Running head: Critical Analysis 1

Paper One

Critical Analysis of an Organizational Safety Climate Research Article

Brianne Fitzgerald

California State University - Monterey Bay

IST520 Learning Theory

Dr. Sarah Tourtellotte, Ph.D.

March 15, 2017

ZOONOTIC DISEASES 2

Table of Contents

Critical Analysis of an Organizational Safety Climate Research Article 3

Methods 4
Research Results 5
Discussion of Results 6
Summary 6
References 8
ZOONOTIC DISEASES 3

Critical Analysis of an Organizational Safety Climate Research Article

This article described a quantitative, corollary research study conducted in a large

hospital in Australia. The study examined the impact of safety climate on the knowledge,

motivation, and performance of individuals in an organization. It aimed to fill in the gaps of

historical research on safety climate, which is an element of organizational climate. Prior studies

have shown that safety climate predicts safety behaviors but no studies have been conducted that

link general organizational climate and specific safety climate (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., &

Hart, P. M., 2000, p. 100). The researchers listed eight explicit hypotheses that are clearly stated

within the article:

H1- Organizational climate predicts safety climate.

H2- Knowledge predicts both compliance and participation.
H3- The relationship between knowledge and compliance is stronger than the relationship

between knowledge and participation.

H4- Motivation predicts both compliance and participation.
H5- The relationship between motivation and participation si stronger than te relationship

between motivation and compliance.

H6- Safety climate predicts both knowledge and motivation.
H7- Knowledge and motivation mediate the relationship between safety comate and

safety performance.
H8- Safety climate, knowledge, and motivation mediate the relationship between

organisational climate and safety performance.

(Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. (2000), p. 102)

There was no indication of bias towards the study group as the authors listed statistical

information on the groups constituency. Information was not included which indicated the

reasons for selecting that particular study group. The researchers were based in Australia as

were the study group. No other information was provided about the study group other than it
ZOONOTIC DISEASES 4

being comprised of 525 employees from 32 work groups in a large Australian hospital with

the mean age of 40.1 years and 89% female (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. 2000, p.

102).

The researchers made a convincing case that a research hypothesis was important as they

outlined the lack of knowledge about factors influencing safety climate. Research has been

conducted on how safety climate impacts safety behaviors, but there is nothing known about

how organizational climate impacts safety behaviors. The researchers generated hypotheses

in order to develop an empirical study of the correlations between the two. They derived their

hypotheses from a validated safety performance model which was qualitatively studied but

which had a missing element of motivation which the current study sought to mitigate (Neal,

A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. 2000, p. 102).

Methods

Employees perceptions about seven different aspects of their work environment

(appraisal and recognition, goal congruency, role clarity, supportive leadership, participative

decision making, professional growth, professional interaction) were assessed using 35 items

from Hart et al. (1996b)s Organizational Climate Scale (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M.

2000, p. 102). The participants answered the questions by giving assigning a rating on a scale

between strongly disagree to strongly agree.

56% of the target of the target group responded and no information was shared regarding

the makeup of those respondents relative to their mean age or gender. The group overall (525

employees) were an appropriate group for the purposes of studying general organizational and

safety climate, but the article did not indicate if the respondents (56%) were representative of the
ZOONOTIC DISEASES 5

of the target population. A hospital study group was appropriate as they have the ability to self-

report on their perceptions toward both organizational climate and safety climate.

There were limitations to the study which may have produced some unreliable

correlations but the measurements that were conducted were viable. The researchers addressed

these limitations which included self-reporting, inability to assess causal relationships, and the

lack of measurements of safety skill (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M., 2000, p. 107).

The researchers clearly outlined their statistical methods and measurement analyses so

that they could be easily replicated. Examples of questions were provided as well as tables of

statistical results. Statistical tools were listed that were applied to each group of hypotheses and

the model used to estimate direct paths from safety climate to compliance and participation

(Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M., 2000, p. 105).

Research Results

To the best of my knowledge, appropriate statistical techniques were used correctly. They

applied a Goodness of Fit Index (GFT), Non-normed Fit Index (NNFI), Comparative Fit Index

(CFI), and a Square Root Mean Residual (SRMR) (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M., 2000,

p. 104).

The results were summarized and outlined according to each of the hypotheses in a clear

fashion including non-supportive (null) results. An alternate model was developed in response to

the data results which explained certain elements of the study better than the original

hypothetical model. Subsequently, the researchers added this alternate model to the original

hypothesis and were able to prove it through the data gathered.

ZOONOTIC DISEASES 6

Discussion of Results

The results of the data analyses supported their hypotheses in all cases except for H5

which theorized that the relationship between motivation and participation would be stronger

than the relationship between motivation and compliance. The inverse of this relationship was

supported which surprised the researchers. They offered an explanation for this finding by

suggesting that the motivation assessment may not have captured all aspects of motivation or the

value individuals place on participation in safety behaviors (Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P.

M., 2000, p. 106). They went further provided a more relevant means to assess this measurement

in future studies.

Implications for practice were included in the discussion. By proving that safety climate

is related to organizational climate, interventions could be developed to improve organizational

climate and safety climate would also improve. Safety climate produces improved safety

compliance and performance more so than organizational climate. Therefore working toward a

more positive safety climate would improve safety performance. The indications are that both

types of interventions need to occur for the best outcomes. Additionally, they showed that safety

climate interventions would be most successful when they include both attention to increased

safety knowledge and to individual motivation. The researchers shared that historical

interventions tend to focus on motivational systems for improving safety behaviors (Neal, A.,

Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M., 2000, p. 107).

Summary

This article was of great value to my research for my Capstone project. My project is tied

to safety compliance behavior in a work setting. Results of the environmental analysis I

conducted for the project highlighted the safety climate barriers to adopting safe work practices
ZOONOTIC DISEASES 7

that are proscribed in the project. This article supported my findings that simply adding training

to increase safety knowledge will not produce the desired learning outcomes. General

organizational climate and safety climate interventions must be adopted which include open

communication and managerial support of safety practices and an overall environment of

safety-mindedness by the whole organization. My organization has begun to focus on

interventions that include safety tailgate sessions designed for front-line managers. The goal is

to educate managers on safety awareness and implications for task-related activities their work

group practices. I have participated in these sessions and recognize their value for shifting the

overall safety climate. I intend to share this research article with our Safety Department in

support of their efforts which has a direct implication for the product I am developing for my

department.

I would like to see the follow-up research studies indicated in this research article. They

outlined the need for better measurements of motivation and a longitudinal study to further

validate causal relationships. Additionally, I would like to find case studies of specific

interventions that were implemented for improving safety climate that had positive outcomes of

increases in worker compliance and attitudes toward adopting safety practices.

ZOONOTIC DISEASES 8

References

Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. (2000). The impact of organizational climate on safety

climate and individual behavior. Safety Science, 34(13), 99109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00008-4