4.7 Article

Identifying and assessing the critical factors for effective implementation of safety programs in construction projects

Journal

SAFETY SCIENCE
Volume 106, Issue -, Pages 47-56

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.02.025

Keywords

Construction safety; Safety program; DEMATEL; FDM

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Safety issues are considered as the major concerns in the construction industry. Despite the rapid advancement of technology, it is revealed that the rate of the fatality in the construction industry is extremely high. Safety programs implemented by contractors, has always been known as one of the most effective strategies to reduce accidents and injuries in construction sites. There are myriad studies conducted to determine and evaluate the relative effectiveness of critical safety program factors; however, the interactions among these factors have rarely been investigated. The aim of this paper is to identify and assess the causal relationships of safety program factors in the construction projects in Kuala Lumpur, capital of Malaysia. First, Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) was used to identify the safety program factors. Second, Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), which is a multiple criteria analysis tool, was employed to investigate the interdependences among the safety program factors. Then, the causal relationships among all safety program factors were visualized through a cause-effect relationship diagram. In this paper, 11 safety program factors were identified through FDM. Finally, the obtained results from DEMATEL indicate that Safety Commitment and Responsibilities, Sub-Contractors and Personnel's Selection, Safety Supervisor and Professionals, Plan for safety, and Employee Involvement and Safety Evaluation are critical safety program factors. It was concluded that focusing on these five influencing factors results in the improvement of all safety program factors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available