RISK CONTROL ENHANCEMENT USING SAFETY CLIMATE FACTORS FOR

HIRARC METHOD IN STEEL PRODUCT INDUSTRY

MOHAMAD FARIZ ADIPUTRA

A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Engineering (Industrial Engineering)

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JUNE 2015

iii

To my beloved mother and father

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In preparing this thesis, I was in contact with many people, researchers,

academicians, and practitioners. They have contributed towards my understanding and

thoughts. In particular, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my main thesis

supervisor, Dr. Mohd Shuisma Mohd. Ismail, for encouragement, guidance, critics and

patience. I am also very thankful to my co-supervisor Dr. Jafri Mohd. Rohani for his

guidance, advices and motivation. Without their continued support and interest, this

thesis would not have been the same as presented here. I also would like to thank Assoc.

Prof. Dr. Mat Rebi Abdul Rani for his guidance during finding my thesis topic and Dr.

Ardiyansyah bin Syahrom for his support.

I am also very grateful for the company to approve me preparing this thesis

based on study in the company. I am thankful for all the cooperation given to me while I

was there especially from Safety, Health, and Environment Department, Mr. Farissan

and Mr. Farid. I also would like to express my gratitude to fellow friends in UTM for all

the troubles that I have caused them in preparing this thesis Bang Fitra, Bang Zul, Bang

Cici, Kak Cica, Kak Reiza, Kak Weni, Agung, Vika, Ihda, Dwiky, Anggi, Ichsan, Rizal,

Yulizar, Dhika, Fadhil, Nyomie, and many others whom I could not mention here.

Without them, this thesis would not be finished. I also would like to thank my friends

anywhere for their encouragement.

Lastly, I am grateful to all my family members. To my parents, brothers, sister,

grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins for their full support through my master’s life.

Without them, this thesis would be meaningless.

v

ABSTRACT

Accident in manufacturing industry in Malaysia has been high for the last

five years. The current strategy of reducing accident by detecting the hazard and do

necessary action to the hazard was found to be not enough to prevent accidents in

manufacturing industry. The method used for that was Hazard Identification, Risk

Assessment, and Risk Control (HIRARC). Meanwhile, safety climate was developed

to understand the current condition of safety in the organization. The purpose of this

study was to enhance selected risk control in HIRARC method using safety climate

factors. The hazards were identified using observation, interview, and analysis of the

accident history. Then each hazards were assessed to get the risk score and level. A

survey was conducted to get the safety climate result. The safety climate result was

subject to Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). From the EFA result, it was found that

five factors were safety climate in steel product industry, involving management

commitment and actions for safety, worker’s commitment towards safety, priority for

safety over production, emergency preparedness in the organization, and safeness in

work environment. From analysing the factors, administrative control method was

selected to enhance risk control that was already selected by incorporating techniques

in administrative control parallel with other type of risk control. In conclusion,

factors of safety climate could be used in enhancing the risk control method selected

for HIRARC in steel product industry.

vi

ABSTRAK

Kemalangan dalam industri pembuatan di Malaysia telah tinggi untuk tempoh

lima tahun yang lalu. Strategi semasa mengurangkan kemalangan dengan mengesan

bahaya dan melakukan tindakan yang perlu untuk bahaya yang telah didapati tidak

cukup untuk mencegah kemalangan dalam industri pembuatan. Kaedah yang

digunakan untuk itu adalah Pengenalpastian Bahaya, Penilaian Risiko dan Kawalan

Risiko (HIRARC). Sementara itu, iklim keselamatan telah dibangunkan untuk

memahami keadaan semasa keselamatan dalam organisasi. Tujuan kajian ini adalah

untuk meningkatkan kawalan risiko yang terpilih dalam kaedah HIRARC

menggunakan faktor-faktor iklim keselamatan. Bahaya telah dikenal pasti dengan

menggunakan teknik pemerhatian, temu bual, dan analisis sejarah kemalangan.

Setiap bahaya dinilai untuk mendapatkan nilai risiko dan paras risiko. Satu kajian

telah dijalankan untuk mendapatkan hasil iklim keselamatan. Hasil iklim

keselamatan adalah tertakluk kepada Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Dari

keputusan EFA, didapati bahawa lima faktor adalah iklim keselamatan dalam

industri produk keluli, yang melibatkan komitmen dan tindakan untuk keselamatan,

komitmen pekerja terhadap keselamatan, keutamaan untuk keselamatan ke atas

pengeluaran, persediaan kecemasan dalam organisasi, dan keselamatan dalam

persekitaran kerja. Dari menganalisis faktor, kaedah kawalan pentadbiran telah

dipilih untuk meningkatkan kawalan risiko yang telah dipilih dengan melaksanakan

teknik dalam kawalan pentadbiran yang selari dengan lain-lain jenis kawalan risiko.

Kesimpulannya, faktor-faktor iklim keselamatan boleh digunakan dalam

meningkatkan kawalan risiko yang dipilih untuk HIRARC dalam industri produk

keluli.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES xi

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

LIST OF APPENDICES xiv

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Overview 1

1.2 Background of Problem 1

1.3 Problem Statement 3

1.4 Objectives 3

1.5 Scopes 4

1.6 Significances 4

1.7 Organization of the Thesis 4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Overview 6

2.2 Accident 6

2.2.1 Accident Causation Theory 6

2.2.1.1 Domino Theory 7

2.2.1.2 Human Factors Theory 8

viii

2.3 Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Risk

Control (HIRARC) 9

2.3.1 Definition of HIRARC 9

2.3.2 Objectives of HIRARC 9

2.3.3 Steps in HIRARC 10

2.3.4 Classifying Work Activities 11

2.3.5 Hazard Identification 11

2.3.5.1 Classification of Hazard 12

2.3.5.2 Groups of Hazard 13

2.3.6 Risk Assessment 13

2.3.7 Risk Control 16

2.3.7.1 Risk Control Method 16

2.4 Safety Climate 18

2.4.1 Definition of Safety Climate 18

2.4.2 Dimensions of Safety Climate 18

2.5 Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1994 20

2.5.1 Objectives of OSHA1994 20

2.5.2 Scopes of OSHA 1994 21

2.6 Literatures Summary 21

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 23

3.1 Overview 23

3.2 Study Design 23

3.3 Data Collection 25

3.3.1 Hazard Identification 25

3.3.1.1 Kiswire Group Structure 25

3.3.1.2 KSB Organizational Structure 26

3.3.1.3 KSB Factory Staffing 27

3.3.1.4 KSB Plan Layout 28

3.3.1.5 Accident History 29

3.3.1.6 Standard Operating Procedure 29

3.3.1.7 Observation and Interview 30

3.3.2 Safety Climate 30

ix

3.3.2.1 Population and Sampling 30

3.3.2.2 Questionnaire Development 31

3.3.2.3 Questionnaire Content Validation 32

3.3.2.4 Questionnaire Distribution 32

3.4 Data Analysis 33

3.4.1 Risk Level Assessment 33

3.4.2 Safety Climate Scoring 34

3.4.3 Exploratory Factor Analysis 34

3.4.4 Safety Climate Reliability Analysis 35

3.5 Risk Control Selection 36

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 37

4.1 Overview 37

4.2 Accident Analysis 37

4.2.1 Accident Based on Injury and LTI 39

4.2.2 Accident Based on Year of Experience 40

4.2.3 Accident Based on Department 41

4.3 Hazards Identified 42

4.3.1 Drawing Hazards 43

4.3.2 Stranding Hazards 45

4.3.3 Closing Hazards 47

4.4 Risk Assessment Result 50

4.5 Risk Control 53

4.5.1 Safety Climate Survey Result 53

4.5.1.1 Respondent’s Demographic 54

4.5.1.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 56

4.5.1.3 Reliability Test 57

4.5.1.4 Safety Climate Factors 58

4.5.2 Risk Control Selection 62

4.5.2.1 High Risk Hazard Analysis 62

4.5.2.2 Selecting and Implementing

Risk Control 64

4.5.2.3 Enhancing Risk Control Selected 65

x

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 67

5.1 Overview 67

5.2 Conclusions 67

5.3 Limitations of the Study 68

5.4 Recommendations 68

5.4 Recommendations 67

REFERENCES 69

Appendices A-C 74-94

xi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Example of classification of hazards 12

2.2 Severity Likelihood Matrix for qualitative method

(Source: DOSH, 2008) 14

2.3 Likelihood in semi-quantitative method

(Source: DOSH, 2008) 14

2.4 Severity in semi-quantitative method

(Source: DOSH, 2008) 15

2.5 Severity Likelihood Matrix for semi-quantitative method

(Source: DOSH, 2008) 15

2.6 Summary of important literatures 21

4.1 Accident database for the period of 2011-2013 in KSB

and KNSB 38

4.2 LTI per injury type from 2011-2013 in KSB and KNSB 39

4.3 Drawing process component description

(Source: KSB Internal Report) 44

4.4 Drawing process hazard 45

4.5 Stranding process component description

(Source: KSB Internal Report) 46

4.6 Stranding process hazard 47

4.7 Closing process component description

(Source: KSB Internal Report) 48

4.8 Closing process hazard 49

4.9 Drawing process risk assessment result 50

4.10 Stranding process risk assessment result 51

xii

4.11 Closing process risk assessment result 52

4.12 Respondent’s demographic 54

4.13 KMO and Bartlett’s Test result 57

4.14 Total variance explained for each factor 57

4.15 Cronbach’s Alpha for each dimensions 58

4.16 Safety climate factors in KSB 58

4.17 High Risk Steps in Wire Rope Department

sorted by Risk 63

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Flowchart of HIRARC processes (Source: DOSH, 2008) 10

3.1 Study design 24

3.2 Kiswire group structure in Malaysia 26

3.3 Kiswire Sdn Bhd organization structure illustration 27

3.4 Kiswire Sdn Bhd production department structure

illustration 28

3.5 Typical wire rope plant layout 29

4.1 Accident occurrences from 2011-2013 by year of

experience in KSB and KNSB 40

4.2 Accident summary from 2011-2013 by department 41

4.3 Wire rope production process 42

4.4 Drawing process (Source: KSB Internal Report) 43

4.5 Stranding process (Source: KSB Internal Report) 45

4.6 Closing process (Source: KSB Internal Report) 48

4.7 Risk level frequency of hazards identified 53

4.8 Risk level percentage of hazards in wire rope department 62

xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Sample of Safety Climate Questionnaire Survey

Content Validation 74

B Sample of Safety Climate Questionnaire Survey 75

C Safety Climate Exploratory Factor Analysis Result 85

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

This chapter is covering overview of the study from the background of

problems, problem statement, objectives, scopes and significances. The brief

overview explains the general information regarding the study, such as the problems

studied, limits used, and goals of the study.

1.2 Background of Problem

Accident is an undesired event that causes injury or property damage (Bird

and Germain, 1985). Malaysian Department of Occupational Safety and Health

(DOSH) is keeping records of reported occupational accidents in Malaysia (OSHA,

1994). From the record, manufacturing industry has the highest number of accident

occurrences in 2014 compare to nine other sectors. Furthermore, manufacturing

industry also recorded to have the highest number of non-permanent disability and

permanent disability as the result of accidents in 2014. In addition, the record also

shows that manufacturing industry has been the highest accident occurrences for five

consecutive years from the year 2010 until 2014. Zakaria et al. (2012) studied that

accident in manufacturing industry is from changing the production method from

manual or by hand process to mechanical or machine process. This change eliminates

hazard from hand or manual to the new mechanical hazard.

2

In order to stop accident from occurring, numerous studies have been done.

The earliest theory known for accident causation model is written by Heinrich in

1931. In his theory, he stated that accident happens as the result from sequential of

events. Thus, in order to prevent accident from occurring, simply removing one of

the events from the sequence would be sufficient. In manufacturing industry,

removing hazards from the sequence of events would prevent the accident from

occurring.

To remove a hazard, it is started with identification of hazard. Hazard is a

situation with potential for it to cause any harm in terms of human injury or ill health,

damage to the property or environment, or any combination of these (DOSH, 2008).

Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Risk Control (HIRARC) method

suggested by Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) Malaysia

could be used in identifying hazards in the process. After identifying hazards, the

hazards could be prioritized before any preventive measures are given by assessing

the risks from each hazard. The hazards are assessed using three method of assessing,

such as qualitative method, quantitative method, and semi-quantitative method. Then

risk control strategy selected for each hazards based on the priority or risk level

assessed.

However, there are six method of risk control available according to DOSH

(2008), such as elimination, substitution, isolation, engineering control,

administrative control and using personal protective equipment or PPE. The selection

of a method using DOSH guideline is based on the hierarchy of risk control method

and proposed duration of risk control method will be applied, such as for long term

or only for short term. For short term or temporary control, it is usually for the high

risk hazard where immediate action is required. But for the long term control, it

needed further planning on which method should be applied to control the risk.

Meanwhile, safety climate is employees’ current perceptions or opinions regarding

safety policies, procedures, practices, and general importance and priority of safety at

work (Griffin and Neal, 2000; Zohar, 1980). From the result of safety climate, it is

expected to get the factors that are contributing to the safety in the company. By

3

focusing on the factors, selected method for risk control could be further enhanced

mainly for the long term plan.

1.3 Problem Statement

HIRARC method as strategy in preventing accident has been used in many

industry. The three steps of HIRARC are applicable in every industry. The last step

in HIRARC is selecting risk control method and implementing it to the hazard. On

the other hand, safety climate has been studied by many researchers to understand

the safety condition in the industry. From the previous studies, many dimensions as a

result of safety climate have been found, such as management commitment, safety

procedure, and many others. However, very limited studies of safety climate have

been done in the manufacturing industry, especially in steel product industry. In

addition, safety climate factors are different for each industry even between

organizations in the same type of industry due to differences of the employees’

perception of the safety condition in the organization. Furthermore, HIRARC as a

method of preventing accident is rarely integrated with safety climate for enhancing

the selected risk control method.

1.4 Objectives

The objectives of this study are as follows:

a. To determine the structure of safety climate in steel product industry

using an exploratory factor analysis.

b. To applied safety climate factors for enhancing risk control selected in

HIRARC method.

4

1.5 Scopes

The study scopes are as follows:

a. The study was conducted in Kiswire Sdn Bhd located in Pasir

Gudang, Johor, Malaysia.

b. Historical data of accident from the company was collected for three

years.

c. Safety climate data was collected from operators and staff in the

company.

d. Risk control method suggested is for long term duration in wire rope

department in the company.

1.6 Significances

There are two significances from this study, there are:

a. Gained more understanding about hazards and risks in the steel

product industry.

b. Give application of enhancing risk control selection of HIRARC

method using safety climate factors.

1.7 Organization of the Thesis

Chapter 2 dealt with literatures related to HIRARC and safety climate. It

began with a brief overview on accident causation theories. Then followed by a

detailed explanation about HIRARC method which consist of hazard identification,

risk assessment, and risk control. Safety climate and dimensions were also described.

Current legislation of safety in Malaysia were briefly explained. This chapter was

ended with a complete review on HIRARC method and safety climate.

5

Chapter 3 presented the methodology used in this study. This chapter showed

the data collection and data analysis process of the study. The data collection process

included the data collected from the company. The analysis of the data were

explained in detail. This chapter also explained the background of company where

the study took place.

In Chapter 4, the data collected was represented in tables and graphics. The

data then briefly explained. The analysis result of the data were also showed in this

chapter. Discussion of the data and theory were the last part of this chapter. The

proposed enhancement for risk control method in HIRARC using safety climate

factors were discussed in detail.

In Chapter 5, concluded the discussion of this study and several

recommendations for future study were given. The limitations of this study were also

explained in this chapter.

REFERENCES

Agwu, M. O. (2012), The Effects of Risk Assessment (Hirarc) on Organisational

Performance in Selected Construction Companies in Nigeria. British Journal of

Economics, Management, & Trade. 2(3), 212-224. SCIENCEDOMAIN

International.

Astley, R. W. and Lawton, R. H. (1971). The Ergonomic Aspects of Fork Lift Truck

Design. Bedfordshire: Cranfield Institute of Technology.

Barling, J., Loughlin, C., and Kelloway, K. E. (2002). An exploratory study of the

role of trust in safety climates and overall safety (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). Los Angeles: Allliant International University.

Bird, F. E. J. and Germain, G. L. (1985). Practical Loss Control Leadership.

Loganville, Georgia: International Loss Control Institute, Inc.

Brown, R. L. and Holmes, H. (1986). The use of factor analytic procedure for

assessing the validity of an employee safety climate model. Accident Analysis &

Prevention. 18(6), 445-470.

Budworth, N. (1997). The development and evaluation of a safety climate measure as

a diagnostic tool in safety management. IOSH Journal. 1, 19-29.

Cox, S. and Cox, T. (1991). The structure of employee attitudes t safety: a European

example. Work and Stress. 5(2), 93-106.

Cox, S. J. and Cheyne, A. J. T. (2000). Assessing safety culture in offshore

environments. Safety Science. 34, 111-129.

Coyle, I. R., Sleeman, S. D., and Adams, N. (1995). Safety climate. Journal of Safety

Research. 16(4), 247-254.

DeDobbeleer, N. and Beland, F. (1991). A safety climate measure for construction

sites. Journal of Safety Research. 22(2), 97-103.

Donald, I. and Canter, D. (1994). Employee attitudes and safety in chemical industry.

Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industries. 7(3), 203-208.

70

Evans, D. D., Michael, J. H., Wiedenbeck, J. K., and Ray, C. D. (2004).

Relationships between organizational climates and safety related events at four

wood manufacturers. Forest Products Journal. 55, 23-28.

Firenze, R. J. (1978). The Process of Hazard Control. New York: Kendal/Hunt.

Flin, R., Mearns, K., O’Connor, P., and Bryden, R. (2000). Measuring safety climate:

Identifying the common features. Safety Science. 34(1-3), 177-192.

Gadd, S. (2002). Safety culture – A review of the literature. London: Health and

Safety Executive.

George, D. and Mallery, P. (2006). SPSS for Windows step-by-step: A simple guide

and reference, 13.0 update. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Glendon, A. I. and Litherland, D. K. (2001). Safety climate factors, group

differences, and safety behavior in road construction. Safety Science. 34, 177-

193.

Goetsch, D. L. (2011). Occupational Safety and Health for Technologists, Engineers,

and Managers. (7th ed.) New Jersey: Pearson.

Griffin, M. A. and Neal, A. (2000). Perceptions of safety at work: a framework for

linking safety climate to safety performance, knowledge, and motivation. Journal

of Occupational Health and Psychology. 5, 347-358.

Gyekye, S. A. (2010). Occupational safety management: The role of causal

attribution. International Journal Of Psychology. 45(6), 405–416.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate

data analysis with readings. (4th ed.) New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Haslam, R. A., Hide, S. A., Gibb, A. G. F., Gyi, E. D., Pavitt, T., and Atkinson, S.

(2005). Contributing Factors in Construction Accidents. Applied Ergonomics.

4(36), 401-415.

Health and Safety Executive (1991). Health and safety climate survey tool. London:

Health and Safety Executive.

Health and Safety Executive (1999). Reducing error and influencing behavior. (2nd

ed.) London: Health and Safety Executive.

Health and Safety Executive (2004). Working Together to Reduce Stress at Work: A

Guide for Employees [Brochure]. London: Health and Safety Executive.

Heinrich, H. W. (1931). Industrial Accident Prevention: A scientific approach. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

71

Heinrich, H. W., Petersen, D., and Ross, N. (1980). Industrial Accident Prevention.

(5th

ed.) , New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hovden, J., Albrechtsen, E, and Herrera, I. A. (2010). Is there a need for new

theories, models and approaches to occupational accident prevention? Safety

Science. 48, 950-956.

Joel, L. (1997). The Handbook of Maintenance Management. New York: Industrial

Press.

Krispin, J. (1997). The construction and validation of a measure of safety climate:

Exploring the link between attitudes and perceptions around safety and safety

performances (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University.

Latham, M. (1994). Constructing the team HSMO.

Lee, T. and Harrison, K. (2000). Assessing safety culture in nuclear power stations.

Safety Science. 34, 61-97.

Lipton, S. and Lynch, J. (1994). Handbook of health hazard control in the chemical

process industry. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

M. S. Syed Mohamed and Harizah Ideris (2012). Managing Risks in a Manufacturing

Environment: A Perspective from Reason’s Accident Causation Model.

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences. 2(8) 38-46.

Malaysia (1967). Factories and Machinery Act. Act 139.

Malaysia (1994). Occupational Safety and Health Act. Act 514.

Malaysia (2008). Guidelines for Hazard Identification, Risk assessment and Risk

Control (HIRARC). JKPP DP 127/789/4-47.

Maragakis, I., Clark, S., Piers, M., Prior, D., Tripaldi, C., Masson, M., and Audard,

C. (2009). Guidance on Hazard Identification. European Strategic Safety

Initiative.

Mason, S. and Simpson, G. (1995). Measuring safety attitudes to target management

actions. The Safety and Health Practitioner.

McDonald, N., Corrigan, S., Daly, C., and Cromie, S. (2000). Safety management

systems and safety culture in aircraft maintenance organizations. Safety Science.

34, 151-176.

Mearns, K. J. and Reader, T. (2008). Organizational Support and Safety Outcomes:

An Uninvestigated relationship? Safety Science. 46, 388-397.

72

Mearns, K. J., Whitaker, S. M., and Flin, R. (2003). Safety climate, safety

management practice, and safety performance in offshore environments. Safety

Science. 41, 641-680.

Mearns, K., Flin, R., Fleming, M., and Gordon, R. (1997). Human and

Organizational Factors in Offshore Safety. Suffolk: Offshore Safety Division,

Health and Safety Executive.

Neal, A. and Griffin, M. A. (2006). A study of the lagged relationships among safety

climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and injuries at the individual group

levels. Journal of Applied Psychology. 91, 946-953.

Niskanen, T. (1994) Safety climate in road administration. Safety Science. 17, 237-

255.

Noorul Huda Zakaria, Norudin Mansor, and Zalinawati Abdullah (2012). Workplace

Accident in Malaysia: Most Common Causes and Solutions. Business and

Management Review. 2(5), 75-88.

Payne, N. (2011). Machinery Accidents in the Workplace. Cited in Noorul Huda

Zakaria, Norudin Mansor, and Zalinawati Abdullah (2012). Workplace Accident

in Malaysia: Most Common Causes and Solutions. Business and Management

Review. 2(5), 75-88.

Reason J. (1990). Human Error. Cambridge: University Press. As cited in M. S.

Syed Mohamed and Harizah Ideris (2012). Managing Risks in a Manufacturing

Environment: A Perspective from Reason’s Accident Causation Model.

Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences. 2(8) 38-46.

Rundmo, T. (1994). Associations between safety and contingency measures and

occupational accidents on offshore petroleum platforms. Scandinavian Journal of

Work and Environmental Health. 20, 128-131.

Sargent, E. V. and Gallo, F. (2003). Use of Personal Protective Equipment for

Respiratory Protection. ILAR Journal. 44(1), 52-56.

Seppala, A. (1992). Evaluation of safety measures, their improvement and

connection to occupational accidents. Cited in Niskanen, T. (1994) Safety climate

in road administration. Safety Science. 17, 237-255.

Shannon, H. S., Mayr, J., and Haines, T. (1997). Overview of the relationship

between organizational and workplace factors and injury rates. Safety Science.

26, 201-217.

73

Sherry, P. (1991) Person-environment fit and accident prediction. Journal of

Business and Psychology. 5, 411-416.

Stup, R. (2002). Standard Operating Procedures: Managing the Human Variables.

National Mastitis Council Regional Meeting Proceedings.

Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate analysis. (2nd

ed.)

New York, NY: Harper Collins.

Tam, C. M. and Chan, A. P. C. (1999). Nourishing safety culture in the construction

industry of Hong Kong. Proceedings of the Second International Conference of

CIB Working Commission W99. March 24-27 1999. Honolulu, Hawaii, 117-122.

Thomas. (1989). As cited in Norasikin Hussin. (2010). Occupational Safety and

Helath Improvement at a Casting Plant (Published master’s thesis). Johor Bahru:

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Tomas, J. M., Melia, J. L., and Oliver, A. M. (1999). A cross validation of structural

equation model of accidents: organizational and psychology variables as

predictors of work safety. Work and Stress. 13(1), 49-58.

Trimpop, R., Kirkaldi, B., Athansou, J., and Cooper, C. (2000). Individual

differences in working hours, work perceptions and accident rates in veterinary

surgeries. Work Stress. 11, 181-188.

USA (2003). Personal Protective Equipment. OSHA 3151-12R.

Varonen, U. and Mattila, M. (2000). The safety climate and its relationship to safety

practices, safety of work environment and occupational accidents in eight wood

processing companies. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 32, 761-769.

Vinodkumar, M. N. and Bhasi, M. (2009). Safety climate factors and its relationship

with accidents and personal attributes in the chemical industry. Safety Science.

47, 659-667.

Waring, A. (1992). Developing a safety culture. The Safety and Health Practitioner.

Williamson, A. M., Feyer A. M., Cairns, D., and Biancotti, D. (1997). The

development of a measure safety climate: the role of safety perceptions and

attitudes. Safety Science. 25, 15-27.

Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied

implications. Journal of Applied Psychology. 65, 96-102.

Zohar, D. (2002). Modifying supervisory practices to improve sub-unit safety: a

leadership based intervention model. Journal of Applied Psychology. 87(1), 156-

163.