Development of Mechanisms for Industrial Safety Culture Improvement Based on Employee Survey Analysis Results

   Introduction. Ensuring industrial safety (IS) is one of the priority goals of any company. It is obvious that achieving its high level is impossible without the formation of a safety culture among employees, since their wrong actions can lead to emergencies and death of people at hazardous production facilities. The concept of industrial safety culture (ISC) is interpreted in different ways, but all definitions are united by the need for employees to realize that industrial safety should become their main goal and internal need. To date, there are many methods for determining the degree of ISC development. They are actively and successfully used at many enterprises. At the same time, it should be noted that the Russian legislation lacks, in particular, a methodology for quantifying the industrial safety culture specifically at the enterprises of the oil and gas complex, which have their own characteristics and specifics. Therefore, the introduction of a new quantitative approach to assessing the effectiveness of management of industrial safety culture has important scientific and practical significance on the industry agenda.

   The aim of this work in this regard was to develop mechanisms to increase the ISC level at one of the gas transportation enterprises of the country based on the results of the survey of its employees.

   Materials and Methods. For the analysis, the results of a three-level questionnaire conducted in 2021 and 2022 were used, which included socio-biographical characteristics of employees, their assessments on specially developed 16 components of industrial safety, as well as the interview of focus groups on six selected IS components.

   Results. During the analysis of the questionnaires, an increase in the level of industrial safety culture was established from the predicted (third level) to the proactive (fourth level) according to the five-level classification of the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP).

   Discussion and Conclusions. The comparative analysis demonstrated positive dynamics of the results of the ISC level assessment by the employees of the gas transport enterprise. Its increase at this enterprise was achieved through the introduction and implementation of proactive measures, such as the development of personal obligations of employees in the field of safety, their maximum involvement in the development of competencies in the field of industrial safety, ensuring openness / transparency of communications on safety issues, and the formation of a positive attitude of employees to changes in this area.

1. Adzhienko GV, Daiman SYu. Bezopasnost', Osnovannaya na Doverii. Informatsionnyi byulleten'. Chistye tekhnologii i ustoichivoe razvitie. 2017; 3(3):12–15. URL: https://lepel.vitebsk-region.gov.by/uploads/documents/Kontseptsija-nulevogo-travmatizma.pdf (accessed: 25. 08. 2023). (In Russ.).

2. Glebova EV, Volokhina AT, Sufiyanova MA, Vikhrov AE. Analysis of the Results of the Conducted Behavioral Safety Audits at the Enterprises of the Fuel and Energy Complex (FEC). Environmental protection in oil and gas complex. 2021;3(300):15–18. doi: 10.33285/2411-7013-2021-3(300)-15-18 (accessed: 25. 08. 2023). (In Russ.).

3. Guldenmund FW. Understanding and exploring safety culture. The Netherlands, Delft University; 2010. 254 p. URL: https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:30fb9f1c-7daf-41dd-8a5c-b6e3acfe0023/?collection=research (accessed: 25. 08. 2023).

4. Bolshov LA, Arutyunyan RV, Linge II, Abalkina IL. Nuclear accidents: consequences for human, society and energy sector. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena. 2016;9(3):43–52. doi: 10.21514/1998-426X-2016-9-3-43-52 (accessed: 25. 08. 2023). (In Russ.).

5. Skachok VE, Kozhekina IYu, Petrovskaya LYu, Kotlyarovich AA, Prourzina OYu. Mesto bezopasnosti v zhizni cheloveka i obshchestva i ee ves v sisteme potrebnostei. Molodoi uchenyi. 2018;17(203):266–268. URL: https://moluch.ru/archive/203/49645/ (accessed: 25. 08. 2023). (In Russ.).

6. Maslou A. Motivatsiya i lichnost'. 3^-d ed. Saint-Petersburg: Piter; 2019. 400 p. (In Russ.).

7. Reason J. Safety paradoxes and safety culture. Injury Control and Safety Promotion. 2010;7(1):3–14. doi: 10.1076/1566-0974(200003)7:1;1-V;FT003

8. Sari Tappura, Aki Jääskeläinen, Julius Pirhonen. Designing a safety culture maturity model. Occupational and Environmental Safety and Health IV. 2022;449:55–56. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-12547-8_5

9. Dominic Cooper M. The safety culture construct: Theory and practice. Safety Cultures, Safety Models. 2018;224:47–61. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-95129-4_5

10. Sutton IS. Use root cause analysis to understand and improve process safety culture. Process Safaty Progress. 2010;27(4):274–279. doi: 10.1002/prs.10271

11. Beus JM, Payne SC, Bergman ME, Arthur WJr. Safety climate and injuries: an examination of theoretical and empirical relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;95(4):713–727. doi: 10.1037/a0019164

12. Nirupama Gopalaswami, Zhe Han. Analysis of laboratory incident database. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2020;64:104027. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2019.104027

13. Sutton I. Culture and participation. Process Risk and Reliability Management. Second edition. Gulf Professional Publishing; 2015. P. 139–178. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801653-4.00003-5