Posted By Ian G Hutchings
Andrew

Thanks for this link. This sounds about right to me. I think that good quality training of line managers and especially site managers/agents in construction (which this research looked at) definitely has an impact on H&S performance. This is because it alters peoples risk perceptions and 'risk sensitivity'.

Obviously there are caveats to this. Competence comes from role models in the business and on site, as well as training. I don't personally believe that the sheep-dip approach always works, i.e. lets put all our managers through X training course. Its about having very defined expected changes in behaviour, directors and managers reinforcing these and then having good output measures in place. Does this training work versus our investment? Not just a tick in the box but an actual visible result.

All good

Ian

Posted By Konstanty Budkiewicz
The study indicated that ANY training is beneficial.
This is consistent with a statement in Principles of Health and Safety at Work, Page 133. This text entitled Controlling Construction Accidents states "Training in techniques and skills for workers should include a strong health and safety element. Management training is especially important; it fosters that positive commitment to health ans safety and the positive culture".

Taking an overview of any organisation's operations, training is a vital element in the hearts and minds approach to achieving significant improvements in safety, operational effectiveness, and reduced costs. It is not cost-effective to use only H&S professionals to drive H&S forward. As indicated in the report it needs embedded suitably trained managers.

It is a pity that this principle was not mentioned in the Bible (possibly when building the Ark or the tower of Babel etc): it could have prevented a whole load of today's construction problems, e.g. Yesterday's Dubai bridge collapse.

Posted By Andy Brazier
You may be interested in a research project for HSE that I led, looking at Supervision in the chemical and allied industries. The report is available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr292.htm

A key findings was that it is often not possible, and often not helpful to see supervision as an individual's job. It is actually a management function that may be delivered by one or more people, who may work within or outside of the team. However, it is an absolutely key function that is often overlooked.

One of the key problems for people who have a supervisory role is finding the time to fulfill it. This is especially the case where the individual also has an operational role.

I agree training of supervisors can have a role in improving safety, but there are far more organisational and cultural factors that have a greater influence.

By the way, is the original report by Glasgow Caledonian University available anywhere. I've had a quick google and didn't find it.

Posted By Robert K Lewis
DH

You touch on the real issue for supervision for me! Are you, as a supervisor, able to assess competence? At the end of the day any organisation that is managing competence adequately relies on its supervisors and managers to monitor performance, including H&S. The measurement/monitoring must be against benchmarks/standards and thus the A1 standards need to be met.

In construction the competence needs are more clearly set out in the CDM07 acop and it is a fact that many contractors have not yet come to terms with the realities of competence assessment and proof.

Bob