Findings show how CEOs can encourage a company-wide commitment to safety that prevents injuries
October 10, 2016
New research published in the Journal of Applied Psychology shows how CEOs can play a more effective role in developing an organizational safety climate in their organizations that actually reduces injuries.
This year will be the twelfth annual Executive Summit. The Summit, which takes place on Wednesday, brings the perspective of industry and corporate leaders to occupational safety and health (OSH) professionals. Understanding this perspective significantly benefits OSH professionals and improves their effectiveness in directing safety and health programs in their organizations.
The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) has released its annual Top 10 Workplace Trends for 2015. Based on a survey of SIOP’s nearly 8,000 industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologist members, the top ten workplace trends for the coming year are:
ISO 45001 is the number given to ISO’s effort to create a standard for an occupational safety and health management system. This project is well underway, but before the status update, let me begin with some background on occupational safety and health management systems.
A company-wide initiative that included management commitment and lots of employee commitment led to a 60 percent decrease in Lost Time Accident Frequency (LTAF)* at UPM, a company involved in reformation of bio and forest industries.
A great leader has passed, Chuck Noll, Hall of Fame coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Coach Noll impacted the lives of many, many people. Chuck Noll is the only NFL head coach to win four Super Bowls and may be the greatest NFL coach ever.
With organizations reducing the size of their workforce and the continual march of Baby Boomers into retirement, those remaining are finding they are not only doing their job, but also tasks of their departed co-worker’s job.
I quite often hear the lament from the safety fraternity that "my manager doesn't understand me ...".To this I reply - when one understands the myriad of demands placed upon C-level personnel, why should it be incumbent upon them to "learn the language of safety (environment, labour laws, accounting, IP, IT, etc). Rather, if safety pro's are so keen to have their voices heard, the responsibility should be on them to learn the language of management, and place their commentary in the management context.