1
Ch16 Safety and Middle Managers
Faculty of Applied Engineering and Urban Planning
Civil Engineering Department
Lecture 17- Week 12
2nd Semester 2008/2009
UP Copyrights 2008
Const
ruct
ion S
afe
ty
Managem
ent
Eng: Eyad Haddad
(Superintendents)
2
(if you cut enough corners, you may
eventually have a hole to fall into)
3
Main Factors Affect Safety Performance:
• Foreman
• Middle Management
• Top Management
4
Introductions
• Definition:
- The top personnel at the project level
- Resident at the site of the construction project
- Small projects; superintendent
- Projects out of home office; project manager
- Large highway project; PM, Project Eng., Project Superintendent,
5
Roles and Safety levels
• First-line supervisors:
- role is crucial in achieving safe performance at the crew level
• Superintendents:
- Safe performance at the project level
- Foremen and superintendent assist each others
6
Superintendent and New Workers
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
50% and Over Under 50%
Gulf StudyBay Study
Frequency
Of medical-case injuries
(per 200000 hours)
Project workers who worked for same
superintendent in other projects
Figure 16.1 the Number of Project workers who worked with superintendent on other projects
7
Superintendent and New Workers
• New workers must be addressed for the manager to stay in control of safety
• New workers most likely to be involved in accidents
• Superintendent may transfer his workers from project to project for safer projects
• Such workers already “know the drill”
8
Superintendent and New Workers
Frequency
Of medical-
Case injuries
(per 200000 hr)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Personallyinvolved
not very involved
Bay StudyGulf study
Figure 16.2 The extend of the superintendent’s involvement to new workers
9
Superintendent involvement with new workers
• Simple introduction• Informal conversation• Humanize the project• New worker is assimilated into project team • Personal contact with SUP. Helps new
workers feel comfortable in new setting• Safer projects, foremen pay closer attention
to new workers
10
Safer Superintendents Are Good Managers
A good manager is :
• leader, planner, organizer, and good model for others
• Sensitive to personal needs and feelings of workers
• Keep close contact with job-site activities
• Assess problems before they become critical
11
Safer Superintendents Are Good Managers
• Characteristics of SUP. Tends to be subjective matter
• Results of efforts• Can’t be quantified in objective terms • (Hinze 1987) examined :Interviewed 35 sup., Described each sup. In
general terms, no knowledge about past safety performance,
12
Safer Superintendents Are Good Managers
0
5
10
15
20
25
Excellent Good Weak Poor
Good Safety Record
Poor safety record Per
cent
age
Of
sup
erin
tend
ent
Rating of Superintendent’s management ability
Figure 16.3 Distribution of Superintendents by Management Qualities and Safety Performance
13
Safer Superintendents Are Good Managers
• Personnel management is important component
• Every worker has personal life, feelings, needs, concerns
• Good management skills and Good Safety Performance go together
14
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Sensitive/flexible Insensitive/inflexible
Utility contractor study
Gulf coast study
Fre
quen
cy o
f
Med
ical
-cas
e in
juri
es
(per
200
000
hour
s)
Figure 16.4 Safety Performance Related to a Superintendent’s sensitivity and Flexibility in addressing problems
15
Superintendent Keep Job Pressures Down
• Job pressures may be unavoidable
• Productivity and Safety are mutual achievement
• Project completed on/ahead of schedule, within budget have exemplary safety record
Get job done (productivity) Adverse impact on safety
16
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Excellentachievement
Averageachievement
Budget goalsSchedule goalsF
requ
ency
of
med
ical
-cas
e in
juri
es (
per
200,
000
hour
s
Figure 16.5 The Superintendent’s Ability to Meet Corporate Goals
17
Superintendent’s Philosophy about cost information
• Safe SUP. Know ,subordinates are motivated to do good jobs
• Not necessary to place extra pressure on them
• If items begin to overrun, foremen put pressure on themselves
• Added pressure may be the root cause of injuries
• Superintendent has to examine problem, suggests to bring costs under control
18
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Apply pressureregarding costs
No pressureregarding costs
Injuries
Fre
quen
cy o
f m
edic
al-c
ase
inju
ries
(pe
r 20
0,00
0 ho
urs)
Figure 16.6 The Superintendent’s Philosophy about the Use of Cost Information
19
Superintendent’s Philosophy about schedule information
• Running behind schedule does not please any body
• Personnel are motivated that they keep track of their production status
• Schedule is viewed as a tool to help performance on project, not a tool to put pressure
• Pressure is more detrimental to safety than it is beneficial to progress
20
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Advocate ofcompetition
Indifferent tocompetition
Opposed tocompetition
Injuries
Fre
quen
cy o
f
Med
ical
-cas
e in
juri
es
(per
200
,000
hou
rs)
Figure 16.7 The Superintendent’s Philosophy about Competition
21
Comments
As middle managers , superintendents and project managers are in key positions to set the tone for safety at the project level
they possess overall control of the project
company policies are viewed as being implemented by middle managers
middle managers communicate project concerns to top management
to avoid any communication problems , middle managers must be careful to transmit accurate and clear information
22