INSHPO's survey project: results, design, implementation Bradley Turner American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) Conference on Developing an International Standard of Practice, Moscow 9-10 July NSHPO обзор проекта: результаты, проектирование, внедрение
INSHPO's survey project: results, design, implementation. NSHPO обзор проекта: результаты, проектирование, внедрение. Bradley Turner American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) Conference on Developing an International Standard of Practice, Moscow 9-10 July. Who am I? Кто я такой. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
• What do SPs / OSH Ps actually do? (Что SPS / ОШ Ps самом деле)
• Scope and function (Область применения и функции)
• Research goals (исследование целей)
1. Common Body of Knowledge for OSH professionals (Общий Свод знаний по охране труда специалистов)
2. Core competencies (Ключевые компетенции)3. International certification,licensing (Международная сертификация, лицензирование)
• Main literature on the survey (Главная литература по обследованию)o National : Ytrehus 2003 (NO); Bianchi 2004 (IT); Borys et al. 2005 )AU); Dudka
2004 (PL); Jones 2004 (UK); Miguel et al. 2004 (PL); Lang 2004 (CH); Perttula & Saari 2004 (FI); Rillie 2005 (SG); Pryor 2006 (AU); Brauer & Schoolcraft 2008 (US); Pryor & Sawyer 2009 (AU); Toft et al. 2010 (AU).
o Europe: Hale et al. 2005; Hale & Ytrehus 2004; Hale & Guldenmund 2006.
15 Countries surveyed (at least)(Обследованных стран (по крайней мере))
1. Austria (A)2. Australia (AU)3. Canada (CA) – No raw data and not represented in analysis4. Switzerland (CH)5. Cyprus (CY) – No raw data and not represented
6. Germany (DE) – No raw data but usually represented7. Finland (FI)8. Italy (IT)9. The Netherlands (NL)10.Norway (NO)11.Poland (PL)12.Portugal (PT)
13.Singapore (SG)14.United Kingdom (UK)15.United States (US)Note: country sample size is 12 or 13. (Примечание: размеры страны образца 12 или 13.)
No raw data and not represented in analysis (Нет исходных данных и не представлены в анализе)
The survey and data outline (Исследования и данные плана)
A. Organization information (информация об организации)
B. Tasks (83 - 1 not in USA = 82) (Задачи (83 - 1, не в США = 82))
C. Types of hazards/ issues (31) (Виды опасности / вопросы (31))
D. Relations with people (internal, external) (36 – 1 = 35) (Отношения с людьми
(внутренний, внешний) (36 - 1 = 35))
E. Personal information (Персональная информация)
A.Organization information and E. Personal information А. Организация информации и Е. Персональная информация
*CA, DE not in Total**Other categories: "Social insurance and other insurance", "Government agency", and "Other"
Sample size (% Full) Размер выборки (% Full)Response Rate Скорость откликаMale мужчинаFull-time Safety Полный рабочий день безопасностиInternal, External** Внутренняя, внешняя **Multi – Site Multi – сайтMulti-Country МногострановойEdu : High, Mid, Low Edu: высокая, средняя, низкаяExperience: 0-10, >10 Опыт работы: 0-10,> 10
*CA, DE not in Total * CA, DE, не в общем
**Other categories: "Social insurance and other insurance", "Government agency", and "Other«** Другие категории: "Социальное страхование и другие страховые", "государственное
учреждение" и "Другие«
Total общий
A.Organization information and E. Personal information А. Организация информации и Е. Персональная информация
The education question (Вопрос образования)
Blank Rubric пустая Рубрика
IT
UK
AU
DE
US
CH-De
Hale-Guldenmund 06 / Me1.University/Masters/PhD2.Bachelors3.Polytechnic-High / Associate4.Polytechnic-Low / Some College5.Secondary School6.Other
• Hale - Guldenmund 06 / Me• University/Masters/PhD• Bachelors• Polytechnic-High / Associate• Polytechnic-Low / Some College• Secondary School• Other
The education question (Вопрос образования)
Хейл - Guldenmund 06 / MeУниверситет / Мастера / PhDБакалаврыПолитехнический-High / AssociateПолитехнический-Low / Некоторые колледжасредняя школадругой
Two task distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries
0-3 countries 32%
4-9 countries 15%
10-13 countries 54%
0 countries17%
13 countries 21%
1 11%
10 9%
12 17%
11 7%
2 2%3 1%4 2%5 1%6 2%7 4%8 2%9 2%
82 Tasks
Two hazard distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries
3 3%5 3%6 2%7 3%8 2%9 6%10 0%
0 countries13%
1 6%2 10%
11 10%
12 13%
13 countries 19%
10-13 countries 42%
4-9 countries 26%
0-3 countries 32%
9 6%
4 6%
31 Hazards
Two relations distributions: % in hard-core by country range & # of countries
1 0%
5 3%
7 3%
9 0%10 3%
0 countries 11%
2 6%
3 17%
11 9%
13 countries 20%
10-13 countries 37%
4-9 countries 29%
0-3 countries 34%
8 9%
4 9%
35 Relations
12 6%
6 6%
B. Tasks: 82 tasks in 8 groups
BI. Problem identification, analysis (5)
BII. Developing, implementing solutions
(28)
BIII. Training, information, communication
(13)
BIV. Inspection and research (8)
BV. Emergency procedures, settlement of damage (9)
BVI. Regulatory tasks (- 1 not in USA) (8)
BVII. Knowledge management (6)
BVIII. Management and financial (5)
17/44 hard-core tasks ≥ 60% in all 13 countries
Task % of all respondents that do task
1. Read professional safety literature (BVII:knowledge management) 98
2. Attend courses or workshops about safety subjects (VII) 96
3. Investigate and evaluate workplace or plant risks (I: problem id, analysis) 94
4. Exchange knowledge, practical experience with colleagues at local or national level (VII)
92
5-9. Inform/discuss with all levels in company on risk [safety committee, employees, supervisors, line managers, top management] (III:training, info, comm.)
25. Other medical specialist 45 yes AU, CH, FI, US
26. Trade-union official (nat’l, local)
44 AU, FI, NO, UK
Core and sub-core relations20. Occ./industrial hygenist
55 yes AU, NL, US
22. Certification body 48 NL, SG, US
23. Occupational health and safety service
47 NL, NO, US
24. Ergonomist 46 AU, NL, US
27. Poilcy maker, planner in local authority
43 IT, NO, US
28. Industry federation 43 IT, NL
29, Insurer 42 FI, UK, US
30. Company planner 42 IT, US
31. Inspector of (social) insurance
35 CH, DE, PL
32. Standards body 35 0
33. Employer’s federation 35 0
34. People living around site
32 0
35. Work and organization psychologist
27 0
Summary and take-aways
• Hard core: 54% or 44 tasks, 42% or 13 hazards, 37% or 13 relations.o 13 countries: 21% or 17 tasks, 19% or 6 hazards, 20% or 7 relationso 10-13 at 80%: 16% or 13 tasks, 10% or 3 hazards, 20% or 7 relations
• Hard core reflects conventional, technically oriented SPo Contact with all levels of employees, focus on machinery, process, workplace
safety; personal protective equipment Tasks, hazards, and relations.
o Knowledge management, staying current and ongoing education is key.o Ergonomics is a key, high-completion-rate sub-group.
• Low:
o Regulatory tasks including being a member of standards comimittee, keeping
statistics about sickness, being a member of fire team
o Environmental/sustainability tasks and environmental pollution hazard;
o Contact with industry and national federations.
Potential limitations to inference• Besides some demographics, the survey data is consistent and comparable
across all countries.
• Probably not problemso Questionnaire fatigue (169 questions, ~ 1 hour).o Analysis sensitive results?o Definitions and cut-pointso Recoding and processing schemes
• Sample and target population
• Selection bias
• Sampling through professional associations.
• Heterogeneity and representativity Country idiosyncrasies Language and translation Education and affiliation distinctions
• Response rate and sample size: big country effects
Potential further analysis
• Finer analysis of tasks, hazards, relations
• Exploit ordinal data: daily, weekly, yearly, quarterly, yes but not yet, no, never, other.
• Factor analysis and clustering of tasks (see Hale et al 2005, Hale &