Work debate spaces: A tool for developing a participatory safety management
Introduction
The evolution of sociotechnical systems in the world of work is accompanied by the creation of new rules and new technology with the goal of improving safety methods (Rasmussen, 1997). Consequently, employees see different types of changes in their work. On the one hand, local managers find themselves under an obligation of managerial performance, thus distancing them from the technical work site (Journé, 2005). On the other hand, safety procedures are multiplied in order to compensate for the absence of management and to limit the reporting of field information. This can lead to situations where compliance to the rules is difficult or impossible to achieve in the case of an unexpected event (Dekker, 2003, Amalberti et al., 2004). One of the possible effects of such situations is that operators do not want to talk about everyday problems of safety, and managers do not want to hear about them (Rocha et al., 2013).
To remedy this break of interactions within the collectives, various studies emphasize the importance of reestablishing the work group through the participation of workers (Lewin, 1951, Liker et al., 1989), by engaging reflective practices among them (Schön, 1983, Mollo and Falzon, 2004) and initiating discussions about actual work and micro-activities within organizations (Hendry and Seidl, 2003, Detchessahar and Journé, 2011).
The challenge is thus to develop spaces in which employees and managers can participate in arbitrations related to safety, in order to transform the organization (Daniellou et al., 2011). The objective of this debate is that the contradictions raised by the employees, particularly the operators which are at the crossroads of different procedures and instructions produced by the organization, be expressed, discussed and resolved (Detchessahar, 2001).
The research presented here aimed at developing a safety management based on Human and Organizational Factors. It was conducted in an electric company, and implemented work debate space (WDS) within this organization. This paper describes the real-life contributions gained from discussions about work on both the individual and organizational levels, and considers some conditions for discussion implementation.
Section snippets
Developing participatory approaches to create a culture of safety
In daily work, “there will always be situations that are either not covered by the rules or in which the rules are locally inapplicable” (Reason et al., 1998, p.297). Safety relies on the ability of workers to assess the applicability of procedures and adaptations to carry them out (Dekker, 2003). In order to progress in this field, it is necessary to consider the safety approach as adaptive, dynamic, and developmental (Nascimento et al., 2013).
Dekker (2003) distinguishes between two models of
Context and objectives
The present study is a part of a 3-year research project conducted in an electric company that wished to implement a new approach of safety management aimed at better articulating regulated and managed safety, at all levels of the company.
The project consisted at working with managers and operators to co-construct a system capable of anticipating risky conditions from the sharing of experiences and the collective discussion of daily situations. The objectives were twofold. From a theoretical
Results
The results of this study are presented in two parts. In the first section we describe the local method of debate co-constructed with the agents during the experimentation phase. Then, we present the contributions brought on by this method, which is the central theme of this article.
Conclusion: WDS as tools for safety development
The results presented highlighted that the contributions of the WDS concern both the individuals and the organization. The WDS allows operators to develop their competences and construct a collective experience. In doing so, it develops their capacity to come up with pertinent answers in real time, and allows them to increase the reporting of and treatment of risky situations. The results equally show that progressively, agents move from the analysis to the treatment situations, then continue
References (41)
Failure to adapt or adaptations that fail: contrasting models on procedures and safety
Appl. Ergon.
(2003)- et al.
Ergonomic development work: co-education as a support for user participation at a car assembly plant. A case study
Appl. Ergon.
(1995) - et al.
Theory and practice for the implementation of «in-house» continuous improvement participatory ergonomic programs
Appl. Ergon.
(1998) - et al.
A comparative analysis of participatory ergonomics programs in U.S. and Japan manufacturing plants
Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
(1989) - et al.
Auto-and allo-confrontation as tools for reflective activities
Appl. Ergon.
(2004) - et al.
Factors of collaborative working: a framework for a collaboration model
Appl. Ergon.
(2012) - et al.
Evaluation of a participatory ergonomic intervention process in kitchen work
Appl. Ergon.
(2009) Risk management in a dynamic society: a modeling problem
Saf. Sci.
(1997)- et al.
Evaluation of an ergonomics intervention program in VDT workplaces
Appl. Ergon.
(1995) Strategy as practice
Long Range Plan.
(1996)
Understanding Violations and Boundaries
Ouvrir des espaces de discussion pour manager le travail
Manag. Avenir
Participation, représentation, décisions dans l’intervention ergonomique
Human and Organizational Factors of Safety: a State of the Art. Number 2011-01 of the Cahiers de la Sécurité Industrielle
Les facteurs humains et Organisationnels de la Sécurité Industrielle: des Questions Pour Progresser. Number 2012-03 of the Cahiers de la Sécurité Industrielle
Quand discuter, c'est produire… Pour une théorie de l'espace de discussion en situation de gestion
Rev. Française Gest.
Faire face aux risques psycho-sociaux : quelques éléments d'un management par la discussion
Négociations
The Conduct of Strategic Episodes: a Communicational Perspective
Enabling safety: issues in design and continuous design
Cogn. Technol. Work
Development of a Frame Work for Participatory Ergonomics
Cited by (58)
Assessing the impact of industrial glove use on perceived hand dexterity, function, and strength
2024, Applied ErgonomicsBridging the gap between culture and safety in a critical care context: The role of work debate spaces
2020, Safety ScienceCitation Excerpt :Bechky and Okhuysen (2011) confirm the idea that long-term processes such as the development of culture cannot be ignored in the study of situations to understand how reliability and safety are ensured. In this view, the concept of WDS (Detchessahar, 2013; Detchessahar and Journé, 2018; Rocha et al., 2015, 2019) can enable a better understanding of the relationship between situations encountered and long-term aspects. Recent studies on WDS in both the resilience (Detchessahar et al., 2017) and safety (Rocha et al., 2019) literature consider WDS as a way to connect the formal organization with the living organization “to make the daily experiences visible, so that local arbitrations are the starting point of organizational changes” (Rocha et al., 2015, p. 108).