Companies in building and construction must understand what drives behaviour on site and learn to communicate safety messages effectively, a leader in construction safety says.
During a panel session as part of a recent breakfast organised by construction project management software provider Procore on the launch of a new report on construction safety, Sarah Cuscadden, Group HSW Manager at commercial and multi-residential building firm Probuild, described her company’s efforts to improve safety by understanding what drove behaviour on site and how important safety messages could be communicated more effectively.
According to Cuscadden, the building sector has reached a point where safety systems are generally robust. In Probuild’s case, these are suitable and appropriate for their business.
Beyond that, however, outcomes are also influenced by decision making and behaviour – both of which are subject to human influence.
In recognition of this, Probuild recently undertook a journey to understand what drove decision making and behaviour on their sites. The company also sought to understand how messages about safety, the importance of OHS and the potential impact upon workers themselves if they, their colleagues or those under supervision were not safe on site.
To do this, the company engaged a communication specialist. They also spoke with senior leadership, site managers, site supervisors and workers to understand the type of communication which managers and workers wanted to receive.
From this came three core values: care, courage and pride. Care involves genuine concern for the safety and well-being of those on site. Where appropriate, this includes behaviours such as halting or delaying work in order to address potential hazards. Courage involves the willingness to speak openly about safety and to raise important safety concerns. Pride involves the satisfaction of maintaining safe sites and ensuring that all workers return home each day.
Through this exercise, Cuscadden says Probuild uncovered several themes.
First, communication must be straightforward and meaningful. Whilst rules and guides are important tools in safety planning, these should not guide conversations. Rather than telling workers that certain actions did not accord with set procedures or specific sections within detailed guides, concerns should be explained in a way which is simple, practical and meaningful to those in question.
This is particularly the case as many workers in construction are hands-on in nature and are less well attuned to reading detailed guides.
Second, not all leaders and managers were comfortable in talking about safety or understood how to do so effectively. When running ‘tool-box’ sessions, for example, many either did not know how to do this or simply modelled their approach on that of others.
Instead, supervisors and managers wanted training on how to do this effectively and how to use these sessions to help deliver meaningful safety outcomes.
In addition to employees, Cuscadden says communication is necessary with clients and subcontractors.
In the case of clients, Cuscadden says Probuild now makes a conscious effort to involve them on safety matters. Toward this end, the company engages with clients during the tender phase about how the they will undertake construction, the safety measures and controls which are needed and the consequences of these in terms of quality, time and cost. Once contracts are secured, the company runs workshops during eight different phases of the project. During these sessions, Probuild’s project and senior leadership team sit down with clients and explain how they will deliver on particular high-risk elements of the work and whether or not extra time is needed.
This, Cuscadden says, is crucial. As the party which determines timelines, requirements and budgets, clients are a critical part of the safety equation. Yet whilst most understand the importance of safety, many do not fully appreciate the complexity of the work involved. Taking them through this enables Probuild to demonstrate why a project might be bid at $52 million rather than $50 million.
Already, this is paying off. On one large contract which the company recently secured, the client indicated that Probuild’s approach to risk management set it apart as the preferred tenderer.
With subcontractors, Cuscadden says these should be viewed as partners. Head contractors need to be clear from the outset that the relationship is to be built on partnership and collaboration.
Where a subcontractor reports a potential safety issue, this involves working together to find a solution.
As an example, one 67-storey development on which the company was the successful tenderer had been designed without a building maintenance unit which drops down the side of the building to enable cleaning of the façade. This would have created a potential hazard during maintenance as cleaning contractors would need to send workers down the façade with ropes.
When the client was unwilling to foot the additional cost to add a building maintenance unit, Probuild decided to wear the cost of installing a unit themselves – a decision Cuscadden says reflected that safety benefits to cleaning crews outweighed any cost impost which Probuild themselves would bear.
Cuscadden says the importance of subcontractors should not be underestimated.
In Probuild’s case, the company typically has 5,000 to 10,000 subcontractors on site at any time. Moreover, it is often subcontractors who performing the work and who possess expertise with regard to the work in question.
Cuscadden’s comments came as Procore launched its aforementioned safety report, which it commissioned ACA research to prepare.
That report identified three tiers of company when it comes to safety attitudes and performance.
According to that report, ‘safety first’ companies had fewer accidents, an organisation-wide commitment to safe workplaces, safety efforts which were driven by senior management, more comprehensive plans to address risk and greater confidence in their ability to manage external challenges and disruptions from a safety viewpoint.
