety subcultures associated with various demographic and job-related variables. NOSACQ-24 responses from VET workers (N = 549) were utilised, with safety climate subcultural differences demonstrated for managerial function, work-type, workplace location, employment status, and gender. Thus, the NOSACQ-24 retained the NOSACQ-50’s capacity to identify subcultural differences offering further support for the validity and practical usefulness of the NOSACQ-24. Study four sought to develop a 4-item supplementary measure to accompany the NOSACQ-24 to identify organisational change capability issues that might impede successful safety intervention implementation. These items were derived from research evidence associated with factors facilitating or hindering organisational change and included: overall change capability, overt top management support, use of champions of change, and worker buy-in. Mixed methodology was employed to validate the measure using qualitative and quantitative responses from VET workers (N= 485). Results provided initial support for the change capability measure and suggested that with further validation and development, the combination of the NOSACQ-24 and 4-item change capability measure could be a useful practical measure for identifying safety concerns requiring remediation and for providing a measure of an organisation’s ability to successfully implement change, thus reducing the high failure rate of change interventions reported in the research literature.