Image: Berkeley Homes
Berkeley Group has developed a new construction worker safety engagement model, based on research led by Glasgow Caledonian University’s BEAM Research Centre. Professor Billy Hare explains how it was developed and how it works.
How well do you engage with your workforce on health and safety matters?
This is a question researchers at Glasgow Caledonian University (GCU) BEAM Research Centre have been investigating after winning funding from housebuilder Berkeley Group’s Health and Safety Innovation Fund.
The work has led to the creation of a new ‘Worker Engagement Maturity Model’ (WEMM) to benchmark this process for the benefit of the wider construction industry.
‘Worker engagement’ is a term used by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) construction division to describe the process of involving employees and supply chain operatives in health and safety management. A working definition was developed by GCU for the Health & Safety Exectutive (HSE) over a decade ago but this has been updated in light of the new research to reflect the five key elements identified of:
- Empowerment;
- Trust;
- Motivation;
- Commitment; and
- ‘Meaningful Discussion’.
In practical terms, the five elements are part of a process where every worker on a construction site is motivated and empowered to participate in improving health and safety through meaningful discussions, influencing others, and is committed to sharing their experiences and knowledge; and managers positively encourage workers to identify and resolve health and safety problems in a culture of trust, leading to every worker on site benefiting from safe and healthy working conditions.
A new model for engagement
Project-wide engagement is one of the key benefits of the new ISO 45001 standard for health and safety management systems. The updated standard recognises the value of worker consultation in the development of better health and safety practices and places greater emphasis on workers actively participating in the development, planning, implementation and continual improvement of the health and safety management system.
But there is currently no recognised model of worker engagement maturity for the improvement of occupational health and safety in construction. Therefore, the aim of this research was to develop a model that could evaluate cultural maturity, benchmark it and then detect any improvement in worker engagement practices.
The WEMM provides that framework, but more importantly it is ‘worker focused’. Therefore, progression can only be achieved through worker-centred improvements.
Stages of the Worker Engagement Maturity Model
The WEMM criteria
Health and safety managers can score workers based on their responses to questions under each of the WEMM’s five thematic indicators to assess the underlying conditions for engagement in health and safety issues, and track improvements over time. The research team also recommends that managers using the tool also refer to the HSE’s Leadership and Worker Involvement Toolkit.
The five criteria break down into various levels, based on the answers to questions received from workers (see below). These answers must include specific examples relating to where the work is being done. For example, ‘Meaningful Discussion’ relates to the issues discussed with workers, and can range from PPE, to hazard spotting, with the top level of discussion being ‘Beyond the Site Gate’ (such as management policy, design impact on site health and safety, or even mental health). The top level of discussion will be challenging for most workers and may be more suited to safety representatives or ‘safety champions’.
The remaining criteria provide in-depth insight to individual worker maturity. Empowerment broadly splits into initial competence, which then leads to impact on decision making within and beyond the site gate. Trust can be lacking in many construction sites for various reasons. Workers need to initially trust in others around them, feel that their line managers demonstrate ‘genuine benevolence’ with respect to their health and safety (as opposed to merely avoiding fines or enforcement), and finally the ‘integrity’ of the organisation or project team. A key question relates to what the company does when a safety concern is reported.
Meanwhile, motivation and commitment are closely linked: the workers’ perceptions of what motivates them and to what extent this affects their behaviour. Motivation theories are reasonably well known to most health and safety practitioners, but ‘citizenship’ levels of commitment are less so. This relates to what extent a worker either ‘complies’ with health and safety requirements or goes further, for example reporting an unsafe act or having the confidence to say something at the time.
Using the WEMM
The researchers have produced a full report from the work, which includes instructions for use as well as numerous examples of statements aligned to the maturity levels, with links to further guidance for improvement. Most of these links are to the HSE ‘Leadership & Worker Involvement Toolkit’ LWIT, which the report makes recommendations for developing further.
The meaningful discussion target
The report also presents a handy dashboard-style ‘target’ graphic (see above), which expands with a ring for each level of maturity. The research team hopes to develop this further into a digital application for industry use.
The report is available here.
Professor Billy Hare is deputy director of Glasgow Caledonian University’s Built Environment Asset Management Research Centre and chair of the Chartered Institute of Building’s health and safety special interest group.
