1. Safety Implementations in Malaysian SMEs 2. OSHMS Safety Participation in Malaysian Manufacturing Firms

1. OSH Implementation in SMEs in Malaysia:
The Role of Management Practices and Legislation
-----------
Assoc. Prof Dr Lilis Surienty (lilis@usm.my)
School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia. 11800 Minden. Pulau Pinang. Malaysia
Acknowledgments:
USM RU Grant: 1001/PMGT/816052
Video-PosterAbout the author
Dr Lilis is keen in finding solutions to a sustainable safety management
practices for SMEs.
She is working collaboratively with partners in Canada, Norway and Britain.
Introduction
Methodology
Results
DiscussionS
Aims
References:
Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). (2016). Strategic Plan for Occupational Safety and Health: Small Medium Industry Sector 2016-2020,
DOSH: Putrajaya.
Dillard, B.G. (1997). Employee involvement: An effective strategy for reducing workers’ compensation costs. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management,
2, 318-328.
Fairman, R. and Yapp, C. (2005). Making an impact on SME compliance behaviour: An evaluation of the effect of interventions upon compliance with health
and safety legislation in small and medium sized enterprises. Research Report 366. Kings Centre for Risk Management, Kings College London.
Khor, L. K. 2017. Safety capital and safety participation in occupational safety and health management system (OSHMS) in Malaysia manufacturing
companies. Unpublished Thesis. Universiti Sains Malaysia: Georgetown.
McQuiston, T. H., Zakocs, R. C., & Loomis, D. (1998). The case for stronger OSHA enforcement--evidence from evaluation research. American Journal of
Public Health, 88(7), 1022–1024.
SME Annual Report 2015. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.smecorp.gov.my/sites/default/files/SME%20AR08%20Eng%20Text.pdf on 3-2-2017.
Vredenburgh, A.G. (2002). Organizational safety: Which management practices are most effective in reducing employee injury rates? Journal of Safety
Research, 33, 259-276.
Worsfold, D., & Griffith, C.J. (2003). A survey of food hygiene and safety training in the retail and catering industry. Nutrition & Food Science, 33, 68-79.
Management Practices
• Management
Commitment
• Hiring Practices
• Employee Participation
• Safety Reward
• Safety Training
OSH Implementations
• General Compliance
• Safety
Procedures/Policy
• Safety
Communication/
Documentation
• Safety Resources
• Suppliers OSH
• Risk Assessments
Legislation
99%
Questionnaire
Translated to Bahasa Melayu (national language) and Mandarin.
Participants
152 SMEs in the Northern Region of Malaysia (67.7% response rate).
59% small size firm, No of Accidents reported (0 to 20 cases): 25% (Zero), 59% (4 or less), Co.’s Age; 4% (5 years and
less), 55% (11 to 20 years) & 21% (21 years and more)- M = 16 years, SD = 8.12,
Stratified random sampling using a computer software was adopted and the self-administered survey was
answered either by the safety and health officer (SHO) or personnel incharged of OSH management.
66% male (M = 38.5 years old, SD = 9.2) , 39% Malay, 47% Chinese & 14% Indian, Tenure with Co (M = 8.3
years, SD = 6.2)
• OSH Implementations: 89-item instrument adapted from an OSH Work Inspection Checklist used for Proton vendors based upon Part 1:2005 OSH MS
OSH Act 1994 and an ILO-OSH 2001 Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management System document. Example of statements are,
“Employees have the right to access records relevant to their working environment health, while respecting the need for confidentiality” and “There is a
provision of information and training concerning OSH to all personnel at workplace”.
• Management Practices: 26-items adapted from Vredenburgh (2002), Worsfold and Griffith (2003) and Dillard (1997). Covers the 5 dimensions.
• Legislation: 8-items adapted from McQuiston, Zakocs, and Loomis (1998) and Fairman and Yapp (2005) whom both were investigating the enforcement
elements of legislation on safety behaviours.
All response scale was a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly Agree).
OSH Implementations:
General
Compliance
Safety
Documentation
Safety
Procedure
Safety
Resources
Suppliers
OSH
Risk
Assessment
β R2 β R2 β R2 β R2 β R2 β R2
Management Practices
Management Commitment .65 - - -.45 .26 -.52
Hiring Practices - .38 .33 .19 .22 -
Employee Participation .25 .21 .24 - - -
Safety Reward .10 - -.26 - - -
Safety Training - .81c .18 .42c .34 .45c - .30c .27 .32c - .23c
Moderator
Legislation .12 .82c - .42 - .45 - .31 - .32 - .23
2-way Interactions
Management Commitment X
Legislation
- 1.48 1.63 -2.38 2.15 -2.61
Hiring Practices X Legislation -.61 - - - - 1.55
Employee Participation X
Legislation
- - - - - -
Safety Reward X Legislation -.70 -1.72 - 2.69 -1.59 1.17
Safety Training X Legislation - .84b - .50c - .48 - .42c -.66 .39a - .33c
Table 1.
Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for OSH Implementations, Management Practices, and
Legislation, their Interactions with the Moderator
Note. N = 149. Non significant coeeficients are not included. . a p < .05. b p < .01. c p < .001.
q Employee participation is important in achieving safety
implementations with nature that require collective employees efforts
to complete.
q Safety training helps OSH implementations in area where there
involves systems and structure.
q Legislations enhances the relationships between safety reward and
OSH implementations. Safety reward is important towards achieving
OSH implementation with the influence of legislation. Safety reward
alone, does not influence OSH implementation.
q Higher amount of legislations enhances the achievement of OSH implementation.
Similar to Khor (2017) recent findings that management commitment for Malaysian
manufacturing has no direct influences toward OSH implementation.
q Small amount of legislation moderates the influences of safety training towards
Suppliers OSH implementation. Even when safety training is lowest, OSH
implementation is better when there is higher amount of legislation.
q Future research may want to investigate the mediating role of legislation or support
specifically in OSH implementation.

2. -----------
Assoc. Prof Dr Lilis Surienty* and Khor Lay Kheng (lilis@usm.my)
School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia. 11800 Minden. Pulau Pinang. Malaysia
Video-PosterAbout the author
Dr Lilis also studies safety management practices in container terminal
ports, commuting accidents and gender responsive OSH.
She has collaborations with researchers in Canada, Norway and Britain and
is actively supervising postgraduate students.
Introduction
Methodology
Results
DiscussionS
Aims
• OSH-Master Plan 15 - Occupational Safety, Health and Environment Management System (OSH MS) as a continuous improvement tool for safety
program is adopted by 2020.
• Farouk, Richardson & Santhapparaj (2011) highlighted that employee involvement remains an important factor for a successful transition into the last
phase of the master plan of OSH-MP 15 that envisages a systems approach.
• Participation of all parties important in the stage of implementation phase of risk control and to meet the demands of OSH certification and standards
& towards the sustainability of an integrated management system - Kogi (2002), Lund (2004), Milczarek & Szczecinska (2006).
References:
Allen, R.S. & Kilmann, R. H. 2001. The role of the reward system for a total quality management based strategy. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 14(2), 110-131.
Cheyne, A., Cox, S., Oliver, A., & Tomás, J. M. (1998). Modelling safety climate in the prediction of levels of safety activity. Work & Stress, 12(3), 255-2
Cox, S. J. & Cheyne, A. J. T. 2000. Assessing safety culture in offshore environments. Safety Science, 34(1), 111-129.
Farouk, U.K., Richardson, S. and Santhapparaj, A.J.S., 2011. Occupational Safety and Health Committees: How Fares the Pulse of the Self-Regulatory System in Malaysian
Manufacturing Firms?. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 2(5), 412.
Fernández-Muñiz, B., Montes-Peón, J.M. and Vázquez-Ordás, C.J., 2012. Safety climate in OHSAS 18001-certified organisations: Antecedents and consequences of safety
behaviour. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45, 745-758.
Kogi, K., 2002. Work improvement and occupational safety and health management systems: common features and research needs. Industrial Health, 40(2), 121-133.
Lund, H.L., 2004. Strategies for sustainable business and the handling of workers’ interests: integrated management systems and worker participation. Economic and Industrial
Democracy, 25(1), 41-74.
Milczarek, M. and Szczecińska, K., 2006. Workers’ Active Involvement In theImprovement of Occupational Safety andHealth in a Textile Enterprise—A Case Study. International
Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 12(1), 69-77.
Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. 2000. The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior. Safety Science, 34(1), 99-109.
Vredenburgh, A. G. 2002. Organizational safety: Which management practices are most effective in reducing employee injury rates?. Journal of Safety Research, 33(2), 259-276.
Hinde, A., & Ager, R. 2003. Benchmarking the competent person in manufacturing and engineering sectors. HSE Books. Available online: www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr121.pdf.
(retrieved May 2 2015)
ü Does human, structural, and social factors in organisation influence safety participation
of OSHMS?
ü How does safety advice moderates the relationships between IVs and Safety
Participation OSHMS?
qSafety training and employee involvement were found to be important in
influencing safety participation in OSHMS. Training will provide the knowledge
to prepare employees involvement in the OSHMS. In addition, employees
involvement is important to improve employees expertise and sustainability of
the system as that requires full involvement of everyone in the organisation.
qSafety advice moderates the relationship between management safety
commitment and safety participation in OSHE MS. Safety advice enhances
the influence of management safety commitment towards safety participation
in OSHMS. The role of a safety officer reflected by safety advice is necessary
in a certified company and obviously they play a more significant role in
overseeing the safety matters. Hence, this implies that the role of safety
advice is critical for big organizations that are implementing OSH MS.
qManagement commitment alone does not influence safety participation in
OSH MS.
qFuture research may examine further the moderating effect of safety advice
on work factors that have no direct influence towards safety performance.
qFuture research may investigate whether there is a significant difference
towards safety performance based on the method of administering the reward
(made publicly or privately) and the frequency of giving out rewards.
Safety
Participation in
OSH MS
Safety Advice
Human
1.Management Safety
Commitment
2.Safety Training
Social
4. Employee
Involvement
Structural
3. Reward System
- Intrinsic vs Extrinsic
Safety Capital (SC)
Implementing a management
system capable of decentralizing
the decision-making in this area
will require considerable safety
training in order for it to function
effectively.
Employee involvement can be
viewed as a process for empowering
employees to participate in
managerial decision-making and
improvement activities appropriate
to their levels in the organization.
26% 26%
13%
21%
14%
Less than 3 years 4 - 6 years 7 - 9 years 10 - 11 years Above 12 years
Tenure as OSH Personnels
Participants
100 Malaysian manufacturing with certification of OSHAS18001/MS17021 (27.3% response rate)
answered surveys mailed to them.
1) Against popular beliefs. A big
organisation & the relationship
between the management and
empoyees are diluted.
2) The existence of a safety
officer is replacing the role of
direct Management
Intervention.
Extrinsic rewards such as bonuses
and pay out motivates the behaviour to
participate. Being in a big MNCs, this is
an expectation and a rewarding
employment aspect.
• Safety Participation in OSH MS: 3-items were adapted from Fernandez-
Muniz et al. (2012). The emphasis is focused on the employees’
participation in health and safety activities in their organization. Example of
a statement is, “The workers participate in risk assessments, safety
inspections and accident investigations”.
• Management Safety Commitment: 9-items were adapted from Cox and
Cheyne (2000) and Neal et al., (2000).
• Safety Training: 6-items adapted from Cheyne et al. (1998) and
Vredenburgh (2002). Example, “My company has not adequately
provided training to us to respond to emergency situation in my
workplace.”
• Safety Reward: 13-items adapted from from Allen and Kilmann (2001).
These items measure the different extrinsic and intrinsic rewards (e.g.
profit sharing, gainsharing, employment security and others).
• Employee Involvement: 5-items were adopted from Vredenburgh (2002)
which measure the employee activities in the manufacturing organization.
• Safety Advice: 5-items adopted from Hinde and Ager (2003). The items
measure the safety advice activities played by the SHO.
All response scale was a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree,
5 = Strongly Agree).