Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49

7th International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management

Influencing Workers Performance

through Health and Safety Interventions
Winn-Yam Ayessaki, John Smallwood*
Department of Construction Management, Nelson Mandela Metrpolitan University, Port Elizabeth, 6001, South Africa

Abstract

A study was conducted among registered construction project managers (CPMs) and general contractor (GC) members of an
employers association to determine whether CPMs can and do influence workers performance through H&S interventions. The
salient findings include that CPMs do influence workers performance through H&S and related interventions during the design,
procurement, and construction processes, however, there is potential to enhance such influence. Therefore, it can be concluded that
CPMs have a major role to play in terms of influencing worker performance through H&S interventions. Recommendations include
that CPMs should raise client awareness with respect to worker H&S and welfare facilities.
2016Published
2016 The Authors. Published
by Elsevier by Elsevier
Ltd. This is an openLtd.
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EPPM2016.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EPPM2016
Keywords: construction; health and safety; performance; project managers; workers

1. Introduction

The construction industry is one of the most labour intensive industries [13] and the largest employer in most
countries worldwide [4, 5]. However, productivity trends in the industry have a notable effect on national productivity
and on the economy as a whole [6, 7].
Since workers constitute a large part of the construction cost and the quantity of workers hours in performing
a task in construction is more susceptible to the influence of management than materials or capital are, the
improvement of workers performance should be a major and continual concern to achieve projects objectives.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +2-783-659-2492; fax: +2-741-504-2345.

E-mail address: john.smallwood@nmmu.ac.za

1877-7058 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of EPPM2016
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.111
 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49 43

Worker performance is thus an important factor contributing to the timely completion and success of a construction
project [2].
This research seeks to enhance the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) in the area of performance
improvement, with H&S as the medium. It also seeks to be reminiscent of CPMs influence on project parameters
such as productivity and H&S, and how it may contributes to enhanced overall project performance.

2. The literature review

2.1. H&S culture and perception

A survey conducted by Smallwood and Deacon [8] concluded that H&S culture impacts H&S practices, the
allocation of resources to H&S, and performance relative to H&S. Although any success will remain questionable,
various national and international initiatives have endeavoured to persuade the industry to change the culture relative
to H&S. Furthermore, there remain a number of specific issues and challenges, which indirectly affect workers H&S
and their performance. These include the transient nature of the workforce, competitive tendering and focus on price,
one-off product where design and construction are separated, the lack of leadership and evidence of traditional
management style, and a risk-taking culture [9].

2.2. Profitability, performance and productivity

Profitability is often confused with productivity. The difference between these concepts is that profitability takes
into account monetary effects, while productivity relates to a real process that takes place among purely physical
phenomena. Profitability, just as productivity, is also seen as a relationship between output and input, but the
relationship is monetary; thus the influence of price-factors is included [10].

2.3. The construction work environment

Accidents affect the profitability of a project, and both direct and indirect costs could arise from site accidents [11].
According to Khosravi et al. [12], many attempts have been made to investigate factors that influence H&S
performance on construction sites. However, previous studies have not been able to provide a holistic framework that
would help CPMs address the different policy, process, personnel, and incentive aspects that may affect construction
H&S, despite all the research conducted [13].
According to Lamm et al. [14], there is growing and undeniable evidence that a healthy and safe working
environment can increase labour productivity, and in turn boost business profitability. However, a few issues cannot
be overlooked, such as the negative outcomes, the best way to evaluate occupational H&S measures in terms of
increased productivity, and their economic implications. It is also evident that issues such as a high level of cooperation
between management and employees are key ingredients in terms of ensuring the success of an H&S intervention and
the consequent growth in productivity.
Ergonomic deficiencies in industry are believed to be the main cause of workplace health hazards, low levels of
H&S, and reduced worker productivity, and quality. Awareness is still low in developing countries, although
ergonomics applications have grown significantly in developed countries. Ergonomics technology can eradicate or
mitigate H&S problems in the workplace if properly utilised and improve performance. Fewer injuries result in lower
medical and compensation costs, less loss of wages and workdays, and financial benefits to the organisation [15].
Site-layout planning is frequently overlooked, in spite of the importance of site space as a resource, and the attitude
of engineers has been that it will be attended to as the project progresses. However, a good site layout is vital in order
to promote healthy, safe, and efficient operations, minimise travel time, reduce material handling, and avoid hindering
material and equipment movement, particularly on large-scale projects [16].
44 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49

2.4. Construction project management and H&S

2.4.1. Design
A hundred construction accidents were reviewed by Gibb, Haslam, Hide and Gyi [17], and it was determined that
changes in the permanent design would have mitigated the probability of the accidents experienced in 47% of the
cases.
Construction Prevention through Design (CHPtD) is a process in which architects and engineers specifically
consider workers H&S when designing a building. Design professionals have customarily sought to design buildings
or other facilities that ensure occupants H&S, meet functional requirements, conform to quality standards, are cost-
effective, and can be erected within a client's deadline. CHPtD can therefore be thought of as an alternative way of
designing for constructability [18].

2.4.2. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessments (HIRAs)

Given that the prevention of injuries is one of the principal aims of H&S management, it is crucial to identify the
causes of accidents and develop equivalent prevention measures in the industry [19].

2.4.3. Financial provision for H&S

A study conducted by Chiocha et al. [20] revealed that the inability, or rather the apparent reluctance of
organisations to allocate adequate budget towards investigations relative to H&S issues is notable.

2.4.4. Communication
According to the South African Council for the Project and Construction Management Professions (SACPCMP)
[21], a CPM should have the knowledge and the ability to establish and implement Communication Management
Processes including the preparation of agenda, chairing and preparing minutes of all necessary meetings on the
project.

2.4.5. Partnering
Partnering has been designated the most significant development to date as a means of improving project
performance and it represents an essential shift from the conventional adversarial relationships in construction [22].
It is also defined as a relationship between two or more organisations, which is formed with the intent of improving
performance in the delivery of projects [23].

2.4.6. Risk management

Risk management is one of the nine construction management knowledge areas, and although H&S risks are merely
one category of risk, inadequate H&S and accidents marginalise performance relative to the other project parameters
[24].

3. Research

Over 50 tables were evolved during the Masters study undertaken. However, given the length constraints applying
to papers, only the key findings are presented.
Table 1 presents the response rates for the respective surveys. Q indicates a questionnaire survey and I indicates
interviews. Medium to large sized GC members of the East Cape Master Builders Association (ECMBA) and CPMs
registered with the SACPCMP on a national basis were surveyed using a self-administered questionnaire.
Furthermore, Eastern Cape based CPMs were interviewed based upon a convenience sample.
 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49 45

Table 2 presents the extent to which respondents agree that workers motivation affects their performance. A 4.36
mean MS, which is > 4.20 5.00, indicates that in terms of the mean they agree to strongly agree/strongly agree with
the statement.

Table 1. Response rate.

Questionnaires (Qs) and Interviews (Is)
Response
Group Undertaken/
Requested/Sent Not delivered Not applicable Net sample (%)
Returned
ECMBA (Q) 60 2 0 58 12 20.7
SACPCMP (Q) 1 308 753 0 555 24 4.3
SACPCMP, EC (I) 5 0 0 5 5 100.0

Table 2. Extent to which workers motivation affects their performance.

Response (%)
Strongly disagree.Strongly agree MS
Group Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
ECMBA 0.0 8.3 0.0 16.7 33.3 41.7 4.00
SACPCMP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.8 54.2 4.54
Mean 0.0 2.8 0.0 5.6 41.6 50.0 4.36

The 2.90 mean MS presented in Table 3, which is > 2.60 3.40 indicates that respondents concurrence with
regards to the statement poor constructability is related to workers experiencing WMSDs is between disagree to
neutral/neutral.

Table 3. Extent of relationship between poor constructability and WMSDs.

Response (%)
Group Strongly disagree.Strongly agree MS
Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
ECMBA 16.7 16.7 16.7 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.40
SACPCMP 13.0 4.3 17.4 34.8 21.7 8.7 3.15
Mean 14.2 8.4 17.2 39.9 14.5 5.8 2.90

Table 4 presents the extent of the relationship between poor training and WMSDs. The 3.47 mean MS, which is >
3.40 4.20, indicates that respondents concurrence with regards to the statement poor training is related to workers
experiencing WMSDs is between neutral to agree/agree.

Table 4. Extent of relationship between poor training and WMSDs.

Response (%)
Strongly disagree.Strongly agree MS
Group Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
ECMBA 16.7 16.7 16.7 33.3 8.3 8.3 2.70
SACPCMP 16.7 0.0 8.3 8.3 54.2 12.5 3.85
Mean 16.7 5.6 11.1 16.6 38.9 11.1 3.47
46 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49

Table 5 indicates the degree of CPMs satisfaction with various project aspects. PPE is ranked first with a 4.04 MS,
followed closely by medical/first aid facilities, site conditions, and site planning, which have 4.00, 3.92 and 3.88 MSs
respectively. 8/9 (88.9%) of the MSs > 3.40 4.20, which indicates that CPMs are between satisfied to more than
satisfied/more than satisfied with the aspects. All the MSs are above the 3.00 midpoint, which indicates that CPMs
are generally satisfied with the standard relative to the aspects, however it is notable that none of the MSs are > 4.20
5.00.

Table 5. Degree of CPMs satisfaction with various project aspects (SACPCMP).

Response (%)
Aspect Very dissatisfied...Very satisfied MS Rank
Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
Personal protective equipment 0.0 4.2 0.0 8.3 62.5 25.0 4.04 1
Medical/First aid facilities 0.0 0.0 8.3 8.3 58.3 25.0 4.00 2
Site conditions 0.0 0.0 4.2 12.5 70.8 12.5 3.92 3
Site planning 0.0 0.0 12.5 8.3 58.3 20.8 3.88 4
Hoarding 0.0 0.0 16.7 12.5 50.0 20.8 3.75 5
Scaffolding 4.2 0.0 12.5 12.5 41.7 29.2 3.75 6
Communication among stakeholders 0.0 0.0 16.7 20.8 33.3 29.2 3.75 7
QMSs 0.0 0.0 20.8 16.7 33.3 29.2 3.71 8
Welfare facilities 0.0 0.0 25.0 29.2 33.3 12.5 3.33 9

Table 6 indicates the percentage of contract sums allocated towards H&S according to SACPCMP respondents.
The unsure responses are notable 45.5%, 30.4%, and 59.1%. Approximately a third of the respondents indicated
that provision in the form of provisional sums and detailed H&S preliminaries items is > 4%, and the second highest
percentages are relative to > 0% 1%.

Table 6. Percentage of contract sums allocated towards H&S (SACPCMP).

Response (%)
Form
Unsure 0% > 0% 1% > 1% 2% > 2% 3% > 3% 4% > 4%
Provisional sum 45.5 9.1 13.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.8
Detailed H&S preliminaries 30.4 0.0 17.4 13.0 4.3 0.0 34.8
Preliminaries items 59.1 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 0.0 22.7

Table 7 indicates that CPMs consider all the contractor pre-qualification criteria as important as all he MSs > 3.00.
Technical ability is ranked first with a 4.79 MS, which indicates that it is between more than important to very
important/very important as is experience, management ability, financial stability, and the focus of the study, H&S.
Reputation and past relationships are between important to more than important/more than important.
Table 8 indicates the extent to which factors affect workers performance according to ECMBA respondents. Poor
site conditions are ranked first with a 4.17 MS, followed by poor site planning, accidents, poor maintenance of welfare
facilities, inadequate H&S measures, poor provision of welfare facilities, and poor constructability. The
aforementioned factors have MS > 3.40 4.20, which indicates that they have between an impact to a near major/near
major impact on workers performance. 9/16 (56.3%) factors have MSs above the 3.00 midpoint, which indicates that
the impact is major as opposed to minor. Illness/Ill health, and inadequate risk assessments are included in this range.
The MS of inadequate design falls on the cut point, namely 3.00.
The SACPCMP respondents were requested to indicate whether they review H&S plans or not. 79.2% responded
in the affirmative, however, as much as 20.8% do not.
 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49 47

Table 7. Importance of contractor pre-qualification criteria (SACPCMP).

Response (%)
Criterion Not important.....Very Important MS Rank
Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
Technical capacity 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.8 79.2 4.79 1
Experience 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.2 70.8 4.71 2
Management ability 0.0 0.0 4.2 4.2 29.2 62.5 4.50 3
Financial stability 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 41.7 54.2 4.50 4
Health and Safety 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 37.5 45.8 4.29 5
Reputation 0.0 0.0 12.5 8.3 45.8 33.3 4.00 6
Past relationships 0.0 0.0 20.8 25.0 29.2 25.0 3.58 7

Table 8. Extent to which factors affect workers performance (ECMBA).

Response (%)
Factor Minor...Major MS Rank
Unsure
1 2 3 4 5
Poor site conditions 0.0 0.0 8.3 16.7 25.0 50.0 4.17 1
Poor site planning 0.0 8.3 0.0 16.7 50.0 25.0 3.83 2
Accidents 0.0 8.3 8.3 16.7 33.3 33.3 3.75 3
Poor maintenance of welfare facilities 0.0 0.0 16.7 25.0 33.3 25.0 3.67 4
Inadequate H&S measures 0.0 8.3 0.0 33.3 33.3 25.0 3.67 5
Poor provision of welfare facilities 0.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 16.7 33.3 3.58 6
Poor constructability 0.0 8.3 16.7 16.7 41.7 16.7 3.42 7
Illness/Ill health 8.3 0.0 16.7 16.7 41.7 16.7 3.33 8
Inadequate risk assessments 0.0 8.3 0.0 58.3 33.3 0.0 3.17 9
Inadequate design 8.3 0.0 25.0 25.0 33.3 8.3 3.00 10
Poor integration of design and
8.3 8.3 8.3 33.3 41.7 0.0 2.92 11
construction
Exposure to HCSs 8.3 0.0 33.3 16.7 41.7 0.0 2.83 12
Inadequate medical examinations 8.3 8.3 16.7 41.7 25.0 0.0 2.67 13
Lack of contractor pre-qualification in
16.7 8.3 0.0 50.0 16.7 8.3 2.67 14
terms of H&S
Inadequate financial provision for
8.3 16.7 16.7 33.3 8.3 16.7 2.67 15
H&S
WMSDs 25.0 8.3 8.3 25.0 33.3 0.0 2.33 16

Table 9. Involvement in partnering.

Response (%)
Group Unsure Yes No
ECMBA 8.3 41.7 50.0
SACPCMP 0.0 62.5 37.5
Mean 2.8 55.6 41.7
48 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49

Table 9 indicates that more than half (62.5%) of the SACPCMP respondents have previously been involved in
partnering, while less than half (41.7%) of the ECMBA respondents have ever been involved in partnering. Partnering
promotes H&S as it is multi-stakeholder driven and results in the evolution of common goals, H&S included [23].

4. Recommendations

Based upon the study undertaken and the conclusions, the following recommendations are made:

CPMs need to make better use of their influence to convince clients with respect to: adequate financial provision
for H&S; pre-qualifying contractors in terms of H&S, ensuring H&S is duly implemented during projects, and
promoting partnering
CPMs need to improve communication channels between project stakeholders. Often what happens at worker level
does not align with managements perception and vice-versa, and project stakeholders have a different
understanding of matters at hand. Technology nowadays can be extensively utilised to improve and facilitate
adequate communication
Legislators need to raise client awareness regarding H&S and worker welfare, and need to provide more incentives
for H&S compliance in order to assist CPMs with improving project H&S performance and therefore workers
performance. The awareness programmes that are to be set should be comprehensive as to facilitate participation
and buy-ins
Training need to empower workers and industry professionals with H&S knowledge. Legislation without
willingness and ability is insufficient to drive the stakeholders to take adequate action toward improving H&S
measures in projects
The quality of CPM H&S interventions towards improving workers performance needs to be further interrogated.

5. Conclusion

The focus of the study, namely CPM H&S interventions towards improving workers performance was intended
to determine whether they can and do, bearing in mind that they do not manage the physical construction process.
However, the literature indicates that they can influence worker performance indirectly through H&S interventions
and for that matter other interventions.
The finding that workers motivation affects their performance indicates that H&S, which influences motivation,
should be optimum, which confirms that CPMs can influence workers performance through H&S interventions.
The finding that there is a relationship between poor constructability and WMSDs, and poor training and WMSDs,
and that WMSDs having a direct influence on workers performance, further confirms the potential indirect influence
of CPMs. CPMs should review constructability, and they should indirectly monitor H&S training, which should also
be addressed in H&S plans.
The degree of CPMs satisfaction with various project aspects indicates that they monitor such aspects, which if
optimum, have a positive impact on workers performance.
The extent of unsure response relative to the percentage of contract sums allocated towards H&S is notable as it
is a client responsibility to ensure that such allowance is adequate. CPMS as the lead consultant should not only remind
their clients of their statutory duty, but also interrogate this aspect.
The extent to which factors affect workers performance according to ECMBA respondents further confirms the
potential indirect influence of CPMs on workers performance.
Although 79.2% of SACPCMP respondents indicated they review H&S plans they should all do so as it is a further
indirect medium of CPM influence of workers performance.
Involvement in partnering is not pervasive, which indicates that a potential indirect medium of CPM influence of
workers performance has not been exhausted.
Overall, CPMs do influence workers performance through H&S and related interventions, however, there is
potential to enhance such influence.
 Winn-Yam Ayessaki and John Smallwood / Procedia Engineering 182 (2017) 42 49 49

Acknowledgements

7th International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management (EPPM2016) was financed
in the framework of the contract no. 712/P-DUN/2016 by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education from
the funds earmarked for the public understanding of science initiatives.
7th International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management (EPPM2016) finansowana
w ramach umowy 712/P-DUN/2016 ze rodkw Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyszego przeznaczonych
na dziaalno upowszechniajc nauk.

7th International Conference on Engineering, Project, and Production Management (EPPM2016)

was co-organised by the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture (Poland).

References

[1] Agapiou A, Price ADF, McCaffer R. Planning future construction skill requirements: understanding labour resource issues. Construction
Management and Economics 1995;13:149161.
[2] Kalsum U. Assessing the performance of construction workers in Peninsula Malaysia. International Journal of Engineering and Technology
2010;7(2):4760.
[3] Rowlinson SM, Walker A. The Construction Industry in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Longman; 1995.
[4] Ameh OJ, Shokumbi BB. Effectiveness of Non-Financial Motivational Scheme on Construction Workers Output in Nigeria. Ethiopian
Journal of Environmental Studies and Management 2013;6(3):263272.
[5] Mee-Edoiye M, Andawei MM. Motivation, an alternative to improve workers performance in todays construction industry. The Quantity
Surveyor 2002;40(3):26.
[6] Allmon E, Haas CT, Borcherding JD, Goodrum PM. U.S. construction labour productivity trends, 1970-1998. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 2000;126:97104.
[7] Pekuri A, Haapasalo H, Herrala M. Productivity and performance management Managerial practices in the construction industry.
International Journal of Performance Measurement 2011;1:3958.
[8] Smallwood J, Deacon C. The role of health and safety culture in construction. In: Akintoye A, editor. 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7
September 2001, University of Salford. Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Salford; 2001, p. 111120.
[9] ENTEC UK Ltd., Establishing effective communications and participation in the construction sector HSE Research Report. Sudbury: HSE
Books; 2001.
[10] Tangen S. Demystifying productivity and performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 2005;54(1):34
46.
[11] Mthalane D, Othman AAE, Pearl RG. The economic and social impacts of site accidents on the South African society. In: Proceedings of the
5th Post Graduate Conference on Construction Industry Development, Bloemfontein, South Africa; 2008, p. 110.
[12] Khosravi Y, Asilian-Mahadi H, Hajizadeh E, Hassanzadeh-Rangi N, Bastami H, Behzadan AH. Factors influencing unsafe behaviors and
accidents on construction sites: a review. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics 2014;20(1):111125.
[13] Teo EAL, Ling FYY, Chong AFW. Framework for project managers to manage construction safety. International Journal of Project
Management 2005;124(1):6771.
[14] Lamm F, Massey C, Perry M. Is there a link between workplace health and safety and firm performance and productivity? New Zealand
Journal of Employment Relations 2007;32(1):7590.
[15] Shikdar AA, Sawaqed NM. Ergonomics, and occupational health and safety in the oil industry: a managers response. Computers and
Industrial Engineering 2004;47:223232.
[16] Samdani SA, Bhakal L, Singh AK. Site layout of temporary construction facilities using ant colony optimization. In: Proceedings of the 4th
International Engineering and Construction Conference, International Committee, Los Angeles Section; 2006, p. 110.
[17] Gambatese JA, Behm M, Hinze JW. Viability of Designing for Construction Worker Safety. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management 2005;131(9):10291036.
[18] Toole TM, Gambatese J. The Trajectories of Prevention through Design in Construction. Journal of Safety Research 2008;39:225230.
[19] Leung M, Chan IYS, Yu J. Preventing construction worker injury incidents through the management of personal stress and organizational
stressors. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2012;48:156166.
[20] Chiocha C, Smallwood J, Emuze F. Health and safety in the Malawian construction industry. Acta Structilia 2011;18(1):6880.
[21] SACPCMP, Construction Project Manager: Identification of Work and Scope of Services for Construction Project Managers Registered in
Terms of the Project and Construction Management Professions, Act No. 48 of 2000, Johannesburg: SACPCMP; 2006.
[22] Bygballe LE, Jahre M, Sward A. Partnering relationships in construction. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 2010;16:239253.
[23] Ali A, Moh-Don Z, Alias A, Mamarussaman S, Pitt M. The performance of construction partnering projects in Malaysia. International Journal
of Physical Sciences 2010;5(4):327333.
[24] Smallwood JJ, Venter DJL. The influence of project managers (PMs) on construction health and safety (H&S) in South Africa. The Australian
Journal of Construction Economics and Building 2002;2(1):5769.