hans jørgen limborg & maya flensborg jensen, teamarbejdsliv - denmark
DESCRIPTION
Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises - meeting the challenge of promoting safety and health measures to SME’s. Hans Jørgen Limborg & Maya Flensborg Jensen, TeamArbejdsliv - Denmark. Point of departure. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises - meeting the challenge of
promoting safety and health measures to SME’s.
Hans Jørgen Limborg & Maya Flensborg Jensen, TeamArbejdsliv - Denmark
Point of departure
• Our hypothesis is that SME’s are influenced stronger by the networks they are part of than other external actors
• But we need to identify the mechanisms the ‘drive’ the process
Background of the project• Current research on SME’s and OHS:
– Reasonable knowledge about regulation – but difficulties to meet demands for formalised OHS practise (Hasle et al 2004, Forteyn et al 97)
– They have limited resources but responses to external pressure (Champoux & Brun 2003, Hasle & Limborg 2006)
– Questions of OHS are approached with the same informal approach as the task of management (Walters 2001, Axelsson 2002)
– Local and sectorial networks are important to them (Birgersdottir 2002, Johansson 98, Limborg & Mathiessen 2010)
The objectives
Objectives of the project and the paper:•To provide knowledge on how ”networks among SME’s can be a catalyst for general policy instruments aiming to improve OHS•To assess if Pawsons generative model of causation and network theory enhances our understanding of the mechanisms that will motivate a network to develop higher standards of OHS.
The project - idea, data and methodology
• Two existing networks among small dairies (21) and microbreweries (26) received funding from The Dansih National Prevention Fund for development projects
• The projects aimed to reduce MSD – which is a problem in both sectors – by developing practical and low cost tools
• The projects ran from 2010 to 2012• Our Data: Qualitative interviews (17) with key persons,
documents, company visits and project evaluations.
Programme theory* of both prevention projects
The network as context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation, organised meeting opportunity , limited resources, a “we” in
opposition to the large company, focus on quality
External mechanism
The network
*Pawson: Realistic evaluation
The implementation theoryPolicy instruments:
Prevention project
The network
The network context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation, organised meeting opportunity ,
limited resources, a “we” in opposition to the large company, focus on quality
Skilled advisors
External mechanisms:
Prevention fund
Labour Ínspection
Financial support from Prevention Fund
2020- actionplan reduction of MSD
•Projectorganisation•Mapping of exposure •Catalogue of good ideas
Committee”Front runners”
• Development of prototypes
• Real time testing
Test companiesFollowers,Supplyer
• Implementation of aids
• Utilisation• ”Open house” dissemination of experience
Safety commitee
•Fewer notes from L.I.
• Price for best project 2011
•New generally accepted standard
•Reduced number of heavy lifts
•Reduced sick leave
Outcome
Mechanism 1: External support to project & presure from L.I.
Mechanism 2:•“Handshake” - trust among network participants•Skillful Consultant – able to push
Mechanism 3:Development and testning in real lifeWorkers participationGood relation to supplyer
Mechanism 4:• Curiosity from peers• Accessibility to experiences – “Pact on openness”•Willingness to share
Mechanism 5:Sustainability
Internal context: History, knowledge and experience related to OHS
Primary context: The network
Secondary context: Labour inspection, unions and society
Mechanisms in a network
National regulationLabour inspection
I spite of identical programme theories the projects developed very different.
Mechanism Dairies Breweries
External External pressure +++ ++
External funding +++ +++
Professional support +++ +(+)
Internal Trust within network ++ ++
Pact on openness in relation to the project
+++ (+)
Shared commitment to standards
+ -
Conclusion• SME’s/owner manager values are influenced by their peers in
networks, also in relation to OHS• It is possible to push networks to take up OHS• But these ’mechanisms’ are essential:• External
– They face inspection, receive funding and have access to relevant support (stick, carrot and sermon)
• Internal– The network give priority to OHS– Frontrunners take the lead and inspire– The network are build upon mutual trust– The network make a pact on openness and share knowledge
• Sustainability is dependant on continued focus on OHS