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 nature
 Historic factors
 Organizational structure
 Management measures
 Individual involvement
 Economic investment
 Labour management relation
 Causes 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.
 CONDUCT OF SURVEY
 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%).
 RESULT ANALYSIS
• The percentage of companies that had
participated in the survey are
Promoters - 40
Contractors - 33
Sub contractors - 20
Consultants – 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

50-100
workers
22%
0-50
workers
42%

100-150
workers
 Number of crews
The number of workers in each crew varies from 7 to 22
with an average of 11.

60

48
50
Percentage of workers

40 37

30

20 15

10

0
<10 crews 10 - 20 crews > 20 crews
Number of crews
• 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 act
Coworker 9%
6%

Unexpected/
Natural
7%
Worker was at
fault
53%

Unsafe
condition
25%
• 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