建筑企业差错管理氛围与工人安全绩效关系

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.05.1754

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (5): 28-34.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.05.1754

• 安全社会科学与安全管理 • 上一篇下一篇

建筑企业差错管理氛围与工人安全绩效关系

陈彦霖¹(), 黄文炜¹^,²^,^**(), 李弘扬¹^,²^,³

¹ 华南理工大学土木与交通学院,广东广州 510635
² 华南理工大学亚热带建筑科学国家重点实验室,广东广州 510635
³ 河海大学商学院,江苏南京 211106

收稿日期:2021-12-15 修回日期:2022-02-16 出版日期:2022-08-17 发布日期:2022-11-28
通讯作者: 黄文炜
作者简介:
陈彦霖 (1998—),女,福建龙岩人,硕士研究生,研究方向为工程项目管理。E-mail: 343023189@qq.com。
李弘扬, 教授
基金资助:
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助(B210201014); 广东省自然科学基金资助(2020A1515010765); 广东省哲学社会科学规划项目(GD19CGL27); 亚热带建筑科学国家重点实验室开放课题项目(2021ZB15); 亚热带建筑科学国家重点实验室开放课题项目(2020ZB17)

Relationship between error management climate and workers' safety performance in construction enterprises

CHEN Yanlin¹(), HUANG Wenwei¹^,²^,^**(), LI Hongyang¹^,²^,³

¹ School of Civil Engineering and Transportation, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou Guangdong 510635, China
² State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou Guangdong 510635, China
³ Business School, Hohai University, Nanjing Jiangsu 211106, China

Received:2021-12-15 Revised:2022-02-16 Online:2022-08-17 Published:2022-11-28
Contact: HUANG Wenwei

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为明晰建筑企业差错管理氛围对建筑工人安全绩效的内在作用机制,引入建筑工人安全认知、安全自我效能为中介变量,在文献研究和开放式访谈的基础上,建立四者的链式关系结构方程模型(SEM);采用差错管理氛围量表、安全认知量表、安全自我效能量表和安全绩效量表,调查来自广州和佛山222名一线建筑工人;通过SPSS和AMOS进行模型检验和中介效应检验以验证假设模型。结果表明:差错管理氛围对安全绩效的直接影响不显著,而安全认知、安全自我效能各自的独立中介作用显著,且安全认知和安全自我效能在差错管理氛围和安全绩效关系间的链式中介作用显著。构建良好的差错管理氛围,通过提升工人的安全认知水平和安全自我效能这2条显著正向影响路径,可有效提高工人的安全绩效。

关键词: 建筑企业, 差错管理氛围, 安全绩效, 安全认知, 安全自我效能, 链式中介作用, 结构方程模型(SEM)

Abstract:

In order to clarify the internal influencing mechanism of error management climate on workers' safety performance in construction enterprises, workers' safety perception and self-efficacy were introduced as mediators and a SEM of relationship between the four was established on the basis of literature research and open interviews. 222 front-line construction workers from Guangzhou and Foshan were investigated by utilizing error management climate scale, safety perception scale, safety self-efficacy scale and safety performance scale. Finally, the hypothesis model was verified through model test and mediator effect test by using SPSS and AMOS. The results show that the direct relationship between error management climate and safety performance is not significant, but safety perception and safety self-efficacy indicate significant mediating effect independently as well as plays a significant chain intermediary role between the former two. Building a good error management climate and improving workers' safety perception and self-efficacy can effectively improve their safety performance.

Key words: construction enterprise, error management climate, safety performance, safety perception, safety self-efficacy, chain mediation, structural equation model (SEM)

陈彦霖, 黄文炜, 李弘扬. 建筑企业差错管理氛围与工人安全绩效关系[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(5): 28-34.

CHEN Yanlin, HUANG Wenwei, LI Hongyang. Relationship between error management climate and workers' safety performance in construction enterprises[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(5): 28-34.

图/表 6

图1

表1

表2

图2

表3

表4

参考文献 30

[1]	中华人民共和国住房与城乡建设部. 住房和城乡建设部办公厅关于2019年房屋市政工程生产安全事故和建筑施工安全专项治理行动情况的通报[EB/OL]. (2020-06-19). http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/202006/t20200624_246031.html.
[2]	中华人民共和国住房与城乡建设部. 住房和城乡建设部办公厅关于2018年房屋市政工程生产安全事故和建筑施工安全专项治理行动情况的通报[EB/OL]. (2019-03-22). http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201903/t20190326_239913.html.
[3]	中华人民共和国住房与城乡建设部. 住房和城乡建设部办公厅关于2017年房屋市政工程生产安全事故和建筑施工安全专项治理行动情况的通报[EB/OL]. (2018-03-08). http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201803/t20180322_235474.html.
[4]	HEINRICH H W. Industrial accident prevention: a scientific approach[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1931: 55-56.
[5]	夏妮妮, 李德智, 叶贵, 等. 建设项目员工安全行为前因研究进展与展望[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(6):44-55. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.006
	XIA Nini, LI Dezhi, YE Gui, et al. A literature review on antecedents of employees' safety behavior in construction projects[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(6):44-55. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.006
[6]	MOHAMMAD T N, PETER D, MARCUS J, et al. Role of psychological contract to influence safety behavior at construction sites[C]. International Conference on Applied Human Factors & Ergonomics. Springer, Cham, 2018:545-555.
[7]	ALRUQI W M, HALLOWELL M R, ULISES T. Safety climate dimensions and their relationship to construction safety performance: a meta-analytic review[J]. Safety Science, 2018, 109:165-173. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.05.019
[8]	BIAN Xiaohua, SUN Yueyi, ZUO Zhihong, et al. Transactional leadership and employee safety behavior: impact of safety climate and psychological empowerment[J]. Social Behavior and Personality: an International Journal, 2019, 47(6):1-9.
[9]	WANG Zhongmin, JIANG Zhou, BLACKMAN A. Linking emotional intelligence to safety performance: the roles of situational awareness and safety training[J]. Journal of Safety Research, 2021, 78:210-220. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2021.06.005 pmid: 34399917
[10]	CASEY T W, KRAUSS A D. The role of effective error management practices in increasing miners' safety performance[J]. Safety Science, 2013, 60:131-141. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.07.001
[11]	CIGULAROV K P, CHEN P Y, ROSECRANCE J. The effects of error management climate and safety communication on safety: a multi-level study[J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2010, 42(5):1498-1506. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.01.003
[12]	GRIFFIN M A, NEAL A. Perceptions of safety at work: a framework for linking safety climate to safety performance, knowledge, and motivation[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2000, 5(3): 347-358. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.5.3.347
[13]	LU Ying, TAKSA L, JIA Hongguo. Influence of management practices on safety performance: the case of mining sector in China[J]. Safety Science, 2020, 132(3): DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104947. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104947
[14]	CHRISTIAN M S, BRADLEY J C, WALLACE J C, et al. Workplace safety: a meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2009, 94(5): 1103-1127. doi: 10.1037/a0016172
[15]	HE Changquan, MCCABE B, JIA Guangshe. Effect of leader-member exchange on construction worker safety behavior: safety climate and psychological capital as the mediators[J]. Safety Science, 2021, 142(1): DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105401. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105401
[16]	DYCK C V, FRESE M, BAER M, et al. Organizational error management culture and its impact on performance: a two-study replication[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2005, 90(6):1228-1240. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1228
[17]	PANDIT B, ALBERT A, PATIL Y, et al. Impact of safety climate on hazard recognition and safety risk perception[J]. Safety Science, 2018, 113:44-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.11.020
[18]	MAYO F R, WALLING C. Co-polymerization[J]. Chemical Reviews, 1950, 46(2): 191-287. pmid: 24537829
[19]	BANDURA A. Social learning theory of aggression[J]. Journal of Communication, 1978, 28(3):263-276.
[20]	BANDURA A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change[J]. Advances in Behavior Research & Therapy, 1977, 1(4):139-161.
[21]	NYKÄNEN M, SAMLMELA-ARO K, TOLVANEN A, et al. Safety self-efficacy and internal locus of control as mediators of safety motivation-randomized controlled trial (RCT) study[J]. Safety Science, 2019, 117:330-338. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.037
[22]	GIST M E, MITCHELL E R. Self-efficacy: a theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1992, 17(2):183-211. doi: 10.5465/amr.1992.4279530
[23]	LINDLSEY D H, THOMAS B J B. Efficacy-performing spirals: a multilevel perspective[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1995, 20(3):645-678.
[24]	李乃文, 赵钰. 矿工自我效能感与安全绩效的关系研究:基于自主型安全动机和工作投入的链式中介作用[J]. 科技促进发展, 2020, 16(6):689-695.
	LI Naiwen, ZHAO Yu. The relationship between miners' self-efficacy and safety performance:autonomous safety motivation and chain mediation of job input[J]. Science & Technology For Development, 2020, 16(6): 645-678.
[25]	DEDOBBELEER N, BELAND F. Safety climate measure for construction sites[J]. Journal of Safety Research, 1991, 22(2): 91-97.
[26]	吴建金, 耿修林, 傅贵. 基于中介效应法的安全氛围对员工安全行为的影响研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2013, 9(3):80-86.
	WU Jianjin, GENG Xiulin, FU Gui. Study on the impact of safety atmosphere to employee safety behavior based on the intermediary effect method[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2013, 9(3):80-86.
[27]	张静晓, 李慧, 周天华, 等. 我国建筑安全认知水平“身份”测度[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2011, 21(4):156-163.
	ZHANG Jingxiao, LI Hui, ZHOU Tianhua, et al. Research on measurement of Chinese construction safety cognitive level's identity authentication[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2011, 21(4): 156-163.
[28]	阮国祥. 建筑企业差错管理氛围对员工安全行为影响研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(1):140-145. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.01.025
	RUAN Guoxiang. Research on effects of error management climate on employees' safety behavior in construction firms[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(1): 140-145. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.01.025
[29]	ZHANG Jianxin, SCHWARZER R. Measuring optimistic self-beliefs: a Chinese adaptation of the general self-efficacy scale[J]. Psychologia, 1995, 38(3):174-181.
[30]	袁玥. 建筑企业安全文化对安全绩效作用机理的实证研究[D]. 成都: 西南交通大学, 2012.
	YUAN Yue. Mechanism of function of safety culture on safety performance in construction: an empirical study[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2012.

项目	类别	频次	占比/%
性别	男	204	91.89
性别	女	18	8.11
年龄/岁	25及以下	18	8.11
	26~35	53	23.87
	36~45	80	36.04
	46及以上	71	31.98
学历	初中及以下	140	63.06
	高中(中专)	24	10.81
	大专	48	21.62
	本科及以上	10	4.50
工龄/a	2及以下	19	8.56
	3~5	67	30.18
	6~10	80	36.04
	10及以上	56	25.23

模型	卡方自由度比 CMIN/df	Tucker-Lewis 指数TLI	比较拟合系数 CFI	近似误差均方根 RMSEA	标准残差均方根 SRMR
基准模型	1.508	0.907	0.912	0.048	0.050 9
模型	卡方自由度比 CMIN/df	Tucker-Lewis 指数TLI	比较拟合系数 CFI	近似误差均方根 RMSEA	标准残差均方根 SRMR
三因子模型	1.634	0.883	0.890	0.054	0.056 8
二因子模型	1.659	0.879	0.886	0.055	0.058 6
单因子模型	1.692	0.873	0.880	0.056	0.058 9

路径	非标准化系数	标准化系数	标准误差	T值	P
路径Ⅰ	0.769	0.788	0.092	8.351	^***
路径Ⅱ	0.537	0.488	0.129	4.161	^***
路径Ⅲ	0.567	0.484	0.102	5.538	^***
路径Ⅳ	0.432	0.416	0.081	5.332	^***
路径Ⅴ	0.133	0.116	0.098	1.362	0.173

路径	效应值	系数乘积		95%偏置校正置信区间
路径	效应值	标准误差	Z值	上限	下限
路径1	0.115	0.108	1.065	0.019	0.369
路径2	0.436	0.218	2.000	0.11	0.898
路径3	0.232	0.131	1.771	0.034	0.576

建筑企业差错管理氛围与工人安全绩效关系

Relationship between error management climate and workers' safety performance in construction enterprises

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 30

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李敬强, 樊天辰. 民航法定自查人员安全检查能力模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(7): 7-13.
[2]	戢晓峰, 耿昭师, 普永明, 卢梦媛, 覃文文. 接入道路对山区双车道公路穿村镇路段事故风险影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(5): 155-162.
[3]	桑利斌, 栗继祖. 团队关系冲突对矿工安全绩效影响的跨层次研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(2): 51-58.
[4]	贺琦, 张金锁, 王萍. 煤矿高层管理者工作压力与安全绩效关系研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(9): 29-35.
[5]	王永刚, 方琛亮. 飞行员的注意分配能力与其安全绩效的关系^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8): 8-13.
[6]	冯亚娟, 邢仲超. 破坏性领导对安全绩效影响的条件过程分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8): 14-21.
[7]	丁天维, 沈玉志. 基于优势的心理氛围对员工安全绩效的影响机制^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8): 38-46.
[8]	李妙慧, 栗继祖. 群体动力对矿工不安全行为意向的影响研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 48-55.
[9]	于光玉, 李慧民. 旧工业建筑改造施工安全影响机制研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 120-129.
[10]	韩天园, 李旋, 吕凯光, 周文财, 刘永涛, 乔洁. 车载GPS数据驱动的危货运驾驶员安全绩效评价^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 164-171.
[11]	易涛, 栗继祖. 工作不安全感对矿工安全绩效的影响:基于代际差异视角[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(4): 49-56.
[12]	林晓飞, 林必毅, 宋守信, 喻萧, 沈凡. 地铁乘客火灾应激反应过程模型构建与分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(3): 142-147.
[13]	马跃, 刘严萍. 安全价值观契合对矿工安全行为的影响:一个链式中介模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 9-15.
[14]	冯亚娟, 邢仲超. 辱虐管理对安全绩效的曲线效应:领导信任的调节作用^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(11): 1-8.
[15]	张磊, 彭金栓, 陈晓利. 驾驶分心行为量表设计与影响因素分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(11): 39-46.