Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems

•A survey of 4,202 Danish workplaces compares OHS efforts of adopters and non-adopters of Certified OHS Management Systems (COHSMSs).•Two main dimensions of the OHS efforts are evaluated: the ‘systematic process-related’ OHS efforts and the ‘content-related’ OHS efforts.•Adopters of COHSMSs have a h...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Safety science 2022-08, Vol.152, p.105794, Article 105794
Hauptverfasser: Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian, Vester Thorsen, Sannie, Hasle, Peter, Leonhardt Laursen, Line, Dyreborg, Johnny
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 105794
container_title Safety science
container_volume 152
creator Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian
Vester Thorsen, Sannie
Hasle, Peter
Leonhardt Laursen, Line
Dyreborg, Johnny
description •A survey of 4,202 Danish workplaces compares OHS efforts of adopters and non-adopters of Certified OHS Management Systems (COHSMSs).•Two main dimensions of the OHS efforts are evaluated: the ‘systematic process-related’ OHS efforts and the ‘content-related’ OHS efforts.•Adopters of COHSMSs have a higher overall level of both systematic process-related OHS efforts and content-related OHS efforts, compared to non-adopters.•The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters generally perform a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters do. Certified occupational health and safety management systems (COHSMSs) continue to grow in popularity and to diffuse to new industries. This study investigated differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of COHSMSs. We used cross-sectional survey data from 4,202 Danish workplaces from all sectors to compare self-reported occupational health and safety efforts in workplaces with a COHSMS and workplaces without a COHSMS. The ‘systematic process-related OHS efforts’ and ‘content-related OHS efforts’ were scored on five and seven scales, respectively, for both adopters and non-adopters. The results of linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower score values for non-adopters than for adopters of COHSMSs, which means certified workplaces perform better than non-certified workplaces in both process-related and content-related OHS activities. We conclude that COHSMSs workplaces have a higher overall level of efforts for both process and content OHS activities. The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters provide a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters, and that using the company’s OHS performance as merely ‘window dressing’ is not a general feature of adopters. However, the results also indicate that a small group of COHSMS adopters has a considerably lower level of OHS effort than non-adopters, which implies that the certification system does not necessarily secure a high level of OHS management for all adopters. Furthermore, a small group of adopters have high process activities and low content activities, suggesting a decoupling between the systematic OHS processes and the specific preventive activities in the workplace, which could be a sign of window dressing. Further research is needed to establish the possible effects on health and safety outcomes, such as lost-time injuries.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105794
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2725346185</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0925753522001333</els_id><sourcerecordid>2725346185</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-4e7e31f256d98002efabedf620075ab65595206ffa051d766ec637c8138594bf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1KxDAUhYMoOI6-gKuA645J2qQtuJHxFwbc6Dqk6Y2TMk3GJKPMi_i8tlZc6urC4TuHy4fQOSULSqi47BYxartghLEh4GVdHKAZrco6o6Rgh2hGasazkuf8GJ3E2BFCaC7oDH3eWGMggNMQsXXYa73bqmS9Uxu8BrVJa6xci6MykPYYjPEhRdxA-gBwWLV-myDEb8Z5l_0G3mANIVljof1vtVdOvUIPLuG4jwn6eIqOjNpEOPu5c_Ryd_u8fMhWT_ePy-tVpnPCUlZACTk1jIu2rghhYFQDrRGMkJKrRnBec0aEMYpw2pZCgBZ5qSuaV7wuGpPP0cW0uw3-bQcxyc7vwvBllKxkPC8ErfhAsYnSwccYwMhtsL0Ke0mJHP3LTo7-5ehfTv6H0tVUguH_dwtBDsToubUBdJKtt3_VvwDGJJHb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2725346185</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian ; Vester Thorsen, Sannie ; Hasle, Peter ; Leonhardt Laursen, Line ; Dyreborg, Johnny</creator><creatorcontrib>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian ; Vester Thorsen, Sannie ; Hasle, Peter ; Leonhardt Laursen, Line ; Dyreborg, Johnny</creatorcontrib><description>•A survey of 4,202 Danish workplaces compares OHS efforts of adopters and non-adopters of Certified OHS Management Systems (COHSMSs).•Two main dimensions of the OHS efforts are evaluated: the ‘systematic process-related’ OHS efforts and the ‘content-related’ OHS efforts.•Adopters of COHSMSs have a higher overall level of both systematic process-related OHS efforts and content-related OHS efforts, compared to non-adopters.•The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters generally perform a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters do. Certified occupational health and safety management systems (COHSMSs) continue to grow in popularity and to diffuse to new industries. This study investigated differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of COHSMSs. We used cross-sectional survey data from 4,202 Danish workplaces from all sectors to compare self-reported occupational health and safety efforts in workplaces with a COHSMS and workplaces without a COHSMS. The ‘systematic process-related OHS efforts’ and ‘content-related OHS efforts’ were scored on five and seven scales, respectively, for both adopters and non-adopters. The results of linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower score values for non-adopters than for adopters of COHSMSs, which means certified workplaces perform better than non-certified workplaces in both process-related and content-related OHS activities. We conclude that COHSMSs workplaces have a higher overall level of efforts for both process and content OHS activities. The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters provide a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters, and that using the company’s OHS performance as merely ‘window dressing’ is not a general feature of adopters. However, the results also indicate that a small group of COHSMS adopters has a considerably lower level of OHS effort than non-adopters, which implies that the certification system does not necessarily secure a high level of OHS management for all adopters. Furthermore, a small group of adopters have high process activities and low content activities, suggesting a decoupling between the systematic OHS processes and the specific preventive activities in the workplace, which could be a sign of window dressing. Further research is needed to establish the possible effects on health and safety outcomes, such as lost-time injuries.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0925-7535</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1042</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105794</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Certification ; Decoupling ; Denmark ; ISO45001 ; Management systems ; Occupational health ; Occupational safety ; OHSAS18001 ; Regression analysis ; Safety ; Safety management ; Systematic process-related OHS ; Window dressing ; Work environment ; Workplaces</subject><ispartof>Safety science, 2022-08, Vol.152, p.105794, Article 105794</ispartof><rights>2022 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Aug 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-4e7e31f256d98002efabedf620075ab65595206ffa051d766ec637c8138594bf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-4e7e31f256d98002efabedf620075ab65595206ffa051d766ec637c8138594bf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105794$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vester Thorsen, Sannie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hasle, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leonhardt Laursen, Line</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyreborg, Johnny</creatorcontrib><title>Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems</title><title>Safety science</title><description>•A survey of 4,202 Danish workplaces compares OHS efforts of adopters and non-adopters of Certified OHS Management Systems (COHSMSs).•Two main dimensions of the OHS efforts are evaluated: the ‘systematic process-related’ OHS efforts and the ‘content-related’ OHS efforts.•Adopters of COHSMSs have a higher overall level of both systematic process-related OHS efforts and content-related OHS efforts, compared to non-adopters.•The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters generally perform a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters do. Certified occupational health and safety management systems (COHSMSs) continue to grow in popularity and to diffuse to new industries. This study investigated differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of COHSMSs. We used cross-sectional survey data from 4,202 Danish workplaces from all sectors to compare self-reported occupational health and safety efforts in workplaces with a COHSMS and workplaces without a COHSMS. The ‘systematic process-related OHS efforts’ and ‘content-related OHS efforts’ were scored on five and seven scales, respectively, for both adopters and non-adopters. The results of linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower score values for non-adopters than for adopters of COHSMSs, which means certified workplaces perform better than non-certified workplaces in both process-related and content-related OHS activities. We conclude that COHSMSs workplaces have a higher overall level of efforts for both process and content OHS activities. The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters provide a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters, and that using the company’s OHS performance as merely ‘window dressing’ is not a general feature of adopters. However, the results also indicate that a small group of COHSMS adopters has a considerably lower level of OHS effort than non-adopters, which implies that the certification system does not necessarily secure a high level of OHS management for all adopters. Furthermore, a small group of adopters have high process activities and low content activities, suggesting a decoupling between the systematic OHS processes and the specific preventive activities in the workplace, which could be a sign of window dressing. Further research is needed to establish the possible effects on health and safety outcomes, such as lost-time injuries.</description><subject>Certification</subject><subject>Decoupling</subject><subject>Denmark</subject><subject>ISO45001</subject><subject>Management systems</subject><subject>Occupational health</subject><subject>Occupational safety</subject><subject>OHSAS18001</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Safety management</subject><subject>Systematic process-related OHS</subject><subject>Window dressing</subject><subject>Work environment</subject><subject>Workplaces</subject><issn>0925-7535</issn><issn>1879-1042</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkM1KxDAUhYMoOI6-gKuA645J2qQtuJHxFwbc6Dqk6Y2TMk3GJKPMi_i8tlZc6urC4TuHy4fQOSULSqi47BYxartghLEh4GVdHKAZrco6o6Rgh2hGasazkuf8GJ3E2BFCaC7oDH3eWGMggNMQsXXYa73bqmS9Uxu8BrVJa6xci6MykPYYjPEhRdxA-gBwWLV-myDEb8Z5l_0G3mANIVljof1vtVdOvUIPLuG4jwn6eIqOjNpEOPu5c_Ryd_u8fMhWT_ePy-tVpnPCUlZACTk1jIu2rghhYFQDrRGMkJKrRnBec0aEMYpw2pZCgBZ5qSuaV7wuGpPP0cW0uw3-bQcxyc7vwvBllKxkPC8ErfhAsYnSwccYwMhtsL0Ke0mJHP3LTo7-5ehfTv6H0tVUguH_dwtBDsToubUBdJKtt3_VvwDGJJHb</recordid><startdate>202208</startdate><enddate>202208</enddate><creator>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian</creator><creator>Vester Thorsen, Sannie</creator><creator>Hasle, Peter</creator><creator>Leonhardt Laursen, Line</creator><creator>Dyreborg, Johnny</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202208</creationdate><title>Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems</title><author>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian ; Vester Thorsen, Sannie ; Hasle, Peter ; Leonhardt Laursen, Line ; Dyreborg, Johnny</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-4e7e31f256d98002efabedf620075ab65595206ffa051d766ec637c8138594bf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Certification</topic><topic>Decoupling</topic><topic>Denmark</topic><topic>ISO45001</topic><topic>Management systems</topic><topic>Occupational health</topic><topic>Occupational safety</topic><topic>OHSAS18001</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Safety management</topic><topic>Systematic process-related OHS</topic><topic>Window dressing</topic><topic>Work environment</topic><topic>Workplaces</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vester Thorsen, Sannie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hasle, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leonhardt Laursen, Line</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyreborg, Johnny</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><jtitle>Safety science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian</au><au>Vester Thorsen, Sannie</au><au>Hasle, Peter</au><au>Leonhardt Laursen, Line</au><au>Dyreborg, Johnny</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems</atitle><jtitle>Safety science</jtitle><date>2022-08</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>152</volume><spage>105794</spage><pages>105794-</pages><artnum>105794</artnum><issn>0925-7535</issn><eissn>1879-1042</eissn><abstract>•A survey of 4,202 Danish workplaces compares OHS efforts of adopters and non-adopters of Certified OHS Management Systems (COHSMSs).•Two main dimensions of the OHS efforts are evaluated: the ‘systematic process-related’ OHS efforts and the ‘content-related’ OHS efforts.•Adopters of COHSMSs have a higher overall level of both systematic process-related OHS efforts and content-related OHS efforts, compared to non-adopters.•The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters generally perform a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters do. Certified occupational health and safety management systems (COHSMSs) continue to grow in popularity and to diffuse to new industries. This study investigated differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of COHSMSs. We used cross-sectional survey data from 4,202 Danish workplaces from all sectors to compare self-reported occupational health and safety efforts in workplaces with a COHSMS and workplaces without a COHSMS. The ‘systematic process-related OHS efforts’ and ‘content-related OHS efforts’ were scored on five and seven scales, respectively, for both adopters and non-adopters. The results of linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower score values for non-adopters than for adopters of COHSMSs, which means certified workplaces perform better than non-certified workplaces in both process-related and content-related OHS activities. We conclude that COHSMSs workplaces have a higher overall level of efforts for both process and content OHS activities. The study therefore supports the assumption that COHSMS adopters provide a higher level of OHS management than non-adopters, and that using the company’s OHS performance as merely ‘window dressing’ is not a general feature of adopters. However, the results also indicate that a small group of COHSMS adopters has a considerably lower level of OHS effort than non-adopters, which implies that the certification system does not necessarily secure a high level of OHS management for all adopters. Furthermore, a small group of adopters have high process activities and low content activities, suggesting a decoupling between the systematic OHS processes and the specific preventive activities in the workplace, which could be a sign of window dressing. Further research is needed to establish the possible effects on health and safety outcomes, such as lost-time injuries.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105794</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0925-7535
ispartof Safety science, 2022-08, Vol.152, p.105794, Article 105794
issn 0925-7535
1879-1042
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2725346185
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Certification
Decoupling
Denmark
ISO45001
Management systems
Occupational health
Occupational safety
OHSAS18001
Regression analysis
Safety
Safety management
Systematic process-related OHS
Window dressing
Work environment
Workplaces
title Differences in occupational health and safety efforts between adopters and non-adopters of certified occupational health and safety management systems
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T22%3A15%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differences%20in%20occupational%20health%20and%20safety%20efforts%20between%20adopters%20and%20non-adopters%20of%20certified%20occupational%20health%20and%20safety%20management%20systems&rft.jtitle=Safety%20science&rft.au=Uhrenholdt%20Madsen,%20Christian&rft.date=2022-08&rft.volume=152&rft.spage=105794&rft.pages=105794-&rft.artnum=105794&rft.issn=0925-7535&rft.eissn=1879-1042&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105794&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2725346185%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2725346185&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0925753522001333&rfr_iscdi=true