IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v38y2020i1p11-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Safety indicators: questioning the quantitative dominance

Author

Listed:
  • David Oswald

Abstract

Safety indicators aim to provide information about the condition or state of safety within an organization. Typically, construction practitioners and researchers have focused on quantifying these indicators to provide precise measurement. It is argued that there has been a tendency to focus on the quantity, whilst ignoring qualitative indicators that can also provide valuable insights into the state of safety. Precise measurement has arguably been intensified by ‘borrowing’ leading indicators from the field of economics, which use quantitative frameworks. It is raised that the well-documented statistical limitations surrounding leading and lagging indicators should not be merely viewed as threats to reliability but should be considered as opportunities to further understand the state of safety through the development of appropriate qualitative indicators. A quantitative-only framework may be appropriate in the field of economics; however, this essay challenges the assumption that a similar approach can be implemented within the complex context of construction safety management. A call for researchers and practitioners to consider the qualitative indicators of safety; these can provide powerful insights into both why the state of safety is positive or negative, and how to help future accident prevention.

Suggested Citation

  • David Oswald, 2020. "Safety indicators: questioning the quantitative dominance," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 11-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:38:y:2020:i:1:p:11-17
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2019.1605184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01446193.2019.1605184
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446193.2019.1605184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:38:y:2020:i:1:p:11-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.