ABSTRACT

The Safety and Health Improvement Program (SHIP) was designed to increase workers’ safety and health using supervisor/leadership training. SHIP was implemented and evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial with 20 supervisors and 292 construction crew members representing a high-risk industry. The intervention had three components: (1) computer-based training to teach supervisors ways to better support worker safety and work-life challenges; (2) supervisor behavioural self-monitoring to facilitate transfer of training to practice; and (3) team-based discussions with supervisors and work crew members to identify challenges and opportunities for improvement with 30, 60, and 90 day follow-up check-in meetings. Main effects for the intervention on perceptions of family supportive supervisor behaviors, team effectiveness, and work-life effectiveness were not found, suggesting that the pre-intervention context could help explain the lack of intervention effects. We found that the intervention was more beneficial for work crew members who had poorer pre-intervention perceptions of their supervisor (lower leader-member exchange) and lower perceived team cohesion, suggesting the important impact of the organisational context on intervention effects. We argue that perhaps these work crews were more ready for change and improvements in functioning than were the crews that were already functioning well.

摘要

安全与健康改善计划（SHIP）旨在通过主管/领导力培训来提高工人的安全与健康。SHIP是在一项由20名主管和代表高风险行业的292名施工人员组成的随机对照试验中实施和评估的。干预措施包括三个部分：（1）基于计算机的培训，以指导主管人员更好地支持工人安全和工作生活挑战的方法；（2）监督员的行为自我监督，以促进培​​训向实践的转移；（3）与主管和工作人员进行基于团队的讨论，以通过30、60和90天的后续检查会议确定挑战和改进的机会。干预对家庭支持主管行为，团队效率，并没有发现工作和生活的有效性，这表明干预前的环境可以帮助解释缺乏干预效果的原因。我们发现，这种干预对工作人员具有更好的干预效果，这些工作人员的干预前对其主管的看法较差（领导-成员之间的交流较低），而团队的凝聚力较低，这表明组织环境对干预效果的重要影响。我们认为，也许这些工作人员比已经运转良好的工作人员更愿意为功能的变化和改进做准备。我们发现，这种干预对工作人员具有更好的干预效果，这些工作人员的干预前对其主管的看法较差（领导-成员之间的交流较低），而团队的凝聚力较低，这表明组织环境对干预效果的重要影响。我们认为，也许这些工作人员比已经运转良好的工作人员更愿意为功能的变化和改进做准备。我们发现，这种干预对工作人员具有更好的干预效果，这些工作人员的干预前对其主管的看法较差（领导-成员之间的交流较低），而团队凝聚力较低，这表明组织环境对干预效果的重要影响。我们认为，也许这些工作人员比已经运转良好的工作人员更愿意为功能的变化和改进做准备。