Original Articles
6 October 2016
Vol. 38 No. 4 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4081/gimle.668

[Proactive orientation towards safety at work: qualitative study of motivational antecedents]

Orientamento proattivo alla sicurezza nel lavoro: studio qualitativo degli antecedenti motivazionali

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
14
Views
8
Downloads

Authors

Matteo Curcuruto
m.ma.curcuruto@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
School of Social Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Marco Giovanni Mariani
' Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Adalgisa Battistelli
Laboratoire Psychologie, Santé et qualité de vie, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.

Meta-analyses and research have highlighted the importance of employees' participation in workplace safety. The present research designs an original model of proactive safety orientation which considers existing constructs of proactivity, adapted to organizational safety issues in the workplace. Qualitative data was obtained through semi-interviews with 18 expert of safety and analysed using content analysis. Findings shows six dimensions of proactivity that can be attributed to three managerial areas of Reason, competence, cognizance and commitment

Altmetrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
1) Curcuruto M, Guglielmi D, Mariani MG. A diagnostic tool to evaluate the proactivity levels of risk-reporting activities by the workforce. Chem Engin Transactions 2014; 36: 397-402.
2) Reason J. The human contribution: unsafe acts, accidents and heroic recoveries. Manchester: Ashgate, 2008.
3) Zohar D. Safety climate and beyond: A multi-level multi-climate framework. Saf Sci 2008; 46(3): 376-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2007.03.006
4) Hollnagel E, Pariès J, Woods DD, Wreathall J. Resilience Engineering Perspectives Volume 3: Resilience Engineering in Practice. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2011.
5) Curcuruto M, Conchie SM, Mariani MG, Violante FS. The role of prosocial and proactive safety behaviors in predicting safety performance. Saf Sci 2015; 80: 317-323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.032
6) Griffin MA, Neal A, Parker SK. A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Acad Manage J 2007; 50(2): 327-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24634438
7) Hofmann DA, Morgeson FP, Gerras SJ. Climate as a moderator of the relationship between leader-member exchange and content specific citizenship: Safety climate as an exemplar. J Appl Psychol 2003; 88(1): 170-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.170
8) Parker SK, Collins CG. Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. J Manage 2010; 36(3): 633-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321554
9) Parker SK, Bindl UK, Strauss K. Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. J Manage 2010; 36(4): 827-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310363732
10) Bateman TS, Crant JM. The proactive component of organizationalbehavior: A measure and correlates. J Organ Behav 1993; 14(2), 103-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140202
11) Parker SK, Williams HM, Turner N. Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. J Appl Psychol 2006; 91(3), 636-652. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.636
12) Spreitzer GM. Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Acad Manage J 1996; 39(2), 483-504. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/256789
13) Pierce JL, Kostova T, Dirks KT. Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations. Acad Manage Rev 2001; 26 (2), 298-310. 14) Mariani MG, Martuscelli C, Curcuruto M. Psychological ownership in organization: A contribution to the Italian validation of pierce and colleagues scale. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia 2015; 42(1-2): 329-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/259124
15) Morrison EW. Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of employees perspectives. Acad Manage J 1994; 37, 1543-1562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/256798
16) Frese M, Fay D. Personal Initiative: An Active Performance Concept for Work in The 21st Century. Res Organ Behav 2001; 23, 133-187. 17) Neal A, Griffin MA. A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. J Appl Psychol 2006; 91(4), 946-953. 18) Weick, KE, Sutcliffe KM. Managing the Unexpected. Resilient performance in the age of uncertainty. San Francisco, CA US: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
19) Turner N, Chmiel N, Walls M. Railing for Safety: Job Demands, Job Control, and Safety Citizenship Role Definition. J Occup Health Psychol 2005; 10(4), 504-512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.504
20) Silverman D. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction (T'hird edition). London: Sage, 2006.
21) Geller E. The participation factor. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2002. 22) Havold J, Nesset E. From safety culture to safety orientation: Validation and simplification of a safety orientation scale using a sample of seafarers working for Norwegian ship owners. Saf Sci 2009; 47(3), 305-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2008.05.002
23) Simard M, Marchand A. A multilevel analysis of organizational factors related to the taking of safety initiatives by work groups. Saf Sci 1995; 21, 113-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-7535(95)00050-X
24) Turner N. Parker SK. The effect of teamwork on safety processes and outcomes. In J. Barling, M.R. Frone, J. (Eds.), The psychology of workplace safety (pp. 35-62). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10662-003
25) Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: An agency perspective. Annu Rev Psychol 2001; 52, 1-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
26) Gagné M, Deci EL: Self-determination theory and work motivation. J Organ Behav 2005; 26: 331-362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322
27) Saracino A, Curcuruto M, Antonioni G, Mariani MG, Guglielmi D, Spadoni G: Proactivity-and-consequence-based safety incentive (PCBSI) developed with a fuzzy approach to reduce occupational accidents. Saf Sci 2015; 79: 175-183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.06.011

How to Cite



[Proactive orientation towards safety at work: qualitative study of motivational antecedents]: Orientamento proattivo alla sicurezza nel lavoro: studio qualitativo degli antecedenti motivazionali. (2016). Giornale Italiano Di Medicina Del Lavoro Ed Ergonomia, 38(4), 295-301. https://doi.org/10.4081/gimle.668
Copyright (c) 2016 The Author(s) Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.