Development and initial validation of an Aviation Safety Climate Scale

1. Development and initial validation of an Aviation Safety Climate Scale Journal of Safety Research 38 (2007) 675–682 Bronwyn Evans, A. Ian Glendon, Peter A. Creed Speaker: Jenny

2. Abstract • Objective: build a safety climate scale for aviation industry • Research methods: survey (940) • expert opinions • exploratory factor analysis • confirmatory factor analysis

3. Literature Review • Safety climate: employee attitudes (Cheyne et al., 1999) • Significant association between attitude and accident rate (Donald & Canter, 1994) • The instability of aviation industry resulted from work stress. • Influence of organizational culture on safety performance (Flight Safety Foundation, 2003)

4. Literature Review • Safety climate (Brown & Holmes, 1986) • Management concern • Management activity • Risk perception • Safety climate (Zohar, 1980) • Safety training • Management attitudes • promotion, • Risk in workplace • Required work pace • Status of safety officer • Social status • Status of safety committee difference: North American Israeli

5. Literature Review • Safety climate: road construction • Changes in job demands • Attitudes • Working values • Safety as part of productive work (Niskanen, 1994)

6. Literature Review • Safety climate: road construction and maintenance • Communication and support • Adequacy of procedures • Work pressure • Personal protective equipment • Relationships • Safety rules (Glendon and Litherland, 2001)

7. Literature Review • Safety climate: off-shore oil • Speaking up • Violations • Supervisors • Rules & Regulations • Site management • Work pressure • Work clarity • Communication • Risk (Mearns et al., 1998)

8. Literature Review • Important predictors of safety climate • Supervisory expectation • Supervisory action

9. Literature Review • Industry: aviation • Subjects: ground staff • Safety policy, productivity, group attitudes, prevention strategies, and safety level (Diaz, Cabrera, and Isla, 1997)

10. Literature Review • Industry: rail • Unsafe conditions, managerial decisions, working conditions, local management, and line functions (Clarke, 1999)

11. Method • Age, flying hours, level of managerial responsibility, and type of operations • Invalid questionnaires: for private purpose or military pilots • Valid survey: 940 • 39% public transport • 22% contract : 90% unscheduled operations • 39% specialized work: training, emergency medical service, and agriculture

12. Method • Stratified sample • Commercial pilots • Subjects: 940 • Age: 46.8 • Hours: 465 /year

13. Survey procedures • Safety themes • 10 experts: rank the importance • 6 dimensions: 42items • Safety commitment, communication, Rules and procedures, Shift and schedules, Training, Equipment maintenance, • 12 experts • 30 items • Pilot study: 40

14. Survey • General safety: 5-point Likert scale • How safe do you think flying operations? • How has the overall level of flight operations safety changed ?

15. Results

17. Conclusion • 3-factor model • Management commitment and safety communication • Safety training • Equipment and maintenance

18. Conclusion • Shift and schedules: not perceived as part of well-defined constructs • Safety polity and productivity, Rules/Regulations and work pressure, transport safety • Although these factors were excluded, future research could investigate their importance.

19. Conclusion • Discuss safety commitment and communication respectively • This study offered a safety climate scale for aviations industry, not individual organizations.

20. The End