Okonkwo (2008) describes one of the
methods employed in the prevention of industrial accidents as participation.
Participation implies that all the persons involved in the work system
(managers, workers, experts) participated in risk assessment and prevention
activities, global participative approaches often have a positive impact on the
whole work system and on all the factors and elements that can lead to work
accidents. Participation in risk analysis during training has a positive impact
on the attitude of employee which is often the bottleneck in accident
prevention.
Bullinger (1999), states that the
cost-benefit analysis of prevention is not an easy task. It is accepted that
rapidly changing risks at work can only be tackled effectively when everybody
in the company from the management to every single worker, approaches them
proactively. Prevention is being seen as a result of economic considerations
and as an investment in industries innovative capacity and future prospects,
management systems aim to integrate performance measurement of prevention to
achieve a higher safety level.
Van Aerle (2001) gave the following approaches
as a means to preventing industrial accidents. There include;
(i) Measurement of positive indicators of prevention-
(ii) Measurement of prevention efforts instead
of result
(iii) Involvement of all personnel
(iv) Application in different working environments
(v) Application
can be used as on individual encouragement prevention.
(vi) Application
can be used as a collective promotion of prevention.
(vii) It has
to lead to continuous improvement of the prevention level.
(vii) Simple to follow and evaluate.
Beeck (1998) describes that more
transparency seems to be an important element of management in general and in
management of change in particular. One argument is that one of a few persons
within the company are not able to cover all the aspects any more and therefore
information should be shared. Another argument is that well throughout
information and communication campaigns can be very efficient in dealing with
uncertainty, limiting the feeling of uncertainty amongst workers has a positive
impact on job satisfaction and on risk behaviour.
Jager and Sturk (200) review that
safety and health prevention can no longer be controlled by merely learning
from the past. Workers might be less experienced and organizations may lose
their knowledge due to changes. Also Hierarchical structures are being broken
down. Therefore, self-control and self steering are considered to be
increasingly necessary in the field of prevention.
Eboh (2010) suggested that life-long
learning is becoming more important to sustain one’s employability, as well as
to sustain health and safety. Temporary and fixed term employees and part-time
employees have less access to training and often perform tasks that require
fewer skills. The consequence is that they have fewer opportunities to learn on
the job.
Izundu (2007) suggested that
Education and learning in the broad sense have become a never ending
assignment. Keeping up with and anticipating new evolutions are the very
elements in our changing society. Life long learning can help to anticipate
changes and to cope with risks.
Visser (1998) focused on the
logistic approach to safety. In her review, a logistic approach integrates
safety, health, environment and quality aspects. The accent should lie on
conceptual prevention, not only concerning technical equipment and machines but
also in the concept of work organization and task design. The holistic approach
is based on a system approach where attention is given to all the constituent
elements of the system and based on the understanding that changing one element
can change the whole system, influencing hazards and risk occurrence.
Anoke (2009) in his own theoretical
literature infers that the holistic approach should be integrated from the early
stages of development, design and planning. All products and services should be inherently safe, sustainable
workplaces, sustainable entrepreneurship. Indeed, holistic approaches can
contribute to the efficiency as well as the profitability of safety, health and
quality management.
Ashford and Zwetshtloot (2000) stated
that in order to make significant advances in industrial accident prevention, the
focus of industrial forms must shift from assessing the risk of existing
production and manufacturing systems to discovering technological alternatives
that is from the identification of problems to the identification of solutions.
In the change of working conditions and production systems, it is important to
identify specific inherently safe options. This will advance the adoption of
primary prevention strategies in production systems. Successful approaches to
encourage inherently safer production require both technological and managerial
changes, firms must have willingness, opportunity and the capacity to charge.
Onyekaozulu (2010) states that
preventing process accidents requires vigilance. The passing of time without a
process accident is not necessarily an indication that all is well and may
contribute to a dangerous and growing sense of complacency. When an employees
lose an appreciation of how their safety systems were intended to work, safety
systems and controls can deteriorate, lessons can be forgotten and hazards and
deviations from safe operating procedures can be accepted. Employees and
supervisors can increasingly rely on how things were done before, rather than
rely on sound engineering principles and other controls. Employees can forget
to be afraid. When systems and controls deteriorate, everything can come
together in the worst possible way. Equipment malfunctions and controls lives
or suffer horrible injuries and even communities becoming devastated.
Fafunwa (2006) believes that
leadership from the top of the industry, starting form the Board and going
down, is essential. In his opinion, it is imperative that the company
leadership set the process safety “tone at the top of the organization and
establish appropriate expectations regarding process safety performance.
Fafunwa further believed that any industry that has not provided effective
process safety leadership and has not
adequately established process safety as a core value across its departments
will be involved in industrial accidents, though industry may have an
inspirational goal of “no accidents, no harm to employees”.
Nwabueze (2007) describes that a
good process safety culture requires a positive, trusting and open environment
with effective lines of communication between management and the workforce,
including employee representatives.
Agha (2005) in his theoretical
literature states that incorporation of process safety into management decision
making will help to reduce industrial accidents of employee morale. Most
industrial management are short-term focus and its decentralized management
system and entrepreneurial culture have delegated substantial discretion to the
industry managers without clearly defining process expectations,
responsibilities or accountabilities. In addition, while accountability is a
core concept in company’s management
framework for driving desired conduct, company has not demonstrated that it has
effectively held executive management, managers and supervisors, both at the
corporate level and the industry level,
accountable for process safety performance at its departments.
Orji (2009), in his own review
describes the rise of globalization as concept to industrial safety. According
to him, the rise of globalization requires organizations to expand their vision
of what “diversity” means in the workplace and cultures without any unitary
meaning.
Mgbeke (2009) defines Global
diversity as any characteristic used to differentiate one person from another
or, more narrowly, interns of demographic factors. Boarding the concept of
global diversity is to increase its inclusiveness seems to be a trend in human
resources. Many employers are using the terms diversity of thought to value the
unique perspectives individuals bring to organizations. Despite the broad strategic scope of
diversity, a short-term focus can appear to be rather narrow.
Okafor (2006) states that to make
the global diversity the next competitive advantage, the management must
develop the organization’s strategic diversity plan. Key factors essential for
a solid diversity plan includes global mindsets, cross-border teams and
projects, cultural learning programs and international assignment. Equally, the
key elements of abroad strategic global diversity managements plan are
• Practitioner
competencies (attributes necessary to complete a particular job).
• Strong
business case (relevance to the mission, vision and business objectives).
• Commitment
from the top (active involvement of the
organization’s leadership).
• Vision,
mission and strategy (i.e., the “where, what and how” of the plan).
• Recruitment
and sourcing (companies recruit individuals with a collective mixture of
differences and similarities that include individual characteristics, values
and beliefs, experiences and backgrounds).
• Employee
retention.
• Training
and development.
• On
boarding (process designed to welcome and educate new employees).
• Communications
(internal transfer of knowledge and ideas related to diversity).
• Marketing,
advertising and branding (external communication used by organizations to reach
potential customers, clients, donors and stakeholders)
• Leveraging
employee diversity (the end-state of the diversity management plan).
• Strategic
alliances and partnerships (relationships to achieve a specific goal or meet
the diversity initiatives strategy).
• Corporate
social responsibility (ethical and socially responsible business behavior).
• Customer/member
experience.
• Supplier/vendor
diversity.
• Measurement
and accountability (e.g., set clear diversity targets, establish metrics and
track progress, and offer appropriate management incentives).