A CROSS‐LEVEL INVESTIGATION OF FACTORS INFLUENCING UNSAFE BEHAVIORS AND ACCIDENTS

TLDR

Several recent reviews of industrial accidents have highlighted organizational factors as key antecedents to accident sequences. The study tests whether group process, safety climate, intentions to approach teammates engaged in unsafe acts, and role overload perceptions predict unsafe behavior frequency using a cross‑level design. Data were gathered from 21 teams and 222 employees at a Midwestern chemical plant, applying a cross‑level analytical approach. Results showed that both individual role overload and group factors—group process, safety climate, and approach intentions—significantly predicted unsafe behaviors, with approach intentions mediating the group process effect, and that safety climate and unsafe behaviors were strongly linked to actual accidents, while group process and approach intentions were marginally related to accidents.

Abstract

Several recent reviews of industrial accidents have given increased attention to the role of organizational factors as antecedents to the accident sequence. In the current study, three group‐level factors (i.e., group process, safety climate, and intentions to approach other team members engaged in unsafe acts) and one individual‐level factor (i.e., perceptions of role overload) were hypothesized to influence the frequency of reported unsafe behaviors using a cross‐level research strategy. Data were collected from 21 teams and 222 individuals in a Midwestern chemical processing plant. Both the individual and group‐level variables were significantly associated with unsafe behaviors, thereby supporting the cross‐level hypotheses. There was also initial evidence suggesting that the group process‐unsafe behavior relationship was mediated by intentions to approach other team members engaged in unsafe acts. At the team level of analysis, safety climate and unsafe behaviors were significantly associated with actual accidents. Group process and approach intentions were marginally related to actual accidents ( p < .10). The implications for a cross‐level approach to safety and interventions is discussed.