developing a model for integrating safety, quality and productivity in ...

The Islamic University Of GazaFaculty of Engineeringالجامعة الإسلامية – غزةكلية الهندسةDeanery of Graduate Studiesعمادة الدراسات العلياDEVELOPING A MODEL FOR INTEGRATING SAFETY, QUALITY ANDPRODUCTIVITY IN BUILDING PROJECTS IN THE GAZA STRIPتطوير نموذج تكاملي بين السلامة والجودة والإنتاجية في مشاريع البناء في قطاع غزةMoheeb Abed Abu AlqumbozSupervised byProf. Dr. Adnan EnshassiProfessor of Construction Engineering and ManagementA Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement forDegree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering - Construction ManagementThe Islamic University of GazaAugust, 2007

DedicationI dedicate my dissertation work to my family and many friends. A specialfeeling of gratitude to my loving parents, whose words of encouragementand push for tenacity ring in my ears. My beloved wife Rana owes bestwords for her endless support that I will never forget.Moheeb Abed Abu Alqumbozii

AcknowledgementI would like to thank my supervisor Professor Adnan Enshassi who has been morethan generous with his expertise and precious time. A special thanks goes to himfor his countless hours of reflecting, reading, encouraging, and most of allpatience throughout the entire process.A special thanks goes to Construction Management Staff at the Islamic Universityof Gaza for their academic and scientific support throughout my study of MSc.A special thanks to Deanery of Graduate Studies at Engineering Faculty for theiradministrative and academic support.I would like to acknowledge and thank Occupational Safety division at theMinistry of Labor especially Mr. Abdelfattah Aldoqqy for their valuable supportand revision of my study.A special thanks goes to Palestinian contractors for their participation in filling thequestionnaire.A special thanks goes to all my friends and colleagues especially Mr. SaidElghandour and Mrs. Iyman Abu Khousa whose help was invaluable.Finally, a special thanks goes to statistician who supported me very much.iii

AbstractConstruction industry is one of the largest and most important industries in Palestine.It has been stated that accidents not only result in considerable pain and suffering butalso marginalize productivity, quality, time, and negatively affect the environmentand consequently add to the cost of construction. A critical review of the literature isstructured under three main categories: (1) construction safety; (2) constructionquality; and (3) construction productivity. The three categories were reviewed withregard to their geographical location including international, regional and local.The main objective of the study is to investigate the relationship between constructionsafety, quality, productivity, time, and cost. The main objectives would illustrate forcontractors and consultants the advantages of applying safety and quality practices.The objectives of the study have been approached through sixty one validquestionnaires received from construction firms working in Gaza Strip. One hundredand twenty five factors were extracted from safety, quality, productivity, cost, time,and religion groups of questionnaire.The survey indicated that safety training was considered the most critical factorinfluencing construction quality with regard to safety. A highly ranked factor forconstruction productivity was "Workers' Problems". The survey also indicated that"Safety expenditures are very much less than losses due to accidents" was consideredthe most important factor with regard to safety and cost. "Discussion between topmanagement and foreman on time schedule improves safety and productivity" hasbeen ranked the most critical among factors relating construction safety with time.The survey indicated that "Religious belief in Allah affects human's values too much"had been ranked the first factor.The study concluded that construction safety can be improved while maintainingquality, productivity, cost, time, and religious beliefs. The relationship between themis an integrated one. The study recommended legislating through the legislativecouncil acts and clauses within the Palestinian Law that would impose fines andpenalties on institutions and companies which are found to be violating safetyregulations. The study also recommended that contractors provide high-visibilityapparel to all workers at construction workplace.iv

ملخص البحثتعتبر صناعة الإنشاءات أحد أهم واكبر الصناعات في فلسطين.‏ وإنه من المعروف أن الحوادث ليس منشأنها أن تؤدي إلى إصابات ووفيات في ميدان العمل فحسب بل وأنها تؤدي إلى الإضرار بالجودة والإنتاجيةوالوقت كما وأنها تؤثر سلبا على البيئة مما يعمل على زيادة تكلفة المشروع.‏وقد انقسمت المراجعة الأدبية للدرسات السابقة في هذا المجال إلى ثلاثة أقسام رئيسية وهي:‏ (1) السلامة(2) المهنية،‏ وجودة الإنشاءات،‏ و(‏‎3‎‏)‏ إنتاجية العمل.‏ ولقد تمت مراجعة هذه الأقسام الثلاثة حسب التوزيعالجغرافي مشتملة على الوضع الدولي والإقليمي والمحلي.‏إن الهدف الرئيسي للبحث هو دراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية من جهة والجودة والإنتاجية والزمن والتلكفةوالدين من جهة أخرى.‏ إن الهدف الرئيسي يهدف أيضا إلى توعية المقاولين والإستشاريين إلى مزايا تطبيقأسس السلامة والجودة في مواقع العمل.‏ ولقد تم الوصول إلى الأهداف من خلال واحد وستين استبانة صالحةتم استلامها من شركات المقاولات في قطاع غزة.‏أوضحت الدراسة أن ‏"التدريب في مجال السلامة المهنية"‏ كان من أهم عوامل الجودة التي تؤثر ايجابا علىالسلامة المهنية في المشروع.‏ ومن ناحية أخرى،‏ كان ‏"مشاكل العمال"‏ العامل الاكثر أهمية في الجودة التيتؤثر سلبا على السلامة المهنية.‏كما اظهرت نتائج البحث أن العامل ‏"التكلفة المالية لضمان السلامة المهنية في المشروع أقل بكثير منالخسائر التي يتكبدها المقاول في حالة وقوع حوادث"‏ تعتبر من أهم العوامل المالية التي تؤثر إيجابا فيالسلامة المهنية.‏ وقد كان العامل ‏"مناقشة جدولة المشروع بين الإدارة العليا ورئيس العمال يحسن الإنتاجيةوالسلامة المهنية"‏ العامل الأساسي المؤثر في السلامة المهنية من بين عوامل الزمن في مشاريع الإنشاءات.‏واخيرا فإن العامل ‏"المعتقدات الدينية والإيمان باالله يؤثر بشكل كبير في قيم الإنسان"‏ كان هو العامل الأهمضمن عوامل الدين التي تؤثر بالغجياب عبى السلامة المهنية.‏أوجزت الدراسة العلاقة بين السلامة والجودة والإنتاجية والتكلفة والزمن والدين على انها علاقة تكاملية حيثيمكن تحقيق كافة عوامل السلامة المهنية بالتزامن مع الحفاظ على عوامل الجودة والإنتاجية والتكلفة والزمنوالمعتقدات الدينية.‏وقد اوصت الدراسة بسن قوانين من خلال المجلس التشريعي ضمن القانون الفلسطينيمن من أجل فرضغرامات وعقوبات على المؤسسات والشركات التي تخالف قوانين السلامة المهنية.‏كما واوصت الدراسة بأن يقوم المقاول بتزويد زي واق ذي كفاءة عالية لجميع العمال في موقع العمل وليسفقط العمال الذين يعملون في أنشطة خطرة حيث أن كل عامل لا يرتدي الحذاء الواقي بشكل دائم هم اكثرالناس المعرضون لمخاطر الإصابة.‏v

Table of ContentsChapter one: Introduction 11.1 Construction industry background 11.2 Construction safety in Palestine 21.3 Research problem 21.4 Significance of research 31.5 Research aim 41.6 Research objectives 41.7 Limitations and Assumptions 4CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 52.1 Construction safety 52.1.1 Construction safety in developed countries 92.1.2 Construction safety in developing countries ........................ 112.1.3 Construction safety in Arabic region ................................... 122.1.4 Construction safety in Palestine ........................................... 132.2 Construction quality 142.2.1 Quality Management............................................................ 162.2.2 Total Quality Management................................................... 182.2.3 Construction quality in developed countries........................ 212.2.4 Construction quality in developing countries 212.2.5 Factors affecting construction quality in developing countries 222.3 Construction Productivity 252.3.1 Construction Productivity in Developed Countries 252.3.2 Factors affecting productivity 262.3.3 Productivity Improvement 292.3.4 Productivity measurement 302.3.5 Construction productivity in developing countries 312.3.6 Construction productivity in Arabic region 342.3.7 Construction productivity in Palestine 352.4 Cost associated with construction safety, quality and productivity 352.5 Relationship between safety, quality and productivity in constructionprojects 36CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 383.1 Introduction 383.2 Research Study 383.3 Research Population and Sample Size 403.4 Research Location 423.5 Research Instrument 423.5.1 Research Measurement 423.5.2 Relative Importance Index (RII) and Ranking 433.6 Questionnaire Design 443.6.1 Questionnaire Respondent's' Recommendations 473.6.2 Questionnaire description 483.7 Pilot Study 493.8 Instrument Validity 493.8.1 Reviewers 493.8.2 Internal Consistency 50Group 1: Study on relationship between safety and quality............................. 50Group 2: Study on relationship between safety and productivity .................... 54vi

Group 3: Study on relationship between safety and cost ................................. 56Group 4: Study on relationship between safety and time................................. 57Group 5: Study on relationship between safety and religion ........................... 58Group 6: Importance of studying the relation between safety, quality, andproductivity 59Group 7: Recommendations and suggestions for improving occupational safetyin construction projects .................................................................................... 60Group 8: Main reason for not concerning in safety at workplace.................... 613.9 Structure Validity 623.10 Questionnaire Reliability 633.10.1 Split-half model 643.10.2 Cronbach's Alpha model 663.11 Sampling method 673.12 Data Analysis 683.12.1 Statistical Methods Used in This Research 683.13 Limitation of the Research 68CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 704.1 Introduction 704.2 Part I: Study of population characteristics 704.2.1 Year of establishment 704.2.2 Projects implemented by the company within last five years 714.2.3 Cost of projects implemented by the company within last five years724.2.4 Capital of Company 734.2.5 Engineers, administrative employees, and workers at the company744.2.6 Background, age, qualification, and specialization of respondent 764.2.7 Safety related facts 784.3 Part II: Company's policy, safety program and training 814.3.1 Part III: Linkage between occupational safety and quality inconstruction project 91GROUP 1: Safety and health policy ................................................................ 94GROUP 2: Safety Organization ....................................................................... 96GROUP 3: Safety Training .............................................................................. 97GROUP 4: In-house Safety Rules.................................................................. 100GROUP 5: Safety Inspection ......................................................................... 102GROUP 6: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) ......................................... 104GROUP 7: Accident Documentation ............................................................. 105GROUP 8: Emergency Preparedness............................................................. 106GROUP 9: Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors.................. 108GROUP 10: Safety Committees..................................................................... 110GROUP 11: Safety and Health Promotion..................................................... 112GROUP 12: Health Insurance Program ......................................................... 114GROUP 13: Project Implementation.............................................................. 115GROUP 14: Workmanship ............................................................................ 117GROUP 15: Contract Documents .................................................................. 1204.3.1.1 Summary of Group Ranking .............................................. 1224.3.2 Part IV: Linkage between occupational safety and productivity inconstruction project 127GROUP 1: Factors improving productivity ................................................... 129GROUP 2: Inspection..................................................................................... 131vii

GROUP 3: Local conditions .......................................................................... 133GROUP 4: Worker problems ......................................................................... 135GROUP 5: Subcontractors ............................................................................. 138GROUP 6: Safety program ............................................................................ 140GROUP 7: Personal protective equipments (PPE) ........................................ 1424.3.2.1 Summary of Group Ranking .............................................. 1434.3.3 Part V: Linkage between occupational safety and cost in constructionproject 1464.3.3.1 Study on relationship between safety and cost................... 1464.3.4 Part VI: Linkage between occupational safety and time inconstruction project 1514.3.4.1 Study on relationship between safety and time.................. 1514.3.5 Part VI: Linkage between occupational safety and religion inconstruction project 155GROUP 1: Study on relationship between safety and religion...................... 1554.3.6 Importance of Studying the Relation between Safety, Quality, andProductivity 157CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1615.1 Introduction 1615.2 Conclusion 1615.2.1 Safety and Quality 1615.2.2 Safety and Productivity 1635.2.3 Safety and Cost 1655.2.4 Safety and Time 1655.2.5 Safety and Religion 1665.3 Recommendations 1675.3.1 Safety and Quality 1675.3.2 Safety and Productivity 1685.3.3 Safety and Cost 1685.3.4 Safety and Time 1695.3.5 Safety and Religion 1695.4 Proposed Safety and Quality Management Model 1705.4.1 Age of respondents 1705.4.2 Qualification of respondents 1725.4.3 Specialization of respondents 1745.4.4 Experience of respondents in the field of Safety 1765.4.5 Respondents who joined training courses in Safety 1785.5 Characteristics of Basic Model Representing Relationship betweenSafety and Quality management 181References 184Annex 1: Questionnaire in English 193Annex 2: Questionnaire in Arabic 206Annex 3: Images of safety problems from miscellaneous sites 221viii

List of TablesTable 1: Nonfatal Occupational Injury and Illness Incidence Rates................................................9Table 2: Comparison of productivity problems with other countries (Kaming et al, 1997a) .............. 32Table 3: Quality-productivity relationships as per various authors (Hoffman and Mehra, 1999) ........ 37Table 4: Classification of sample size of the contracting companies ............................................ 41Table 5: Questionnaire distribution in Gaza Strip..................................................................... 42Table 6: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Quality)..... 50Table 7: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (productivity).............................................................................................................................. 54Table 8: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Cost)......... 56Table 9: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Time)........ 57Table 10: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Religion).. 58Table 11: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (importance ofstudy)...................................................................................................................... 59Table 12: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level(recommendations).................................................................................................... 60Table 13: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (reason) .... 61Table 14: : Pearson correlation between the field and the degree of the scale and sig. level .............. 62Table 15 : Correlation coefficients between two halves of each group and the questonnaire itself...... 64Table 16: Cronbach's alpha for items of each group ................................................................. 66Table 4. 1: Number of projects implemented during last 5 years ................................................. 71Table 4. 2: Capital of Company (in thousands $) ..................................................................... 73Table 4. 3: Distribution of Company Capital (in thousands $) according to Year of Establishment .... 73Table 4. 4: Number of fixed engineers at the company.............................................................. 74Table 4. 5: Number of administrative employees at the company................................................ 74Table 4. 6: Educational qualification of respondents................................................................. 78Table 4. 7: Specialization of respondents ............................................................................... 78Table 4. 8: Person in charge of developing saftey training program ............................................. 86Table 4. 9: Person in charge of writing accident report.............................................................. 90Table 4. 10: Factors of relationship between safety and quality................................................... 91Table 4.11: Safety and health policy...................................................................................... 94Table 4.12: Safety Organization ........................................................................................... 96Table 4.13: Safety Training................................................................................................. 98Table 4.14: In-house Safety Rules ...................................................................................... 100Table 4.15: Safety Inspection............................................................................................. 102Table 4.16: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).................................................................. 104Table 4.17: Accident Documentation .................................................................................. 105Table 4.18: Emergency Preparedness .................................................................................. 106Table 4.19: Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors .............................................. 108Table 4.20: Safety Committees .......................................................................................... 110Table 4.21: Safety and Health Promotion ............................................................................. 112Table 4. 22: Health Insurance Program................................................................................ 114Table 4.23: Project Implementation .................................................................................... 115Table 4.24: Workmanship................................................................................................. 117Table 4.25: Contract Documents ........................................................................................ 120Table 4.26: Ranking of Groups of Quality............................................................................ 122Table 4. 27: Factors of safety and productivity linkage ........................................................... 127Table 4. 28: Factors which improves productivity in worksite .................................................. 129Table 4. 29: Inspection of performance and productivity ......................................................... 131Table 4.30: Local conditions of jobsite ................................................................................ 133Table 4.31: Worker problems at home and jobsite.................................................................. 135Table 4.32: Subcontractors safety rules and regulations .......................................................... 138Table 4.33: Safety program ............................................................................................... 140Table 4.34: Personal protective equipments (PPE) ................................................................. 142Table 4.35: Ranking of Groups of Quality............................................................................ 144Table 4.36: Study on relationship between safety and cost....................................................... 146ix

Table 4. 37: Study on relationship between safety and time ..................................................... 151Table 4.38: Study on relationship between safety and religion.................................................. 155Table 4.39: Importance of Studying the Relation between Safety, Quality, and Productivity .......... 158x

List of FiguresFigure 1: Costs and benefits of quality management (Smallwood and Ventur, 2003)....................... 18Figure 2: Methodology Flowchart......................................................................................... 39Figure 3: Ambulance evacuating an injured worker................................................................ 222Figure 4: Workers are heating bitumen without any safety protection ........................................ 222Figure 5: Exacavation activities while people are watching without safety protection ................... 223Figure 6: Excavator is working over a worker fixing pipes with no safety actions taken ................ 224Figure 7: Worker is cutting manhole by a saw without gloves, glasses, or safety helmets.............. 224Figure 8: Worker is fixing house connections without shuttering .............................................. 225Figure 9: There is no safety precautions at high eleveations ..................................................... 225Figure 10: Dirty conditions without safety shoes ................................................................... 226Figure 11: Worker cleaning water channel without safety precautions ....................................... 226Figure 12: Piping works without safety precautions ............................................................... 227Figure 13: Lack of shoes, helmets, gloves, and caution ........................................................... 227Figure 14: Bitumen painting without masks, glasses, or helmets ............................................... 228Figure 15: No safety shoes, helmets or gloves....................................................................... 228Figure16: Proposed Safety and Quality Management Model ....................................................294xi

List of AbbreviationDAIDevelopment Alternatives Inc.GNPGross National ProductPCUPalestinian Contractors UnionPNAPalestinian National AuthoritySPSSStatistical Package for Social ScienceUNDPUnited Nations Development ProgramUNRWAUnited Nations for Relief and Works Agency for Palestine RefugeesUSAUnited States of Americaxii

Chapter one: Introduction1.1 Construction industry backgroundConstruction industry is one of the largest and most important industries in Palestine(MAP Overview, 2001). It holds a big share of the Gross National Production andshares a large part of the Palestinian market especially in the past few years. Althoughimportant, construction industry in countries directs a very small amount of itsrevenues towards scientific research (Barrie and Paulson, 1992).Since 1993, the year when Oslo peace agreement have been signed in Norway,Palestinian occupied territories have undergone a rapid pace of reconstruction ofinfrastructure which had been demolished through thirty years of occupation. In spiteof lack of resources and technologies, hundreds of infrastructure, residential, andgovernmental projects were implemented (MAP Overview, 2002).It is necessary to mention that construction industry in Palestine faced obstacles dueto instability in political situation. This situation was mainly exhibited in shortage ofmaterials resulting in long delays and stoppage of work. Other obstacles and barriersincluded lack of safety, lack of management and compulsory contracts. Althoughconstruction industry in Palestine has achieved a tangible growth, there were manyareas in the industry to improve including safety, quality, and productivity.After eleven years of reconstruction of damaged infrastructure, the Palestinianconstruction industry experienced many accidents during execution of projects inaddition to accidents in previous years. The increasing rate of accidents in Gaza Stripwas strongly noticed by professionals who held seminars, workshops and other meansin order to prevent accidents and losses as well. The increasing rate of accidents couldbe referred to the increase of number of projects executed during that period. Anothercause could be lack of safety precautions in addition to poor project management.The tremendous growth in the construction industry internationally and locally meansmore modern and sophisticated facilities are going to be built on tighter timeschedule. The ever-changing philosophies in the construction industry produced1

tighter time schedules, high productivity rates, and new management visions but yetsafety in Gaza Strip is not considered top priority.1.2 Construction safety in PalestineSafety is a very important issue in the construction industry in large areas of theworld. Safety in general is important for each human being on the planet.Nevertheless, in Palestine like several developing countries safety in constructionindustry and other sectors still suffers from ignorance and lack of supervision(Kartam, 2000). This low consideration of safety importance in Palestine caused theescalation of accident rate in construction projects as noticed at the current time.There was always misunderstanding of the concept of safety all around the world inthe previous years. It was thought that safety interferes with project objectives – or inother words, contractors' and owners' objectives – regarding cost, quality andproductivity. Unfortunately, despite the fact that idea of conflict of safety, quality andproductivity changed dramatically in developed countries, it still prevails in manydeveloping countries.Since there is a great concern towards safety in several regions of the world, it ishoped that safety concern would increase in developing countries, thus reducing thelarge number of fatalities amongst workers. This needs efforts by professionals andacademia in Palestine to work much more on safety.1.3 Research problemSafety, quality and productivity have recently become some of the most importantcompetitive strategic tools for project success. Many organizations in developedcountries have realized that they – safety, quality and productivity – are key toapproaching both human safety and project success.During the last ten years, construction safety was not integrated into constructionprojects. Neither contractor nor owner or worker cared about safety on job sites. Itwas greatly noticed that accident rates have increased in the past few years due to lackof safety and quality procedures. The lack of legislation and regulation regardingsafety in Palestine was also one of the reasons that project parties did not care for2

safety. Safety culture contributes to other factors that affect safety performance inPalestine. Project parties depend on religious beliefs in refusing safety as a concept.Religious beliefs are used incorrectly to interpret lack of care towards safety.Planning and scheduling of projects in Palestine don't consider applying safetyprovisions. On the contrary, safety is seen as a decelerating factor of time scheduleand is considered to be an extra cost associated with project. This situation decreasedcare amongst project parties. Lack of training and insufficient practical workshops onsafety added more obstacles to have an effective safety performance in Palestine.Accidents increased dramatically in construction projects, varying between falls,shocks, and others due to the increase in the number of projects implementedaccompanied with carelessness for safety. Therefore, the author has selected this topicfor his thesis aiming at finding solutions to improve safety, quality, and productivityconditions in projects.1.4 Significance of researchSafety shouldn't be thought as a luxury, but a human then a business need for projectparties and society. It was noticed that only few studies on safety performance in theconstruction industry were conducted in Palestine. Therefore, there are no sufficientmanuals, booklets and references on safety that would have helped empowering safetyculture.The main reason for selecting this topic was the need for improving safetyperformance in Gaza Strip which comes as a human factor first of all. Other reasonswould be:1. The increasing number of fatalities amongst construction workers in Gaza Strip.2. The lack of records and information on construction safety in Gaza Strip3. To help overcoming many problems in the field of construction safety in GazaStrip.4. The misleading understanding of safety that it increases project costs whiledecreasing quality and productivity.3

1.5 Research aimThe study mainly aims at analyzing the current quality and safety performance inconstruction industry in addition to productivity, and to develop a model that can beused to analyze the relationship between those three factors in construction industry inGaza Strip.1.6 Research objectivesMore thoroughly, the study is intended to achieve the following objectives:1. To identify and rank the quality factors that relate to safety, and investigate therelationship between safety practice and quality.2. To identify and rank the productivity factors that relate to safety, and investigatethe relationship between safety practice and time.3. To identify and rank the cost factors that relate to safety, and investigate therelationship between safety practice and cost.4. To identify and rank the time factors that relate to safety, and investigate therelationship between safety practice and time.5. To identify and rank the religion factors that relate to safety, and investigate therelationship between safety practice and religion.6. To model the relationship between construction safety and quality management1.7 Limitations and AssumptionsThis study included the following limitations:1. This study was limited to the safety in Gaza Strip only without studyingconditions of West Bank due to current unstable political situation.2. Sufficient resources of information on accidents records were limited.3. There was a time constraint of three months to complete the study.4. Literature on safety in Palestine and surrounding region is very limited.4

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEWThe purpose of this literature review was to survey literature relevant to this study.2.1 Construction safetySafety can be broadly defined as freedom from whatever exposes one to danger orfrom liability to cause danger or harm (Webster Dictionary). Occupational safety andhealth is the discipline concerned with preserving and protecting human and facilityresources in the workplace (Wikipedia). It is common that construction industry isknown for being a hazardous amongst other industries. Hinze (1997) stated thatconstruction industry is one of those industries with the highest rate of injury andfatality.Benefits of safety and health may include: less injuries, less property damage, lessdown time, improvement in morale, enhanced industrial relations, increasedproductivity, reduced cost, and enhanced quality (Cited by Promfret in Enshassi,2003). Hinze (2003) also stated that safety performance of the construction industryhas consistently been below that of most other industries. The previous statement mayclarify the increasing number of fatalities in the construction industry more than otherindustries. It is well known that the employees in construction industry run a higherrisk of work-related illnesses and accidents as compared to other branches of industryand the public sector (Cited in Hoonakker et al, 2003; Kartam, 1997).Occupational safety and health can be also defined as a multidisciplinary activityaiming at (Hogstedt and Piries, 2000):• Protection and promotion of the health of workers by eliminating occupationalfactors and conditions hazardous to health and safety at work• Enhancement of physical, mental and social well-being of workers andsupport for the development and maintenance of their working capacity, aswell as professional and social development at work• Development and promotion of sustainable work environments and workorganizations5

Basic philosophy of accident prevention was based on 10 axioms. They were asfollows (Cited by Heinrich in Kaliher, 2003):1. The occurrence of an injury invariably results from a completed sequence offactors-the last one of these being the accident itself. The accident in turn isinvariably caused or permitted directly by the unsafe act of a person and/or amechanical or physical hazard.2. The unsafe acts of persons are responsible for a majority of accidents.3. The person who suffers a disabling injury caused by an unsafe act, in theaverage case has had over 300 narrow escapes from serious injury as a resultof committing the very same unsafe act. Likewise, persons are exposed tomechanical hazards hundreds of times before they suffer injury.4. The severity of an injury is largely fortuitous-the occurrence of the accidentthat results in injury is largely preventable.5. The four basic motives or reasons for the occurrence of unsafe acts provide aguide to the selection of appropriate corrective measures.6. Four basic methods are available for preventing accidents-engineeringrevisions, persuasion and appeal, personnel adjustment, and discipline.7. Methods of most value in accident prevention are analogous with the methodsrequired for the control of the quality, cost, and quantity of production.8. Management has the best opportunity and ability to initiate the work ofprevention; therefore it should assume the responsibility.9. The supervisor or foreman is the key person in industrial accident prevention.His application of the art of supervision to the control of worker performanceis the factor of greatest influence in successful accident prevention. It can beexpressed and taught as a simple four-step formula.10. The humanitarian incentive for preventing accidental injury is supplementedby two powerful economic factors: (1) the safe establishment is efficientproductively and the unsafe establishment is inefficient; (2) the directemployer cost of industrial injuries for compensation claims and for medicaltreatment is but 2% of the total cost which the employer must pay.6

The construction industry is often criticized for its poor performance (e.g. lowproductivity, waste, health and safety problems) (Hoonakker et al, 2002). Safety isone of the major factors that affect construction industry and should be studied andinvestigated in order to be integrated as an inherent culture of each member of theconstruction project. Hinze et al (1996) suggested that in order to conduct a successfulresearch study in construction industry, it is important that the research focus be onthose segments of the industry that truly warrant it.Safety cannot be considered as luxury. On the contrary, it is a human need firstlywhich emphasizes the need for making it an integral part of construction projects.Thinking of safety as a human and financial issue increases the need for thecontinuous improvement of safety measures until reaching the Zero AccidentApproach. Improving safety remains a priority but despite innovations that reconceivethe relationship between planning and safety, no systematic theory or practice has yetbeen developed (Howell et al, 2002).There are many practices to improve safety in construction projects. Investigationsabout factors of safety to be improved have been conducted by many. Hinze (2003)mentioned many areas of safety that directly impact the improvement of safetyperformance as follows:i. Demonstrated management commitmentii.Safety staffingiii. Safety planningiv. Orientation and trainingv. Worker involvementvi. Rewards and incentivesvii. Subcontract managementviii. Drug testingix. Accident investigationsLarge construction projects have experienced more safety improvements than smallones. It is also necessary to add that large companies have always better safetyconditions than medium or small ones. Hoonakker et al (2002) found in a research7

that companies with many years of experience in industry and large companies havethe best safety records and nearly all of them had safety procedures in place. Hinze(1997, 2003) also found similar results. On large construction projects, safety ofpersonnel and workers cannot be left to chance. Serious consequences and deadlyaccidents occurred due to starting a project without preconstruction risk assessmentsor safety plans.Each year, work-related injuries and diseases kill an estimated 1.1 million peopleworldwide, which roughly equals the global annual number of deaths from malaria(Hogstedt and Pieris, 2000). Large number of fatalities motivated specialists,researchers and professionals to write on safety issues and methods to improve itsmeasures.Enshassi (2003) stated that accidents not only result in considerable pain and sufferingbut marginalize productivity, quality, time, and negatively affect the environment andconsequently add to the cost of construction. This conceptualization emphasizes onthe importance of construction safety in means of human, cost and time. Thus,continuous improvement of quality of construction safety not only saves lives but alsocost, productivity, quality and time.Howell et al (2002) suggests that the human factors approach holds that human erroris the main cause of accidents and that the design of workplace and tasks alsocontribute. Bahari and Abd. Aziz (1999) stated in their study that accident causationmodels suggest that at least 98% of accidents are related to human factors.8

Table 1 shows nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses during the years 1996,1997, and 1999. It is noticed that during the period from 1996 until 1999 constructionindustry possessed the second dangerous industry in terms of number of nonfataloccupational injuries and illnesses per 100 full time employees.Table 1: Nonfatal Occupational Injury and Illness Incidence RatesIndustry 1996 1997 1999Agriculture, forestry, fishingMiningConstructionManufacturingTransportation/public utilitiesWholesale and retail tradeFinance, insurance, real estateServices8.75.49.910.68.76.82.46.08.45.99.510.38.26.72.25.67.34.48.69.27.36.11.84.9Note: Data represent total number of cases per 100 full-timeemployeesSource: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational injuries andIllnesses in the United States by Industry, annual(Hinze, 1997) categorized construction fatalities as follows:i. Falls (from elevation) 33%ii. Struck-by incidents 22%iii. Caught-in/between incidents 18%iv. Shocks (electrical) 17%v. Other 10%2.1.1 Construction safety in developed countriesConstruction is one of the largest industries in the United States, with 13% of thegross national product and 5-6% of the labor force. It is also one of the mostdangerous industries, accounting for 15% of the occupational fatalities and 17% of allworkers' compensation costs (cited in Hoonakker et al, 2002). The major causes ofaccidents are related to the unique nature of the industry, human behavior, difficult9

work-site conditions, and poor safety management, which results in unsafe workmethods, equipment, and procedures (Cited by Improving Report in Koehn et al,1995).When talking about construction safety in USA, it is not possible to ignore the role ofOSHA in setting standards for safety and saving workers rights of health and safety inconstruction and other industries. In 1970, Congress passed the Occupational Safetyand Health Act (hereafter called the OSH Act) where its essence is that workersshould have and be able to expect a safe place in which to work. When the OSH Actwas passed, it established three different agencies; one of which is the OccupationalSafety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA standards focus on severalindustries including general industry, maritime, agriculture, and construction (Hinze,1997). But although OSHA standards have been in force for more than 25 years, butfatalities and injuries are still high. It is necessary to emphasize the role of OSHAconsultation as regulations set to prevent accidents not solve problems after theyhappen. OSHA reports that in 2000, the injury rate for construction companies withmore than 1,000 employees was 4.3 while the construction industry rate was 8.2(Howell et al, 2002).OSHA legislation, increased litigation, and increasing worker medical expenses andcompensation insurance costs gave the advantage to safer contractors. (Howell et al,2002). Hinze and Bren (1996) in their research stated that accident causation inconstruction has traditionally been attributed either to unsafe work conditions or tounsafe worker practices. In the past two decades the primary emphasis of researchstudies has been on unsafe worker practices. In construction, it is suggested that`unsafe behaviour' is the most significant factor in the cause of site accidents andtherefore provides evidence of a poor safety culture (Cited in Sawacha et al, 1999).Accidents at work occur either due to lack of knowledge or training, a lack ofsupervision or a lack of means to carry out the task safely, or due to an error ofjudgment and carelessness (Enshassi, 2003).After the increase of attention paid to safety issues in USA, it is very common thatcompanies have their own safety programs. Enshassi (2003) in his research concludedthat although an effective safety program can prevent or reduce injuries, not allcontracting organizations implement safety programs. The traditional safetymanagement programs do not always improve the results of safety because they are10

centered exclusively on the technical requirements and on obtaining short-term results(Cited by Weinstein in Herrero et al, 2001).During tendering process, one firm makes an allowance for safety and healthrequirements and the other does not and subsequently has financial advantage and willwin the tender because owners did not consider pre-qualification of contractors onsafety and health (McWilliams et al, 2001, Enshassi, 2003).2.1.2 Construction safety in developing countriesAccording to Koehn et al (1995) construction in developing countries is more laborintensive than that in the developed areas of the globe. Nevertheless, constructionsafety is given a top priority in those countries. Sohail (1999) in his study stated thatconstruction industry is economically important as it typically contributes 10 per centof a developing country's GNP. Only 5-10% of workers in developing countries and20-50% of workers in industrial countries (with a few exceptions) are estimated tohave access to adequate occupational health services (Hogstedt and Pieris, 2000).Despite recent efforts to improve safety in the construction industry, statistics showthat the accident and injury rate in construction is still significantly higher than mostother industries (Elzarka et al, 1999).These poor figures of safety in developing countries was obvious in statement ofJaselkis et al (2002) that greater effort is required to control a construction project in adeveloping country especially in the areas of quality and safety. For example in HongKong, Safety is one of the most difficult issues facing the construction industry there,where the accident rate in construction is reported as highest when compared to otherindustries. (Ahmed et al, 2002)In his research, Koehn et al (1995) emphasized that preventing occupational injuriesand illness should be a primary concern of all employers. He also stated that safety ofboth project personnel and construction workers cannot be guaranteed by legislationalone, nor should safety be the sole responsibility of the employer, the contractor.Employees must be involved. Construction safety in developing countries has somefeatures as follows (Koehn et al, 1995):11

• There is a significant difference between large and small contractors. Most largefirms do have a safety policy, on paper, but employees generally are not aware ofits existence.• For the majority of contractors, maximizing profit – not safety – is the primeconcern.• Injuries generally are unreported; however, if necessary, a laborer might receivefirst aid or preliminary medical care.• Workers themselves consider accidents as due to their own negligence, and acceptthat construction is a dangerous occupation.• Owners and consultants do stress safety before work commences, but as the workprogresses their concern for deadlines becomes a priority and they tend to pay lessattention to safety.• Compensation is generally paid in the event of the death of a worker.• To enforce compliance with the rules and regulations enacted by the foregoinglegislation, work sites are periodically inspected by government officials.Unfortunately, inspections are not regularly conducted.2.1.3 Construction safety in Arabic regionThe construction industry in Saudi Arabia employs 15% of the total labor force andaccounts for 14% of the total energy consumption in the country (Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin, 2002). In Arabic region, construction safety conditions resemble those indeveloping countries. In the construction industry, the working environment isconstantly changing, sites exist for a relatively short time and the activities andinherent risks change daily (Jannadi & Assaf, 1998; Kartam et al, 2000; Jannadi &Bu-Khamsin, 2002). It was found that higher frequencies of construction accidentsoccurred on projects that were over budget and those that were competitively bid(Kartam et al, 2000).Kartam et al (2000) summarized safety problems in Kuwait as follows:1. Competitive tendering2. Lack of safety regulations12

3. Small size of most construction firms4. Extensive use of subcontractors5. Lack of relevant accident data6. Extensive use of foreign labor7. Disorganized labor8. High labor turnover9. Low priority of safety10. Seasonal employment and weather effect11. Other problemsKartam et al (2000) in his research did not mention management in safety problems inKuwait. Jannadi & Bu-Khamsin (2002) found in questionnaire that the most importantthree factors influencing safety performance are; (1) management involvement; (2)personal protective equipment; and (3) emergency/disaster planning and preparation.One of the most prevailing problems in developing and Arabic regions is that workersand engineers receive almost no safety training and are mostly uninformed about thecompany's safety programs or policies (Kartam et al, 2000).The absence of a unified set of safety regulations adversely affects the enforcement ofsafety on the job site.2.1.4 Construction safety in PalestineHealth and Safety in Gaza Strip is not widely recognized as inherent characteristic ofconstruction projects. In many cases, contractors consider health and safety a legalrequirement that means spending money without any profit, although a quick look atthe cost of workplace injuries and the potential return on investing in accidentprevention shows that a safe and healthy workplace can be a good profit. Thissituation resulted in the increased number of accidents recently.Construction safety affects three main elements of a project; human; cost; and quality.Human is considered as the most important. Human injury influences both cost and13

quality and thus productivity. Injury costs a lot of money including treatment andcompensation costs.2.2 Construction qualityQuality in construction is one of most important factors necessary for the projectsuccess. Most of project parties including owner, contractor, and consultants areaware of quality on jobsite. Jenkins and Lew (2003) stated that it is the responsibilityof the contractor to provide the project owner with a facility that meets or exceeds thequality standards required by the contract documents. Moreover, Xiao and Proverbs(2002) introduced in their research that clients’ long-term interests lie in the highquality of their projects. They also recommended that low cost and speedyconstruction should not be achieved at the expense of the quality of the project (Xiaoand Proverbs, 2002).On the other hand, there are other researchers who have found out that quality is nottop priority in construction. For example Jenkins and Lew (2003) stated thatconstruction managers sometimes view quality, cost, and timeliness as three views inconflict with each other thus making quality often sacrificed to save time and costs.Regarding costs inherent to quality, Abdel-Razek (1998) cited from CII that the costof quality was estimated to be at least one-fourth of the total cost of the project.Since the evolution of quality concepts in industry, researchers used many definitionsto define quality. Arditi and Gunaydin (1997) defined quality as meeting the legal,aesthetic and functional requirements of a project whether those requirements besimple, complex, stated in terms of the end result required, or be as a detaileddescription of what is to be done. Another definition of quality but in terms ofprofessional liability by law in Arditi and Gunaydin (1997) is a legal concept thatrequires all professionals to know their trade and practice it responsibly.Rwelamila (1995) has adopted definition of quality for the construction industry.According to his research, quality is defined as the measure of the fitness of thebuilding and its parts to fulfill the purpose defined in the brief or “conformance toestablished requirements” (Rwelamila, 1995).There are other definitions in Rwelamila (1995) for different aspects of quality:14

• Quality management: is that aspect of the overall management function ofthe project which determines and implements the quality policy. The qualitypolicy hinges on achieving the client’s requirements (which are set in thebrief, embodied in the project drawings and specifications).• Quality policy: this embraces the overall quality intentions and directions of aproject as regards quality, as formally expressed by the project topmanagement.• Quality system: this system is defined as a project organizational structure,responsibilities, procedures, processes and resources for implementing qualitymanagement. Such a system must, of necessity, be made up of a number ofelements. Some of these elements will provide quality control by eliminatingnon-conformance, and others will supply verification, or assurance, thatstandards established from the client brief have been met.• Quality assurance: embraces all those planned and systematic actionsnecessary to provide adequate confidence that a building will satisfy givenrequirements for quality.• Quality control: this includes the operational techniques and activities thatare used to fulfill requirements for quality.Quality approaches differ amongst industries. But, there are, generally, twoapproaches to quality in construction; conformance to requirements approach(Torbica and Stroh, 1999; Smallwood and Ventur, 2003; Pheng and Ke-Wei, 1996;Cited by Crosby in Abohimed, 2001; Cited by Costello in Jenkins and Lew, 2003)and customer satisfaction approach (Torbica and Stroh, 1999; Cited by Rwelamila andSmallwood in Smallwood and Ventur, 2003). Conformance to requirements approachis adapted in construction industry as simply conforming to drawings andspecifications (Cited by Crosby in Torbica and Stroh, 1999). Meanwhile, according toTorbica and Stroh (1999), customer satisfaction defines quality as the extent to whicha product or service meets a customer’s expectations. It is important to mention thatcustomer in construction industry is generally defined as either owner or client.15

Despite their wide use, those two approaches have limitations in view of theirrelevance to current quality practices and requirements. Limitations of the twoapproaches are summarized in the following (Torbica and Stroh, 1999):Limitations of conformance to requirements approach:i. Its primary focus is internal,ii.It assumes that providing a facility, which satisfies the design andspecifications, as developed by a designer and interpreted and implemented bya constructor, it is of high quality,iii. It assumes that we can get stable and complete requirements,iv.It ignores the potential mismatch between what is specified and what thecustomer needs or wants.Limitations of conformance to customer satisfaction:i. it is the most complex definition of qualityii.it is the most difficult to measure for different customers place differentweights on the various attributes of a product and serviceiii. There are no commonly accepted methods of measuring customer satisfactionin the construction industry due to the existence of a wide variety of customersthat can be found across the spectrum of construction projects.iv.The absence of a generally acceptable operational definition of customersatisfaction in construction appears to result in neglected implementation ofthis critical concept.2.2.1 Quality ManagementQuality management has been well known for several industries. Unlike theconstruction industry, it is also a well-known precept that the manufacturing sectorhas notably well instituted quality systems. However, this is not to say thatmanagement systems which have worked well in the manufacturing sector cannot beapplied to construction (Pheng and Ke-Wei, 1996). Quality management is one aspect16

of project management that is required for the success of project. Smallwood andVentur (2003) mentioned in their research that project quality management is one ofnine project management knowledge areas where, as cited by Project ManagementInstitute, quality planning, quality assurance, and quality control are identified as themajor project quality management processes.Quality management processes are related to rework in construction. It is believedthat poor quality management would lead to larger rework. Rework can be defined aswork required beyond that initially required and/or envisaged conforming torequirements (Smallwood and Ventur, 2003). Research undertaken by the BuildingResearch Establishment in the UK (Cited in Pheng and Ke-Wei, 1995; Rwelamila,1995) has shown that slightly more than 50 per cent of construction faults werecaused by design deficiencies, 10 per cent by product failure and 40 per cent by poorworkmanship.Research conducted in the USA on nine industrial projects determined the averagecost of rework to be 12.4%, and normal work to be 87.2% of project cost. The 12.4%was constituted as follows: client changes (3.3%); design errors (3.3%); constructionerrors (2.8%), and other (3%). Research conducted among general contractors inSouth Africa determined rework to constitute on average, 13% of the value ofcompleted construction (Cited by Smallwood and Rwelamila in Smallwood andVentur, 1998). It was also found in another research that the average cost of reworkon industrial projects exceeded 12%. Design deviations accounted for roughly 80% ofthe increased costs, while construction deviations accounted for about 20% (Cited byCII in Abdel-Razek, 1998).17

Figure 1 shows the relation between rework and quality management where 15% ofwasted effort were saved by applying quality management.Figure 1: Costs and benefits of quality management (Smallwood and Ventur, 2003)Like other management issues, quality management is not static. Pheng and Ke-Wei(1996) suggested that the inspection-oriented quality system, which is highlyprevalent in the construction fraternity, will be superseded by prevention-orientedquality management. It is also very much noticed that inspection is the most commonway of achieving quality, even though it occurs downstream (Cited by Landin inSmallwood and Ventur, 1998). This reflects the reactive culture of quality inconstruction instead of proactive culture. But it can be noticed that the preventionstrategy saves much more than inspection does. Abdul-Rahman (1996) stated that theamount of cost incurred in prevention is minimal when compared to the cost ofrework, scrap material and lost time. More nation-wide vision regarding benefits ofprevention strategy was shown in other research. Loss prevention consumes capitalresources, and with better education and training devices the effect may beminimized, freeing capital for more productive investments (Cited by Carter andDoherty in Ahmed et al, 2003).2.2.2 Total Quality ManagementAbohimed (2001) mentioned that the introduction of total quality managementconcepts can be traced to the first management consultant, an engineer namedFrederick W. Taylor. Total quality management (TQM) can be defined as a group of18

organizational programs aiming at maximizing satisfaction level of customer throughthe full commitment to continuous quality improvement (Dessler, 2002).Whiletraditional quality management is concerned in end product, total quality managementfocuses on managing the processes that produce the results (Cited by Adams inKaliher, 2003). Love et al (2000) said that the TQM philosophy stresses a systematic,integrated, consistent, organization-wide perspective involving all employees where it– TQM – focuses primarily on total satisfaction for both internal and externalcustomers, within a management environment that seeks continuous improvement ofall systems and processes. It should, however, be noted that the tools associated withTQM can be as readily applied in a stable environment as in the manufacturing sectorbut in construction, where customers’ requirements are increasingly complex andexpectations uncertain, the application of such tools can become difficult (Pheng andKe-Wei, 1996).TQM was adopted to meet requirements of the various industries. Thus, features ofTQM will face little differences while keeping the main concept stable. In theirresearch, there are six key features of TQM as follows (Shammas-Toma et al, 1998):i. Customer/supplier relationships.ii.Prevention rather than detection of defects.iii. Leadership.iv.Change in organizational culture.v. Emphasis on team work.vi.The use of statistical tools.Relatively, other scholars have found or seen similar features of TQM. The mostcommon elements agreed upon by scholars in the field are top managementcommitment, customer focus, quality data and information, employee involvement,training and continuous improvement (Cited by Al-Sulimani and Sharad in Curry andKadasah, 2002).Salaheldin (2003) in his research set guidelines that might be of importance topromote TQM strategy implementation by Egyptian manufacturers. The mainmanagerial implications in his research are:19

• The study demonstrates that results of forces that promote or prohibit TQMimplementation obtained in one developing country may be applicable to anotherless developed country.• The findings of the study enhance the understanding of the impact of topmanagement support and employee involvement upon the introduction of TQMstrategy by Egyptian manufacturers.• The successful implementation of TQM strategy in the Egyptian industrial sectorwould help to improve the quality of goods and services, enhance corporateperformance and may boost the demand for Egyptian products in internationalmarkets.• TQM strategy can be used as a strategic weapon whether to face recent changes inthe domestic and international environment or the increasing trend to privatisestate-owned enterprises, i.e. transformation era, through strengthening qualityimprovement efforts by the adoption of TQM.• Improving workers’ skills and quality consciousness through enhancing trainingprograms is important for TQM implementation.• Policy makers and industry leaders should be aware that the imminent competitivepressures affecting the domestic markets can be appeased through improvingfirms’ performance and this hinges on the adoption of TQM strategy.• Because the implementation of TQM strategy takes a long time, manufacturingfirms that are willing to implement it should be patient and persistent and alsoembracing customer orientation philosophy.• Policy makers in the Egyptian industrial sector should enhance the capability ofmanufacturing firms that are willing to implement TQM strategy throughincreased funding, grants, incentives, and educational programs.TQM is not an easy concept to implement unless it was supported by many factorsincluding top management commitment. The most common barrier to effective TQMimplementation is the failure to take the subject seriously (Cited by Binny in Curryand Kadasah, 2002).20

2.2.3 Construction quality in developed countriesIt is taken for granted that construction quality practices vary amongst differentcountries and cultures. In comparison between construction quality in developedcountries, Japanese have a deep-rooted culture of quality and their contractors regardquality as the top priority. They believe their clients will be satisfied if they cancomplete projects to the required quality and on time and then profits willautomatically follow. Japanese contractors work with their subcontractors on a morestable and closer basis. In contrast, cost and speed are preferred to quality in the UKand the USA (Xiao and Proverbs, 2002).Developed countries have stepped fast and deep in construction quality approaches.Quality is now inherent to successful companies whose records of quality show goodperformance towards "Zero Defect" approach. The quality assurance is an integralpart in project management in many industrial countries such as the USA, UK, Japanand Canada (Al-Momani, 2000). He also mentioned that quality became a majorfactor leading to organizational success and company growth. No one can deny thatreaching high quality levels is common to all countries. Abdel-Razek (1998)mentioned that the growth of international trade and of multinational companies hasforced national construction companies to direct their attention toward improvingquality.Pheng and Ke-Wei (1996) explained the process of construction quality that it beginswith the client stating the requirements exactly, and the designer taking theserequirements and creating a complete set of drawings and specifications. This takesmore time in the beginning but it probably saves time and certainly costs in the longrun.2.2.4 Construction quality in developing countriesQuality in developing countries did not reach a sufficient level of acceptance.Scholars still try to search that area in order to develop and institute the quality culturein the industry. Quality is rapidly becoming as important a discriminating factor asprice has been traditionally (Cited by Harris and McCaffer in Abdel-Razek, 1998).However, according to Abdel-Razek (1998), the construction industry in Egypt is still21

characterized by poor quality. It is also important to include that there is little currentpublished work addressing construction quality issues concerning the economic,political, social and technological environment of developing countries.Smallwood and Ventur (2003) stressed that the achievement of quality is critical asthe non-achievement thereof results in rework, and client, designer, contractor andeven worker dissatisfaction. Abdel-Razek (1998) stated that like the majority ofdeveloping economies, Egypt has been relying completely on the philosophies,methods and techniques concerning quality that were initiated and developed in boththe West and the Far East. Culture in developing countries is difficult to adaptchanges. For example, it is noticed that the implementation of TQM by manufacturingfirms in less developed countries is not an easy task, where there are many factorsdriving or resisting the implementation of it (Cited by Mersha in Salaheldin, 2003).Project parties still think of budget and time as the only factors in concern. Al-Momani (2000) in his research ensured that construction professionals put too muchemphasis on time and budget as a measure for success at the expense of other criteria.2.2.5 Factors affecting construction quality in developing countriesConstruction quality cannot be considered an individual concept. On the contrary, it isrelated to many other factors that influence it. In Singapore, factors that affectconstruction quality are as follow (Cited by Low and Goh in Pheng and Ke-Wei,1996): (These are ranked below in their order of importance)1. Poor workmanship by the contractors in completing the works results from lowtender prices.2. The drawings and specifications do not specify clearly the intentions of thedesigners. Discrepancies are found between different consultants’ drawings whichhave resulted in poor co-ordination during construction.3. The contractors pay more attention to completing the works on schedule andcontrolling the costs to within budget than to achieving quality in construction.4. Poor co-ordination exists between the contractors and the subcontractors as wellas the nominated subcontractors.22

5. The designers do not consider the “buildability” problems in design. For example,the designers do not consider the use of special construction methods to achievethe tight tolerance caused by site constraints.6. The contractors cannot plan and control the works. The contractors lack the skillsto interpret the design and cannot provide the end products on site in accordancewith the design and specifications.7. The completion period fixed by the client and consultants is not realistic.8. The design does not satisfy the relevant codes and standards. This has resulted in alarge amount of remedial work for the contractors and delay in the completion ofprojects.9. The contractors do not know how to establish a quality system to control theworks.10. The materials chosen by the consultants do not satisfy the standards or theBuilding Control Authority.A research in another developing country by Abdel-Razek (1998) concluded factorsof construction quality improvement as follows:i. Improving design and planning during the pre-construction phaseii.Developing and improving quality assurance & control systemsiii. Improving the financial level and standard of living of employeesiv.Improving the accuracy of cost estimatingv. Proper classification of contractors, consultants and projectsvi.Employees' conscientiousnessvii. Improving training for contractors, owners and consultantsviii. Encouraging ISO 9000ix.Increasing contractors' technical and managerial efficiencyx. Improving maintenance systems during and after constructionxi.Improving utilization of resourcesxii. Encouraging and improving specialization in construction work23

xiii. Co-operation between construction industry and scientific organizationsxiv. Participating and co-operating with advanced international organizationsxv. Defining responsibilities between project partiesxvi. Encouraging innovation for simpler and more accurate work methodsConstruction quality in developing countries faces many obstacles due to complexnature of construction industry. Barriers and restraints to implementation ofconstruction quality are many. Griffith (2000) stressed that over the last decade,International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9000 certification has, in themain, been considered sufficient to illustrate a company’s commitment to deliver aproduct or service. This idea changed recently. In Saudi Arabia, what is perhaps \moreimportant still is the finding that project parties do not feel ISO 9000 was in itselfsufficient to produce quality products. Nor was it found to be sufficient in establishingan effective quality management system (Curry and Kadasah, 2002). Abdel-Razek(1998) concluded in his study that manufacturing firms’ leaders in Egypt should knowthat there is a difference between ISO certification and TQM strategy where theformer is a prerequisite for the last.The following are a summary of barriers to achieving and improving quality in SouthAfrica (Cited by Alman in Smallwood and Ventur, 2003):i. the dominant use of the traditional construction procurement system (TCPS)ii.contractors competing primarily on costiii. short contract durationsiv.separation of design and constructionv. intricate and impractical detailsvi.poor design coordinationvii. unrealistic specificationsFinally, Abdel-Razek (1998) concluded that due to the great importance to developingcountries to use appropriate methods in quality management, it is important to ensurethat, in most cases, saimple basic methods and techniques will give a better result thancurrently fashionable methods.24

2.3 Construction ProductivityProductivity including measurement and improvement is considered a key factor ofsuccess in construction industry which is known for its complexity, repeated delaysand cost overruns. It was the focus of extensive research by academia who tried toevaluate and improve it. The dissatisfaction of project parties by end-product or theprocess of construction pressured construction practitioners and academia to improveperformance and enhance productivity. Construction productivity is widely referred aslabor productivity also.Definitions of production and productivity are wide-ranging. Langford et al (2000)defined production as the strategically organized combination of labor, plant, andmaterials as an economic entity with a view to developing the social, economic, andtechnical capacity to carry out construction or civil engineering projects. There havebeen also many definitions of productivity according to relative industrynotwithstanding the more usual method of defining productivity as Proverbs (1998b)stated is output divided by input (e.g. operative hours)2.3.1 Construction Productivity in Developed CountriesIn the construction industry point of view, Hendrickson (2000) defined productivity asratio of output by input. He also included that “it is important to note that laborproductivity is a measure of the overall effectiveness of an operating system inutilizing labor, equipment and capital to convert labor efforts into useful output, and isnot a measure of the capabilities of labor alone” (Hendrickson, 2000). The importanceof productivity in construction projects is highly reflected by the innumerableresearch and study on construction productivity. Proverbs et al (1999) stated that areasonably correct assessment of the labor cost is fundamental to the accuracy of anyestimate. Certainly, assessment of the labor cost cannot be performed withoutmeasuring productivity.According to Janssen (2000), there are huge inequalities in productivity betweenleading members of the European Union (EU). For example, a study on productivityrates of reinforcement fixing among French, German, and UK construction25

contractors by Proverbs et al (1998b) reveal that contractors in the UK would be moreproductive than their French and German counterparts at reinforcement fixingoperations (for a model project) and may also incur the lowest labor costs for suchwork. On the other hand, UK contractors could be less productive than theircounterparts in French and German for concrete placing operations (Proverbs et al,1998a).2.3.2 Factors affecting productivityDue to complex and varying nature of construction industry, techniques for measuringproductivity are numerous and so are the factors affecting it. Productivity isinfluenced by many factors (Zakeri, 1997; Motwani, 1995; Proverbs et al, 1998b).Actually those factors are variable either regionally or characteristically. To myknowledge, recent studies of productivity concentrate on labor as a main factorinfluencing productivity despite of that some authors holds that natural resources isthe predominant factor which is reflected by the failure of current studies around theworld to improve productivity.In this regard, Bleischwitz (2000) showed that the contribution of natural resourcesand ecosystems to economic processes still remains underassessed by marketevaluation and productivity analysis thus it is necessary to establish a research agendato redefine the theoretical framework of productivity. In furtherance of his study(Bleischwitz, 2000), it is claimed that recalling the history of the productivity concepthelps to understand in a hermeneutical way why statistical data, measurementconcepts, and many econometric models are still biased towards labor and largelyignore services from the natural environment (as well as from non-paid labor). Areport by Center for Construction Industry Studies (1999) highlighted many factorsinfluencing labor productivity as follows:Project UniquenessTechnologyManagementLabor Organization26

Real Wage TrendsConstruction TrainingHendrickson (2000) divided factors affecting quality into three main categoriesincluding sub-categories: labor characteristics; project work conditions; or nonproductiveactivities. Those factors are sub-categorized as follows (Hendrickson,2000):The labor characteristics include:age, skill and experience of workforceleadership and motivation of workforceThe project work conditions include among other factors:Job size and complexity.Job site accessibility.Labor availability.Equipment utilization.Contractual agreements.Local climate.Local cultural characteristics, particularly in foreign operations.In this regard, Mohamed and Srinavin (2002) concluded that the efficiency of ahuman worker depends on the working conditions and the skill level of the worker.The working conditions, in turn, depend on the atmospheric condition, which is acombination of site location and thermal environment. Weather effect on productivitywas presented in many researches. El-Rayes and Moselhi (2001) stated thatconstruction projects are executed usually in an outdoor environment, and, therefore,are affected by various weather conditions. Furthermore, Srinavin and Mohamed(2003) stressed that numerous studies have found that human performance andproductivity depend on the thermal environment although most of them failed todetermine a direct relationship between productivity and climatic, activity andpersonal parameters.27

The typical construction working day can be divided into two categories; productiveand unproductive periods. Kaming et al (1997a) defined the productive period of aworking day as the time spent on construction activities, for example laying bricks,fixing formwork and fixing steel rods, while unproductive time the time associatedwith poor productivity, that is, time lost in one or all of the following six categories(Cited by Imbert in Kaming 1997a):1. Internal delays--including times when materials are unavailable and/or crew andmachine interference.2. Lack of skill--including operational mismanagement.3. Waiting and relaxation--including waiting for instructions, supervision andchatting among workmates.4. Supervision--including time spent understanding the construction specificationand drawings, etc.5. Extra breaks--including late starts and early quits.6. Official breaks--including afternoon breaks at 12.00 to 13.00p.m. and on Fridays11.00 to 12.00 (prayer time for Moslem workers)Al Abo Omar and Mangin (2002) summarized factors that have an influence onproductivity:LaborResource availability and harmonization between themMethods of constructionQuality of the managementControl of resource costsControl of time and wasteLove and Irani (2003) concluded that non-productive time is waste because it consistsof inactivity (e.g. waiting time, idle time, and traveling) and ineffective work (e.g.rectifying mistakes and errors, working slowly and inventing work). The nonproductiveactivities include among other factors (Hendrickson, 2000):Indirect labor required to maintain the progress of the project28

Rework for correcting unsatisfactory workTemporary work stoppage due to inclement weather or material shortageTime off for union activitiesAbsentee time, including late start and early quitsNon-working holidaysStrikesEmployee motivation or the desire to perform is the foundation of productivityimprovement (Cited by Huysamen in Hinzelman and Smallwood, 2003). They alsomentioned (Hinzelman and Smallwood, 2003) other factors like employeecompetence, which is gained through training; and work environment. Hinzelman andSmallwood (2003) concluded that the environment of a construction site does affectdemotivation levels of site personnel. Specifically several variables were significantlylinked to this result, including long hours, chaos, non-recognition for work done andcolleagues’ aggressive management style (Smithers and Walker, 2000).2.3.3 Productivity ImprovementProductivity trends vary from location to another and from to time to time. Inaddition, the productivity for the same work item is not constant throughout theconstruction period, and varies at different stages of the production (Lam et al, 2001).Productivity improvement can be defined as the establishment of approaches toimprove this productivity index (Baines, 1997). Hoffman and Mehra (1999)considered productivity improvement as a process to achieve higher levels of outputwhile consuming same or lesser amounts of input resources. Research onimprovement of labor productivity did not end. Improvement of constructionproductivity should be a major and continual concern of those who are responsible forcost control and quality of constructed facility (Hendrickson, 2000). Debrah and Ofori(2001) asserted that the main priority of the government is to improve constructionproductivity by tackling the factors which impede productivity enhancement in theindustry.29

Improvement of productivity should not stop at improving manpower but it should bemore total such that it includes improving many areas of construction industry.Although there have been many attempts in different studies introduced techniquesand procedures aimed at improving productivity, it is still suffering from either slowprogress or declination. According to Hoffman and Mehra (1999) it appears thatproductivity improvement programs have frequently produced disappointing results.The different estimates of productivity improvement are partially a reflection of thedifferent distribution of types of construction activity in different divisions of aconstruction company. Baines (1997) expressed that the basic approach towardsproductivity is the root cause of failure. A study by Goodrum et al (2002) presentedevidence that the US construction productivity measured at the activity level andusing a variety of data sources improved between 1976 and 1998.2.3.4 Productivity measurementProductivity measurement does not have one type of measurement. There are manytechniques used in measuring productivity according to the nature of the constructionprojects. This means that measuring construction productivity could be uncountablebased on the unique nature of each construction project. There is no standard way ormethod for measuring construction workers’ productivity (CWP) becauseconstruction involves many complex operations and relationships (Cited by Oglesbyet al in Mohamed and Srinavin, 2002). Nonetheless, four theories of how productivitymay be measured can be detected as follows (Langford, 2000):1. productivity as a ratio2. productivity as a rate of return3. productivity as a form of efficiency4. productivity as a utilization of resourcesGoodrum et al (2002) stated that the difficulty in measuring productivity accurately isnot only unique to the construction industry but this problem has stumped economistsacross a broad range of industries. The simplest form of productivity measurement isthat it entails a comparison of outputs to inputs normally by calculation of aproductivity index (output/input ratio) (Baines, 1997). Baines (1997) also illustrated30

the importance of measurement as “A productivity measurement system enables anorganization to formulate clear goals and targets with regard to productivity and toidentify problem areas of the organization.” (Baines, 1997).Abdul-Kadir and Price (1995) introduced that one of the numerous difficulties ofconstruction industry is the alarmingly rapid decline in the growth of productivity.Teicholtz (2001) used real output of construction per work-hour as measured by theUS Department of Commerce and the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, and found thatthe construction industry’s labor productivity declined by 0.72% at an annualcompound rate from 1964 to 2000.2.3.5 Construction productivity in developing countriesThere have been several researches on labor productivity in developing countries. Thedifferent nature of developing countries in the field of construction urged toinvestigate the relation between labor and productivity more thoroughly becauseconstruction in developing countries is a labor-intensive one. Besides, cost of labor indeveloping countries is greatly cheaper than in developed countries. Due to its criticalimportance to the profitability of most construction projects, productivity is regardedas one of the most frequently discussed topics in the construction industry (Cited byHancher and Abdl-Elkhalek in Srinavin and Mohamed, 2003).Labor productivity is not only a measure of output with regard to input, but a tool forconstruction estimation and bidding. Ersoz (1999) illustrated that the success of aconstruction company in today’s competitive market largely depends on accurateestimation of productivity. Labor productivity in developing countries doesn’t greatlyvary from each other (Kaming et al, 1997b). Low (2001) listed some factors thataffect the labor productivity as:Efficient site managementQuality of subcontractorsRelevant skills of tradesmenKaming et al (1997a) summarized the problems of productivity as follows:1. Lack of material31

2. Lack of tools3. Equipment breakdown4. Rework5. Changing of workers6. Interference7. Absenteeism8. Supervision delays9. Changing of foremen10. Too much work11. Over crowdedUnfortunately, safety was considered in previous the problems list. It is widelyknown that an injury would either stop worker or stop the work which means inboth two cases a low productivity. Table 4 shows productivity problems accordingto different ranking between developed and developing countries (Kaming et al,1997a, Cited by Olomolaiye in Kaming et al, 1997a). Lack of materials stayed onfirst rank in all countries surveyed which supportTable 2: Comparison of productivity problems with other countries (Kaming et al, 1997a)Productivity Problems Indonesia Nigeria UK USARank Rank Rank RankLack of material 1st 1st 1st 1stLack of equipment 5th 3rd 5th 2ndInterference 3rd 6th 2nd 5thAbsenteeism 4th 5th 6th 6thSupervision delays 6th 4th 4th 4thRework 2nd 2nd 3rd 3rdProductivity problems continue to come up in other developing countries likeSingapore. In spite of the impressive performance of Singapore's constructionindustry over the past few years, the construction sector is perceived as a low-32

productivity sector, because of its low technology image and its employment of alarge number of mainly unskilled foreign workers (Lim and Alum, 1995).Nevertheless, it should be noticed that productivity has increased in Singapore at anaverage rate of 3.1% over the 10 years period 1982 – 1991 (Cited by ConstructionIndustry Development Board-Singapore in Lim and Alum, 1995) based on theeconomic indicator used which considers productivity as value added per worker(Lim and Alum, 1995).Kaming et al (1997a) in his study used NEDO activity sampling technique to observecraftsmen on about 400 occasions randomly on five work items: working, walking,talking with supervisor, talking with mate and inactive. The proportion ofunproductive time of labors in Indonesia discovered in his study (Kaming et al,1997a) is comparatively lower than that associated with Nigeria and the UK whereunproductive time is about %50 (Cited by Olomolaiye in Kaming et al, 1997a).However, the output of craftsmen (especially) in the UK is much higher although theywork for fewer hours. In other words, Indonesia, although working longer hours andspending more time working (On average, Indonesian craftsmen spend about 75% oftheir time working productively although their actual outputs are about 87% oftargeted output), have a lower output due to a lack of skill and low levels of trainingand education of craftsmen (Kaming et al, 1997a).Developing countries share the characteristic of low productivity. In their pilot surveyconducted on Iranian construction projects, Zakeri et al (1997) found out thatproductive work was between 33 and 56%. In Turkey, the labor-intensive productionis still in use in the construction sector which is one of the most unproductive sectors(Kazaz and Ulubeyli, 2004). This also shows that labor in developing countriesconstitutes a driving force in the construction industry in terms of cost, quality andproductivity. Jannadi (1995) stated that workers are the ones who carry out the workin a company, and they can be an important factor in making the company profitableor bankrupt. In other words, labor becomes a more important input in the productionphase (Kazaz and Ulubeyli, 2004).In an attempt to focus on root causes of low productivity and performance inconstruction projects, Lim and Alum (1995) concluded the causes of low constructionproductivity in Singapore include the following:33

(i) the unattractiveness of the construction trades to local workers,(ii) the lack of recognition,(iii) the large, mostly unskilled and transient, pool of foreign workers,(iv) and the presence of workers from various sources, speaking differentlanguages which adds to communications problems on site.It is important to talk about time and cost overruns in labor productivity because thosetwo problems are inherent to productivity. Kaming et al (1997b) stated that Indonesiasuffers from construction time and cost overruns like other developing countriesincluding Malaysia, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. Kazaz and Ulubeyli (2004) includedthat construction industries in many developed and developing countries suffer fromdelays and cost overruns due to labor productivity. Poor labor productivity is acceptedas one of the main causes of delays in Turkey (Cited by Arditi et al in Kazaz andUlubeyli, 2004).2.3.6 Construction productivity in Arabic regionConstruction productivity in Arabic region does not differ very much from those indeveloping countries. The construction industry as a whole experiences a lag withregard to developed countries. Odeh and Battaineh (2002) stated that the constructionindustry in Jordan is not adequately prepared for project management problemsaccompanying the anticipated boom in construction activities and the increasingcomplexity of projects. Low productivity in Arabian Gulf area caused delays inconstruction projects (Cited by Fereig and Qaddumi in Assaf et al, 1995).According to Odeh and Battaineh (2002) construction projects in Jordan experience alow productivity although labor supply is not a problem considering the relativelyinexpensive and flux of foreign and local laborers. This problem may be attributed tolack of incentives for higher productivity, lack of or improper training, and absence oftrade unions or associations that regulate, train, and classify construction trades (Odehand Battaineh, 2002).34

2.3.7 Construction productivity in PalestineThe construction productivity in Palestine is mainly influenced by border closure andincursions by Israeli occupation forces resulting in delay of materials and workstoppages. This issue is understandable because work cannot be done without thenecessary materials. Delay in material delivery is the most important factor affectingproductivity (Kaming et al, 1997a) because Productivity (Kaming et al, 1997b) willsuffer if the materials planning process is not executed properly.2.4 Cost associated with construction safety, quality andproductivityAccidents in general cost money. No matter how it does, but it affects the contractor’sfinancial status much. This point made many researchers investigate the reasons ledsafety to cost money. Moreover, researchers worked on reduction of accidents inorder to reduce associated financial losses. The financial costs borne by contractorsdue to construction accidents and its related works have been a hot topic for manyyears (Tang et al, 2004).Project success indications changed nowadays. Navon (2004) stated that success fromthe project management’s viewpoint is when the project is completed with the lowestpossible cost as quickly as can be achieved, with the highest quality, with noaccidents, etc. Levitt and Samelson (1993) stressed that construction industry hasalways been a very cost-conscious industry. They also concluded from theirexperience that when foremen and superintendents start to see what accidents reallycost the firm, they develop a sharply heightened interest in preventing them.Baxendale and Jones (2000) also assumed that improved health and safetymanagement systems make good financial sense and should be part of the costconscious culture of companies dedicated to efficiency and profitability. They alsostressed that it has been recognized that a reduction in the level of accidents would bethe principal quantifiable benefit of new construction design and managementregulationsQuality systems have been widely accused of being bureaucratic, costly and with thepotential for creating burdensome paperwork (Townsend 1999).35

One of the major problems facing safety, quality and productivity is the competition ycontractors on tenders based basically on cost.One of the methods for improving safety suggested by (McWilliams et al, 2001) wasto include safety costs in tenders. They also said that the end client needs moreunderstanding that safety costs and he needs to be prepared to pay the costs.Lim and Alum (1995) stress that decisions made during the conceptual planning stagehave the greatest influence on project costs. The items that influence project costs, indescending order of importance, are (Lim and Alum, 1995): conceptual planning; design; procurement; construction; startup (i.e. commissioning).In Arabic region, safety still suffers. Kartam et al (2000) concluded that manymanagers in Kuwait think that safety procedures substantially increase the cost ofconstruction. Moreover, accident costs and safety procedures are not considered in thecontractor's bid and only the insurance cost is considered for those items (Kartam etal, 2000). Unfortunately, contractors often feel that their bids will be considered evenif they do not make proper provisions for safety costs. Assaf et al (1995) introducedconstruction projects in Saudi Arabia suffer from construction time and cost overrunsdue to labor productivity.2.5 Relationship between safety, quality and productivityin construction projectsThe issue of linking safety, quality, and productivity to each other was the majorconcern of several authors especially in the field of manufacturing industry. Forexample, Yeow and Sen (2003) concluded that ergonomic interventions inworkstation electrical tests resulted in many benefits in terms of improvements inquality, productivity and OSH, reduction in rejection cost and increase in revenue.Navon (2004) introduced that success from the project management’s viewpoint iswhen the project is completed with the lowest possible cost as quickly as can be36

achieved, with the highest quality, with no accidents. In other words, integrationbetween safety, quality and productivity would stand for the success of anyconstruction project.Hoffman and Mehra (1999) reviewed and summarized the emphasis of experts put onmanagement relationship between quality and productivity (Table 3) which opens thedoor for establishing a TQM program prior to embarking on a journey of improvingproductivity.Table 3: Quality-productivity relationships as per various authors (Hoffman and Mehra, 1999)AuthorRelationshipDemingCrosbyJuranGarvinQuality means improved productivityQuality means improved operating measuresQuality means preventionPrevention implies improved productivityAnalytical tools improve qualityImproved quality means improved productivityQuality and productivity have similar roots:Both rely on reduction of disruptions and rework, improvement towork processes, and a well-trained workforceQuality and productivity reflect how workers feel about their jobsProductivity and quality are positively related37

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY3.1 IntroductionThis chapter describes the methods and procedures used to carry out thesis study.Methodology chapter will discuss structure of thesis and the way it was developed.The chapter will define the methods used for conducting the questionnaire and theresearch. It will also show how the researcher could prove or not prove hypothesisbased on the objectives defined in the research proposal. This chapter will includeinformation about how the sample was selected, a description of the sample,reliability and validity, and the instruments being used. In addition, data collectionand data analysis procedures will be provided. The chapter will conclude with themethodological limitations.3.2 Research StudyThrough working on producing this thesis, the researcher phased the thesis into fourphases. The first phase included introduction and literature review. During this phase,the literature related to the thesis topic was reviewed which would support the thesishypothesis and strengthen the structure of questionnaire.Second phase of thesis included but not limited to developing the questionnaire,distribution of the questionnaire, and collection of data. Questionnaire aimed atextracting data from local contractors in order to achieve proposed objectives ofthesis.Third phase of thesis included refining and analysis of data collected. Discussion ofsuch results is part of this phase. Finally, fourth phase included the conclusion andrecommendation in addition to references used within the thesis. In this research,descriptive analysis methodology has been used through which the researcherattempted to describe the case, analyze data, show correlation between casecomponents and related opinions, research procedures, and relative consequences.38

Figure 2: Methodology Flowchart39

3.3 Research Population and Sample SizeResearch population consists of 105 Palestinian contractors in the Gaza Strip for theyear 2005 who were classified as first, second, and third class excluding fourth andfifth classes. The exclusion of fourth and fifth classes was due to the small size oftheir companies which would not give accurate or expressive answers regardingsafety and quality as a result of their poor administrative and practical experience.Surveyed population included companies which have a valid registration at thePalestinian Contractors Union (PCU) in the fields of building, roads, water andsewage, electro-mechanics, and public works.The term ‘sample’ means a specimen or part of a whole (population) which is drawnto show what the rest is like (Naoum, 1998). Similarly, sample is referred to as a subheadingof a unit that refers to population in statistics terminology. The main reasonsa sample is used lies within low cost and short time that a sample needs in order to bestudied especially when population is very large. Selecting the research sample is veryimportant and a great care must be taken when choosing the type of sample design.The following formula was used to determine the sample size (Ayyub and Mccuen,2003).ZSS =2× P × (1 − P)C2Where:SS = Sample sizeZ = Z value (e.g. 1.96 for 95% confidence level)P = Degree of variance between the elements of population percentageC = Confidence interval (margin of error), expressed as decimal (e.g., .05 = ±5)2(1.96) × 0.5×(1 − 0.5)SS =≈ 3852(0.5%)40

Correction for Finite PopulationSS SS= correcte ( SS − 1 ) 1+NWhereN = PopulationSScorrecte385=(385 −1)1+105≈ 83To ensure good representation of each stratum, the percentage of representationwithin strata was calculated as shown in Table 4:Where sample size equals percentage of relevant populationTable 4: Classification of sample size of the contracting companiesNumber ofcompanies(population)Number ofsampleNumber ofdistributedquestionnairesNumber ofrespondentsNumber of validrespondents105 83 83 71 61Table 4 shows that number of valid respondents is 61 although number ofrespondents was 71. After collection of data, received questionnaires have beenreviewed and it was found that 10 of them are not qualified for testing. 6 of 10invalid questionnaires were improperly filled by filling only 10% of thequestionnaire questions. The remaining 4 invalid questionnaires were filledusing one scale. In other words, the respondents filled one single answer forquestions.41

3.4 Research LocationResearch has been conducted in the Gaza Strip only not including West Bankdue to political situation. Gaza Strip is constituted of four governorates includingNorthern, Gaza, Middle, and Southern. Researcher has visited many contractingcompanies within the Gaza Strip for survey distribution and data collectionaccording to Table 5.Table 5: Questionnaire distribution in Gaza StripGovernorateNo. of distributed No. of No. of validsurveys respondents respondentsNorthern 15 13 11Gaza 40 35 31Middle 18 15 13Southern 10 8 6Total 83 71 613.5 Research InstrumentThe study of the relation between safety, quality, productivity, cost, time, andreligion is important for improving construction safety. The study of suchrelation requires precise measurement of the factors that relate one to each other.Researcher used questionnaire on occupational safety, quality and productivity.The questionnaire has been prepared by researcher with the use of previousstudies related to the subject of this research including Azhar et al (1995),Kartam et al (2000), Long et al (2004), Arditi and Mochtar (2000). Measuringfactors of study can provide a useful tool in assessing the relationship betweensafety, quality, productivity, cost, time, and religion, and how to help improvethe safety of project parties.3.5.1 Research MeasurementStanley (1946) has classified measurement levels into four levels; nominalmeasurement, ordinal measurement, interval measurement, and rationmeasurement (Cited in Wikipedia Encyclopedia). The most popular scales are42

nominal and ordinal scales. Nominal scale is nominal numbering which impliesbelonging to a classification. In nominal measurement the numerical values just"name" the attribute uniquely. No ordering of the cases is implied. On the otherhand, ordinal scale is a ranking of rating data which normally uses integers inascending or descending order. Distances between ranks do not have anymeaning. In this classification, the numbers assigned to objects represent therank order (1st, 2nd, 3rd etc.) of the items measured. The numbers are calledordinals. The variables are called ordinal variables or rank variables.In this research, ordinal scale has been used because the research aimed atranking the data extracted from respondents. The research data will be used formeasurement and ranking purposes.3.5.2 Relative Importance Index (RII) and RankingThe ranking has been based on the Relative Importance Index (RII). RII is acommonly used method in construction to obtain priority rankings of attributes,and it is particularly useful where a structured questionnaire is used to solicitmeasurements that are subjective in nature (Cited by Holt in Cheung et al, 2000).The mean item score for each factor within groups is calculated to obtain therelative importance index as follows (Odusami, 2002; Kumaraswamy and Chan,1996; Chinyio et al, 1997; Cheung, 2000; and Tam et al, 2000):Relative Importance Index =5n5 + 4n4+ 3n3+ 2n2+ 1n15NWhere n 1 = number of respondents for strongly disagree; n 2 = number ofrespondents for disagree; n 3 = number of respondents for neutral, n 4 = number ofrespondents for agree; and n 5 = number of respondents for strongly agree. Therelative importance indices are then ranked from the highest to the lowest for thefactors. The relative importance index ranges from 0 to 1 (Tam et al, 2000).43

3.6 Questionnaire DesignThe questionnaire has been designed to elaborate the opinion of contractingcompanies in the field of construction safety. The questionnaire has been designedaccording to the following steps:1. Literature related to research subject has been reviewed. Consequently,sentences reflecting safety, quality, and productivity measures taken bycontractors have been defined (Azhar et al, .2002, Long et al, 2004)2. Questionnaire and sentences have been reviewed by five safety experts at theIslamic university, al Azhar University, Ministry of Labor, DAI, andUNRWA. The thesis supervisor reviewed the questionnaire thoroughly whichinevitably enriched the research. They have thoroughly reviewed andcommented on questions. They have also recommended adding or alteringlittle text. They have also recommended dropping some questions that areirrelevant to the research.3. After the researcher had conducted the required modifications and suggestionson statements of questionnaire, the questionnaire came into a final version of145 statements.4. Five-point Likert scale which is most commonly used has been used in thisresearch. Five Likert scales have been chosen in order to expand the way therespondents would reply. One disadvantage of Five Likert scale is thatrespondents would have a tendency to answer in the middle or neutral, ifprovided the opportunity (Wikipedia Encyclopedia). A five-point scale can belabeled, agree strongly, agree somewhat, neutral, disagree somewhat, disagreestrongly. Statements have been phrased in a manner that reflects occupationalsafety at contracting companies. Responses (Likert scale) have been calculatedas follows:a. If respondent responses agree strongly, response is given (5) pointsb. If respondent responses agree somewhat, response is given (4) pointsc. If respondent responses neutral, response is given (3) pointsd. If respondent responses disagree somewhat, response is given (2) points44

e. If respondent responses disagree strongly, response is given (1) pointsIn this regard, high points that a tested questionnaire respondent obtains throughresponding one statement or all statements indicates high commitment and concern tosafety, quality, and productivity measures.Ordinal scale, which is a ranking or rating data that normally uses integers inascending or descending order, has been used to calculate relative index of each factorof questionnaire. The numbers assigned to the agreement or degree of influence (1, 2,3, 4, and 5) do not indicate that the interval between scales are equal, nor do theyindicate absolute quantities. They are merely numerical labels (Naoum, 1998). Thequestionnaire included 8 main parts as follows (See Appendix 1):Part I: Personal InformationThis part of questionnaire is related to the company profile in order to elaborate someimportant information that would enrich the research background. Informationelaborated from questionnaire included year of establishment, field of work,classification, number of engineers and workers, and cost of projects implementedwithin last five years, etc.Part II: Occupational Safety and HealthThis part generalizes basic information about the company profile in the fieldOccupational Safety and Health (OSH). This part is important since it draws thereader attention as to how the company considers OSH and the way OSH concept isdelivered to employees through top management. Questions of this part includedwhether the company has safety program, safety training, top managementcommitment, accident reports, type of injuries, and safety meetings, etc.Part III: Linkage between Quality and Occupational SafetyThis part and the coming parts constitute the main body of thesis objectives. This partis focused on whether a linkage between quality and safety exists in constructionprojects. Questions in this part included company's OSH policy, safety objectives,45

OSH and quality measures, OSH organization, OSH related training, OSH laws, OSHmonitoring, accident and injuries reporting, and labor, etc.46

Part IV: Linkage between Productivity and Occupational SafetyThis part of questionnaire highlights whether a linkage between productivity andsafety exists in construction projects. Questions in this part included productivityimprovement factors, supervision, laborer problems, subcontractors, and OSHprogram, etc.Part V: Linkage between Cost and Occupational SafetyThis part focuses on whether a linkage between cost and safety exists in constructionprojects. Questions in this part included project cost, wages, incentives,compensations, and safety engineer, etc.Part VI: Linkage between Time and Occupational SafetyThis part is dedicated to explore whether a linkage between time and safety exists inconstruction projects. Questions in this part included project duration, tight and shortschedules, and hot weather, etc.Part VII: Linkage between Religion and Occupational SafetyThis part focuses on whether a linkage between religion and safety exists inconstruction projects. This part is very sensitive one since it deals with the mostimportant value in human's life. This part was reviewed carefully in order to bring itinto best form of religious expressions and current safety conditions in constructionprojects. Questions in this part included religious beliefs, priorities, belief in Allah,justice, and equity, etc.3.6.1 Questionnaire Respondent's' RecommendationsFinally, the importance of this study has been introduced in the form of somequestions that required the respondents to answer. This part would contribute to thereliability of respondents' answers. Recommendations were also included to47

questionnaire questions in order to enrich recommendations chapter. Responses ofrecommendation questions inside the questionnaire would be very helpful and wouldwiden the recommendations because it elaborates opinions and experiences ofdifferent safety experts and professionals from construction site.3.6.2 Questionnaire descriptionThe questionnaire was classified into close form or restricted type. Closed questionsoften require short responses in the form of Yes or No, Agree or Disagree, Importantor Not Important, etc. A fourteen page questionnaire, accompanied by a coveringletter was used for gathering data. The letter indicated the objective of the researchand explained to respondents that the results of the questionnaire would be used toimprove safety measures and conditions in construction projects in Gaza Strip.The draft questionnaire was discussed with supervisor who gave valuable advice andcomments. After modifying the preliminary draft questionnaire, it was submitted tosupervisor to have a preliminary approval, and then it was discussed with twostatistical experts and five of well known construction safety professionals to evaluatethe content of the questionnaire. Modifications, changes, annulments and additionswere introduced to the questions and the final form of the questionnaire was ready topilot study and test validity content.The questionnaire was developed in English because literature entirely was Englishbut then it was translated into Arabic in order to make it convenient for respondents tounderstand. Questionnaire was designed to be concise and easy to complete taking aminimal amount of time of one month. In addition, instructions at the beginning of thequestionnaire inform the respondents that the results will be anonymous and at notime will their name or the name of their company be mentioned in the study. Thesemeasures were taken to protect the respondents and the companies where they work.Content validity test was conducted by sending the draft questionnaire to five expertsin construction to evaluate the content validity, check reliability, offensiveness of thelanguage, and add more information and to delete unacceptable wording if needed. 83copies of questionnaire have been printed and distributed to contracting companieswhich represents the sample size of study in Gaza Strip.48

3.7 Pilot StudyWhenever a researcher constructs a questionnaire, it is advisable to complete a pilotstudy before collecting the final data form the whole sample. A pilot study provides atrial run for the questionnaire, which involves testing the wording of the question,identifying ambiguous questions, testing the technique that the researcher uses tocollect the data, measuring the effectiveness of your standard invitation to respondents(Naoum, 1998).A pilot study for the questionnaire was conducted before starting gatheringinformation in order to test the wordings of the questions, make sure that thequestions are not ambiguous, and make sure there are not duplication in the questionsand check the length of the questionnaire. Five questionnaires were distributed toexperts of safety and contracting companies of first, second and third class category inGaza Strip. Selected experts were invited to participate in the piloting process. Theywere provided with an explanation about the study and were asked to complete thequestionnaires. The researcher asked the chosen sample many questions about someterms and thus has been requested to modify some wordings of the questionnaire.After this process, some changes, annulments, additions and modifications wereintroduced to the questions and the final form of the questionnaire was ready todistribution.3.8 Instrument Validity3.8.1 ReviewersA draft questionnaire has been distributed to five of safety experts in Gaza Strip whowork in different field works of construction industry. They presented their opinionsand comments about content of questionnaire, the degree to which questionnaireparagraphs are relevant to their groups, and lingual clarity of words. In this regard,few paragraphs have been dropped while others have been altered until number ofstatements reached (145).49

3.8.2 Internal ConsistencyInternal consistency has been checked for this questionnaire by applying thisquestionnaire on exploratory sample consisting of 30 contractors out of researchsample. The thirty contractors have been selected as sample size because thequestionnaire is longer than regular questionnaires which needs sufficient sample sizeto be studied for purpose of computing internal consistency.Pearson correlation coefficient has been computed between each statement ofquestionnaire groups and the whole questionnaire. Pearson correlation coefficient hasbeen also computed between each statement and its related group. Statistical Packagefor Social Sciences (SPSS) software has been used to find Pearson correlationcoefficient. If significance level (p-value) for a paragraph within a group is found tobe between (0.01 – 0.05), this means the correlation coefficient is significant at α =0.05 and then the paragraph is consistent and valid to measure what it was set for. Onthe other hand, if p-value is less than or equals 0.01, this means the correlationcoefficient is significant at α = 0.01 and the paragraph is valid to measure itsobjective. Tables 6 – 13 show the required computations as follows:Group 1: Study on relationship between safety and qualityAs shown in Table 6, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 6: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Quality)Group 1# Items1. safety and health policyThe safety & health policy forms a part of the company1core valuesThe safety and health policy contains objectives for2safety and health commitment relevant toP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.568 0.010.737 0.0150

Group 1# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevelorganizational goals34512312312Quality assurance referring to international standardsimproves safety0.793 0.01Existence of written policy for quality standardssupports commitment to safety0.671 0.01Top management commitment to safety improvesquality0.509 0.012. Safety OrganizationThe safety organization is formed with knowledgeablepersonnel which exhibit characteristics necessary to 0.791 0.01achieve work safety objectivesThe safety organization is formed with culture atcommunity considers safety a vital need for people0.878 0.01The safety organization is formed with positivebehavior of workers and top management towards 0.781 0.01safety3. Safety TrainingAll managers should go through proper safetymanagement training0.721 0.01All engineers should go through proper safetymanagement training0.864 0.01All workers should go through proper safetymanagement training0.662 0.014. In-house Safety RulesCompany should formulate worker and equipmentsafety rules through assistance of experts of safety0.606 0.01Company should use safety rules of Ministry of Laboror international and regional companies to formulate its 0.407 0.05own rules3 Safety rules could change according to project nature 0.777 0.014 Safety program supports quality of project 0.765 0.015. Safety Inspection1 Safety engineer at workplace improves safety 0.559 0.012Absence of inspection team leads to noncompliance ofboth quality and safety0.680 0.0151

Group 1# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel3Over-inspection of safety from site engineer decreasesquality0.716 0.014 Rework due to inspection increase accidents 0.482 0.016. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)1 Use of PPE (gloves, helmet, etc.) decreases injuries 0.804 0.012Lack of top management commitment to providing PPEleads to lack of attention of workers and engineers to 0.626 0.01safety3 Worker use of PPE improves quality 0.515 0.017. Accident Documentation1Regular analysis of accidents improves safety anddecreases future accidents0.873 0.012Regular documentation of accidents improves safetyand decreases future accidents0.871 0.018. Emergency Preparedness1 Emergency plans at company decrease accidents 0.879 0.012 First Aid at workplace improves safety 0.716 0.013 First Aide improves safety 0.814 0.019. Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors1Evaluation, selection and control of subcontractors havebeen conducted through matching with or alignment ofcompany safety objectives0.800 0.0123412Following-up of subcontractors by contractor improvessafety0.815 0.01Owner should consider subcontractor whose safetyrecord is clean0.851 0.01No preconstruction site visit by contractor increasesrisks and decreases quality due to unexpected 0.690 0.01conditions10. Safety CommitteesSafety committee is formed to monitor safetyperformance0.802 0.01The safety committee is an arena of different interests0.686 0.01groups of safety52

Group 1# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel31The company senior manager always chairs the safetycommittee0.667 0.0111. Safety and Health PromotionAll employees know the results of accident and injuryinvestigations and follow up actions0.434 0.052 The values of safety and health are adequately defined 0.631 0.013Current negative culture dominating local communitydecreases quality0.364 0.054 Top management support improves safety 0.725 0.0112. Health Assurance Program1 Health assurance program helps reducing injuries 0.749 0.012123123456Health assurance program increases concern ofcontractor towards worker safety0.772 0.0113. Project ImplementationImplementation according to agreed specification incontract improves safety0.592 0.01Many change orders during implementation decreasesproductivity and increases accidents and injuries0.831 0.01Increase of material price leads to use of low qualitymaterial thus harms workers0.564 0.0114. WorkmanshipLack of worker experience decreases quality andexhibits him to more accidents0.675 0.01The older the worker, the better the quality and the lessaccidents he is exposed0.699 0.01Absence of one or more of workers results inreplacement of new worker temporarily which 0.575 0.01decreases quality and increases accidentsNon-orientation of new workers decreases quality andincreases risk they face0.455 0.05Worker working with same crew (friends relatives, etc.)increases quality, productivity, and safety0.477 0.01Lack of sufficient workers decreases quality and alsodecreases safety due to pressure on workers0.443 0.0553

Group 1# ItemsPersonal problems decreases concentration and thus7decreases quality and safety15. Contract DocumentsInclusion of contractor safety and quality records into1bid awarding process decreases accidentsSpecifications required which are higher than local2experience increases risks associatedInclusion of safety into contract clauses improves safety3and ensures compliance with safety regulationsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.674 0.010.764 0.010.479 0.010.691 0.01Group 2: Study on relationship between safety and productivityAs shown in Table 7, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 7: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level(productivity)Group 2# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel1. Factors improve productivity1 Increase of productivity is at the expense of safety 0.825 0.012 Increase of work hours affects safety 0.463 0.013 Skillfulness of worker improves safety 0.506 0.014 Rework negatively affects safety 0.690 0.015 Incentives based on productivity decreases safety 0.587 0.012. Inspection1When foreman allocates tasks to workers, he considerssafety measures0.608 0.012 Delegation given to foreman so that he contributes to 0.555 0.0154

Group 2# Itemstime schedule preparation, would increase productivityand safetyOver-inspection by foreman decreases productivity and3safety3. Local conditionsStrikes and non-default nonworking days accelerates1work thus affecting safety badlyPutting much concern on regulations of safety2decreases productivityIn order to overcome delays resulting from closures3productivity increases which would increase accidentsCurrent security conditions affect workers badly which4would decrease both productivity and safety.In order to avoid closure, workers tend to leave early5which would decrease safety, quality and productivity.4. Worker problemsPersonal and family problems of worker affect safety1and productivity badly.Turnover creates unusual relation between workers2 which would decrease productivity and increaseaccidentsWorkers performing works without referring to3foreman affects safety and productivity badly.Illustrating daily activities of work to workers before4start of activity would contribute to improving safety5. SubcontractorsWhen subcontractor performs works, accidents1increase.Main contractor would hire more subcontractors to2 increase productivity, creating lack of coordinationwhich leads to less safety attention.Accidents frustrate workers which would decrease3productivitySubcontractor lack of safety concerns, decreases4productivityP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.802 0.010.573 0.010.361 0.050.794 0.010.644 0.010.513 0.010.492 0.010.583 0.010.649 0.010.588 0.010.727 0.010.745 0.010.681 0.010.678 0.0155

Group 2# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel6. Safety program1 Safety program contributes to increasing productivity 0.747 0.012In order to avoid accidents, anticipated risks areincluded in safety program which would increaseproductivity.0.558 0.0134123Training new and old workers on preventive actionsand first aid increases productivity.0.763 0.01Defining schedule of safety meetings contributes toincreasing productivity.0.523 0.018. Personal protective equipments (PPE)Using PPE constrains worker movement whichdecreases productivity0.667 0.01Hot weather decreases productivity and exhaustsworkers which exposes them to more accidents0.763 0.01When workers are not adapted with PPE, safety andproductivity are affected badly0.559 0.01Group 3: Study on relationship between safety and costAs shown in Table 8, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 8: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Cost)Group 3# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel1. Financial loss of contractor affects safety badly 0.413 0.052. Occupational safety increases project cost 0.366 0.053. Incentives improve safety and productivity 0.462 0.054. Worker satisfaction of daily rate decreases 0.538 0.0156

Group 3# Itemspsychological pressure which improves safety andproductivity5.Compensations make contractors pay more attention tosafety6.Contractors neglecting safety are expected not to winfuture bids due to bad reputations7.Hiring safety engineer contributes to decreasingaccidents in workplaceIncentives paid to foreman may affect safety8. negatively because he may hide accident reports toshow good safety reputationThere is a need towards existence of annual9. subscription to support national safety monitoringcommittee10.Fines should be imposed by Ministry of Labor onworkers not using PPEP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.487 0.010.363 0.050.363 0.050.497 0.010.374 0.050.363 0.05Group 4: Study on relationship between safety and timeAs shown in Table 9, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 9: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (Time)Group 4# ItemsShort time schedules provided to foreman affects safety1 badly because foreman may stress on workers tocomply with scheduleDiscussion between top management and foreman on2time schedule improves safety and productivityP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.456 0.050.364 0.0557

Group 43Overtime affects safety and productivity badly becauseit stresses worker0.413 0.054Preparation of short time schedule by project managerimproves safety and productivity0.366 0.055Preparation of short time schedule by foremanimproves safety and productivity0.408 0.056Applying safety measures and rules increases projectduration0.695 0.017In short projects (e.g. 2 months), workers doesn't haveenough time to anticipate risks thus increases accidents0.427 0.058 Safety meetings are waste of time 0.477 0.019Working in noon times, reduces productivity andexposes worker to summer sun0.370 0.0510Short time schedules provided to foreman affects safetyand quality badly because foreman may stress on 0.619 0.01workers to comply with schedule11Asking workers to finish their tasks fast affects safetybadly0.429 0.05Group 5: Study on relationship between safety and religionAs shown in Table 10, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 10: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level(Religion)Group 5# ItemsReligious values and beliefs increases worker concern1in his own safetyReligious values and beliefs increases worker concern2in his colleagues' safetyP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel0.545 0.010.845 0.0158

Group 5# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel3 It is vital to consider safety as value not as priority 0.429 0.054Not complying with safety regulations is considered asan act against religious beliefs0.363 0.055Everyone at project is committed to his colleague'ssafety0.624 0.016Religious belief in Allah affects human's values toomuch0.653 0.017Safe and healthy workplace provides environment ofjustice and equity0.485 0.018Safe and healthy workplace provides deep workerdignity0.486 0.019 Belief in Allah helps avoiding much of accidents 0.398 0.0510 Compensations don't confront with religion 0.371 0.0511Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is les careful tosafety0.397 0.0512Islam has strengthened principle of preventive actionsthrough many verses0.608 0.01Group 6: Importance of studying the relation between safety,quality, and productivityAs shown in Table 11, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 11: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level(importance of study)Group 6P-ValuePearson# ItemsSignificanceCorrelationLevel1 Improving work environment at workplace 0.468 0.0159

Group 6# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel2Setting practical and applicable policies for safety,quality and productivity0.455 0.053Improving plans and policies of company for safety,quality and productivity0.833 0.014Improvement of safety and health conditions ofpersonnel of company0.374 0.055 Increasing productivity of work 0.599 0.016 Increasing quality of work 0.835 0.017 Good reputation of contractor locally and regionally 0.452 0.058Improving classification of contractor at governmentaland private sector0.363 0.059 Decreasing cost of project (e.g. compensations) 0.427 0.0510Providing new opportunities for specialized engineersin fields of safety, quality, and productivity0.746 0.0111 Decreasing accidents during work at projects 0.696 0.01Group 7: Recommendations and suggestions for improvingoccupational safety in construction projectsAs shown in Table 12, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 12: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (recommendations)Group 7# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel1A safety engineer at projects whose cost is more than100,000$0.375 0.052 Written and clear policy of safety 0.371 0.053 Coordination between contractor and Ministry of Labor 0.770 0.0160

Group 7to apply safety regulations4Allocation of part of project expenditures for applyingsafety regulations0.721 0.015 Safety program for each project 0.472 0.016 Good attitude of workers towards using PPE 0.370 0.057Safety regulation in workplace with foreman or safetysupervisor0.481 0.018Training for workers especially newly hired to avoidrisks0.532 0.019 Evaluating contractors with regard to his safety records 0.731 0.0110 Health insurance of workers 0.604 0.0111Worker participation in safety program considering itpart f his work because he is highly exposed to risks0.731 0.0112 Local commission of safety for coordination 0.716 0.01Group 8: Main reason for not concerning in safety at workplaceAs shown in table 11, the p-values are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus the correlation ofthis part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that the paragraphs ofthis group are consistent and valid to measure what they were set for.Table 13: Pearson correlation between the item and the degree of the scale and sig. level (reason)Group 8# ItemsP-ValuePearsonSignificanceCorrelationLevel1 Cost of PPE 0.583 0.012 No safety engineers at workplace 0.551 0.013 Workers are not concerned in their own safety 0.816 0.014 There is no lime authority for safety 0.760 0.015 There is compensation and protection laws for workers 0.690 0.01* Tabulated T-value at degree of freedom (28) and significance level (0.05) equals 0.463* Tabulated T-value at degree of freedom (28) and significance level (0.05) equals 0.36161

It is clear from previous tables (6 – 13) that all statements are statistically correlatedto total level of questionnaire at a significance level (0.01, 0.05) which proves that thequestionnaire has high level of internal consistency.3.9 Structure ValidityStructure validity is the second statistical test that is used to test the validity of thequestionnaire structure by the testing validity of each field of group and the validity ofthe whole questionnaire. It measures the correlation coefficients between the field ( afield is part of a group and consists of many paragraphs) and the whole fields of thequestionnaire that have the same level of Likert scale.As shown in Table 14, the p-values for groups are less than 0.05 or 0.01, thus thecorrelation of this part is significant at α = 0.01 or α = 0.05, so it can be said that thefields are valid to measure what they were set for to achieve the main aim of thestudy.Table 14: : Pearson correlation between the field and the degree of the scale and sig. levelSummary of GroupsPearson SignificanceItemsCorrelation LevelSafety and health policy 0.671 0.01Safety Organization 0.450 0.01Safety Training 0.554 0.01In-house Safety Rules 0.879 0.01Safety Inspection 0.451 0.05Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 0.662 0.01Accident Documentation 0.569 0.01Emergency Preparedness 0.749 0.01Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors 0.652 0.01Safety committees 0.595 0.01Safety and Health Promotion 0.651 0.01Health Assurance Program 0.375 0.05Project Implementation 0.580 0.01Workmanship 0.690 0.01Contract Documents 0.539 0.01Total (quality) 0.939 0.01Factors improve productivity 0.473 0.01Inspection 0.410 0.0562

Local conditions 0.485 0.01Worker problems 0.800 0.01Subcontractors 0.509 0.01Safety program 0.592 0.01Personal protective equipments (PPE) 0.366 0.05Total (productivity) 0.813 0.01Total (cost) 0.589 0.01Total (time) 0.466 0.01Total (religion) 0.636 0.01Total (importance of study) 0.639 0.01* Tabulated T-value at degree of freedom (28) and significance level (0.05) equals 0.463* Tabulated T-value at degree of freedom (28) and significance level (0.05) equals 0.3613.10 Questionnaire ReliabilityReliability means the capacity to repeat a result, and is a measure of the instrumentused in the research. A research instrument is anything that produces information,from a tape measure to a questionnaire. Reliability is generally measured by means ofstatistics. A reliable research instrument is one that produces the same result, withinreasonable boundaries, each time it is used to measure a particular thing ((test – retestreliability). A questionnaire that produces substantially the same responses each timeit is administered to a certain group of people is a reliable measuring instrument.Being reliable, however, does not necessarily mean that the measuring instrument isvalid. Period of two weeks to a month is recommended between two tests (Burns andGrove, 1987)It was difficult to return questionnaire which is used to measure the questionnairereliability to the same respondents because of the unstable political situation includingclosures and barriers in Gaza Strip. Thus, reliability analysis has been conducted onthe exploratory sample using Cronbach's alpha and Split-half models.63

3.10.1 Split-half modelSignificance levels of exploratory sample have been used to compute questionnairereliability using Split-half model. The method randomly divides the measurementinstrument into two halves. Each of the two sets of items is treated as a separateinstrument form and is scored as such. The two sets of scores are correlated, and thisis considered to be an estimate of the measure of reliability. Then, correcting thePearson correlation coefficients can be done by using Spearman Brown correlationcoefficient of correction. The corrected or modified correlation coefficient(consistency coefficient) is computed according to the following formula:Consistency coefficient =2rr + 1, where r is the Pearson correlation coefficient.Table 15 shows computations:Table 15 : Correlation coefficients between two halves of each group and the questonnaire itselfQualityProductivityGroup# of statementsBeforemodificationAftermodificationSafety and health policy 5 0.425 0.458Safety Organization 3 0.606 0.738Safety Training 3 0.377 0.440In-house Safety Rules 4 0.345 0.513Safety Inspection 4 0.387 0.558Personal Protective Equipment(PPE)3 0.516 0.518Accident Documentation 2 0.520 0.685Emergency Preparedness 3 0.660 0.631Evaluation, Selection andControl of Subcontractors4 0.747 0.855Safety committees 3 0.532 0.553Safety and Health Promotion 4 0.413 0.584Health Assurance Program 2 0.557 0.715Project Implementation 3 0.419 0.591Workmanship 7 0.353 0.678Contract Documents 3 0.366 0.405Factors improve productivity 5 0.597 0.613Inspection 3 0.464 0.484Local conditions 5 0.516 0.523Worker problems 4 0.337 0.504Subcontractors 4 0.306 0.469Safety program 4 0.424 0.595Personal protectiveequipments (PPE)3 0.313 0.50464

Group# of statementsBeforemodificationAftermodificationCostrelationship between safetyand cost17 0.575 0.579Timerelationship between safetyand time11 0.503 0.506Religionrelationship between safetyand religion12 0.478 0.647Importance ofStudyImportance of Study 11 0.808 0.819Total 132 0.744 0.853RecommendRecommendations AndSuggestions12 0.569 0.725Reasonsreasons for not concerning insafety5 0.611 0.638* Guttman split-half reliability coefficient which is an adaptation of the Spearman-Brown coefficienthas been used because the two split-halves are not equal.Table 15 shows that reliability coefficients computed by Split-half method beforemodification were (0.744) and after modification were (0.853). The differencebetween the two values is minor noticing that the values are relatively high. Thisindicates how much reliable the questionnaire is and also such result motivated theresearcher to apply the method on the study sample.65

3.10.2 Cronbach's Alpha modelResearcher has used another method to compute reliability of questionnaire wherealpha coefficients value for each group of questionnaire and the questionnaire itselfhaves been computed. Cronbach's Alpha has been used because it is mathematicallyequivalent to the average of all possible split-half estimates, although that's not how itis computed. The normal range of Cronbach's coefficient alpha value is between 0.0and +1.0 where higher values reflect a higher degree of internal consistency.Cronbach's coefficient alpha was calculated for the eight groups of questionnaire asshown in table 14 where results for groups ranged from 0.285 and 0.799 and resultsfor whole questionnaire was 0.926 which proves the questionnaire is of high level ofreliability.Table 16: Cronbach's alpha for items of each groupQualityProductivityItem# ofstatementsCronbach'sCoefficientSafety and health policy 5 0.676Safety Organization 3 0.750Safety Training 3 0.608In-house Safety Rules 4 0.541Safety Inspection 4 0.419Personal Protective Equipment 3 0.285(PPE)Accident Documentation 2 0.685Emergency Preparedness 3 0.707Evaluation, Selection and Control 4 0.799of SubcontractorsSafety committees 3 0.481Safety and Health Promotion 4 0.558Health Assurance Program 2 0.571Project Implementation 3 0.353Workmanship 7 0.659Contract Documents 3 0.590Factors improve productivity 5 0.612Inspection 3 0.362Local conditions 5 0.496Worker problems 4 0.315Subcontractors 4 0.657Safety program 4 0.49266

CostTimeReligionImportanceof StudyRecommendReasonsItemPersonal protective equipments(PPE)relationship between safety andcostrelationship between safety andtimerelationship between safety andreligionImportance of Study# ofstatementsCronbach'sCoefficient3 0.34210 0.49611 0.48612 0.63311 0.785Total 125 0.926Recommendations AndSuggestionsreasons for not concerning insafety12 0.7955 0.686In this manner, it can be figured out that the researcher proved the questionnaire wasvalid, reliable, and ready to distribute to population sample.3.11 Sampling methodA probability sampling method is any method of sampling that utilizes some form ofrandom selection. With probability sampling, all elements in the population havesome opportunity of being included in the sample, and the mathematical probabilitythat any one of them will be selected can be calculated. A simple random sample is agroup of subjects (a sample) chosen from a larger group (a population). Each subjectfrom the population is chosen randomly and entirely by chance, such that each subjecthas the same probability of being chosen at any stage during the sampling process.This process and technique is known as Simple Random Sampling (WikipediaEncyclopedia).In this research, simple random sampling was used to have a good representation ofpopulation. A list of contractors which was requested from PCU has been prepared ina way that only First, Second, and third classifications of contractors are listed. Thesamples were selected randomly from the list until the desired sample size has beenreached.67

3.12 Data AnalysisQuantitative statistical analysis for the questionnaire was done by using StatisticalPackage for Social Sciences (SPSS). The analysis of data is done to rank the factorsthat contribute to linkage between safety, quality, productivity, cost, time, andreligion. Ranking was followed by comparison of mean values within groups and forthe overall sub-factors. The opinion of contractors regarding the importance of eachfactor was checked by analysis of variance (ANOVA).3.12.1 Statistical Methods Used in This ResearchThe following statistical methods have been used:1. Occurrences, mean, percentiles2. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to check internal consistency ofquestionnaire3. 1-Sample K-S test to check if the data are related to Normal Distribution.4. One Sample T Test5. Independent Sample T Test6. One Way ANOVA7. For computing reliability coefficient, Spearman-Brown formula for equalsplit-half method, Guttmann's formula for non-equal split-half method, andCronbach's' alpha coefficient were used.3.13 Limitation of the ResearchThe research faced several limitations including but not limited to the following:1. The study is limited to the contracting companies classified as first, secondand third with a valid registration by Palestinian Contractors Union (PCU) inGaza Strip. Fourth and fifth classes were excluded68

2. The study is limited to the contracting companies classified by PCU excludingother classifications announced by international organizations such asUNRWA and UNDP, etc.3. The subcontractors and contracting companies of fourth and fifth categorieswere excluded due to low rate of minimum experience, efficiency andmanagerial and financial capability of such companies which may affect theaccuracy of the research results.4. The research was conducted taking into account only the contractor point ofview excluding the owner and consultant point of view.5. This research was limited to the construction industry practitioners in GazaStrip within the last five years.6. The research was conducted in Gaza Strip and was not conducted in the WestBank due to barriers and travel limitations.69

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION4.1 IntroductionThis chapter describes the results and discussion of questionnaire results obtainedfrom contractors in Gaza Strip. The chapter will focus on describing the populationcharacteristics in addition the discussion of safety relation with quality, productivity,time, cost, and religion. This chapter will also discuss linkage between safety andother factors of project. Statistical tests have been used in this chapter to explain howmuch research objectives are satisfied.4.2 Part I: Study of population characteristicsThe research sample included sixty one (61) Palestinian contractors in Gaza Stripclassified within the year 2005. The list of contractors which has been obtained fromPalestinian contractors Union (PCU) included 134 contractors who are classified as1st, 2 nd , and 3 rd classes.4.2.1 Year of establishmentFigure 4.1 shows the percentage of companies with respect to their year ofestablishment. The figure shows that the range of years (1994 – 2000) possesses thehighest percentage of companies (57%).Figure 4. 1: Year of establishment of responding companies70

This results from the fact that the Palestinian economy exhibited dramatic revivalafter the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PNA) in 1994. During 1994 –2000, hundreds of projects were implemented for reconstructing Palestinian territoriesafter occupation. Prior to 1994 when occupation existed, 34% of respondingcompanies were established which is a low percentage comparing to those of 1994 –2000 mentioning that companies established before 1994 falls within the range ofyears (1950 – 1994). After 2000 – when Al-Aqsa Intifada started – Palestinianeconomy exhibited a dramatic drop which was clear in the establishment of only 8%of responding companies with the preceding 5 years (2001 – 2005). Moreover, afterestablishment of PNA, contractors who worked inside the Green Line merged theirwork to Palestinian territories to benefit from foreign investments and donations.4.2.2 Projects implemented by the company within last five yearsTable 4.1 shows the number of projects implemented by the responding companiesduring the last five years. Table 4.1 shows that 31.15% of companies implementedbetween 10 – 20 projects while only 11.48% could implement between 31 – 40projects. Considering that large scale companies are those which implemented morethan 40 projects within five years, it can be deduced that 16.39% of respondingcompanies are large scale companies regardless of volume and cost of project.Table 4. 1: Number of projects implemented during last 5 yearsNumber of Projects Frequency PercentLess than 10 10 16.3910-20 19 31.1521-30 15 24.5931-40 7 11.48More than 40 10 16.39Total 61 100.00It can be noticed that the years between 1994 and 2000 exhibited the implementationof 57.38% of total number of projects according to Figure 4.1. The 57.38%percentage included all projects ranges shown in Table 4.1. This can be referred todonations which flooded into Palestinian territories as a result of Oslo Agreement in71

1993. The period between 1994 and 2000 was considered a golden era of constructionprojects in Gaza Strip and West Bank.4.2.3 Cost of projects implemented by the company within last fiveyearsFigure 4.2 also shows that only (13.11%) of respondents implemented projects whosecost was less than one million dollar during the past five years. On the other hand(29.51%) of companies responded that they implemented projects of total more thanfour million dollars cost. It can be understood from Figure 4.2 that most of companiesare considered as large companies with regard to size of projects in the Gaza Strip.30.00%1618Percentage of Companies25.00%20.00%15.00%10.00%5.00%81180.00%Less than 1 1-2 2.1-3 3.1-4 More than 4Percent 13.11% 18.03% 26.23% 13.11% 29.51%Cost of Projects implemented during last 5 years (in million $)Figure 4. 2: Cost of projects implemented during last 5 years (in millions $) (2000 – 2005)It can be deduced from Figure 4.2 that quite large amounts of money spent on projectsin Gaza Strip during the last five years.72

4.2.4 Capital of CompanyTable 4.2 shows the capital of responding companies. It is noticed that the capital of42.62% of respondents is more than 500,000$. Only 14.75% of respondents providedthat their companies have a capital less than 100,000$. This indicates that the majorityof companies are of large scale companies.Table 4. 2: Capital of Company (in thousands $)Capital (thousand $) Frequency PercentLess than 100 9 14.75100-250 13 21.31251-500 13 21.31More than 500 26 42.62Total 61 100.00Since the majority of companies indicated that their capital is more 500,000$, thismeans they are large companies with respect to capital size in Gaza Strip. Largecompanies are assumed to have sufficient safety, quality, and productivity measuresduring project performance. Large companies are assumed to consider safety a highpriority.Table 4.3 describes the relationship between Year of Establishment and Capital ofcompany. It is clear that most of companies (34.3%) that were established during1994 – 2001 possess the highest capital (a capital that is more than 500,000$). Thisresult reflects the economic prosperity during 1994 – 2000 in the Palestinianterritories.Table 4. 3: Distribution of Company Capital (in thousands $) according to Year of EstablishmentYear ofEstablishment1950 - 19941994 - 20002001 - 2005Total 14.8%(9)Capital of Company (in thousands $)Less than 100 100 – 250 251 – 500 More than 500 Total9.5% 9.5% 14.3% 66.7% 100.0%(2)(2) (3)(14) (21)8.6% 31.4% 25.7% 34.3% 100.0%(3)(11) (9)(12) (35)80.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0%(4)(0) (1)(0)(5)21.3% 21.3% 42.6% 100.0%(13) (13)(26) (61)73

4.2.5 Engineers, administrative employees, and workers at thecompanyTable 4.4 shows the relevant number of fixed term engineers at a company. Very fewnumber of companies (3.28%) have sufficiently large number of engineers. Majorityof companies (45.90%) indicated they have only one or two fixed term engineers.Table 4. 4: Number of fixed engineers at the companyNumber of fixed engineers Frequency Percent1-2 28 45.903-5 24 39.346-10 7 11.4811-20 2 3.28Total 61 100.00This fact may reflect the current critical economic situation which prevents companiesfrom having sufficient number of fixed-term engineers consistent with the capital,number of projects, and cost of projects of company.Moreover, it could be understood from low number of fixed-term engineers is thatturnover could be noticeably high which means the company is highly exposed tonewly hired engineers coming to jobsite. Indeed, employee turnover is a concernbecause of the potential inexperience of new hires, although that high turnover ofemployees is routine in construction industry. This is similar to results obtained byKartam et al (2000).The results of Table 4.5 are similar to those of Table 4.4 which both indicate lownumber of fixed term of engineers and administrative employees. It also indicates thatonly 1.64% of companies have more than 20 administrative employees while 72.13%have range between 1 and 5 employees.Table 4. 5: Number of administrative employees at the companyNumber of administrative employees Frequency Percent1 – 5 44 72.136 – 10 14 22.9511 – 15 2 3.28More than 20 1 1.64Total 61 100.0074

Employees' background may vary according to nature of work. There are secretary,accountant, stock keeper, receptionist, messenger, and others. They all combine a setof employees that refer to the level of proficiency of a company. Researcher did notreveal employee background through the questionnaire in order not to expand thescope of work and size of thesis.Due to need of several workers at a company, it can be understood from Figure 4.3that majority of companies (36.07%) has more than 20 workers while only (16.39%)of companies have from 1 to 5 workers. The number of workers at a company isdifferent than number of fixed engineers and administrative employees.40.00%22Percentage of companies35.00%30.00%25.00%20.00%15.00%10.00%5.00%0.00%10157 71 – 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 16 – 20Percent 16.39% 24.59% 11.48% 11.48% 36.07%Number of WorkersMore than20Figure 4. 3: Number of workers at a companyThey are relatively more than number of engineers and employees of company.Construction trades workers are employed in a large variety of occupations that areinvolved in all aspects of the construction industry.75

4.2.6 Background, age, qualification, and specialization ofrespondentFigure 4.4 shows the job titles of respondents where majority (36.07%) is projectmanagers. Few of respondents (16.39%) were the company manager. (13.11%) ofrespondents didn't answer the question about the job title.Site Engineer,34.43%CompanyManager,16.39%N/A, 13.11%ProjectManager,36.07%Respondents' Job TitlesFigure 4. 4: Job title of respondentIt is noticed that 16.39% of respondents were company managers. This finding hastwo facets of regard; one of which is increasing concern of managers to fillquestionnaire and thus concern in the field of safety, quality, and productivity. Thesecond facet is it shows a trend among companies in Gaza Strip to employ managerswho are aware of scientific research and its advantages n construction industry.Project Managers (36.07%) and Site engineers (34.43%) were found to be majorityamongst job titles of respondents because they are more close to workplace, site, andworkers. They could reveal inherent problems and accidents that occur duringconstruction thus more aware to safety, quality and productivity issues.13.11% of respondents did not reveal their job title which could be due to working atsmall size companies which employ engineers who work as site engineer, projectmanager and other selective tasks performers for short and limited time periods.76

Respondents might have also not been able to identify their exact job title due to lackof experience in job description and specifications.35.00%20Percentage of companies30.00%161625.00%20.00%15.00%810.00%5.00%10.00%20 – 25 26 – 30 31 – 40 41 – 50 More than 50Percent 26.23% 32.79% 26.23% 13.11% 1.64%Age of RespodentsFigure 4. 5: Age of respondentsFigure 4.5 illustrates that the majority of respondents (32.79%) are of age between 26and 30 years old. This is the appropriate age for a graduate engineer to work and starthis/her professional life. Only (1.64%) is more than 50 years old. Constructionindustry in Gaza Strip is considered one of the tough and hard jobs due to its naturewhich may require workers, employees, and engineers to retire early or turnover tomore restful jobs.Table 4.6 shows the majority of respondents (88.52%) have BSc degree while only(6.56%) hold MSc degree. It is understood that this situation is natural because mostof respondents as shown in Figure 4.5 are young (their ages range between 20 and30).77

Table 4. 6: Educational qualification of respondentsQualification Frequency PercentBSc 54 88.52MSc 4 6.56Other 3 4.92Total 61 100.00Another reason could be that engineers may think construction management requirespractical experience more than educational qualifications.Table 4.7 shows that 86.89% of respondents are civil engineers. It can be seen alsothat there are 8.20% of respondents are architects.Table 4. 7: Specialization of respondentsSpecialization Frequency PercentCivil Engineering 53 86.89Architecture 5 8.20Other 3 4.92Total 61 100.00Only (4.92%) of respondents are neither civil engineer nor architect. They could beassistant engineer, surveyor, or administrative employee.4.2.7 Safety related factsFigure 4.6 illustrates that 68.85% of respondents have experience years between 1 and5. Meanwhile, 3.28% have more than 20 years experience in safety. This is not anacceptable situation because in large and medium companies with respect to capitaland amount of work, such companies should have engineers with sufficientexperience in field of safety.78

70.00%60.00%42Percentage of respondents50.00%40.00%30.00%1020.00%10.00%3 420.00%1 – 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 16 – 20 More than 20Percent 68.85% 16.39% 4.92% 6.56% 3.28%Experience in Field of SafetyFigure 4. 6: Respondent's experience in the field of SafetyThis situation might be resulted from lack of safety profession and education inPalestinian workplace and universities. Another reason might be the lack of trainingin field of safety resulting in engineer working away from safety fields.Figure 4.7 shows that only 1.64% of respondents spent more than 20 years working atthe current company they work at. 68.85% of respondents (majority) worked onlybetween 1 to 5 years at the current company.Percentage of respondents80.00%60.00%40.00%20.00%0.00%42121 – 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 16 – 20Percent 68.85% 19.67% 6.56% 3.28% 1.64%4Experience at the Same Company21More than20Figure 4. 7: Years of respondent's experience at the same company79

The problem of low number of years of experience with the same company may beresulted from the fact that most of engineers are employed on a project basis not acompany's need basis. Another reason could be that many companies reduced theirstaff or had bankrupted due to political and security conditions in Gaza Strip during2000 – 2006.From Figure 4.8 it is shown that when respondents were questioned about trainingreceived through their general contracting companies, almost (75.41%) replied thatthey had received no safety training, while (24.59%) of the sample received training.Respondentsdidn't receivetraining,(75.41%)Respondentsreceivedtraining,(24.59%)Respondents' TrainingFigure 4. 8: Respondens who received training courses in Occupational Health and SafetyUnfortunately it is evident here that the majority of companies are rather negligent inproviding safety training. This is critical situation with regard to construction safety.Lack of safety training conflicts with basic safety requirements for a professional tobe able to monitor and manage safety on site.Due to increasing turnover in construction projects in Gaza Strip, extensive trainingcourses on safety have to be provided to engineers, workers, and other relative partiesespecially in the field of first aid training. First aid training appears to reduceemployees' willingness to accept prevailing levels of occupational safety and healthrisk and decrease the perceived probability that they would suffer a severe workrelatedinjury.80

4.3 Part II: Company's policy, safety program and trainingFigure 4.9 shows that majority of respondents (91.80%) mentioned that occupationalsafety forms a part of company policies although (75.41%) of respondents expressedthat they didn't receive training courses according to Figure 4.8. Despite thecontradiction in the two previous results, it can be understood that many companieswhom safety forms a part of policy do not apply such safety policies. A written healthand safety policy helps to promote an effective Occupational Safety and Health(OSH) program. Such a policy should reflect the special needs of the company inmeans of safety and should be regularly reviewed and updatedSafety doesnot form a partof companypolicies,(8.20%)Safety forms apart ofcompanypolicies,(91.80%)Occupational safety forms a part of company policiesFigure 4.9: Occupational safety forms a part of company policiesCompany which considers OSH as part of its policies should consequently considertraining as important action of complying with safety regulation. The inconsistencybetween answers of respondents regarding training received and whether OSH is apart of company policies could be a result of turnover of employees. Constructionindustry faces high rate of turnover because of project-based nature of constructionindustry. When engineers or workers leave the project to another, they do not havesufficient time for safety training. Many companies and employees believe that safetytraining is a waste of time and comes at the expense of project duration. Under thoseconditions it is not unusual to notice that respondents did not have the opportunity to81

join training courses although they have shown that they believe that safetyconstitutes an important part of company policy.As shown in Figure 4.10, on a question about whether the company has a safetyprogram for each project, 34.43% of respondents ensured that their companies designa safety program for each project. On the other hand, 14.75% replied negatively withrespect to this question. Majority of respondents (50.82%) shows that their companiessometimes have safety program for each project.Figure 4.10: Companies which have safety program at each projectSafety Program would discriminate between those companies which are committed tosafety and those which claim they are committed to safety. Thus, it should bequestioned why many companies don't have safety program. They might haveconsidered that safety program is useless and costly in view of worker compensationand injury treatment. Results here show that companies are realizing that a legitimatesafety program is not only beneficial for the employees. It is also a way to gain acompetitive edge over the competition considering the cost of insurance for workers'compensation, general liability, etc. A reason why many companies in Gaza Stripstarted to consider safety programs is that most of projects are funded by internationalor regional donors. International donors come from regions where construction safetyoccupies top priorities of construction industry. In developed countries, it is usual and82

obligatory to provide safety programs by contracting companies according to projectand company size. Thus, when donors started to fund construction projects inPalestine, they required that contractors must have their relevant safety program inmost cases.The main constraint of having a safety program applicable becomes evident when thecompany top management doesn't commit to applying safety program. In this case, itwill be hard to convince employees and workers to act safely on workplace. Anotherconstraint might be that worker may disregard company rules and safety program,because some workers believe that accident occurs due to fate not due to their own orcompanies wrong safety behavior.Figure 4.11 shows whether company provides project employees safety trainingcourses or not. (44.30%) replied positively while (55.70%) mentioned that projectemployees didn't join any kind of safety training.Figure 4.11: Companies which provide employees safety trainingThis result shows that companies which provide safety training to the projectemployees are less than those who don't provide. This result shows the discrepanciesin safety measures applied in Gaza Strip companies. Although safety training is an83

inherent part of any company's safety policy, it is seen from Figure 4.11 that suchtraining did not play an important role in safety policies in Gaza Strip.Figure 4.12 shows the percentage of employees who joined a training course onsafety. It can be noticed that 62.30% of respondents did not receive any trainingcourse in safety. 37.70% of respondents declared that project employees receivedtraining. Employees who received training consist of 26.23% of engineers, 6.56% ofproject managers and 4.92% of workers.Figure 4.12: Employees who joined trainingAlthough it is very important that workers join safety courses because they are moreexposed to accidents, it is shown in Figure 4.12 that such workers consist of only4.92% of employees who joined safety training.Figure 4.13 outlines duration of training course. It is shown that (19.67%) of totalrespondents received a training course within one week duration. Only 3.28% ofrespondents attended more than one month training whether it is one course or more.84

Percentage of respondents80.00%60.00%40.00%20.00%0.00%1241 week 2 weeks 1 month5Percent 19.67% 6.56% 8.20% 3.28% 37.70% 62.30%2morethan 123Total38didn't jointrainingFigure 4.13: Duration of training coursesThis Figure shows that safety training does not take enough attention regardingduration. It has to be mentioned that training culture in Gaza Strip did not reach alevel where both employees and top management consider it as top priority. Few ofthem consider training in general as a need for capacity building while the majoritystill thinks that training is not essential although they may join it. This might uncoverthe reason why project parties did not receive enough safety training.It is internationally well known that construction project should provide enough safetytraining for everyone working on site (Huang and Fang, 2003). Unfortunately, inGaza Strip it is evident from results that employees do not join enough safety trainingwhich might include course such as fall protection, chemical hazards overview, handand power tool safety, indoor crane and sling safety, trenching and excavation safety,and many others.Table 4.8 shows the person responsible for developing the safety training program. Itis shown that 43.48% of respondents referred the development of such safety trainingprogram to safety engineers while company managers constituted 34.78% ofrespondents.85

Table 4. 8: Person in charge of developing saftey training programFrequency Percent(of respondentsPercent(of total respondents)who joined)Company manager 8 34.78 13.11Project manager 5 21.74 8.20Safety engineer 10 43.48 16.39Total 23 100.00 37.70Didn't Join Training 38 62.30 62.30Total 61 100.00 100.00From Table 4.8, it is shown that 21.74% of respondents referred the development ofsuch training program to project managers.Figure 4.14 describes respondents' responses when they have been asked whetherproject is planned and implemented according to safety measures. It is shown that40.98% of respondents replied yes while only 11.48% replied no. Majority ofrespondents (47.54%) said that project sometimes is planned and implementedaccording to safety measures.Yes, 40.98%No, 11.48%Sometimes,47.54%Figure 4. 14: Project is planned and implemented according to safety measures86

Projects that are planned taking into account safety are said to be projects that costless and perform well. In other words, when safety is included into project planning,compensation will reduce and quality will increase. Compensation will reducebecause planning for safety means that project employees and workers will be lessexposed to expected hazards and thus accidents and its inherent compensations willdecrease. Moreover, quality will also increase because planning for safety means thatproject tasks will be performed safer and rework due to accidents or injuries will beminimal.Figure 4.14 shows the extent to which projects in Gaza Strip are planned with regardto safety. A company that plans for safety during project planning phase probably willreduce accidents on workplace. Actually, construction safety in Gaza Strip shows aconfusing trend for not applying safety measures adequately although there are lessaccidents and injuries.Respondents who said that project sometimes is planned and implemented accordingto safety measures may be inexperienced to know the meaning of safety planning. Theword "sometimes" could have two meanings in this questionnaire; respondents mayrefer to that several projects are planned taking into consideration safety measures,while some of them may have thought that all projects are planned with regard tosafety measures but not 100%. They might also have thought that company appliessafety measures while planning in different levels of concern according to size, cost,and importance of project.Figure 4.15 describes importance of top management commitment towardsstrengthening safety concepts at project employees. Majority of respondents (81.97%)expressed that top management commitment towards safety is an important factor tostrengthen safety concepts at project employees. This could be due to the concerntowards safety amongst respondents. Respondents totally agree that top managementcommitment is very vital for ensuring safe workplace. In fact, top managementcommitment is vital for not only safety but any other management action includingquality, productivity, human resources, etc. It is essential to the success of anycompany's safety and health program that top management demonstrate not only an87

interest, but a long term serious commitment to protect every employee from injuryand illness on the job.No, 18.03%Yes, 81.97%Figure 4. 15: Importance of top management commitment towards safetyMinority of respondents (18.03%) did not consider top management commitment aneffective factor towards safe workplace. It may be understood that those respondentsdid not recognize that top management commitment will create a strong desire toimprove the company's safety culture. Managers will invest serious time and moneyinto effective safety management by developing programs, policies, written plans,processes and procedures. They will also display leadership through effectiveaccountability and recognition of behaviors and results. Unluckily, this might not bethe way minority of respondents think.Figure 4.16 shows percentages of companies that issue accident reports at projects. Itcan be easily noticed that about one third (29.51%) of companies do not issueaccident reports. 37.70% of respondents explicitly said that the company has accidentreports at projects implemented while 32.79% said that the company does not issueaccident reports. This situation refutes the opinion of respondents that theircompanies' top management should be committed to safety. It can be assumed that topmanagement is not fully committed to safety or its commitment is not based onprofessional background but on emotions only. Another reason is that they might not88

e aware of importance of accident report to document an accident, injuries andcasualties.Sometimes,32.79%Yes, 37.70%No, 29.51%Figure 4. 16: Companies which have accident reports at projectsIt is essential to ensure that reaching a compensatory settlement in a constructionaccident, requires filing construction accident reports immediately following theinjury. A number of people can be held accountable for a construction accident, fromthe subcontractor and contractor to the owners, architects, insurance companies andequipment manufacturers. The only way to prove or not is an accident report.Contractors may be held accountable if the construction accident reports theminefficient.Table 4.9 displays who is in charge of writing the accident report for those companieswhich have accident reports documented as shown in Figure 4.13. It can be noticedthat site engineer is the most responsible for writing the report of accident (40.00% ofcompanies which have accident reports, 19.67% of total respondents). Site engineer isthe most long-staying person at workplace and is close to workers and thus siteengineer could be the best one for producing realistic and accurate accident reports.89

Table 4. 9: Person in charge of writing accident reportReport WriterPercentPercent(within company which have report) (of total)Accountant 6.67% 3.28%Administrative 3.33% 1.64%Company Manager 13.33% 6.56%Insurance Co. 3.33% 1.64%Project Manager 33.33% 16.39%Site Engineer 40.00% 19.67%None 0.00% 50.82%Total 100.00% 100.00%On the contrary, it is unusual that insurance company is the party in charge for writingthe accident report according to what respondents (33.33% of companies which haveaccident reports, 16.39% of total respondents) have stated.90

4.3.1 Part III: Linkage between occupational safety and quality inconstruction projectThe researcher throughout the thesis investigated the linkage between safety andquality using 15 groups and 55 factors. Ranking of factors has been used twicethroughout the thesis; ranking within one group; and the other is within the wholerange of groups. Ranking was based on relative importance index values.Table 4. 10: Factors of relationship between safety and qualitySafety and quality factors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroups1. safety and health policyThe safety and health policy forms a part ofthe company core valuesThe safety and health policy containsobjectives for safety and health commitmentrelevant to organizational goalsQuality assurance referring to internationalstandards improves safetyExistence of written policy for qualitystandards supports commitment to safetyTop management commitment to safetyimproves quality2. Safety OrganizationThe safety organization is formed withknowledgeable personnel which exhibitscharacteristics necessary to achieve worksafety objectivesThe safety organization is formed withculture at community considers safety vitalneed for peopleThe safety organization is formed withpositive behavior at workers and topmanagement towards safety3. Safety TrainingAll managers should go through propersafety management trainingAll engineers should go through propersafety management trainingAll workers should go through proper safetymanagement training4. In-house Safety RulesCompany should formulate worker andequipment safety rules through assistance ofexperts of safety61 1 2 5 25 28 0 0.811 2 761 1 5 18 30 7 0 0.648 5 4061 1 3 12 30 15 0 0.721 4 1961 0 5 7 36 13 0 0.730 3 1761 0 2 2 34 23 0 0.816 1 661 0 4 13 31 13 0 0.713 3 2561 0 3 4 21 33 0 0.840 1 161 0 0 6 29 26 0 0.828 2 561 0 0 9 22 30 0 0.832 1 261 1 2 5 20 33 0 0.832 1 361 0 4 6 26 25 0 0.791 3 961 2 2 12 36 9 0 0.693 3 3091

Safety and quality factors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroupsCompany should use safety rules of Ministryof Labor or international and regional 61 3 0 10 38 10 0 0.709 2 26companies to formulate its own rulesSafety rules could change according toproject nature61 0 11 6 29 15 0 0.693 4 31Safety program supports quality of project 61 2 3 8 33 15 0 0.725 1 185. Safety InspectionSafety engineer at workplace improves safety 61 0 4 14 28 15 0 0.717 2 21Absence of inspection team leads tononcompliance of both quality and safety61 1 6 11 17 26 0 0.746 1 15Over-inspection of safety from site engineerdecreased quality61 4 16 17 16 8 0 0.529 3 50Rework due to inspection increase accidents 61 4 21 9 22 5 0 0.508 4 536. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)Use of PPE (gloves, helmet, etc.) decreasesinjuries61 2 2 3 30 24 0 0.791 1 10Lack of top management commitment toproviding PPE leads to lack of attention of 61 0 8 8 28 17 0 0.717 2 22workers and engineers to safetyWorker use of PPE improves quality 61 0 10 13 30 8 0 0.643 3 417. Accident DocumentationRegular analysis of accidents improves safetyand decreases future accidents61 0 4 9 34 14 0 0.734 1 16Regular documentation of accidentsimproves safety and decreases future 61 0 2 13 37 9 0 0.713 2 24accidents8. Emergency PreparednessEmergency plans at company decreases61 3 6 6 37 9 0 0.672 3 36accidentsFirst Aid at workplace improves safety 61 0 1 5 36 19 0 0.795 1 8First Aide improves safety 61 0 5 12 28 16 0 0.721 2 209. Evaluation, Selection and Control of SubcontractorsEvaluation, selection and control ofsubcontractors have been conducted throughmatching with or alignment of companysafety objectivesFollowing-up of subcontractors by contractorimproves safetyOwner should consider subcontractor whosesafety record is cleanNo preconstruction site visit by contractorincreases risks and decreases quality due tounexpected conditions10. Safety CommitteesSafety committee is formed to monitor safetyperformanceThe safety committee is an arena of differentinterests groups of safetyThe company senior manager always chairsthe safety committee11. Safety and Health Promotion61 5 10 16 22 8 0 0.570 4 4661 2 8 4 33 14 0 0.697 1 2861 2 7 15 24 13 0 0.656 3 3961 1 14 5 24 17 0 0.668 2 3761 0 1 19 37 4 0 0.676 1 3461 0 2 21 32 6 0 0.668 2 3861 1 10 34 11 5 0 0.533 3 4892

Safety and quality factors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroupsAll employees know the results of accidentand injury investigations and follow up 61 2 19 13 23 4 0 0.529 3 49actionsThe values of safety and health areadequately defined61 2 14 22 21 2 0 0.525 4 51Current negative culture dominating localcommunity decreases quality61 0 1 20 29 11 0 0.701 2 27Top management support improves safety 61 1 2 6 30 22 0 0.783 1 1112. Health Insurance ProgramHealth insurance program helps reducinginjuries61 1 18 17 15 10 0 0.557 2 47Health insurance program increases concernof contractor towards worker safety61 2 10 19 17 13 0 0.615 1 4513. Project ImplementationImplementation according to agreedspecification in contract improves safety61 0 7 13 32 9 0 0.672 1 35Many change orders during implementationdecreases productivity and increases 61 0 14 16 18 13 0 0.619 3 44accidents and injuriesIncrease of material price leads to use of lowquality material thus harms workers61 4 8 11 27 11 0 0.631 2 4314. WorkmanshipLack of worker experience decreases qualityand exhibits him to more accidents61 0 2 2 30 27 0 0.832 1 4The older the worker, the better the qualityand the less accidents he is exposed61 1 8 14 30 8 0 0.643 7 42Absence of one or more of workers results inreplacement of new worker temporarilywhich decreases quality and increases61 0 4 12 37 8 0 0.697 5 29accidentsNon-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they face61 0 4 3 39 15 0 0.762 3 13Worker working with same crew (friendsrelatives, etc.) increases quality, productivity, 61 0 3 14 31 13 0 0.717 4 23and safetyLack of sufficient workers decreases qualityand also decreases safety due to pressure on 61 0 9 5 41 6 0 0.676 6 33workersPersonal problems decreases concentrationand thus decreases quality and safety61 0 1 11 28 21 0 0.779 2 12Non-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they face61 0 2 2 30 27 0 0.832 1 4Worker working with same crew (friendsrelatives, etc.) increases quality, productivity, 61 1 8 14 30 8 0 0.643 7 42and safety15. Contract DocumentsInclusion of contractor safety and qualityrecords into bid awarding process decreases 61 0 10 6 32 13 0 0.693 2 32accidentsSpecifications required which are higher thanlocal experience increases risks associated61 4 18 15 18 6 0 0.512 3 5293

Safety and quality factors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroupsInclusion of safety into contract clausesimproves safety and ensures compliance withsafety regulations61 2 3 6 31 19 0 0.750 1 14GROUP 1: Safety and health policyTable 4.11 shows the respondents’ opinion about safety and health policy with regardto quality according to Likert scale. Group 1 contains five factors of safety and healthpolicy.Table 4.11: Safety and health policy1. Safety and health policy# ofRespondentsFrequency of occurrenceStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithinthisgroupRankwithinallgroupsTop management commitment to safetyimproves qualityThe safety & health policy forms a part ofthe company core valuesExistence of written policy for qualitystandards supports commitment to safetyQuality assurance referring to internationalstandards improves safetyThe safety and health policy containsobjectives for safety and health commitmentrelevant to organizational goals61 0 2 2 34 23 0 0.816 1 661 1 2 5 25 28 0 0.811 2 761 0 5 7 36 13 0 0.730 3 1761 1 3 12 30 15 0 0.721 4 1961 1 5 18 30 7 0 0.648 5 40"Top management commitment to safety improves quality" factor was ranked in thefirst position among Safety and health policy group with RII = 0.816 and was rankedin the 6 th position among all groups of quality (Table 4.11). This proves thatmanagement commitment is vital for success of any action or plan within a company.94

Results also show how much important the role of top management in implementingsafety and health policy in a manner that also improves quality. Thus, it can bededuced that quality can be achieved through the commitment of top management ofthe company."The safety and health policy forms a part of the company core values" factor wasranked in the second position among the safety and health policy group with RII=0.811 and was ranked in the 7 th position among all groups factors of quality. Thisresult supports that companies are concerned with safety and health of employees toan extent that such concern is reflected in the company's core values."Existence of written policy for quality standards supports commitment to safety"factor was ranked in the third position among the safety and health policy group withRII = 0.730 and was ranked in the 17 th position among all groups factors of quality.This result shows that writing clauses for safety policy in project contract emphasizesthe importance of safety and exposes contractors to legal liability towards worker'ssafety."Quality assurance referring to international standards improves safety" factor wasranked in the fourth position among the safety and health policy group with RII=0.721 and was ranked in the 19 th position among all groups factors of quality. Qualityassurance (QA) is a set of activities aimed at ensuring the system will meet itsobjectives. Thus, if QA according to international standards is implemented, safetywill be improved because of the high importance of safety with regard to QA."The safety and health policy contains objectives for safety and health commitmentrelevant to organizational goals" factor was ranked in the fifth position among thesafety and health policy group with RII= 0.648 and was ranked in the 40 th positionamong all groups factors of quality. It can be deduced that safety and health policyobjectives are relatively poor with regard to organizational goals of the company. Inother words, although respondents have shown a tendency towards agreeing that95

safety and health policy objectives are part of company's goal, they – respondents –didn't consider this item important as other items of Group 1.This situation might result from the suggestion that several companies although arecommitted to health and safety, but this commitment is lacked in writtenorganization's goals. Company might not have managed to explicitly prove theirsafety and health policy objectives within organizational goals.GROUP 2: Safety OrganizationTable 4.12 illustrates respondents’ opinion about safety organization with regard toquality. Group 2 contains three factors of safety organization.Table 4.12: Safety Organization2. Safety Organization# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankThe safety organization is formed withculture at community considers safety vitalneed for peopleThe safety organization is formed withpositive behavior at workers and topmanagement towards safetyThe safety organization is formed withknowledgeable personnel which exhibitscharacteristics necessary to achieve worksafety objectives61 0 3 4 21 33 0 0.840 1 161 0 0 6 29 26 0 0.828 2 561 0 4 13 31 13 0 0.713 3 25"The safety organization is formed with culture at community considers safety vitalneed for people" factor has been ranked in the first position among safety organizationgroup with RII = 0.840 and has been ranked also in the first position among all groupsfactors of quality. This result shows that the community culture is the most importantfactor in the process of forming safety organization. This factor is also the mostimportant factor among those that relates to quality. Safety culture is not only about96

good safety attitudes in people but it is also about good safety managementestablished by organizations."The safety organization is formed with positive behavior at workers and topmanagement towards safety" factor was ranked in the second position among safetyorganization group with RII = 0.828 and was ranked in the 5 th position among allgroups factors of quality. This result shows both top management and worker'spositive behavior towards safety regulations is essential for achieving successfulsafety organization."The safety organization is formed with knowledgeable personnel which exhibitscharacteristics necessary to achieve work safety objectives" factor was ranked in thethird position among safety organization group with RII = 0.713 and was ranked inthe 25 th position among all groups factors of quality. It is the lowest important factorwithin the group of safety organization. It can be deduced that human resourcesalthough important, cannot achieve set goals without the necessary culture. On thecontrary, they require support from community and top management. This result issimilar to results obtained from (Shammas-Toma et al, 1998) who defined that changein organizational culture is one of the significant factors of TQM. This result is alsosimilar to the results of (Sawacha et al, 1999) who proved that safety culture is themost important factor in causing accidents. As shown previously, safety culture at thecommunity is the most important factor of achieving safe workplace whenaccompanied with knowledgeable personnel. The integration of good safety culturewithin community and knowledgeable safety personnel will help principally informing excellent safety organization.GROUP 3: Safety TrainingTable 4.13 shows the respondents’ opinion about safety training with regard to qualityaccording to Likert scale. Group 3 contains three factors of safety training.97

Table 4.13: Safety Training3. Safety Training# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankAll managers should go through propersafety management trainingAll engineers should go through propersafety management trainingAll workers should go through proper safetymanagement training61 0 0 9 22 30 0 0.832 1 261 1 2 5 20 33 0 0.832 1 361 0 4 6 26 25 0 0.791 3 9"All managers should go through proper safety management training" factor wasranked in the first position among safety training group with RII = 0.832 and was alsoranked in the second position among all groups factors of quality. This result showshow much important the training is. It also indicates that training of top managementis very important which proves the importance of top management role instrengthening safety within workplace.All employees are required to attend safety training from manager to worker. Safetytraining gives employees opportunity to identify hazards and the best practices toavoid such hazards at workplace. The reason why managers' safety training owned thehighest rank among the three factors of safety training is that project manager is incharge of the safety and health of all workers of the project. If the project manager isnot sufficiently trained in the field of safety, he would not be able to feel the hazardsand risk surrounding workers he is in charge of. It is also known that top managementcommitment is vital to applying safety measures at workplace.Project manager is required to have knowledge in the field of construction safetymanagement, risk management, accident investigation, first aid, design andimplementation of safe systems of work and accident prevention programs, and otherrelated topics. Project manager would train workers based on his experience in safetyand as a result of professional safety training the manager joined. It would be highlyappreciated by workers and easily grasped when their project manager train them. Thegood relations that the manager has with workers would make the training presented98

y him mostly well understood and applicable. Project manager who train workers,will be able to monitor the results of training and observe whether workers benefitedfrom his training or not. The idea of the training of workers is provided by theirmanagement is that worker feels that their safety is a shared responsibility. Both staffand management work together to identify and reduce risk in the workplace."All engineers should go through proper safety management training" factor wasranked in the first position among safety training group with RII = 0.832 and wasranked in the third position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows howmuch important the training is. It also indicates that training of engineers is greatly ofthe same importance of managers' training. Trained engineers would assist inimproving safety conditions at workplace. Engineer's role at workplace makes itimportant for them to be trained in the field of safety because they are in directcontact with workers. This result is not consistent with results obtained from a studywhich shows that engineers in Arabic region receive almost no training (Kartam et al,2000)."All workers should go through proper safety management training" factor wasranked in the third position among safety training group with RII = 0.791 and wasranked also in the 9 th position among all groups factors of quality. Although workertraining is extremely important because he is in direct contact with hazards,respondents did not consider this factor as top priority in Safety Training. This resultseizes quite important position among total factors of quality (9 th rank) which proveshow much important is the training of worker. This result is consistent with resultsobtained from a study which shows that engineers in Arabic region receive almost notraining (Kartam et al, 2000). Generally, the most important training is the orientationof newly hired workers. During this phase of training the new worker is provided withcompany expectations, work procedures and project specific safety training. It isbelieved that orientation can increase accidents and injuries and thus increaseturnover.99

GROUP 4: In-house Safety RulesTable 4.14 shows the respondents’ opinion about in-house safety rules with regard toquality according to Likert scale. Group 4 contains four factors of in-house safetyrules.Table 4.14: In-house Safety Rules4. In-house Safety Rules# ofRespondentsFrequency of occurrenceStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankSafety program supports quality of project 61 2 3 8 33 15 0 0.725 1 18Company should use safety rules of Ministryof Labor or international and regional 61 3 0 10 38 10 0 0.709 2 26companies to formulate its own rulesCompany should formulate worker andequipment safety rules through assistance of 61 2 2 12 36 9 0 0.693 3 30experts of safetySafety rules could change according toproject nature61 0 11 6 29 15 0 0.693 4 31"Safety program supports quality of project" factor was ranked in the first positionamong in-house safety rules group with RII = 0.725 and was ranked in the 18 thposition among all groups factors of quality. This result shows how much importantthis factor is. This result also shows the importance of establishing written safety rulesand regulations that are relevant to the organization, in addition to the legalrequirements. This involves inculcating in workmen, including contractors, their rolesand responsibilities in safety whilst performing their work at workplace. Respondentsbelieved that safety program supports the quality of the project because of theimportance of safety program to ensure safety and healthy workplace.This result supports the idea that a good safety program is vital to the success ofconstruction business. A safety program is said to prevents injuries, increases qualityand productivity, and enhances company's reputation with trade contractors andclients. It also can save thousands of dollars through reduced workers' compensation100

costs and increased loss-control. Thus, a project is believed to be of quality if aprofessional and applicable safety program is provided for company's projects."Company should use safety rules of Ministry of Labor (MOL) or international andregional companies to formulate its own rules" factor was ranked in second positionof in-house safety rules group with RII = 0.709 and was ranked in the 26 th positionamong all groups factors of quality. This factor indicates that local companies shoulduse either safety regulations of MOL or international regulations. The reason for thisis that many companies whether committed or not to safety are lacking the requiredsafety management experience. They need in addition to training, to have an insight tointernational standards to help them establish their own safety regulations andmanagement. The use of international regulations could assist companies toimplement safety regulations due to the lack of clear and descriptive regulations inregional context."Company should formulate worker and equipment safety rules through assistance ofexperts of safety" factor was ranked in the third position among in-house safety rulesgroup with RII = 0.693 and was ranked in the 30 th position among all groups factorsof quality. This result shows that safety management can also be achieved by hiringexternal expert or consultant who would guide the company towards formulating theirown safety regulations. The role of this consultant is integrant to the role of usinginternational or MOL's regulations."Safety rules could change according to project nature" factor was ranked in thefourth position among in-house safety rules group with RII = 0.693 and was ranked in31 st position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows the in-house safetyrules could change whenever applicable so that it becomes suitable for the projectnature. Project nature varies according to type, environment, and size of project.Project types are several; building, road, chemical plans, nuclear plants, factories,schools, etc. Project environment changes according to the location of the projectwhile the size of the project might be small, medium, and large according to cost andduration.101

Safety rules in road projects will be considerably different from building projects.Road projects do not undergo high risk of fall accidents which constitute the highestpercentage of accidents in building projects. Safety rules within large-scale projectswould differ with regard to number of safety staff, safety program, and the existenceof external safety experts. In small-scale projects, safety staff would be small andprojects might need external safety experts.GROUP 5: Safety InspectionTable 4.15 shows the respondents’ opinion about safety inspection with regard toquality according to Likert scale. Group 5 contains four factors of safety inspection.Table 4.15: Safety Inspection5. Safety Inspection# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankAbsence of inspection team leads tononcompliance of both quality and safety61 1 6 11 17 26 0 0.746 1 15Safety engineer at workplace improves safety 61 0 4 14 28 15 0 0.717 2 21Over-inspection of safety from site engineerdecreased quality61 4 16 17 16 8 0 0.529 3 50Rework due to inspection increase accidents 61 4 21 9 22 5 0 0.508 4 53"Absence of inspection team leads to noncompliance of both quality and safety"factor as ranked in the first position among safety inspection group with RII = 0.746and was ranked in the 15 th position among all groups factors of quality. This resultdemonstrates that inspection at workplace is important factor to both safety andquality.The goal of safety inspections is to reduce injuries, illness and fatalities byconcentrating safety measures enforcement on those projects that do not haveeffective safety and health program. The goal of safety inspection extends to thoseprojects which have effective safety and health programs. It is difficult to qualify a102

project as of high quality in case of lack of safety inspection because there will be noway to measure the success or failure of safety system at project."Safety engineer at workplace improves safety" factor was ranked in the secondposition among safety inspection group with RII = 0.717 and was ranked in the 21 stposition among all groups factors of quality. This result demonstrates the importanceof the existence of safety engineer at workplace. Safety engineer is responsible forconducting safety meetings, accident reports, guiding foremen with regard to safetyand other activities that improve workplace safety. Safety engineer role cannot beunderestimated because he will be responsible for safety on real ground of workplace.Foremen would ask his advice in conditions of risk that would appear."Over-inspection of safety from site engineer decreased quality" factor was ranked inthe third position among safety inspection group with RII = 0.529 and was ranked inthe 50 th position among all groups factors of quality. This factor which was ranked 3 rdamong its relative group was not supported by contractors. They don't see quality isnegatively affected by over inspection. Over inspection can affect productivitynegatively and cause waste of the company resources."Rework due to inspection increase accidents" factor was ranked in the fourth positionamong safety inspection group with RII = 0.508 and was ranked in the 53 rd positionamong all groups factors of quality. Respondents did not consider the rework as afactor that increases accidents. It was deduced from respondents who ranked reworkthe lowest amongst factors of safety inspection.Rework is considered a problem in construction projects due to the loss ofproductivity resulted from repeating the same task due to errors or changes. Reworkcan cause accidents when workers are forced to rework on a task within tight timeschedule to avoid delay of the project. It also claimed that lack of safety leads torework. When worker is injured because of errors or mistakes in a task, he will repeatthe task to avoid the errors that might have caused by his injury. It also said thattaking safety into account during design stage will reduce not only accidents but alsorework.103

GROUP 6: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)Table 4.16 shows the respondents’ opinion about personal protective equipment withregard to quality according to Likert scale. Group 6 contains three factors of personalprotective equipment.Table 4.16: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)6. Personal Protective Equipment(PPE)# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankUse of PPE (gloves, helmet, etc.) decreasesinjuries61 2 2 3 30 24 0 0.791 1 10Lack of top management commitment toproviding PPE leads to lack of attention of 61 0 8 8 28 17 0 0.717 2 22workers and engineers to safetyWorker use of PPE improves quality 61 0 10 13 30 8 0 0.643 3 41"Use of PPE (gloves, helmet, etc.) decreases injuries" factor was ranked in the firstposition among personal protective equipment (PPE) group with RII = 0.791 and wasranked in the 10 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows theimportance of PPE in decreasing injuries at workplace. It is usual that such personalprotective equipments when used properly will stand as a barrier to hazard and risk.The use of PPE is requires to reduce employee exposure to hazards when engineeringand administrative controls are not feasible or effective in reducing these exposure toacceptable levels. If PPE is to be used, a PPE program should be implemented. Thisprogram should address the hazards present; the selection, maintenance, and use ofPPE; the training of employees; and monitoring of the program to ensure its ongoingeffectiveness."Lack of top management commitment to providing PPE leads to lack of attention ofworkers and engineers to safety" factor was ranked in the second position among PPE104

group with RII = 0.717 and was ranked in the 22 nd position among all groups factorsof quality. This result illustrates that project managers are required to determine ifPPE should be used to protect their workers. This result is similar to results obtainedfrom a study by Mbuya (2001) which shows that the poor planning of safety inTanzanian construction industry has contributed to lack of safety programs and thuslack of required PPE provided to workers. Top management is required to commit toproviding such PPE in case of hazardous conditions at workplace. In USA, OSHA’sgeneral PPE requirements mandate that employers conduct a hazard assessment oftheir workplaces to determine what hazards are present that require the use of PPE,provide workers with appropriate PPE, and require them to use and maintain it insanitary and reliable condition. Project quality measures require that a professionalassessment of hazardous to be conducted in order to manage the use of PPE."Worker use of PPE improves quality" factor was ranked in the third position amongPPE group with RII = 0.643 and was ranked in the 41 st position among all groupsfactors of quality. Respondents did not consider this factor as a major contributor toquality within Group 6. A study by Azhar et al (2002) shows that majority ofrespondents consider it an important element of TQM in Hong Kong.GROUP 7: Accident DocumentationTable 4.17 shows the respondents’ opinion about accident documentation with regardto quality according to Likert scale. Group 7 contains two factors of accidentdocumentation.Table 4.17: Accident Documentation7. Accident Documentation# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankRegular analysis of accidents improves safetyand decreases future accidentsRegular documentation of accidentsimproves safety and decreases futureaccidents61 0 4 9 34 14 0 0.734 1 1661 0 2 13 37 9 0 0.713 2 24105

"Regular analysis of accidents improves safety and decreases future accidents" factorwas ranked in first position among accident documentation group with RII = 0.734and was ranked in the 16 th position among all groups factors of quality. This resultshows that regular analysis of accident causations and roots is main factor to retrieverisks associated. As means of documentation, regular analysis of accidents isconducted in a manner that increases safety at workplace and avoid the occurrence offuture accidents. Such analyses would be reported to management and can be viewedby project employees."Regular documentation of accidents improves safety and decreases future accidents"factor was ranked in the second position among accident documentation group withRII=0.713 and was ranked in the 24 th position among all groups factors of quality.This result shows that regular documentation of accident contributes also to safetyimprovement. Accident documentation varies between camera, tape, accidentlogbook, reports, and other means. Short course training might be offered to elaboratefindings of accident analysis reports. Moreover, leaflet or bulletin board would beappreciable to show results of accident analysis reports. Statistical analysis of suchdocuments helps studying current safety conditions of company and also wouldimprove future plans to avoid accidents.GROUP 8: Emergency PreparednessTable 4.18 shows the respondents’ opinion about emergency preparedness with regardto quality according to Likert scale. Group 8 contains three factors of emergencypreparedness.Table 4.18: Emergency Preparedness8. Emergency Preparedness# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankFirst Aid at workplace improves safety 61 0 1 5 36 19 0 0.795 1 8106

8. Emergency Preparedness# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankFirst Aide improves safety 61 0 5 12 28 16 0 0.721 2 20Emergency plans at company decreases61 3 6 6 37 9 0 0.672 3 36accidents"First Aid at workplace improves safety" factor was ranked in the first position amongemergency preparedness group with RII = 0.795 and was ranked in the 8 th positionamong all groups factors of quality. It can be understood from the results that first aidis important in decreasing injuries. First aid is emergency care given immediately toan injured worker. The purpose of first aid is to minimize injury and future disability.In serious cases, first aid may be necessary to keep the victim alive. In order of it to beeffective, first aid supplies shall be easily accessible when required. The contents ofthe first aid kit shall be placed in a weatherproof container and shall be checkedregularly to ensure that the expended items are replaced. In addition, prompttransportation of the injured person to a physician or hospital, or a communicationsystem for contacting necessary ambulance service, shall be provided."First Aide improves safety" factor was ranked in the second position amongemergency preparedness group with RII = 0.721 and was ranked in the 20 th positionamong all groups factors of quality. This result illustrates that the employer shallinsure the availability of medical personnel for advice and consultation on matters ofoccupational safety and health. The first aide could also train workers formally ornon-formally on how to react in case of accidents. Companies should considerselected workers to train in the field of first aid to help serving injured workmates."Emergency plans at company decreases accidents" factor was ranked in the thirdposition among emergency preparedness group with RII = 0.672 and was ranked inthe 36 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows that a companythat is fully equipped with emergency plans faces fewer accidents due to risk107

preparedness. Emergency operations or Emergency preparedness is a set of doctrinesto prepare project employees to cope with natural or man-made accidents. Emergencyplan can save money and lives when planned and managed properly. Emergencyresponse actions are guided by the project manager to protect workers safety. It iswidely believed that being prepared no matter how much it costs is still less costlythan accident compensation.GROUP 9: Evaluation, Selection and Control of SubcontractorsTable 4.19 shows the respondents’ opinion about evaluation, selection and control ofsubcontractors with regard to quality according to Likert scale. Group 9 contains fourfactors of evaluation, selection, and control of subcontractors.Table 4.19: Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors9. Evaluation, Selection and Control ofSubcontractors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankFollowing-up of subcontractors by contractorimproves safetyNo preconstruction site visit by contractorincreases risks and decreases quality due tounexpected conditionsOwner should consider subcontractor whosesafety record is cleanEvaluation, selection and control ofsubcontractors have been conducted throughmatching with or alignment of companysafety objectives61 2 8 4 33 14 0 0.697 1 2861 1 14 5 24 17 0 0.668 2 3761 2 7 15 24 13 0 0.656 3 3961 5 10 16 22 8 0 0.570 4 46"Following-up of subcontractors by contractor improves safety" factor was ranked inthe first position among evaluation, selection, and control of subcontractors groupwith RII = 0.697 and was ranked in the 28 th position among all groups factors ofquality. This result shows that a responsibility of subcontractors should be maintainedby general contractors which would improve safety. The primary objectives of every108

general contractor and subcontractor are to successfully deliver to the owner thespecified project safely, on time, at the contract price and achieve a reasonable profitin return for performance of its work. Regardless of personal pride, businessphilosophy, contractual authority or years of experience, no general contractor candeliver a project successfully without the cooperation of competent subcontractors.Similarly, no subcontractor, regardless of skill and experience in its specialty, canperform its work successfully without the corresponding measure of cooperation andleadership of a competent general contractor.Subcontractors will be reluctant to ignore safety regulations for many reasons amongof which is that they would secure their professional reputations, save workers' lives,keep good relations and records with general contractor. Subcontractors must abide bythe safety requirements established by the general contractor as well as those of theirown safety programs and applicable jurisdictions."No preconstruction site visit by contractor increases risks and decreases quality dueto unexpected conditions" factor was ranked in the second position among evaluation,selection, and control of subcontractors group with RII = 0.668 and was ranked alsoin the 37 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows that it isnecessary for contractors to keep up with preconstruction site visits and assess theexpected problems and risks inherent so that they can be avoided. The ConstructionManager is responsible for participating in the preconstruction meeting to establishhealth and safety expectations for the project."Owner should consider subcontractor whose safety record is clean" factor wasranked in the third position among evaluation, selection, and control of subcontractorsgroup with RII = 0.668 and was ranked also in the 39 th position among all groupsfactors of quality. This result demonstrates how much important is the clean safetyrecord of subcontractor for the owner to consider. Subcontractors will try to keep theirprofessional reputations and clean safety records so that their work would continuewithout having problems with owners who might be unwilling to employsubcontractors with black listed safety records. Because the costs of jobsite accidentsare sometimes borne by the owner, many owners try to indemnify themselves in their109

contracts by making the subcontractor responsible for safety. By addressing safetyspecifically in the contract documents, owners send the message that safety isimportant to contractor who in turn delivers it to subcontractor."Evaluation, selection and control of subcontractors have been conducted throughmatching with or alignment of company safety objectives" factor was ranked in thefourth position among evaluation, selection, and control of subcontractors group withRII = 0.668 and was ranked in the 46 th position among all groups factors of quality.Respondents did not give high support to this statement. It is hoped that in the future,the evaluation, selection, and control of subcontractors been conducted to meet thecompany's safety objectives. This will reduce accidents because subcontractors willbe aware of worker safety due to insertion of safety records into contract documentsand selection criteria.GROUP 10: Safety CommitteesTable 4.20 shows the respondents’ opinion about evaluation, selection and control ofsubcontractors with regard to quality according to Likert scale. Group 10 containsthree factors of safety committees.Table 4.20: Safety Committees10. Safety Committees# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankSafety committee is formed to monitor safetyperformanceThe safety committee is an arena of differentinterests groups of safetyThe company senior manager always chairsthe safety committee61 0 1 19 37 4 0 0.676 1 3461 0 2 21 32 6 0 0.668 2 3861 1 10 34 11 5 0 0.533 3 48110

"Safety committee is formed to monitor safety performance" factor was ranked in thefirst position among safety committee group with RII = 0.676 and was ranked in the34 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result emphasizes the importantrole that safety committees play to monitor safety performance. Safety committee is acommittee that promotes health and safety in the workplace, with membersrepresenting employees and management from all sections of an organization. Safetycommittees will monitor performance of general contractor and all subcontractorsensuring that they deliver services to equivalent standards of health and safety andthat management is in place to rectify shortfalls. Since the committee combines allproject parties, transparency will be evident while monitoring project activities withregard to safety."The safety committee is an arena of different interests groups of safety" factor wasranked in the second position among safety committee group with RII = 0.668 andwas ranked in the 38 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result showsthat safety committee is a combination of project parties including project manager,safety engineer, site engineer, foreman, labor, etc. The committee consists of laborand management representatives who meet on a regular basis to deal with health andsafety issues. The advantage of a safety committee is that the in-depth practicalknowledge of specific tasks (labor) is brought together with the larger overview ofcompany policies, and procedures (management). Another significant benefit is theenhancement of a cooperative attitude among all parties of the project toward solvinghealth and safety problems."The company senior manager always chairs the safety committee" factor was rankedin the third position with RII = 0.533 and was ranked in the 48 th position among allgroups factors of quality. This result shows that the company is concerned withsafety. Company manager chairing the safety committee means that the company topmanagement is in full view of all safety related problems on jobsite. Chairman beingthe company manager is the decision maker who can approve proposed solutions toany safety problem raised by labor during committee meetings. Respondents ranked itthe lowest within the safety committee group. They may have considered that the111

company manager chairing safety committee is not as important as to that thecommittee should represent all relevant parties and that the committee will monitorsafety performance.GROUP 11: Safety and Health PromotionTable 4.21 shows the respondents’ opinion about safety and health promotion withregard to quality according to Likert scale. Group 11 contains four factors of safetyand health promotions.Table 4.21: Safety and Health Promotion11. Safety and Health Promotion# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankTop management support improves safety 61 1 2 6 30 22 0 0.783 1 11Current negative culture dominating localcommunity decreases quality61 0 1 20 29 11 0 0.701 2 27All employees know the results of accidentand injury investigations and follow up 61 2 19 13 23 4 0 0.529 3 49actionsThe values of safety and health areadequately defined61 2 14 22 21 2 0 0.525 4 51"Top management support improves safety" factor was ranked in the first positionamong safety and health promotion group with RII = 0.783 and was ranked in the 11 thposition among all groups factors of quality. This result shows that respondentsstrongly agree that top management support is very essential for improving safety.One of the most challenges that top management faces is improving safety conditionsat workplace. As they are on the top of management pyramid, their commitment tostrengthening safety will lead the lower management levels commit to strengtheningsafety.112

For a safety program to be properly implemented, top management involvementshould be visible in implementing the program so that all will understand thatmanagement's commitment is serious. If top management gives high priority to safetyand health protection in practice, other will see and follow. If not, a written or spokenpolicy of high priority for safety and health will have little credibility, and others willnot follow it.Top management commitment is considered a promotional effort towards safetyimprovement. Safety promotion and accident prevention has a lot to do with persistentinformation, education and culture. Top and line management must get used tothinking “what can I do in my work to prevent accidents or incidents” There must be aculture for doing tasks correctly even if it takes two minutes more."Current negative culture dominating local community decreases quality" factor wasranked in the second position among safety and health promotion group with RII =0.701 and was ranked in the 27 th position among all groups factors of quality. Thisresult shows that safety culture plays an important role in addition to top managementin providing safer workplace. Self-regulation, however, would not work unless it isunderpinned by a good safety culture. Respondents referred in their responses to thatdue to negative safety culture, quality of work decreases. Negative culture wouldmake workers unreceptive towards applying quality and safety regulations. Indeed,refusing safety regulation is a violation of quality regulations."All employees know the results of accident and injury investigations and follow upactions" factor was ranked in the third position among safety and health promotiongroup with RII = 0.529 and was ranked in the 49 th position among all groups factorsof quality. This result shows the company supplies an access for employees todocuments related to health and safety. This step helps employees benefit from pastexperience of their colleagues."The values of safety and health are adequately defined" factor was ranked in thefourth position among safety and health promotion group with RII = 0.525 and wasranked in the 51 st position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows113

safety and health values and message are adequately understandable and well defined.Respondents did not rank this factor as an important one. It was ranked the lowestwithin 11 th group. Values of safety cannot be clearly defined and understood unlessthere is a safety culture at the company and community. Safety should be treated as apassion and a commitment rather than a business priority. It is rooted in human valuerather than business value — and the company should have strengthened this priorityamong employees.GROUP 12: Health Insurance ProgramTable 4.22 shows the respondents’ opinion about health insurance program withregard to quality according to Likert scale. Group 12 contains two factors of healthinsurance program.Table 4. 22: Health Insurance Program12. Health Insurance Program# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankHealth insurance program increases concernof contractor towards worker safetyHealth insurance program helps reducinginjuries61 2 10 19 17 13 0 0.615 1 4561 1 18 17 15 10 0 0.557 2 47"Health insurance program increases concern of contractor towards worker safety"factor was ranked in the first position among health insurance program group with RII= 0.615 and was ranked in the 45 th position among all groups factors of quality. Thisresult shows that construction safety is positively related to health insurance. Healthinsurance is a policy that will pay specified sums for medical expenses or treatments.Health policies can offer many options and vary in their approaches to coverageincluding accident insurance and medical expense insurance. Respondents supportedthe idea that health insurance program increases the concern of contractors towardstheir workers' health and safety. With regard to overall rank, this factor was ranked as114

low factor that affects quality (45 th ) which would indicate that health insuranceprogram doesn't include to the quality of the project. One reason for this low rank isthat respondents agree that workers might not receive the benefit of insurance."Health insurance program helps reducing injuries" factor was ranked in the secondposition among safety insurance program group with RII = 0.557 and was ranked inthe 47 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result shows lowimportance of this factor with regard to construction safety and health insurance. Thisresult indicates that reduction of injuries is not noticeably influenced by heathinsurance programs. Respondents might have considered health insurance as a remedyof an injury but wouldn't help preventing injuries in the future since it is not a remedyfor safety failures and deficiencies on workplace.GROUP 13: Project ImplementationTable 4.23 shows the respondents’ opinion about project implementation with regardto quality according to Likert scale. Group 13 contains three factors of projectimplementation.Table 4.23: Project Implementation13. Project Implementation# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankImplementation according to agreedspecification in contract improves safetyIncrease of material price leads to use of lowquality material thus harms workersMany change orders during implementationdecreases productivity and increasesaccidents and injuries61 0 7 13 32 9 0 0.672 1 3561 4 8 11 27 11 0 0.631 2 4361 0 14 16 18 13 0 0.619 3 44115

"Implementation according to agreed specification in contract improves safety" factorwas ranked in the first position among project implementation group with RII = 0.627and was ranked in the 35 th position among all groups factors of quality. This resultshows the compliance with project specification during implementation phase willimprove safety. This action depends on whether work plan of the project considerssafety during planning and implementation. This paragraph of research requires thatsafety be inherent to project specifications. Safety might also be implicitly mentionedin the project specification when the specification writer is aware of risks associatedwith tasks of project. Time, Cost, Quality, and Safety should remain the four primefactors that need to be kept in mind and weighed accurately while taking decisionover the specifications for each component of project construction. It is necessary toensure that key health and safety issues are jointly identified at the earliest stage ofproject; this arrangement helps to eliminate or reduce hazards through design andspecification optimization. This is important, as the risks that eventually becomeuncontrollable often arise from decisions taken in the earliest project stages. Projectdesigner's background including knowledge of concept, education, training,motivation affects the implementation of the project. Implementation consideringsafety will have a direct impact on contractor liability and profitability."Increase of material price leads to use of low quality material thus harms workers"factor was ranked in the second position among project implementation group withRII = 0.631 and was ranked in the 43 rd position among all groups factors of quality.This result shows that increase of material price is a factor that decreases quality ofmaterial and thus decreases safety measures. In Gaza Strip, due to unstable politicalsituation, closure of borders always affects the entrance of raw materials to GazaStrip. Under such conditions, the existing imported raw materials will decrease whiletheir prices increase. Some contractors may use local materials with low qualitywhich would not only decrease quality of project but also affect workers safety. Lowquality materials may contain materials that harm health and safety. The use of lowquality construction equipments including scaffolding, hammer, nails, and cables mayalso expose worker to risk of accident.116

"Many change orders during implementation decreases productivity and increasesaccidents and injuries" factor was ranked in the third position among projectimplementation group with RII = 0.619 and was ranked in the 44 th position among allgroups factors of quality. This result shows the excess of change orders whiledecreasing productivity will also increase accidents and injuries. The excess of changeorders would decrease quality due to that contractor would work under tighter timeschedules. Some contractors may use low quality materials to achieve more profitableworks under change orders umbrella. Under such conditions safety would besacrificed for the favor of profit and time.GROUP 14: WorkmanshipTable 4.24 shows the respondents’ opinion about workmanship with regard to qualityaccording to Likert scale. Group 14 contains nine factors of workmanship.Table 4.24: Workmanship14. Workmanship# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankLack of worker experience decreases qualityand exposes him to more accidentsNon-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they facePersonal problems decreases concentrationand thus decreases quality and safetyNon-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they faceWorker working with same crew (friendsrelatives, etc.) increases quality, productivity,and safetyAbsence of one or more of workers results inreplacement of new worker temporarilywhich decreases quality and increasesaccidentsLack of sufficient workers decreases qualityand also decreases safety due to pressure onworkersWorker working with same crew (friendsrelatives, etc.) increases quality, productivity,and safetyThe older the worker, the better the qualityand the less accidents he is exposed to61 0 2 2 30 27 0 0.832 1 461 0 2 2 30 27 0 0.832 1 461 0 1 11 28 21 0 0.779 2 1261 0 4 3 39 15 0 0.762 3 1361 0 3 14 31 13 0 0.717 4 2361 0 4 12 37 8 0 0.697 5 2961 0 9 5 41 6 0 0.676 6 3361 1 8 14 30 8 0 0.643 7 4261 1 8 14 30 8 0 0.643 7 42117

"Lack of worker experience decreases quality and exposes him to more accidents"factor was ranked in the first position among workmanship group with RII = 0.832and was ranked in the 4 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result isranked one of the highest ranks within quality groups and 1 st within its own group.This result indicates that the worker experience is a major factor in both safety andquality. This result is similar to results found by Mbuya (2001). Inexperiencedworkers would act unsafely and thus harm themselves and also decrease quality ofproject. Site-specific safety orientations of new workers and inexperienced ones isvital at the start of new projects. Supervisors and safety officers need to be heldresponsible for inexperienced workers in their care, with more investigation ofaccidents and all serious accidents investigated."Personal problems decrease concentration and thus decreases quality and safety"factor was ranked in the second position among workmanship group with RII = 0.779and was ranked in the 12 th position among all groups factors of quality. This resultindicates personal problems of workers have an influence on their quality and safety.Personal problems disperse worker's concentration which exposes him to accidentsduring work. Such a worker carries to the job considerable "mental baggage," whichmight impair work performance (Hinze, 1997). At the time the worker'sconsciousness is lost, his behavior will be uncontrollable and his quality will decrease.Probably, rework will increase also. Clever project manager or foreman will not solveeach worker's family or personal problem, but by talking with workers about theirproblems a little would help the workers resolving them."Non-orientation of new workers decreases quality and increases risk they face" factorwas ranked in the third position among workmanship group with RII = 0.762 and wasranked in the 13 th position among all groups factors of quality. This result indicatesthe importance of the orientation for new workers to prevent accidents and improvequality. It is very vital to offer new worker orientation sessions including a discussionof safety and health policies and procedures. One of the demonstrated managementcommitments is participation in orientation. Oriented new workers are said to behave118

safer. A new worker when oriented will perform tasks of project of good quality sincehe has been shown risks and hazards associated with tasks."Worker working with same crew (friends relatives, etc.) increases quality,productivity, and safety" factor was ranked in the fourth position among workmanshipgroup with RII = 0.717 and was ranked in the 23 rd position among all groups factorsof quality. This result indicates workers working with same crew either friends orrelatives, feel more comfortable than with new crews. This comfortable feelingmotivates workers to collaborate and cooperate on resolving any kind of problems andthus eliminate unexpected hazards. Same crew workers would produce more qualitywork since they would collaborate on performing tasks effectively. Same crewworkers might help solving each other's personal problems thus reducing mentaldispersion which leads to more accidents, less quality, and less productivity."Absence of one or more of workers results in replacement of new worker temporarilywhich decreases quality and increases accidents" factor was ranked in the fifthposition among workmanship group with RII = 0.697 and was ranked in the 29 thposition among all groups factors of quality. This result is relatively relevant to theabove mentioned paragraph of same crews. This result illustrates that when a workeris absent he is replaced by a new one who might not be familiar to crew. Thus, inorder to get familiar to the crew the new worker needs time during which he might beexposed to hazards. The mechanism of task performance would be inconsistent sincea new worker is involved which means that crew would need more time to make thenew worker cope with their productivity and quality in addition to safety."Lack of sufficient workers decreases quality and also decreases safety due topressure on workers" factor was ranked in the sixth position among workmanshipgroup with RII = 0.676 and was in the 33 rd position among all groups factors ofquality. This result indicates sufficient number of workers should be provided at theproject which would increase quality and safety. The lack of worker at the projectwhich might be resulted from the contractor would lead to pressure on workers towork faster and more productively. Working within tight schedules and loaded tasks119

would disperse consciousness of workers which leads to less quality and morehazards."The older the worker, the better the quality and the less accidents he is exposed to"factor was ranked in the seventh position among workmanship group with RII = 0.643and was ranked in the 42 nd position among all groups factors of quality. This resultshows that this factor has been ranked lowest within group and apparently low withinthe quality overall groups. Respondents showed that older workers are less exposed tohazards which might be a result of their long experience and their wise character thatprevents them from exposing themselves to apparent hazards opposing young workerswho are motivated sometime to perform hazard associated tasks. Another reason maybe that older workers are aware that fewer job opportunities are available for them, sothey are more committed at work and are willing to comply with safety rule.GROUP 15: Contract DocumentsTable 4.25 shows the respondents’ opinion about contract documents with regard toquality according to Likert scale. Group 15 contains three factors of contractdocuments.Table 4.25: Contract Documents15. Contract DocumentsFrequency ofoccurrence# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreDisagreeNeutralAgreeStrongly AgreeMissinganswersRIIRankwithingroupRankInclusion of safety into contract clausesimproves safety and ensures compliance withsafety regulationsInclusion of contractor safety and qualityrecords into bid awarding process decreasesaccidentsSpecifications required which are higher thanlocal experience increases risks associated61 2 3 6 31 19 0 0.750 1 1461 0 10 6 32 13 0 0.693 2 3261 4 18 15 18 6 0 0.512 3 52120

"Inclusion of safety into contract clauses improves safety and ensures compliancewith safety regulations" factor was ranked in the first position among contractdocuments group with RII = 0.750 and was ranked in the 14 th position among allgroups factors of quality. This result shows how much important is the inclusion ofsafety provision into contract clauses. Contractors are forced to comply with safetyregulations in case such regulations are strongly and explicitly mentioned withincontract documents. Inclusion of safety clauses into contract strengthens thecommitment towards safe workplace and a support for the objective of Zero Accidentapproach. Noncompliance with safety clauses will make contractor responsible andreliable for accidents and injuries and thus compensations."Inclusion of contractor safety and quality records into bid awarding processdecreases accidents" factor was ranked in the second position among contractdocuments group with RII = 0.693 and was ranked in the 32 nd position among allgroups factors of quality. This result illustrates that inclusion of safety and qualityrecords into bidding will stimulate contractors to keep their records clean of safetyand quality problems by enhancing their performance. Black-listed contractors arethose who have bad records in terms of quality and safety. Such contractors will notbe awarded any project until their records and reputation reach an acceptable level.Quality control at workplace would be applied based on quality provisions withincontract documents which will force contractors to perform quality work. Combinedtogether, safety and quality clauses in contract documents ensures that the project willbe performed within time and cost specified in the contract and would also ensuresthat the project reaches Zero Accident."Specifications required which are higher than local experience increases risksassociated" factor as ranked in the third position among contract documents groupwith RII = 0.512 and was ranked in the 52 nd position among all groups factors ofquality. This result indicates that overstated specifications which might be broughtfrom international contexts increases risk of accident. Worker would not be familiarwith the right method of implementing the imported standards and also will not befamiliar with associated hazards of the tasks. Workers who worked using overstated121

specifications might feel like newly hired workers and thus need orientation to letthem be familiar with such new standards. Such specifications might require moretime to be achieved due to lack of relevant experience which in turn will make thecontractor force workers to work under tight time schedules.4.3.1.1 Summary of Group RankingTable 4.26 shows a summary of ranking of quality group factors. Ranking was basedon RII. RII of each group has been found by computing the mean values of relativefactors of each group.Table 4.26: Ranking of Groups of QualityGroup RII RankGroup 3: Safety Training 0.818 1Group 2: Safety Organization 0.794 2Group 1: Safety and health policy 0.745 3Group 8: Emergency Preparedness 0.730 4Group 14: Workmanship 0.730 5Group 7: Accident Documentation 0.723 6Group 6: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 0.717 7Group 4: In-house Safety Rules 0.705 8Group 15: Contract Documents 0.652 9Group 9: Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors 0.648 10Group 13: Project Implementation 0.641 11Group 11: Safety and Health Promotion 0.634 12Group 10: Safety Committees 0.626 13Group 5: Safety Inspection 0.625 14Group 12: Health Insurance Program 0.586 15It can be noticed that the “Safety Training” group was ranked in the first positionamong quality groups of factors. This ranking shows that safety training is consideredthe most important factor in developing both safety and quality management. Safetytraining is essential to establish safety culture and safety organization, and thus helpsin instituting safety behavior that is necessary for reaching zero accident theory.Safety training is essential to prove the company quality management. Quality122

management can be achieved through various types of training including safetytraining.“Safety Organization” group was ranked in the second position. Safety organization isimportant factor in the process of enhancing safety conditions in projects. Unlessthere is a strong and relevant safety training, safety organization will fail to organizesafety regulations and measures properly. Thus, safety organization has been rankedin the second position while safety training was ranked in the first position. It is alsoimportant to ensure that safety organization in order to be effective should be formedfrom workers and top management whose safety behavior sustains a good safetymanagement.“Safety and Health Policy” group was ranked in the third position. Safety and healthpolicy can be established properly if good safety training and a good safetyorganization exist. Safety and health policy are essential in setting regulation, laws,and provisions of safety on jobsite. In good quality management point of view, aproper written policy should exist to control and organize the regulatory part ofproject management.“Emergency Preparedness” group was ranked in the fourth position. Good safetyplanning must include emergency preparedness. Emergency preparedness couldinclude training courses in safety, orientation for newly hired workers, providing PPEand many other components.“Workmanship” group was ranked in the fifth position. Workmanship is importantfactor for both safety and quality management. Good workmanship decreases reworkand accidents. Skilled workers are less exposed to accidents because they are moreexperienced with worksite conditions. Old workers are less exposed to accidentsbecause they think before executing a task associated with risk.“Accident Documentation” group was ranked in the sixth position. Accidentdocumentation helps reducing risks associated because of lessons learnt from previoussafety violations. The documentation and analysis of accidents lead also to disclosing123

causation and roots of accidents which is important in reducing such accidents in thefuture.“Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)” group was ranked in the seventh position. Theimportance of this group lies in that using PPE helps decreasing injuries because itstands as a barrier to hazards at workplace. PPE should be selected and maintainedbased on feasible PPE program which should primarily address the importance of topmanagement commitment to providing such tools to workers and employees. Thiscommitment is importance to increasing the awareness of workplace workers andemployees of using PPE for their personal safety.“In-house Safety Rules” group was ranked in the eighth position. It is important toestablish written safety rules and regulations relevant to the organization, in additionto the legal requirements within the country. Hiring experts to set up company safetyrules is important to ensure applicability of such rules. Such rules also may change inorder to coincide with project nature.“Contract Documents” group was ranked in the ninth position. Inclusion of safety intocontract clauses improves safety and ensures compliance with safety regulations.Contract documents are important for contractors and subcontractors becausenoncompliance with safety clauses will make contractor responsible and reliable foraccidents and injuries and thus compensations. Contract documents are also importantfor workers because it reserves their right of working under safe environment.“Evaluation, Selection and Control of Subcontractors” group was ranked in the tenthposition. It is important that general contractors select subcontractor thoroughly fortheir subcontracts taking into account their safety records. It is also important thatgeneral contractor insert safety clauses into subcontractors in order ensure thatsubcontractor will comply with safety provisions to workers. Good selection andcontrol of subcontractors will decrease compensations that the general contractorsmay pay in case of injuries and accidents.124

‘Project Implementation” group was ranked in the eleventh position. Projectimplementation is important to improve safety if the implementation coincides withcontract documents which ensure safety provisions. Moreover, skilled workers helpimplementing the project safely because of their experience of avoiding risks inhered.On the other hand, having many change orders and corrective actions affects safetynegatively due to expected tighter time schedules that contractor may use.“Safety and Health Promotion” group was ranked in the twelfth position. This groupis important because it defines the role of top management which is primary toimprove safety. Promoting safety and health through top management strengthens theawareness of workers of their personal safety.“Safety Committees” group was ranked in the thirteenth position. The importance ofsafety committees lies in its intention to monitor safety performance. Safetycommittee is a committee that promotes health and safety in the workplace, withmembers representing employees and management from all sections of anorganization. One of major outputs of safety committee is enhancement of acooperative attitude among all parties of the project toward solving health and safetyproblems.“Safety Inspection” group was ranked in the fourteenth position. Absence of safetyinspection team leads to noncompliance of safety provisions at workplace. The goalof safety inspection is to reduce injuries, illness and fatalities by concentrating safetymeasures enforcement on those projects that do not have effective safety and healthprogram.“Safety Insurance Program” group was ranked in the fifteenth position. This grouphas been ranked in the lowest position among all groups. This low importance mightbe attributed to lack of safety insurance programs in local industry in Gaza Strip. In125

other words, even if safety insurance program is included in contract documents,workers might be accessible to such programs.126

4.3.2 Part IV: Linkage between occupational safety and productivityin construction projectThe researcher throughout the thesis investigated the linkage between safety andproductivity using 7 groups of questions including 28 factors. Ranking of factors hasbeen used twice throughout the thesis; ranking within one group; and the other iswithin the whole range of groups. Ranking was based on relative index values. Manystatistical analyses have been used to elaborate and analyze questionnaire resultsincluding; relative importance index (RII), rank within group, and overall ranking ofproductivity groups. Analysis of factors and relative groups resulted in 7 groups to bestatistically not significant which means that it cannot be ranked.Table 4. 27: Factors of safety and productivity linkage# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroups1. Factors improving productivityIncrease of productivity is on the expense ofsafety61 3 26 9 18 5 0 0.480 4 25Increase of work hours affects safety 61 0 4 8 38 11 0 0.725 2 7Skillfulness of worker improves safety 61 0 0 4 30 27 0 0.840 1 1Rework negatively affects safety 61 2 17 20 17 5 0 0.520 3 23Incentives based on productivity decreasessafety61 9 23 14 15 0 0 0.389 5 282. InspectionWhen foreman allocates tasks to workers, heconsiders safety measures61 0 4 7 39 11 0 0.730 1 5Delegation given to foreman so that hecontributes to time schedule preparation, 61 0 3 13 40 5 0 0.689 2 13would increase productivity and safetyOver-inspection by foreman decreasesproductivity and safety61 0 27 15 15 4 0 0.480 3 243. Local conditionsStrikes and non-default nonworking daysaccelerates work thus affecting safety 61 3 14 13 27 4 0 0.557 4 22negativelyPutting much concern on regulations of safetydecreases productivity61 2 30 14 12 3 0 0.430 5 26In order to overcome delays resulting fromclosures productivity increases which wouldincrease accidents61 0 15 12 32 2 0 0.582 3 20127

# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankwithinallgroupsCurrent security conditions affect workersnegatively which would decrease bothproductivity and safety.In order to avoid closure, workers tend toleave early which would decrease safety,quality and productivity.4. Worker problemsPersonal and family problems of worker affectsafety and productivity negatively.Turnover creates unusual relation betweenworkers which would decrease productivityand increase accidentsWorkers performing works without referringto foreman affects safety and productivitynegatively.Illustrating daily activities to workers beforestart of activity would contribute to improvingsafety5. SubcontractorsWhen subcontractor is assigned specific tasks,accidents increaseMain contractor would hire moresubcontractors to increase productivity,creating lack of coordination which leads toless safety attentionAccidents frustrate workers and createabsenteeism which would decreaseproductivitySubcontractor's lack of safety concerns,decreases productivity6. Safety programSafety program contributes to increasingproductivityIn order to avoid accidents, anticipated risksare included in safety program whichincreases productivityTraining new and old workers on preventiveactions and first aid increases productivityScheduling of safety meetings contributes toincreasing productivity7. Personal protective equipments (PPE)Using PPE constrains worker movementwhich decreases productivityHot weather decreases productivity andexhausts workers which exposes them to moreaccidentsWhen workers are not adapted with PPE,safety and productivity are affected negatively61 2 9 5 34 11 0 0.672 2 1561 2 4 10 35 10 0 0.689 1 1261 0 2 10 39 10 0 0.730 2 661 0 11 11 33 6 0 0.635 4 1861 0 3 7 43 8 0 0.725 3 861 0 1 5 33 22 0 0.807 1 261 1 11 27 15 7 0 0.561 4 2161 0 10 12 32 7 0 0.643 2 1761 0 4 6 39 12 0 0.738 1 41 9 16 27 8 0 0.627 3 1961 0 0 13 40 8 0 0.725 2 961 1 0 11 34 15 0 0.750 1 361 0 5 11 37 8 0 0.693 3 1161 0 4 18 28 11 0 0.684 4 1461 2 34 7 16 2 0 0.422 3 2761 1 10 6 36 8 0 0.660 2 1661 0 1 8 48 4 0 0.721 1 10128

GROUP 1: Factors improving productivityTable 4.28 shows the respondents’ opinion about factors improving productivity withregard to productivity according to Likert scale. Group contains five factors of factorsimproving productivity.Table 4. 28: Factors which improves productivity in worksite1. Factors improving productivity# ofRespondentsStronglyFrequency of occurrenceDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithinthisgroupOverallRankSkillfulness of worker improves safety 61 0 0 4 30 27 0 0.840 1 1Increase of work hours affects safety 61 0 4 8 38 11 0 0.725 2 7Rework negatively affects safety 61 2 17 20 17 5 0 0.520 3 23Increase of productivity is on the expense ofsafety61 3 26 9 18 5 0 0.480 4 25Incentives based on productivity decreasessafety61 9 23 14 15 0 0 0.389 5 28"Skillfulness of worker improves safety" factor was ranked in the first position amongfactors improving productivity group with RII=0.840 and was ranked in the firstposition among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows skilled workersare committed to safety more than others. Skilled workers tend to perform tasks safelybecause of their high experience in construction industry. Throughout their years ofexperience they faced most of the hazards that come up during construction. It is theresult of experience and training that they avoid risks of accidents. Moreover, skilledworkers are company's fortune which try to keep safe as much as possible. Companytends to train their skilled workers on safety barriers and obstacles and how to avoidthem."Increase of work hours affects safety" factor was ranked in the second positionamong factors improving productivity group with RII=0.725 and was ranked in theseventh position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows that over-129

time would have negative effects on safety. Workers, who work over time, areexposed to exhaustion more than others. Thus, their productivity in addition to thesafety would be influenced. It is not always advised to assign workers more workinghours. Such extra time would worsen the safety conditions in addition to projectproductivity."Rework negatively affects safety" factor was ranked in the third position amongfactors improving productivity group with RII = 0.520 and was ranked in the 23 rdposition among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows that rework andcorrective actions have negative effects on safety. Rework is needed when supervisionor contractor engineers would detect failure or bad quality work. Worker has to repairand implement corrective actions in order to overcome the quality problem. Workerwould be under stress to complete this corrective activity faster so that work can be onschedule. This condition exposes worker to more accidents."Increase of productivity is on the expense of safety" factor was ranked in the fourthposition among factors improving productivity group with RII = 0.480 and wasranked in the 25 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This result showsthat the increase of productivity has negative effect on safety. This was ranked lowwhich means that majority of contractors do not support such factor. The increase ofproductivity could be on the expense of safety if productivity is increased abnormally.Safety increases productivity because safe workers feel more confident manage riskseffectively consequently."Incentives based on productivity decreases safety" factor was ranked in the fifthposition among factors improving productivity group with RII = 0.389 and wasranked in the 28 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This factor wasthe lowest within the group. This result shows that productivity incentives may notnegatively affect safety. It may be believed that when workers are given incentivesbased on their productivity records, they would ignore their personal safety.Respondents did not support this idea; on the contrary, their answers were neutral.Productivity incentives would motivate workers to work more productively but not130

more unsafely. Productive workers are said to be skilled workers who haveexperience and stay ahead learning curve. Thus, their experience would help them toprevent accidents and workplace hazards. In this regard, the reason why incentivesmay improve productivity and decrease safety might be that with the monetaryincentive condition workers experience high work pressure in pursuing the monetaryincentive or that the amount of the incentive was not adequate or sufficient.GROUP 2: InspectionTable 4.29 shows the respondents’ opinion about inspection with regard toproductivity according to Likert scale. Group 2 contains three factors of inspection.Table 4. 29: Inspection of performance and productivity2. Inspection# ofRespondentsFrequency of occurrenceStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankWhen foreman allocates tasks to workers, heconsiders safety measuresDelegation given to foreman so that hecontributes to time schedule preparation,would increase productivity and safetyOver-inspection by foreman decreasesproductivity and safety61 0 4 7 39 11 0 0.730 1 561 0 3 13 40 5 0 0.689 2 1361 0 27 15 15 4 0 0.480 3 24"When foreman allocates tasks to workers, he considers safety measures" factor wasranked in the first position among inspection group with RII = 0.730 and was rankedin the fifth position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows thatforeman role in safety cannot be ignored. Foremen are in direct contact with workersat workplace. The key to success in any construction loss prevention program is itsactual implementation on the job site. Field supervision is the main mechanism bywhich the loss prevention policy and procedures are implemented. The attitude of131

individual workers toward the company loss prevention program is dependent uponthe attitude of their supervisor.The foreman's actions in directing the work are the critical link in delivering success.If foremen are given clear responsibilities for job site safety, and are held accountablethrough a performance review and reward system, the likelihood of accidents will bereduced helping to achieve greater construction quality, productivity, and workersafety. The foreman who understands the mechanics of direct and indirect accidentcosts, as well as overhead implications for workers' compensation and other insurancecoverage is in a better position to make intelligent decisions in directing the workactivities."Delegation given to foreman so that he contributes to time schedule preparation,would increase productivity and safety" factor was ranked in the second positionamong inspection group with RII = 0.689 and was ranked in the 13 th position amongall groups factors of productivity. This result shows the importance role of foreman inensuring more safe and productive workplace. Because foreman is in direct contactwith workers and workplace, he has good experience in safe working methods. Hecan advise the project manager on the best time required to accomplish a task safely.Thus, given a delegation to participate in task scheduling, would give the projectmanager better opportunities to complete the project within a reasonable time framewhile maintaining safety and productivity at workplace at optimum."Over-inspection by foreman decreases productivity and safety" factor was ranked inthe third position among inspection group with RII = 0.480 and was ranked in the 24 thposition among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows over-inspectionby foreman brings negative results opposite to previous factor. Over-inspection byforeman will cause the decrease of productivity due to rework, thorough measurementtools, insignificant safety violations and other reasons. Workers whose performance isover inspected would feel reluctant to correct errors and deficiencies. Mentaldispersion caused by over inspection will negatively affect worker's safety who mayencounter hazards without preparedness.132

GROUP 3: Local conditionsTable 4.30 shows the respondents’ opinion about local conditions with regard toproductivity according to Likert scale. Group 3 contains five factors of localconditions.Table 4.30: Local conditions of jobsite3. Local conditions# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankIn order to avoid closure, workers tend toleave early which would decrease safety,quality and productivity.Current security conditions affect workersnegatively which would decrease bothproductivity and safety.In order to overcome delays resulting fromclosures productivity increases which wouldincrease accidentsStrikes and non-default nonworking daysaccelerates work thus affecting safetynegativelyPutting much concern on regulations ofsafety decreases productivity61 2 4 10 35 10 0 0.689 1 1261 2 9 5 34 11 0 0.672 2 1561 0 15 12 32 2 0 0.582 3 2061 3 14 13 27 4 0 0.557 4 2261 2 30 14 12 3 0 0.430 5 26"In order to avoid closure, workers tend to leave early which would decrease safety,quality and productivity" factor was ranked in the first position among localconditions group with RII = 0.689 and was ranked in the 12 th position among allgroups factors of productivity. This result shows workers share in decreasing safety,quality and productivity at workplace when they leave work early due to closures andbarriers. In Gaza Strip, prior to Israeli disengagement plan, barriers between north andsouth existed in addition to closure of borders between Gaza Strip and Green Line.Under such conditions, lack of materials dominates and limits the constructionindustry in Gaza Strip.Workers tend to leave workplace early sometimes due to security risks which enforcethem to complete their assigned tasks earlier. Sometimes, foreman enforce workers tocomplete tasks earlier to avoid payment of extra wages based on that workers are paidon daily basis in Gaza Strip. These conditions tend to reduce workers safety because133

of extra efforts exerted. Moreover, quality of work will not be as anticipated.Productivity apparently increases due to extra efforts, but if workers get exhaustedtheir productivity will decline rapidly."Current security conditions affect workers negatively which would decrease bothproductivity and safety" factor was ranked in the second position among localconditions group with RII = 0.672 and was ranked in the 15 th position among allgroups factors of productivity. This result shows that security conditions have greatinfluence on construction industry in Gaza Strip. When security conditions worsens inGaza, workers who work in infrastructure projects especially are exposed to morehazards and thus a worker's brain would be occupied by worry and tension. Workers'brain being occupied by such negative feelings would have great influence on theirperformance in a manner that decreases their concentration and accidents are moreprobable to occur. Worker's productivity will decrease also due to these conditions.Errors are more probable to occur and rework actions will happen frequently."In order to overcome delays resulting from closures productivity increases whichwould increase accidents" factor was ranked in the second position among localconditions group with RII = 0.582 and was ranked in the 20 th position among allgroups factors of productivity. This result shows that workers who are forced to workmore than expected are more exposed to accidents at workplace. When delays areovercome by putting pressure on workers to work more productive, contractor mayget negative results. Accidents decreases productivity because workers will be absentand other colleagues of injured worker will be thinking of their friend which makesthem reluctant to worker with enthusiasm."Strikes and non-default nonworking days accelerates work thus affecting safetynegatively" factor was ranked in the fourth position among local conditions groupwith RII = 0.557 and was ranked in the 22 nd position among all groups factors ofproductivity. This result shows that strikes and nonworking days would affect safety.Respondents did not support this factor so much. This might be because strikes and134

nonworking days rarely occur in Gaza Strip. The only conditions when work stops arelack of materials due to closure and national holidays."Putting much concern on regulations of safety decreases productivity" factor wasranked in the fifth position among local conditions group with RII = 0.430 and wasranked in the 26 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This result showsthat respondents did not support this factor which can be noticed from its low rankwithin its relevant group and overall rank of productivity. Compliance with safetyregulations will not decrease worker's productivity because such regulations weredesigned and applied to maintain worker's safety and productivity. Compliance withsafety regulations were assembled to ensure worker's comfort at workplace taking intoconsiderations all means of project success as well including productivity.GROUP 4: Worker problemsTable 4.31 shows the respondents’ opinion about worker problems with regard toproductivity according to Likert scale. Group 4 contains four factors of workerproblems.Table 4.31: Worker problems at home and jobsite4. Worker problems# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankIllustrating daily activities to workers beforestart of activity would contribute toimproving safetyPersonal and family problems of workeraffect safety and productivity negatively.Workers performing works without referringto foreman affects safety and productivitynegatively.Turnover creates unusual relation betweenworkers which would decrease productivityand increase accidents61 0 1 5 33 22 0 0.807 1 261 0 2 10 39 10 0 0.730 2 661 0 3 7 43 8 0 0.725 3 861 0 11 11 33 6 0 0.635 4 18135

"Illustrating daily activities to workers before start of activity would contribute toimproving safety" factor was ranked in the first position among worker problemsgroup with RII = 0.807 and was ranked in the first position among all groups factorsof productivity. This result shows that when foreman shows daily activities to workersprior to start of any activity, safety conditions will be better. Workers wouldunderstand expected hazards when they are shown daily tasks to perform. Workerswould feel that foreman shares information with them which strengthens their moraland thus would have a goal to achieve. They will feel that they created andcontributed to task planning which makes them more committed to completing taskson time. They would eliminate such hazards because they simply have been shownschedule which enables them to forecast hazards inherited. On the contrary, Hinze(1997) shows in a study that frequency of medical case injuries increases dramaticallywhen foreman gives crew schedule for task completion. Furthermore, supervisors areaccused of imposing pressure on workers by setting deadlines for them to meet(Hinze, 1997)."Personal and family problems of worker affect safety and productivity negatively"factor was ranked in the second position among worker problems group with RII =0.730 and was ranked in the sixth position among all groups factors of productivity.This result shows that when worker's mind is pre-occupied by personal and familyproblems, the probability of having accident is high. This factor importance is similarto what Hinze (1997) has found in his study. The personal and family problems notonly cause accidents but also decrease worker's productivity because of the mentaloccupation and conscious dispersion."Workers performing works without referring to foreman affects safety andproductivity negatively" factor was ranked in the third position among workerproblems group with RII = 0.725 and was ranked in the eighth position among allgroups factors of productivity. This result shows that the role of foreman on theworkplace cannot be neglected. The foreman would guide the workers to completeactivities of project based on his extensive experience in construction. Foremanhaving good experience in safety knows risks associated with tasks and thus would136

warn workers to avoid them. Workers who do not refer their foreman are exposed tomore accidents because they would a resource of safety information onsite.Nevertheless, this result is contradiction with results obtained by Hinze (1997) whofound out that rate of injuries increases dramatically when foreman exists most of thetime on workplace."Turnover creates unusual relation between workers which would decreaseproductivity and increase accidents" factor was ranked in the first position amongworker problems group with RII = 0.635 and was ranked in the 18 th position amongall groups factors of productivity. This result shows that respondents ranked thisfactor the lowest within its relevant group and also relatively low within overall rank.Worker turnover is the ratio of the number of workers that are replaced in a giventime period to the average number of workers. Turnover occurs due to completion ofproject, end of contract, better opportunity, problem, etc. in case of turnover, newlyhired workers are replaced which means they need orientation and they need time tocope with old workers of the company. It has been previously illustrated in this thesisthat workers who are friend and relatives are closer to each other and thus safetyconditions would be better. Turnover causes relatively loss of productivity at thebeginning. Probably safety conditions will not be as good as if the crews are of goodrelation. Respondents did not support that turnover negatively affects safety althoughHinze and Gambatese (2003) defines the factors shown to positively affect safetyperformance include minimizing worker turnover.137

GROUP 5: SubcontractorsTable 4.32 shows the respondents’ opinion about subcontractors with regard toproductivity according to Likert scale. Group 5 contains four factors ofsubcontractors.Table 4.32: Subcontractors safety rules and regulations5. Subcontractors# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankAccidents frustrate workers and createabsenteeism which would decreaseproductivityMain contractor would hire moresubcontractors to increase productivity,creating lack of coordination which leads toless safety attentionSubcontractor's lack of safety concerns,decreases productivityWhen subcontractor is assigned specifictasks, accidents increase61 0 4 6 39 12 0 0.738 1 461 0 10 12 32 7 0 0.643 2 171 9 16 27 8 0 0.627 3 1961 1 11 27 15 7 0 0.561 4 21"Accidents frustrate workers and create absenteeism which would decreaseproductivity" factor was ranked in the first position among subcontractors group withRII = 0.738 and was ranked in the fourth position among all groups factors ofproductivity. This result shows that lack of worker's safety negatively affect theworker's productivity. Injured worker would feel frustrated and reluctant to comeback to work unless a sufficient time to retrieve mood is given. Colleagues of injuredworker would feel the same feeling. Injured workers would be away of work untilthey are recovered. This happens when the injury is moderate or more hazardous andneeds medical action for remedy. Workers who help the injured worker would beaway of work until they bring their colleague to hospital or medical center fortreatment. Injuries play a direct role in the overall productivity of a constructionproject. When an injury occurs, the productivity of the entire crew usually comes to acomplete stop. Not only will there be down time where work will not be completed138

ut also when the crew does return to work they will be left short-handed andproductivity is often below normal (Hinze, 1997)."Main contractor would hire more subcontractors to increase productivity, creatinglack of coordination which leads to less safety attention" factor was ranked in thesecond position among subcontractors group with RII = 0.643 and was ranked in the17 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows that hiringlarge number of subcontractors exposes the project to poor coordination which wouldbe at the expense of safety. Having more subcontractors does not necessarily meanmore productive environment because a crowded workplace is said to be lessproductive and more risky."Subcontractor's lack of safety concerns, decreases productivity" factor was ranked inthe third position among subcontractors group with RII = 0.627 and was ranked in the19 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows that unsafesubcontractors are probably unproductive. General contractor is generally aware pfthe subcontractors' safety behavior during selection process. Unsafe subcontractorsare frequently exposed to corrective actions because of errors caused by them whenthey are exposed to accident. Productivity decreases because workers would bestressed when they feel that subcontractor is not aware of their personal safety."When subcontractor is assigned specific tasks, accidents increase" factor was rankedin the fourth position among subcontractors group with RII = 0.561 and was ranked inthe 21 st position among all groups factors of productivity. This factor holds the lowestrank within its relevant group and extremely low rank within overall rank ofproductivity. This result shows that respondents did not support the idea that hiringsubcontractors for specific trades affect safety negatively. Ensuring thatsubcontractors execute an effective safety and health program is one of the thorniestissues confronting general contractors. Safety considerations must be integral to theplanning and execution, at all phases, of subcontracted construction work done.Construction subcontractors are responsible for providing their employees, theemployees of their lower-tier subcontractors, and members of the public with a work139

site that is free from safety and health hazards. Moreover, general contractors oftenrely on the special expertise of subcontractors, who may know more about the hazardsof the particular job they will be performing. Thus, it is agreed that auditing the safetyperformance of subcontractors against safety plan or program is also critical forsuccess.GROUP 6: Safety programTable 4.33 shows the respondents’ opinion about safety program with regard toproductivity according to Likert scale. Group 6 contains four factors of safetyprogram.Table 4.33: Safety program6. Safety program# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankIn order to avoid accidents, anticipated risksare included in safety program whichincreases productivitySafety program contributes to increasingproductivityTraining new and old workers on preventiveactions and first aid increases productivityScheduling of safety meetings contributes toincreasing productivity61 1 0 11 34 15 0 0.750 1 361 0 0 13 40 8 0 0.725 2 961 0 5 11 37 8 0 0.693 3 1161 0 4 18 28 11 0 0.684 4 14"In order to avoid accidents, anticipated risks are included in safety program whichincreases productivity" factor was ranked in the first position among safety programgroup with RII = 0.750 and was ranked in the third position among all groups factorsof productivity. This result shows that the inclusion of hazards identification intosafety program will help in increasing productivity. OSHA states that an effectivesafety and health program depends on the credibility of management's involvement inthe program; inclusion of employees in safety and health decisions; rigorous worksiteanalysis to identify hazards and potential hazards, including those which could result140

from a change in worksite conditions or practices; stringent prevention and controlmeasures; and thorough training.Productivity is increased by identifying hazards and including them in safety program,which helps worker to avoid such hazards and thus preventing worker from beinginjured. Injuries and illnesses increase workers' compensation and retraining costs,absenteeism, and faulty product. They also decrease productivity, morale, and profits.A Fortune Five company increased productivity by 13 percent, while a small, 50-person plant decreased faulty product and saved more than $265,000 with a strongsafety and health program according to OSHA report (www.osha.gov)."Safety program contributes to increasing productivity" factor was ranked in thesecond position among safety program group with RII = 0.725 and was ranked in theninth position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows that safetyprogram is important for achieving a productive work environment. Safety programconsists of instructions and methodologies that outline how safety can be achieved onsite. By achieving safety, workers feel comfortable and more loyal to their work. Theywould be more productive in such safe conditions."Training new and old workers on preventive actions and first aid increasesproductivity" factor was ranked in the third position among safety program groupwith RII = 0.693 and was ranked in the 11 th position among all groups factors ofproductivity. This result shows that training workers on safety contributes toproductivity. Training workers on safety increases their safety managementknowledge and experience, which would also increase productivity."Scheduling of safety meetings contributes to increasing productivity" factor wasranked in the fourth position among safety program group with RII = 0.684 and wasranked in the 14 th position among all groups productivity factors. This result showsthat respondents did not support that safety meetings contribute to enhancingproductivity. Safety meeting includes all employees and a management person is thereto ensure that issues are addressed. In many instances productivity comes beforesafety according to some contractors. Many contractors consider safety meetings as141

waste of time. Those contractors do not ask their workers to attend such meetings forthe favor of work productivity.Respondents probably did not consider safety meetings an important factor ofproductivity because their companies do not hold such meetings. Safety meetings willbe waste of time and cause of productivity loss when such meetings lack the rightpurpose which it was held for. In other words, safety meetings will be useless andproductivity decreasing factor, if such meetings produce information and decisionsthat are not met at workplace.GROUP 7: Personal protective equipments (PPE)Table 4.34 shows the respondents’ opinion about PPE with regard to productivityaccording to Likert scale. Group 7 contains three factors of personal protectiveequipments.Table 4.34: Personal protective equipments (PPE)7. Personal protective equipments(PPE)# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankwithingroupRankWhen workers are not adapted with PPE,safety and productivity are affectednegativelyHot weather decreases productivity andexhausts workers which exposes them tomore accidentsUsing PPE constrains worker movementwhich decreases productivity61 0 1 8 48 4 0 0.721 1 1061 1 10 6 36 8 0 0.660 2 1661 2 34 7 16 2 0 0.422 3 27"When workers are not adapted with PPE, safety and productivity are affectednegatively" factor was ranked in the first position among PPE group with RII = 0.721and was ranked in the tenth position among all groups factors of productivity. Thisresult shows that PPE play an important role in maintaining safety and productivity.PPE can reduce the number and severity of injuries and illnesses. Personal protectiveequipment not only helps protect people but also improves productivity and profits.142

Comprehensive worker education through ongoing training programs about the use,wear and care of PPE is a critical first step in creating a safer working environmentand reducing injury-related costs. This result also refines the relatively widely spreadidea in Gaza Strip that PPE prevents worker from working properly."Hot weather decreases productivity and exhausts workers which exposes them tomore accidents" factor was ranked in the second position among PPE group with RII= 0.660 and was ranked in the 16 th position among all groups factors of productivity.This result shows that hot weather conditions, which are a prevailing condition inGaza Strip from June until November, exposed workers to accidents. Hot weatherexposes workers to headache, sun stroke, and heat exhaustion. Under these conditionsworker feels reluctant to work and his productivity decreases noticeably."Using PPE constrains worker movement which decreases productivity" factor wasranked in the third position among PPE group with RII = 0.422 and was ranked in the27 th position among all groups factors of productivity. This result shows thatrespondents were reluctant to support that PPE constrains movement of workers andthus decreases productivity. Using PPE doesn't constrain worker movement especiallyif the worker is trained on how to use their PPE and keep it clean.4.3.2.1 Summary of Group RankingTable 4.35 shows a summary of ranking of productivity group factors. Ranking wasbased on RII. RII of each group has been found by computing the mean values ofrelative factors of each group.143

Table 4.35: Ranking of Groups of ProductivityGroup RII RankGroup 4: Worker problems 0.724 1Group 6: Safety program 0.713 2Group 5: Subcontractors 0.642 3Group 2: Inspection 0.633 4Group 7: Personal protective equipments (PPE) 0.601 5Group 1: Factors improving productivity 0.591 6Group 3: Local conditions 0.586 7It can be noticed that the “Worker problems” was ranked in the first position amongquality groups of factors. This result shows that worker’s problems affect hisperformance very much on jobsite. Worker problems cause mind distraction ofworker which decreases his productivity so much and increasing the exposure toaccidents. It is difficult to overcome this problem and foreman should be aware ofworkers problems in order to avoid accidents.“Safety Program” group was ranked in the second position. Safety program isconsidered one of the most important documents which are necessary for good safetymanagement. Safety program is essential in establishing safety management plan.Safety program in its contents directs all project parties to proper action in order toavoid accidents. Good safety program is written in a manner that productivity ismaintained and safety is also maintained.“Subcontractors” group was ranked in the third position. This result shows theimportance of subcontractor’s safety on jobsite. Professional general contractor hiressubcontractors taking into account their safety records. Sometimes, subcontractors donot take care of their worker because they consider the project is a temporary.“Inspection” group was ranked in the fourth position. This result shows theimportance of inspection of performance on workplace. The foreman role in providing144

directions of safe actions cannot be ignored. If foremen are given clear responsibilitiesfor worker safety, and are held accountable through a performance review and rewardsystem, the likelihood of accidents will be reduced helping to achieve greaterconstruction productivity, and worker safety. On the contrary, over-inspectioncontributes to decreasing safety measures on workplace due to pressure set byforemen on workers.“Personal Protective Equipments (PPE)” group was ranked in fifth position. Thisresult shows the importance of PPE role in maintaining safety and productivity. PPEcan reduce the number and severity of injuries and accidents if workers are adapted tosuch tool. This result also shows that PPE doesn’t restrain the movement of workersduring their work; on the contrary it helps them performing their tasks safely.“Factors Improving Productivity” group was ranked in the sixth position. Skillfulnessof workers helps improving safety because skilled workers when performing theirtasks avoid risks associated. Skilled workers are company's fortune which try to keepsafe as much as possible. Some factors which improve productivity contribute indecreasing safety on workplace. Increasing work hours and incentive-basedproductivity increases the exposure of workers to hazards. Rework, which is neededfor corrective actions, exposes workers to more accidents due to pressure that workersare put under while correcting bad quality work.“Local Conditions” group was ranked in the seventh position. This group was rankedin the lowest position among productivity groups. Border closure in Gaza Strip causedlong delays in project schedules which enforced workers to more work hours whenborders open in order to overcome delays. This would increase accidents amongworkers who spent longer work times145

4.3.3 Part V: Linkage between occupational safety and cost inconstruction projectThe researcher throughout the thesis investigated the linkage between safety and costusing 1 group of questions. Ranking of factors has been used throughout the thesiswithin the group. Ranking was based on relative index values. Many statisticalanalyses have been used to elaborate and analyze questionnaire results including;relative index (RII), and ranking of cost group.4.3.3.1 Study on relationship between safety and costTable 4.36 shows the respondents’ opinion about cost with regard to safety accordingto Likert scale. This part consists only of one group containing ten factors ofrelationship between safety and cost.Table 4.36: Study on relationship between safety and costStudy on relationship between safety andcost# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency of occurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankSafety expenditures are very much less thanlosses due to accidents61 0 6 3 30 22 0 0.775 1Worker satisfaction of daily rate decreasespsychological pressure which improves 61 0 2 4 43 12 0 0.762 2safety and productivityIncentives improve safety and productivity 61 0 2 9 42 8 0 0.725 3Fines should be imposed by Ministry ofLabor on workers not using PPE61 1 4 8 36 12 0 0.717 4Financial loss of contractor negatively affectssafety61 2 7 8 30 14 0 0.689 5Compensations make contractors pay moreattention to safety61 1 10 6 32 12 0 0.676 6Hiring safety engineer contributes todecreasing accidents in workplace61 0 7 21 27 6 0 0.627 7Contractors neglecting safety are expectednot to win future bids due to bad reputations61 2 10 12 31 6 0 0.615 8There is a need towards existence of annualsubscription to support national safety 61 3 7 20 22 9 0 0.607 9monitoring committeeOccupational safety increases project cost 61 0 20 7 28 6 0 0.578 10146

"Safety expenditures are very much less than losses due to accidents" factor wasranked in the first position among the group with RII = 0.775. This result shows thatsafety expenditure doesn't entitle contractor huge amounts of money. Compensationsand medical treatment cost the contractor huge amounts of money. Moreover, it costsmore with regard to reputation. Compensations cost contractors too much locally andinternationally (Hoonakker et al, 2003). In an effort to improve onsite constructionsafety, contractors tend to implement safety policy which reduces the compensationsand treatment costs by training workers to work safely."Worker satisfaction of daily rate decreases psychological pressure which improvessafety and productivity" factor was ranked in the second position among the groupwith RII = 0.762). This result shows that increased safety and productivity can beachieved through improvements of worker's job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is thefeelings that the worker experiences in a job role. A positive association was foundbetween job satisfaction and safety and productivity. This result indicates that workerswho expressed more satisfaction at their posts had positive perceptions of safety andproductivity. Workers who are not satisfied with their job including daily rate, are putunder personal and family pressure to improve life conditions. Worker's feeling ofinjustice with regard to his daily wage may cause him to be less willing to workproductively and safely. Moreover, the high safety performance variability may stemfrom inconsistent job satisfaction in various job-related organizational factors (Kim etal, 2002)."Incentives improve safety and productivity" factor was ranked in the third positionamong the group with RII = 0.725. This result shows that incentives based workenvironment would improve safety and productivity of workers. Incentives can bedefined as performance-based pay approach that is designed to increase output, basedon the performance of workers. This result being ranked 3 rd amongst factors assessesthe influence of financial incentives on worker's safety and productivity. Safetyincentives are distinguished factor of safety at workplace.The safety incentive program is encountered by two main obstacles; cost, andeffectiveness because safety incentive programs have been hinged to hitting monetary147

or numerical targets. The main concern with regard to monetary incentives is whetherit strengthens safety behavior and culture or money behavior and culture. In otherwords, it is worried that workers would achieve safety for the favor of incentive itselfnot for their safety which would lead to decline of safety at the time incentives arestopped. The focus of an effective incentive program should be on rewarding theappropriate behavior. In addition, eligibility for incentives should be based on crewperformance rather than on individual performance. Recognition should accompanythe award of incentives (Hinze, 2002).Non-monetary incentives and rewards might be more effective if incentives are meantto be good reputations, performance certificates, appraisal, and other means. Nonmonetaryincentives are seen more effective because workers might compare thevalue of safety to the amount of monetary incentives granted. Social reinforcementcan be one of the most important rewards for a job well-done. Social reinforcement isacknowledgement from one's peers, supervisors, family and friends. Tangible rewardsoffer more opportunities for social reinforcement."Fines should be imposed by Ministry of Labor on workers not using PPE" factor wasranked in the fourth position among the group with RII = 0.717. This result shows thatrespondents support imposing fines by Ministry of Labor (MOL) on workers notusing PPE. Since MOL is in charge for safety inspection in Gaza Strip, it has a bigrole in improving safety at workplace. Imposing fines on labors would contribute toimproving their personal health and safety. Fines probably should be imposed oncontractors not workers in order to make such contractors committed to safety andthus they would monitor their workers attitude towards using PPE."Financial loss of contractor negatively affects safety" factor was ranked in the fifthposition among the group with RII = 0.689. This result shows construction safetydecreases at contractor who suffers from lack or loss of finance. This result can beillustrated in that contractors who suffer from financial losses would feel reluctant topay for safety thinking that it would increase costs and expenditures. Additionally,such contractors would be psychologically engaged so much that they wouldn't thinkof their workers' safety. Contractors may neglect safety costs for the favor of148

ecovering their bankruptcy. Under this condition, workers would perform less safelybecause their top management neglects safety procedures.'Compensations make contractors pay more attention to safety" factor was ranked inthe sixth position among the group with RII = 0.676. This result shows contractor'scommitment to safety would increase due to compensation program that is applied forjobsite accidents. The impact of accidents leads to employee deaths, injuries,equipment damage and costs pertaining to workers compensation insurance, lostoperations time. Compensations which may be very high in many cases, proves to bea factor towards making contractors attention to safety to increase. The reason whycontractors would consider safety top priority is that compensations would increasecontractor's loss financially and professionally."Hiring safety engineer contributes to decreasing accidents in workplace" factor wasranked in the seventh position among the group with RII = 0.627. This result showsthat respondents to limited extent support that hiring safety engineer contributes todecreasing accidents at workplace. In Gaza Strip, very few projects hired safetyengineers. This might be the reason why respondents felt hesitant to recommendinghiring safety engineer for projects. In general, safety engineer's role cannot be ignoreddue to their act of monitoring safety activities performance and avoiding safetyfailures. The role of safety engineer should be strengthened to ensure that it is lesseasy to marginalize what is essentially an advisory role. This result should motivateconstruction industry in Gaza Strip towards increasing the engineer's capacity toreduce hazards on the job by assigning safety engineers for relatively large projects."Contractors neglecting safety are expected not to win future bids due to badreputations" factor was ranked in the eighth position among the group with RII =0.615. This result shows that contractors who are not aware of their workers' safetymay not win bids for their low ranked reputation. Contractor's safety record should besubmitted when purchasing bid offers so that such records are evaluated. This resultshows that there is an important role that owners play during bidding which is thecareful selection of safe contractors (pre-qualification). One way that an owner can149

carry out this responsibility is to hire contractors who have a record of good safetyperformance. This requires attention during the processes of qualifying contractors forbidding work and selecting contractors for a contract award. A prospective contractorwith a history of good safety performance is more likely to perform safely in thefuture than a contractor with a poor, or less-than-average, safety record."There is a need towards existence of annual subscription to support national safetymonitoring committee" factor was ranked in the ninth position among the group withRII = 0.607. This result shows that despite of respondents' positive response of thisfactor, they ranked it very low. This result proposes that contractors should payannual subscription fees to a national safety monitoring committee. Such subscriptionfees would make contractor more committed to safety. Such committee would be asupport to ministry of labor in monitoring safety performance at workplace. Suchcommittee would provide training covering safety topics for professionals andworkers.One reason why respondents ranked this factor to ninth rank would be that suchsubscription would not be effective to make contractors committed to safety. Besides,the committee itself needs executive body that supports the application of safetyprocedures and ensures decreasing violation of safety regulations."Occupational safety increases project cost" factor was ranked in the tenth positionamong the group with RII = 0.578. This result shows respondents did not support thisfactor. This is consistent with the general idea that applying safety regulations doesn'tincur extra cost to the project but on the contrary it would decrease it. In many cases,contractors consider health and safety a legal requirement that means spending moneywithout any hope of profit. But a quick look at the cost of workplace injuries and thepotential return on investing in accident prevention shows that a safe, healthyworkplace can be a profit centre. Implementation of safety regulations is expected toresult in decreased injuries, illnesses, and fatalities for contractors resulting in adecrease in worker compensation costs. The investment naturally costs money in theshort run but in the long run it can save lives, reduce injuries, and increase profit .150

4.3.4 Part VI: Linkage between occupational safety and time inconstruction projectThe researcher throughout the thesis investigated the linkage between safety and timeusing 1 group of questions. Ranking of factors has been used throughout the thesiswithin the group. Ranking was based on relative index values. Many statisticalanalyses have been used to elaborate and analyze questionnaire results including;relative importance index (RII), and ranking of time group.4.3.4.1 Study on relationship between safety and timeTable 4.37 shows the respondents’ opinion about time with regard to safety accordingto Likert scale. This part consists only of one group containing eleven factors ofrelationship between safety and time.Table 4. 37: Study on relationship between safety and timeStudy on relationship between safety andtime# ofRespondentsFrequency of occurrenceStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankDiscussion between top management andforeman on time schedule improves safetyand productivityWorking in noon times, reduces productivityand exposes worker to Heat StrokePreparation of short time schedule by projectmanager improves safety and productivityPreparation of short time schedule byforeman improves safety and productivityOvertime affects safety and productivitynegatively because it stresses workerForcing workers to finish their tasks fastaffects safety negativelyIn short projects (e.g. 2 months), workersdoesn't have enough time to anticipate risks61 0 1 7 44 9 0 0.746 161 0 4 11 32 14 0 0.725 261 0 1 15 38 7 0 0.705 361 0 2 22 31 6 0 0.664 461 4 6 7 36 8 0 0.652 561 2 13 13 25 8 0 0.594 661 0 13 22 22 4 0 0.566 7151

Study on relationship between safety andtime# ofRespondentsFrequency of occurrenceStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankthus increases accidentsApplying safety regulations increases projectduration61 2 17 13 27 2 0 0.537 8Short time schedules provided to foremanaffects safety negatively because foremanmay stress on workers to comply with61 3 21 15 20 2 0 0.484 9scheduleShort time schedules provided to foremanaffects safety and quality negatively becauseforeman may stress on workers to comply61 5 25 9 22 0 0 0.443 10with scheduleSafety meetings are waste of time 61 8 28 11 13 1 0 0.377 11"Discussion between top management and foreman on time schedule improves safetyand productivity" factor was ranked in the first position among this group with RII =0.746. This result shows communication between top management and first-linesupervisors regarding time schedule would improve safety and productivity. Theinvolvement of foreman in time scheduling of project activities strengthens their rolein improving safety. In many companies, foreman is consulted with supervisor andtop management to resolve problems, such as equipment performance, output quality,and work schedules. This involvement fortifies foreman's self-confidence andsupports his role at the workplace. Foreman, being in direct contact with workers, isable to extract safety problems at workplace and the ways to avoid them. He canconsult top management during project scheduling on such hazards and time requiredto avoid them and to arrange tasks and activities to avoid such hazards if possible."Working in noon times, reduces productivity and exposes worker to Heat Stroke"factor was ranked in the second position among this group with RII = 0.725. Thisresult shows that working in hot weather exposes worker to hazards of excess heatwhich affects worker's safety and productivity negatively. Excessive exposure to heat152

is referred to as heat stress. In a very hot environment, the most serious concern isheat stroke. In absence of immediate medical attention, heat stroke could be fatal.Heat stroke fatalities do occur every summer. Heat exhaustion and fainting are lessserious types of illnesses which are not fatal but interfere with a worker's ability towork. Workers should given frequent breaks in a cool area away from heat. Suchbreak would make worker more comfortable and increases his productivity."Overtime (shiftwork) affects safety and productivity negatively because it stressesworker" factor was ranked in the fifth position among this group with RII = 0.652.This result shows how much overtime has effect on both safety and productivity.Overtime can be defined as the means of accelerating progress or recoveringdecelerated activity. While extended hours (shiftwork) operations offer majoradvantages to workers with regard to financial point of view, it is predicted that thefinancial and social costs of such work are likely to escalate as extended hoursoperations become even more prevalent. Shiftworks or overtime would put the workerin stress due to excess of working hours per day. Such stress affects his health andsafety so much in a manner that even his productivity will decline. Supervisors shouldadjust worker's work schedules and staffing distribution to minimize excess overtime,absenteeism, turnover and replacement costs."Forcing workers to complete their tasks fast affects safety negatively" factor wasranked in the sixth position among this group with RII = 0.594. This result showsworkers behave unsafely if they are forced to work under tight schedules. Hinze(1997) suggests that it might appear beneficial for foreman to share information abouttime schedule of specified tasks with workers because it gives them a goal to try toachieve. Nevertheless, this suggestion might lead to opposite results if the timeestimate was less or over estimated. In other words, workers will be frustrated if theyfeel the time schedule is too tight to complete which leads to psychological effect thatdecrease their attention and thus lack of safety and low productivity.Such psychological effects will double in case they are forced to accomplish theirassigned tasks earlier. The frustration increases due to working under time pressureand supervisor's pressure. When the schedule is tight, workers tend to take shortcuts153

and get careless. Contractors should be careful not to overwork crews. Meanwhile,contractor should schedule a full work crew because when there are enough workersto help each other with heavy tasks, the chances of losing crew members to injurieswill be reduced"In short time projects (e.g. 2 months), workers doesn't have enough time to anticipaterisks thus increases accidents" factor was ranked in the seventh position among thisgroup with RII = 0.566. This result shows that short duration projects are moreexposed to unsafe environment because workers might not be able to anticipatehazards. When duration of projects is short, there will not be enough time for workersto get used to the workplace and accomplish their assigned tasks. This factor was notsupported so much by respondents. This might be due to the nature of projects inGaza Strip. Due to small area of Gaza Strip, it is not noticed very much to have longduration projects. Most of projects fall within 2 months to 24 months.On the contrary, projects with short duration that is to say small projects should beless risky due to the ability to control all tasks of project easily. Moreover, activitiesare not so hazardous that they need more attention than those of large projects."Applying safety regulations increases project duration" factor was ranked in theeighth position among this group with RII = 0.537. This result shows that respondentsdid not support this factor which states that safety regulation at workplace extendsproject duration. Safety regulations were designed to improve health and safetyconditions which would also not affect the duration of the project negatively. Safeworkplace means there is no work stoppage due to injuries, there is no worksuspension due to accidents, and there is no project suspension due to rework."Safety meetings are waste of time" factor was ranked in the 11 th position among thisgroup with RII = 0.377. This result shows that respondents did not support that Safetymeetings are waste of time. A pre-construction safety meeting is required to discussall aspects of safety. Safety meetings are generally 10-15 minute on-the-job meetingsheld to keep workers alerted to potential hazards for work-related accidents andillnesses. Topics should be about health and safety problems that really exist on the154

job. They can cover work practices, machinery, tools, equipment, materials, attitudes,and anything else that may cause or contribute to work-related accident or illness.They can be held prior to starting of shift or after lunch break.Safety meetings have proven their worth by alerting workers to workplace hazardsand by preventing accidents, illnesses and on-the-job injuries. One hour safetymeeting weekly would save hours that would have been lost trying to help an injuredworker. Thus, it cannot be said that such safety meetings are waste of time.4.3.5 Part VI: Linkage between occupational safety and religion inconstruction projectThe researcher throughout the thesis investigated the linkage between safety andreligion using one group of questions. Ranking of factors has been used throughoutthe thesis within the group of safety and religion only. Ranking was based on relativeindex values. Many statistical analyses have been used to elaborate and analyzequestionnaire results including; relative importance index (RII), and ranking ofreligion group.GROUP 1: Study on relationship between safety and religionTable 4.38 shows the respondents’ opinion about religion with regard to safetyaccording to Likert scale. This part consists only of one group containing twelvefactors of relationship between safety and religion.Table 4.38: Study on relationship between safety and religionStudy on relationship between safety andreligion# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankReligious belief in Allah affects human's61 0 0 0 33 28 0 0.861 1values too muchIslam has strengthened principle of 61 0 2 8 22 29 0 0.816 2155

Study on relationship between safety andreligion# ofRespondentsStronglyDisagreeFrequency ofoccurrenceDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyAgreeMissing answersRIIRankpreventive actions through many versesBelief in Allah helps avoiding much ofaccidents61 0 1 6 30 24 0 0.811 3Safe and healthy workplace provides deepworker dignity61 0 0 0 46 15 0 0.807 4Safe and healthy workplace providesenvironment of justice and equity61 0 0 8 35 18 0 0.787 5Everyone at project is committed to hiscolleague's safety61 0 2 4 39 16 0 0.779 6Religious values and beliefs increases workerconcern in his colleagues' safety61 0 4 8 32 17 0 0.750 7Religious values and beliefs increases workerconcern in his own safety61 0 6 6 35 14 0 0.730 8Compensations don't confront with religion 61 2 0 15 28 16 0 0.725 9It is vital to consider safety as value not aspriority61 0 6 10 35 10 0 0.697 10Not complying with safety regulations isconsidered as an act against religious beliefs61 2 7 11 30 11 0 0.664 11Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is lescareful to safety61 15 15 14 11 6 0 0.406 12"Religious belief in Allah affects human's values too much" factor was ranked in thefirst position among this group with RII = 0.861. This result shows how much religionplays role in human's life especially with regard to Islam. Since Islam has set detailedprinciples for living good life including living safely, it is very well known thatreligion affects human behavior to great extent. Human safety has been proved to beone of most Islam's important principles. Human's life is invaluable according to mostof Islam verses. This makes it essential for contractors to consider human's life thatmuch important.156

"Islam has strengthened principle of preventive actions through many verses" factorwas ranked in the second position among this group with RII = 0.816. This resultshows that Islam focused on saving human's life through setting preventive actions.Such preventive actions were meant not to expose human to unnecessary risksbecause human life is the second important thing after religion. Scholars of Sharia`(Islamic science) have shown that human's life comes in the second order of the mostimportant principles in Islam which are; religion, human life, honor, mind, andmoney. Money comes as the less important principle which means that safety is moreimportant than any profits in a project."Not complying with safety regulations is considered as an act against religiousbeliefs" factor was ranked in the 11 th position among this group with RII = 0.664.This result shows that complying with safety regulations would be as part of religiousbelief. When contractors and workers think that not complying with safety regulationsis against beliefs, they will be more stimulant to achieving zero accident onsite."Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is less careful to safety" factor was ranked inthe 12 th position among this group with RII = 0.406. This result shows the problem ofdepending on fate in the wrong way. Many workers think that if it is their fate to beinjured they cannot escape from their fate. This is correct, but prevention actionsshould be taken in order to decrease accident as well. Depending on fate doesn't meanto expose ourselves to clear risks. Careless workers who depend on the fact that fatemust happen, understand fate in wrong way. Fate means that accidents occur buthuman should do his best to prevent them. Fate is a mixture of belief and work.4.3.6 Importance of Studying the Relation between Safety, Quality,and ProductivityThe study of the relationship between safety, quality, and productivity has beenthoroughly discussed through the questionnaire and the literature review. Theimportance of studying this relationship evolves from many reasons as shown inTable 4.38.157

Table 4.39: Importance of Studying the Relation between Safety, Quality, and ProductivityImportance of Studying The Relationbetween Safety, Quality, and Productivity# of RespondentsFrequency of occurrenceVeryimportantImportantNeutralNotimportantNot veryimportantMissing answersRIIRankGood reputation of contractor locally andregionally61 0 2 4 23 32 0 0.844 1Improving work environment at workplace 61 1 0 3 30 27 0 0.832 2Decreasing accidents during work at projects 61 0 4 3 23 31 0 0.828 3Setting practical and applicable policies forsafety, quality and productivity61 0 0 5 36 20 0 0.807 4Improving classification of contractor atgovernmental and private sector61 0 6 4 22 29 0 0.799 5Increasing productivity of work 61 0 1 3 40 17 0 0.795 6Improvement of safety and health conditionsof personnel of company61 0 1 4 42 14 0 0.779 7Increasing quality of work 61 0 7 3 32 19 0 0.754 9Providing new opportunities for specializedengineers in fields of safety, quality, and 61 1 3 8 31 18 0 0.750 9productivityDecreasing cost of project (e.g.compensations)61 3 4 6 33 15 0 0.713 10"Good reputation of contractor locally and regionally" factor was ranked in the firstposition among this group with RII = 0.844. This result shows that good reputation ofcontractors is the most important factor when studying safety, quality, andproductivity because the reputation of contractor would mean profit and failure interms of business."Improving work environment at workplace" factor was ranked in the second positionamong this group with RII = 0.832. This result shows improving work environment isan important factor because good workplace means enhanced safety, quality andproductivity.158

"Decreasing accidents during work at projects" factor was ranked in the third positionamong this group with RII = 0.828. This result shows that decreasing accidents is animportant factor in this study because of the injuries and losses such accidents cause."Setting practical and applicable policies for safety, quality and productivity" factorwas ranked in the fourth position among this group with RII = 0.807. This resultshows that this factor is important because such combination between safety, quality,and productivity is important in setting out policies."Improving classification of contractor at governmental and private sector" factor wasranked in the fifth position among this group with RII = 0.799. This result shows thisstudy is important in assisting setting up an improved classification system forcontractors at governmental and private sector based on their safety records."Increasing productivity of work" factor was ranked in the sixth position among thisgroup with RII = 0.795. This result shows this study would help in increasing workproductivity through applying safety measures and quality control."Improvement of safety and health conditions of personnel of company" factor wasranked in the seventh position among this group with RII = 0.779. This result showsthis factor comes in the 7 th rank of importance with its relevance to study of safety,quality, and productivity. When efficient policies are set and the top management inaddition to personnel commitment to such policies, company personnel will benefitwith regard to safety conditions."Increasing quality of work" factor was ranked in the eighth position among thisgroup with RII = 0.754. This result shows that quality will enhance as a consequenceof this study.159

"Providing new opportunities for specialized engineers in fields of safety, quality, andproductivity" factor was ranked in the ninth position among this group with RII =0.750. This result shows that this study will provide new opportunities for engineersin fields of safety, quality, and productivity."Decreasing cost of project (e.g. compensations)" factor was ranked in the tenthposition among this group with RII = 0.713. This result shows that this factor is thelowest with regard to its importance of this study. Nevertheless, decreasing costs ofprojects is always a concern at projects.160

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS5.1 IntroductionThis chapter includes the conclusion and the practical recommendations that wouldhelp in setting up policy for managing safety, quality, and productivity in constructionprojects in Gaza Strip. The main objective of this study was to find relationshipbetween safety, quality, and productivity in construction projects in Gaza Strip. Thestudy also aimed at finding the relationship between safety, time, cost, and religionand to investigate the effect of such factors on construction safety in Gaza Strip.Finally, the research aimed at developing a model illustrating the linkage betweensafety and quality in construction projects.5.2 ConclusionThis part of thesis concludes the main findings as follows:5.2.1 Safety and QualityThis part of thesis included 15 groups of factors. Each group contains a range offactors that focus on the relation between safety and quality in construction projects.The total number of factors included among the 15 groups of quality is 55.Table 5.1 shows the most important five factors of quality which has a strong linkagewith safety based on overall ranking among quality groups. Results indicated that"Safety organization is formed with culture at community considers safety vital needfor people" factor in safety organization group has been ranked in the 1 st position withregard to its importance in sustaining safety and quality of project. This factor belongsto safety organization group. Since organization culture constitutes one of qualitymanagement pillars, it plays a significant role in safety management as shown inresearch results. This proves the strong linkage between safety and quality in terms oforganization culture.161

Table 5.1: The most important factors of Quality# Factors of Quality and Safety Related Group RII Rank1. The safety organization is formed with culture at Safety Organization 0.840 1community considers safety vital need for people2. All managers should go through proper safety Safety Training 0.832 2management training3. All engineers should go through proper safety Safety Training 0.832 3management training4. Non-orientation of new workers decreases quality Workmanship 0.832 4and increases risk they face5. The safety organization is formed with positivebehavior at workers and top management towardssafetySafety Organization 0.828 5Results indicated that the factor” All managers should go through proper safetymanagement training” has been ranked in the 2 nd position. Moreover, results have alsoindicated that the factor “All engineers should go through proper safety managementtraining” in safety training group has been ranked in the 3 rd position. These twofactors belong to safety training group. This proves the importance of training insustaining safe environment at workplace. It is commonly known that training ismajor pillar of quality management. This proves the significant of linking quality tosafety at worksite.Results also have shown that the factor “Non-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they face” in workmanship group has been ranked in the 4 thposition. This factor belongs to workmanship group. Orientation of newly hiredworkers or employees is an important component of good quality management. Suchorientation proved to be an important component of good safety managementaccording to results of research. This indicates that a strong linkage between safetyand quality management exists.Results have indicated that the factor “The safety organization is formed with positivebehavior at workers and top management towards safety” has been ranked in 5 th162

position. This factor belongs to safety organization group. Behavior of workers andtop management at an organization controls how the degree of quality an organizationwould reach. Although behavior is an important factor, it has been ranked in the 5 thposition because unless a disciplined culture exists at the organization, behavior willnot prove good quality management. Culture significantly contributes to producingthe behavior of workers and top management. Thus, safety culture at organization hasbeen ranked in the 1 st position while safety behavior at organization has been rankedin the 5 th one. This shows how much the strength the linkage between safety andquality is.5.2.2 Safety and ProductivityThis part of thesis included 7 groups of factors. Each group contains a range of factorsthat focus on the relation between safety and productivity in construction projects.The total number of factors included among the 9 groups of productivity is 28.Table 5.2 shows the most important five factors of productivity which have a stronglinkage with safety based on overall ranking among productivity groups. Resultsindicated that "Skillfulness of worker improves safety" factor has been ranked in the1 st position with regard to its importance in sustaining safety and productivity ofproject. This factor belongs to factors improving productivity group. In terms ofproductivity, skillful worker is a productive one because he performs his tasks on timeand with quality. Results of research show that skillfulness of workers enhancessafety. This factor shows the significant linkage between safety and productivity.Table 5.2: The most important factors of Productivity# Factors of Productivity and Safety Related Group RII Rank1. Skillfulness of worker improves safety Factors improving 0.840 1productivity2. Illustrating daily activities to workers before start of Worker problems 0.807 2activity would contribute to improving safety3. In order to avoid accidents, anticipated risks are Safety program 0.750 3included in safety program which increasesproductivity163

4. Accidents frustrate workers and create absenteeismwhich would decrease productivity5. When foreman allocates tasks to workers, heconsiders safety measuresSubcontractors 0.738 4Inspection 0.730 5Results have also indicated that “Illustrating daily activities to workers before start ofactivity would contribute to improving safety” factor has been ranked in the 2 ndposition. This factor belongs to worker problems group. This factor of productivity issimilar to the factor of quality “Non-orientation of new workers decreases quality andincreases risk they face”. This proves that orientation of either newly hired workers orregular workers is essential especially for irregular job tasks. It helps avoidingdiscrepancies with safety regulations.Results show that “In order to avoid accidents, anticipated risks are included in safetyprogram which increases productivity” factor was ranked in the 3 rd position. Thisfactor shows the importance of safety program in sustaining a safe environment atworksite. It also shows that such safety program enhances productivity because of lessaccidents and injuries.Results show that “Accidents frustrate workers and create absenteeism which woulddecrease productivity” factor has been ranked in the 4 th position. This factor belongsto subcontractors group. Since safety program plays a big role in preventing accidents,its related factor was more important than this factor. Accidents can decrease injuredworker’s productivity in addition to other workers’ productivity because of minddistraction or fear of associated risks. This shows the linkage between safety andproductivity is strong.Results show that “When foreman allocates tasks to workers, he considers safetymeasures” factor has been ranked in the 5 th position. This factor belongs to inspectiongroup. This indicates that a good linkage exists between safety and productivity. Suchlinkage exists because worker and task allocation is major component of goodproductivity management.164

5.2.3 Safety and CostThis part of thesis included 1 group of factors. This group contains a range of factorsthat focus on the relation between safety and cost in construction projects. The totalnumber of factors included within the group of cost is 10. Table 5.3 shows the mostimportant factor in addition to the least important factor of cost which has a linkagewith safety.Table 5. 3: The most and least important factors of cost# Factors of Cost and Safety RII Rank1. Safety expenditures are very much less than losses due to accidents 0.775 12. Occupational safety increases project cost 0.578 10The results indicated that safety and cost can be both managed effectively withoutenhancing one at the expense of other. Results indicated that "Safety expenditures arevery much less than losses due to accidents" factor has been ranked in the firstposition with regard to its importance in sustaining safety and cost of projectincluding resources. Results have also indicated that the lowest factor "Occupationalsafety increases project cost" has been ranked in the 10 th position.5.2.4 Safety and TimeThis part of thesis included 1 group of factors. This group contains a range of factorsthat focus on the relation between safety and time in construction projects. The totalnumber of factors included within the group of time is 11. Table 5.4 shows the mostimportant factor in addition to the least important factor of time which has a linkagewith safety.Table 5. 4: The most and least important factors of time# Factors of Time and Safety RII Rank1. Discussion between top management and foreman on0.746 1time schedule improves safety and productivity2. Safety meetings are waste of time 0.377 11165

The results indicate that safety and time can be both managed effectively withoutenhancing one on the expense of other. Results indicated that the factor "Discussionbetween top management and foreman on time schedule improves safety andproductivity" has been ranked as the 1 st factor with regard to its importance insustaining safety and time of project including resources. Results have also indicatedthat the factor "Safety meetings are waste of time" has been ranked the lowest; 11 thrank.5.2.5 Safety and ReligionThis part of thesis included 1 group of factors. This group contains a range of factorsthat focus on the relation between safety and religion in construction projects. Thetotal number of factors included within the group of religion is 12. Table 5.5 showsthe most important factor in addition to the least important factor of religion whichhas a linkage with safety.Table 5. 5: The most and least important factors of religion# Factors of Religion and Safety RII Rank1. Religious belief in Allah affects human's values too much 0.861 12. Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is les careful to safety 0.406 12The results indicate that safety and religion can be both managed effectively withoutenhancing one on the expense of other. Results indicated that the factor "Religiousbelief in Allah affects human's values too much" has been ranked as the 1 st factor withregard to its importance of religious beliefs on construction safety. Results have alsoindicated that the factor "Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is les careful tosafety" has been ranked the lowest; 12 th rank.166

5.3 RecommendationsRecommendations are dedicated to policy makers and contractors. Therecommendations shall address remedial action to solve the problem, further researchto fill in gaps in researcher's understanding, and directions for future investigations onthis or related topics. Government should strengthen Occupational Safety and HealthDepartments at Ministry of Labor to an extent that it can legislate and implementsafety policies. Department of Occupational Safety and Health is recommended to:5.3.1 Safety and Quality1. Develop more practical and effective safety policies which mainly address clearsafety regulations and clauses. Effective policies should ensure providing a safeplace to work, a work environment conducive to safe work practices.2. Observe construction safety at workplace regularly and irregularly to make suresuch workplaces are in compliance with general safety regulations. Observationsinclude site visits, on-site training, visiting injured workers and conductingmeetings with workers and contractors.3. Legislate through the legislative council acts and clauses within the PalestinianLaw that would impose fines and penalties on institutions and companies whichviolate safety regulations.4. Assign specialized engineers in different fields of safety in different areas of GazaStrip to observe safety regulations at workplaces. Such engineers should haveexecutive responsibilities in addition to reporting to their safety department.5. Provide training and technical assistance to local health department staff forimproved site and plan review and inspection capability. Such training shouldeducate local department officers to professionally and easily recognize safety andhealth violations and risks associated.6. Policy makers should work together to ensure that regulations from agencies withoverlapping jurisdiction are compatible.167

7. Collaborate with contractors, consultants, policy makers, manufacturers, lawenforcement officials, and the research community work in partnership to preventoccupational injuries at workplace.8. Establish an ongoing advisory board to advise and monitor local departments'activities. An advisory board of government and non-governmental organizationscould serve as a forum for improved agency and organization coordination,collaboration and communication in the different fields of occupational safety andhealth. It could also be a communication conduit between workers, contractors,agencies, organizations, and policy makers.5.3.2 Safety and Productivity1. Contractors are recommended to act strategically to protect workers bycontinuously identifying, evaluating, and mitigating hazardous conditions, asactivities, work locations, and other conditions change in workplace.2. Provide high-visibility apparel to all workers in construction workplace, not just toworkers who are in direct contact to hazards because any worker routinely on footin a work zone is at potential risk of injury.3. Provide training to all workers at workplace specific to the hazards of being struckby moving construction vehicles and equipment and by other risks such as fall andelectric shock.5.3.3 Safety and Cost1. Establish a funding mechanism for local health departments to provide therequired safety plan and site reviews, and pre-occupancy and periodic safety andhealth inspections. Funding mechanism is required in order to overcome theshortage of fund provided to local authorities in Gaza Strip due to currenteconomical situation.2. Consider, as a standard practice, incorporating the costs of worker safetyprotection into bid specifications. Currently, safety-conscious contractors risk168

losing contracts because bids that include more comprehensive worker protectionmay be less competitive.3. Create a national database of safety and health complaints and medical records.This includes developing standardized health surveys to be used in workplaceswith complaints to identify how workers and employees are affected.5.3.4 Safety and Time1. Set competitive provisions to contractors so that safety violations are taken intoaccount when owners evaluate tenders. Competitive provisions may include extrapoints for contractors with proper safety record and effective time schedulingtaking into account safety.2. Contractors are recommended to use time schedules taking into account thatsafety regulations are met without squeezing the project duration.5.3.5 Safety and ReligionGovernment and contractors should conduct orientation sessions for workers hostingreligious people in order to illustrate the following:1. Importance of human values and how to protect such values during work.2. Importance of avoiding hazards and risks associated and making it clear thatreligion urges human not to harm themselves3. Illustrate to workers that depending on Allah's protection does not mean to act incarelessness while working.169

5.4 Proposed Safety and Quality Management ModelIn order to present a model linking between safety and quality, it is necessary topropose hypotheses based on which the model can be developed. Measurement toolsused to propose such hypotheses are as follows:5.4.1 Age of respondentsAge of respondents has been used as a measurement tool to investigate therelationship between safety and quality. The age factor has been grouped into fourlevels as shown in the questionnaire (i.e. 20-25, 26-30, 31-40, 41-50, and more than50). Thus, two hypotheses can be proposed as follows:Ho: There is no difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion) due to theage at significance levelα =0.05Ha: There is difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion, andproductivity contributes) due to the age at significance levelα =0.05Table 5.6 shows the mean and standard deviations for each category corresponding tothe age levels. For the relationship between safety and quality, it is noticed that themean of the age (mean = 2.522) correspondence in the level (20 – 25) is the largestmean, while the smallest mean of the age (mean = 2.083) correspondence lies in thelevel (41 – 50). This means that the level of age (20 -25) supports that there is arelationship between safety and quality more than other levels of age.170

Table 5. 6: Mean and standard deviations for the respondent answers corresponding to ageCategoryRelationshipbetweensafety andqualityRelationshipbetweensafety andproductivityRelationshipbetweensafety andcostRelationshipbetweensafety andtimeRelationshipbetweensafety andreligionRelationshipbetweensafety,quality, andproductivity20-25 30-2631-40 41-50 More than 50Std.MeanDeviation Mean Std.Deviation Mean Std.Deviation Mean Std.Deviation Mean Std.Deviation2.522 0.562 2.300 0.307 2.230 0.380 2.083 0.317 2.308 0.4242.423 0.325 2.505 0.291 2.313 0.386 2.407 0.285 2.419 0.3272.500 0.263 2.497 0.253 2.348 0.325 2.444 0.213 2.451 0.2722.722 0.379 2.695 0.408 2.420 0.241 2.646 0.371 2.623 0.3702.089 0.424 2.054 0.297 1.990 0.404 2.009 0.202 2.040 0.3472.000 0.580 1.723 0.388 1.835 0.605 1.758 0.232 1.830 0.493Table 5.7 shows ANOVA results for the differences in the mean values of thecategories. Analysis results showed that F value for each category is less than thecritical value of F 0.05 which equals 2.76 at degrees of freedom (3, 57), and the P-valuefor each category is greater than 0.000, hence, we fail to reject Ho with 95%confidence interval and conclude that there is no difference in the mean value for therespondent answers for the relationship between safety and (quality, productivity,cost, time, religion, and productivity contributes) due to the age at significance level=0.05 α .171

Table 5. 7: ANOVA results for the differences in the mean value of all aspectsType of Sum of MeanCategorydfRelationship Squares SquareBetween Groups 1.289 3 0.430Relationship between safety and quality Within Groups 9.505 57 0.167Total 10.794 60Between Groups 0.331 3 0.110Relationship between safety and productivity Within Groups 6.081 57 0.107Total 6.412 60Between Groups 0.251 3 0.084Relationship between safety and cost Within Groups 4.203 57 0.074Total 4.454 60Between Groups 0.922 3 0.307Relationship between safety and time Within Groups 7.290 57 0.128Total 8.212 60Between Groups 0.091 3 0.030Relationship between safety and religion Within Groups 7.140 57 0.125Total 7.231 60Between Groups 0.740 3 0.247Relationship between safety, quality, andWithin Groups 13.830 57 0.243productivity contributesTotal 14.570 60The critical value of F 0.05 equal 2.76 at degrees of freedom “df” (3, 57)FSig.(P)2.577 0.0631.034 0.3851.135 0.3432.403 0.0770.242 0.8671.017 0.3925.4.2 Qualification of respondentsQualification of respondents has been used as a measurement tool to investigate therelationship between safety and quality. The qualification factor has been groupedinto three levels as shown in the questionnaire (i.e. BSc, MSc, and Other). Thus, twohypotheses can be proposed as follows:Ho: There is no difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion) due to thequalification at significance levelα =0.05Ha: There is difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion, andproductivity contributes) due to the qualification at significance levelα =0.05Table 5.8 shows the mean and standard deviations for each category corresponding tothe qualification levels. For the relationship between safety and quality, it is noticedthat the mean of the qualification (mean = 2.325) correspondence in the level (BSc) isthe largest mean, while the smallest mean of the qualification (mean = 2.107)correspondence lies in the level (MSc). This means that respondents who hold a BSc172

degree support that there is a relationship between safety and quality more than otherlevels of qualification.Table 5. 8: Mean and standard deviations for the respondent answers corresponding toqualificationCategoryBSc MSc Other TotalStd.Std.Std.MeanMeanMeanMean Std. DeviationDeviation Deviation DeviationRelationship betweensafety and quality2.325 0.431 2.107 0.394 2.268 0.399 2.308 0.424Relationship betweensafety and productivity2.427 0.329 2.333 0.435 2.378 0.204 2.419 0.327Relationship betweensafety and cost2.448 0.267 2.375 0.401 2.601 0.230 2.451 0.272Relationship betweensafety and time2.599 0.356 2.705 0.522 2.939 0.410 2.623 0.370Relationship betweensafety and religion2.049 0.358 1.938 0.275 2.000 0.289 2.040 0.347Relationship betweensafety, quality, andproductivity contributes1.838 0.512 1.864 0.302 1.636 0.364 1.830 0.493Table 5.9 shows ANOVA results for the differences in the mean values of thecategories. Analysis results showed that F value for each category is less than thecritical value of F 0.05 which equals 3.18 at degrees of freedom (3, 58), and the P-valuefor each category is greater than 0.000, hence, we fail to reject Ho with 95%confidence interval and conclude that there is no difference in the mean value for therespondent answers for the relationship between safety and (quality, productivity,cost, time, religion, and productivity contributes) due to the qualification atsignificance level=0.05 α .Table 5. 9: ANOVA results for the differences in the mean value of all aspects corresponding toqualificationCategoriesRelationship between safety and qualityRelationship between safety andproductivityRelationship between safety and costRelationship between safety and timeRelationship between safety and religionType of relationshipSum of MeandfSquares SquareBetween Groups 0.182 2 0.091Within Groups 10.612 58 0.183Total 10.794 60Between Groups 0.038 2 0.019Within Groups 6.374 58 0.110Total 6.412 60Between Groups 0.091 2 0.046Within Groups 4.362 58 0.075Total 4.454 60Between Groups 0.357 2 0.179Within Groups 7.855 58 0.135Total 8.212 60Between Groups 0.052 2 0.026Within Groups 7.179 58 0.124FSig.(P)0.497 0.6110.173 0.8420.608 0.5481.319 0.2750.208 0.813173

Relationship between safety, quality, andproductivity contributesTotal 7.231 60Between Groups 0.121 2 0.060Within Groups 14.449 58 0.249Total 14.570 60The critical value of F 0.05 equal 3.18 at degrees of freedom (2, 58)0.242 0.7855.4.3 Specialization of respondentsSpecialization of respondents has been used as a measurement tool to investigate therelationship between safety and quality. The specialization factor has been groupedinto three levels as shown in the questionnaire (i.e. Civil Engineering, Architecture,and Other). Thus, two hypotheses can be proposed as follows:Ho: There is no difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion) due to thespecialization at significance levelα =0.05Ha: There is difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion, andproductivity contributes) due to the specialization at significance levelα =0.05Table 5.10 shows the mean and standard deviations for each category correspondingto the specialization levels. For the relationship between safety and quality, it isnoticed that the mean of the specialization (mean = 2.309) correspondence in the level(Architecture) is the largest mean, while the smallest mean of the correspondence(mean = 2.173) lies in the level (Other). This means that respondents who hold anArchitecture degree support that there is a relationship between safety and qualitymore than other levels of specializations.Table 5. 10: Mean and standard deviations for the respondent answers corresponding toSpecializationCategoryRelationshipbetween safetyand qualityRelationshipbetween safetyand productivityCivil Eng. Architecture Other TotalStd.Std.Std.Std.MeanMeanMeanMeanDeviationDeviationDeviationDeviation2.309 0.434 2.382 0.264 2.173 0.560 2.308 0.4242.411 0.341 2.560 0.128 2.322 0.283 2.419 0.327174

Relationshipbetween safetyand costRelationshipbetween safetyand timeRelationshipbetween safetyand religionRelationshipbetween safety,quality, andproductivitycontributes2.447 0.273 2.504 0.087 2.420 0.516 2.451 0.2722.599 0.367 2.800 0.311 2.758 0.533 2.623 0.3702.013 0.324 2.467 0.139 1.806 0.542 2.040 0.3471.847 0.512 1.855 0.199 1.485 0.448 1.830 0.493Table 5.11 shows ANOVA results for the differences in the mean values of thecategories. Analysis results showed that F value for each category is less than thecritical value of F 0.05 which equals 3.18 at degrees of freedom (2, 58), and the P-valuefor each category is greater than 0.000, hence, we fail to reject Ho with 95%confidence interval and conclude that there is no difference in the mean value for therespondent answers for the relationship between safety and (quality, productivity,cost, time, and productivity contributes) due to the specialization at significance level=0.05 α .Table 5. 11: ANOVA results for the differences in the mean value of all aspects corresponding toSpecializationCategoriesRelationship between safety and qualityRelationship between safety andproductivityRelationship between safety and costRelationship between safety and timeRelationship between safety and religionRelationship between safety, quality, andproductivity contributesType of relationshipSum of MeandfSquares SquareBetween Groups 0.082 2 0.041Within Groups 10.712 58 0.185Total 10.794 60Between Groups 0.131 2 0.066Within Groups 6.281 58 0.108Total 6.412 60Between Groups 0.018 2 0.009Within Groups 4.436 58 0.076Total 4.454 60Between Groups 0.242 2 0.121Within Groups 7.970 58 0.137Total 8.212 60Between Groups 1.115 2 0.557Within Groups 6.116 58 0.105Total 7.231 60Between Groups 0.376 2 0.188Within Groups 14.194 58 0.245Total 14.570 60The critical value of F 0.05 equal 3.18 at degrees of freedom (2, 58)FSig.(P)0.223 0.8010.606 0.5490.116 0.8910.882 0.4195.287 0.0080.769 0.468175

On the other hand, with regard to the relationship between safety and religion, it isnoticed that F value is greater than F 0.05 ; hence we fail to reject Ha with 95%confidence interval and conclude that there is a difference in the mean value forrespondents’ answers for the relationship between safety and religion.5.4.4 Experience of respondents in the field of SafetyExperience of respondents in the field of Safety has been used as a measurement toolto investigate the relationship between safety and quality. The years of experiencefactor has been grouped into five levels as shown in the questionnaire (i.e. 1 – 5, 6 –10, 11 – 15, 16 – 20, and More than 20). Thus, two hypotheses can be proposed asfollows:Ho: There is no difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion) due to theexperience in the field of safety at significance levelα =0.05Ha: There is difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion, andproductivity contributes) due to the experience in the field of safety at significancelevelα =0.05Table 5.12 shows the mean and standard deviations for each category correspondingto the experience in the field of safety. For the relationship between safety andquality, it is noticed that the mean of the experience in the field of safety (mean =2.392) correspondence in the level (1 -5) is the largest mean, while the smallest meanof the correspondence (mean = 1.795) lies in the level (More than 20). This meansthat respondents who have 1 -5 years experience in the field of safety support thatthere is a relationship between safety and quality more than other levels of years ofexperience. This may be reasoned to fresh graduates and young professionals joinedtraining courses in the field of safety or studied more specialized courses in the fieldof safety during their university study.176

Table 5. 12: Mean and standard deviations for the respondent answers corresponding toexperience in the field of safetyCategoryRelationshipbetweensafety andqualityRelationshipbetweensafety andproductivityRelationshipbetweensafety andcostRelationshipbetweensafety andtimeRelationshipbetweensafety andreligionMean1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 More than 20 TotalStd.Std.Std.Std.Std.Std.Deviatio Mean Deviatio Mean Deviatio Mean Deviatio Mean Deviatio Mean Deviationnnnnn2.392 0.438 2.207 0.263 2.173 0.560 2.040 0.359 1.795 0.164 2.308 0.4242.441 0.338 2.380 0.318 2.322 0.283 2.450 0.397 2.217 0.212 2.419 0.3272.479 0.263 2.370 0.267 2.420 0.516 2.495 0.252 2.217 0.184 2.451 0.2722.667 0.385 2.391 0.250 2.758 0.533 2.750 0.215 2.409 0.193 2.623 0.3702.050 0.369 2.092 0.293 1.806 0.542 1.958 0.144 2.083 0.118 2.040 0.347Relationshipbetweensafety,1.892quality, and0.538 1.718 0.401 1.485 0.448 1.750 0.227 1.773 0.193 1.830 0.493productivitycontributesTable 5.13 shows ANOVA results for the differences in the mean values of thecategories. Analysis results showed that F value for each category is less than thecritical value of F 0.05 which equals 2.56 at degrees of freedom (4, 56), and the P-valuefor each category is greater than 0.000, hence, we fail to reject Ho with 95%confidence interval and conclude that there is no difference in the mean value for therespondent answers for the relationship between safety and (quality, productivity,cost, time, and productivity contributes) due to the experience in the field of safety atsignificance level=0.05 α .Table 5. 13: ANOVA results for the differences in the mean value of all aspects correspondenceto experience in the field of safetySum of MeanCategoriesType of relationshipdfSquares SquareBetween Groups 1.264 4 0.316Relationship between safety and quality Within Groups 9.530 56 0.170Total 10.794 60Relationship between safety andBetween Groups 0.150 4 0.037productivity Within Groups 6.262 56 0.112FSig.(P)1.857 0.1310.335 0.853177

Relationship between safety and costRelationship between safety and timeRelationship between safety and religionRelationship between safety, quality, andproductivity contributesThe critical value of F 0.05 equal 2.56 at degrees of freedom (4, 56)Total 6.412 60Between Groups 0.220 4 0.055Within Groups 4.234 56 0.076Total 4.454 60Between Groups 0.829 4 0.207Within Groups 7.383 56 0.132Total 8.212 60Between Groups 0.226 4 0.056Within Groups 7.005 56 0.125Total 7.231 60Between Groups 0.675 4 0.169Within Groups 13.895 56 0.248Total 14.570 600.726 0.5781.572 0.1940.451 0.7710.680 0.6095.4.5 Respondents who joined training courses in SafetyRespondents who joined training courses in Safety have been used as a measurementtool to investigate the relationship between safety and quality. The training coursesfactor has been grouped into two levels as shown in the questionnaire (i.e. Yes andNo). Thus, two hypotheses can be proposed as follows:Ho: There is no difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion) due to thesafety training courses at significance levelα =0.05Ha: There is difference in the mean value for the respondent answers for therelationship between safety and (quality, productivity, cost, time, religion, andproductivity contributes) due to the safety training courses at significance levelα =0.05Table 5.14 shows the mean and standard deviations for each category correspondingto the respondents who joined safety training courses. Since levels of respondents hastwo levels (Yes and No), Independent Samples T Test should be conducted in order totest the hypothesis.Table 5. 14: Mean and standard deviations for the respondent answers correspondence totraining coursesCategoryHave you received training courses inOccupational Health and SafetyN Mean Std. DeviationRelationship betweenYes 15 2.1917 0.40493safety and quality No 46 2.3459 0.42765Relationship betweenYes 15 2.4511 0.34246safety and productivity No 46 2.4080 0.32487178

Relationship betweenYes 15 2.4623 0.30880safety and cost No 46 2.4471 0.26314Relationship betweenYes 15 2.6303 0.39844safety and time No 46 2.6206 0.36480Relationship betweenYes 15 1.9333 0.35383safety and religion No 46 2.0743 0.34167Relationship betweenYes 15 1.67880 0.39755safety, quality, andproductivityNo 46 1.8794 0.51428Table 5.15 shows the Independent Samples T Test results for the differences in themean values of the categories. Analysis results showed that T value for each categoryis greater than the critical value of T 0.05 which is equal to 1.99 at degrees of freedom(59), and the P-value for each category is greater than 0.000, hence, we fail to rejectH o with 95% confidence interval and conclude that There is no difference in the meanvalue for the respondent answers for the relationship between safety and( quality,productivity, cost, time, religion, and productivity contributes) due to the trainingcourses at significance level=0.05 α .Table 5. 15: Independent Samples T Test results for the differences in the mean value of allaspects correspondence to training coursesCategoryHave you received trainingcourses in OccupationalHealth and SafetyRelationship betweenYes 15safety and quality No 46Relationship betweensafety and productivityRelationship betweensafety and costYes 15No 46Yes 15No 46Relationship betweenYes 15safety and time No 46N df tP-Value59 -1.228 0.22459 0.441 0.66159 0.187 0.85359 0.088 0.930Relationship betweensafety and religionRelationship betweensafety, quality, andproductivityYes 15No 46Yes 15No 46The critical value of T 0.05 equals 1.99 at degrees of freedom (59)59 -1.376 0.17459 -1.380 0.173Table 5.16 summarizes the strength of the relationship between each category andothers which shows that there is relation between the category "relationship between179

safety and quality and each of the categories (relationship between safety andproductivity, relationship between safety and religion, and relationship betweensafety, quality, and productivity contributes).Table 5. 16: Correlation matrix between all aspectsCategoryRelationshipbetweensafety andqualityRelationshipbetweensafety andproductivityrelationshipbetweensafety andcostRelationshipbetweensafety andtimeRelationshipbetweensafety andreligionRelationshipbetweensafety,quality, andproductivitycontributesStatisticalRelationRelationshipbetweensafety andqualityRelationshipbetweensafety andproductivityRelationshipbetweensafety andcostRelationshipbetweensafety andtimeRelationshipbetweensafety andreligionRelationshipbetweensafety, quality,andproductivitycontributesPearsonCorrelation1 0.358 ** 0.460 ** 0.157 0.535 ** 0.527 **Sig. (2-tailed). 0.005 0.000 0.227 0.000 0.000N 61 61 61 61 61 61PearsonCorrelation0.358 ** 1 0.911 ** 0.413 ** 0.285 * 0.046Sig. (2-tailed)0.005 . 0.000 0.001 0.026 0.725N 61 61 61 61 61 61PearsonCorrelation0.460 ** 0.911 ** 1 0.507 ** 0.334 ** 0.147Sig. (2-tailed)0.000 0.000 . 0.000 0.008 0.258N 61 61 61 61 61 61PearsonCorrelation0.157 0.413 ** 0.507** 1 -0.056 -0.140Sig. (2-tailed)0.227 0.001 0.000 . 0.669 0.281N 61 61 61 61 61 61PearsonCorrelation0.535 ** 0.285 * 0.334 ** -0.056 1 0.509 **Sig. (2-tailed)0.000 0.026 0.008 0.669 . 0.000N 61 61 61 61 61 61PearsonCorrelation0.527 ** 0.046 0.147 -0.140 0.509 ** 1Sig. (2-tailed)0.000 0.725 0.258 0.281 0.000 .N 61 61 61 61 61 61* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).180

5.5 Characteristics of Basic Model Representing Relationshipbetween Safety and Quality managementSafety, quality, productivity, cost, and time management in the construction industryare not separated from each other. The similarity and integration between them havebeen discussed extensively in the Chapter Two. Figure 16 represents how therelationship between safety management and quality management can be integrated atconstruction field. The basic model shown in the Figure 16 discusses the elementswhich constitute the process of both safety and quality management.Figure 16: Proposed Safety and Quality Management ModelThe similarity between safety management and quality management has been studiedextensively in Chapter Two. The similarity could be summarized in flow ofmanagement levels cycle of both safety and quality management into four levels asfollows in Table 5.14:181

Table 5. 17: Similarities between safety and quality management processessSafety ManagementQuality ManagementLevel One Policy and Objectives Policy and Strategy Organization People ManagementLevel Two Resources Practices and Procedures Processes Implementation and ComplianceLevel Three Verification and AssessmentLevel Four Management Review LeadershipLevel OneOne of the important similarities of safety and quality is the fact that theimplementation of both should begin by drawing up of a policy statement. While atsafety management, scholars call it policy and objectives, they call it policy andstrategy at quality management. Integration of safety and quality managementsystems should be improved in the construction industry in order to develop astrategic approach at tackling problems associated with safety in the constructionindustry. The model should start by setting up a policy and objectives that integratesboth safety and quality in one pattern. Such policy will draw all necessary stepsrequired for the good safety and management implementation process.Level TwoThe organization of safety constitutes the top management, safety engineers, workersand other parties related to safety in a project. The organization should be formedwith knowledgeable personnel who exhibit characteristics necessary to achieve safetyobjectives. Safety organization is formed within a culture at community that considerssafety a vital need for people. On the other hand, resources of project and peoplemanagement are essential components of quality management. People managementrequires knowledgeable personnel who exhibit characteristics necessary to achievework quality objectives.Good organization of safety prepares efficient procedures for safety practices that areapplicable at workplace and improves safety at all levels of personnel and workers.Such practices and procedures include safety training courses, creating in-house182

safety rules, safety inspection, providing PPE, accident documentation, andemergency preparedness. On the other hand, in quality management processes arerequired by resources and top management in order to ensure quality is achieved.Such processes include quality assurance, quality control, and ISO training courses.Level ThreeImplementation and compliance of safety procedures and practices are inherentcharacteristics of goof safety management. Compliance with local safety regulationsrequires high commitment towards safety, safety committees to be organized, safetyand health promotion, creation of safety program, and documenting incompliancepenalties in contract forms. Verification and assessment processes are important forensuring safety is achieved and that violations are documented and removed. Throughassessment of accident reports, causes and consequences of safety violations areinvestigated and the method for removing hazards can be uncovered by goodinvestigation by safety specialist or safety engineer who is located at workplace.Level FourManagement review of safety reports and accident reports is necessary for thecorrection actions of safety policy or safety procedures. Top managementcommitment to safety assists in achieving zero accident theory at workplaceespecially if integrated with the total commitment of project parties towards safety.The leadership style in quality management is similar to management review in safetymanagement. The similarity lies at that management review and leadership control thesafety and quality processes alternatively.183

ReferencesAbdel-Razek, R., 1998, Factors affecting construction quality in Egypt: identificationand relative importance, Engineering, Construction and ArchitecturalManagement, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 220 – 227Abdul-Rahman, H., 1995, Some observations on the management of quality amongconstruction professionals in the UK, Construction Management andEconomics, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 485 – 495Abo Mostafa, Z., 2003, Study of the measurement of labor productivity in thePalestinian construction industry: The Gaza Strip, unpublished MSc Thesis,Islamic University of Gaza, Palestine.Abohimed, B., 2001, Identifying some management approaches to total qualitymanagement (TQM) within industrial organizations, unpublished MSc. Thesis,University of Wisconsin-Stout, USA.Ahmed, S.M, P. Tang, Azhar, S., and Irtishad, A., 2002, An Evaluation of SafetyManagement System in the Hong Kong Construction Industry Using TQMPrinciples,” Proceedings of CIB-W65/W55 International Conference,Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.Ahmed, S.M., Azhar, S., and Irtishad, A., 2002, Evaluation of Florida GeneralContractors’ Risk Management Practices, Construction Engineering Journal,Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 4-11, Florida, USAAl Abo Omar, E. and Mangin, J. C., 2002, A new cost control model and indicatorsto measure productivity on building sites, Construction Innovation, Vol. 2, pp.83 – 101.Al-Momani, A.H., 2000. Examining service quality within construction processes,Journal of Technovation, Vol. 20, No. 11, pp. 643-651Arditi, D., and Gunaydin, M., 1997, Total quality management in the constructionprocess, International Journal of Project Management Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 235-243.184

Arditi, D., and Mochtar, K., 2000, Trends In Productivity Improvement in The USConstruction Industry, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 18, pp.15 – 27.Assaf SA, Al-Khalil M, and Al-Hazmi M., 1995, Causes of Delay in Large BuildingConstruction Projects, Journal of Management in Engineering; Vol. 11, No. 2,pp. 45–50.Bahari, I. and Abd. Aziz, N., 1999, Changes for Positive Attitude Towards Safetyand Health at the Work Place, The Electronic Journal of Insurance and RiskManagement, Vol. 1, No. 1.Baines, A., 1997, Productivity Improvement, Work Study Journal, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp.49–51.Barrie, D.S. and Paulson, B.C., 1992, Professional Construction Management,McGraw-Hill International Editions, USABaxendale, T. and Jones, O., 2000, Construction Design And Management SafetyRegulations in Practice – Progress On Implementation, International Journal ofProject Management, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 33 – 40.Bleischwitz, R., 2001, Rethinking Productivity: Why Has Productivity Focused onLabor Instead of Natural Resources?, Environmental and Resource Economics19: 23 – 36.Center for Construction Industry Studies, 1999, U.S. Construction LaborProductivity Trends, 1970-1998. Report No. 7, March, USAChan, D. W. M. and Kumaraswamy, M. M., 2002, Compressing ConstructionDurations: Lessons Learned from Hong Kong Building Projects, TheInternational Journal of Project Management, Vol. 20, No., pp. 23 – 35.Cheung, S.O., Tam, C.M., Ndekugri, I., and Harris F.C., 2000, Factors AffectingClients’ Project Dispute Resolution Satisfaction in Hong Kong, ConstructionManagement and Economics, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 281 – 294.Chinyio, E.A., Olomolaiye, P.O., Kometa, S.T., and Harris, F.C., 1998, A needsbasedmethodology for classifying construction clients and selecting contractors,Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 91 – 98.185

Curry, A. and Kadasah, N., 2002, Focusing on key elements of TQM – evaluationfor sustainability, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 207 – 216Debrah, Y. A. and Ofori, G., 2001, The State, skill formation and productivityenhancement in the construction industry: the case of Singapore, InternationalJournal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 184–202.Dessler, G., 2002, Human Resources Management, Prentice Hall, 9 th edition, USAEl-Rayes K. and Moselhi, O., 2001, Impact of Rainfall on the Productivity ofHighway Construction, ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering andManagement, Vol. 127, No.2, pp. 125–131.Elzarka H., Minkarah, I. A. and Pulikal R., 1999, A Knowledge-Based ApproachFor Automating Construction Safety Management, Proceedings of The 2 ndInternational Conference on the Implementation of Safety and Health onConstruction Sites. Sponsored by CIB. Honolulu, Hawaii, March, pp. 24-27.Enshassi, A., 2003, Factors Affecting Safety on Projects Construction, CIB WorkingCommission W99, Brazil.Ersoz HY., 1999, Neural network model for estimating construction productivity.Journal of Construction Engineering and Management; Vol. 123, No. 4, pp. 399– 410.Etchegaray, J.M. and Fischer, W., 2006, Survey research: be careful where youstep, Reliability and Validity of Measures, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 154.Goodrum P. M., Haas, C. T., and Glover, R. W., 2002, The divergence inaggregate and activity estimates of US construction productivity, Vol. 20, No. 5,pp. 415–423, USA.Griffith, A., 2000, Integrated management systems: a single management systemsolution for project control?, Engineering, Construction and ArchitecturalManagement, 7 (3), 232–240Hendrickson, C. and Au, T., 1989, Project Management for Construction:Fundamental Concepts for Owners, Engineers, Architects and Builders, Prentice Hall,USA.186

Herrero, S., Saldana, M., Del Campo, M., and Ritzel, D., 2002, From thetraditional concept of safety management to safety integrated with quality,Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 33, No., pp. 1 – 20.Hinze, J., 1997, Construction Safety, Prentice Hall, USA.Hinze, J., 2003, Improving Safety Performance on Large Construction Sites, CIBWorking Commission W99, Brazil.Hinze, J., and Bren, K., 1996, Identifying OSHA paragraphs of particular interest,Journal of construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 122, No. 1,pp. 98–100.Hinzelman, J. A. and Smallwood, J., 2003, Declining Productivity and Lack ofMotivation among Site Managers: Medium Sized Contractors’ Perceptions,CIDB 1st Postgraduate Conference, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.Hoffman, J. M. and Mehra, S., 1999, Operationalizing productivity improvementprograms through total quality management, International Journal of Quality &Reliability Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 72-84.Hogstedt, C., and Pieris, B., 2000, Occupational Safety and Health in DevelopingCountries, Review of strategies, case studies and a bibliography,arbetslivsrapport No. 2000:17.Hoonakker, P., Loushine, T., and Carayon, P., 2003, Do quality programs help toimprove safety in construction industry?, Human Factors in OrganizationalDesign and Management – VII.Hoonakker, P., Loushine, T., Kallman J., Carayon, P., Kapp, A., and Smith, M.,2003, Accidents, Injuries, Worker's Compensation, Safety and Safety Policy inconstruction industry: The Effort/Results Paradox, Center for Quality andProductivity Improvements, USA.Howell, G., Ballard, G., and Abdelhamid, T., 2002, Working near the edge: a newapproach to construction safety, Proceedings IGLC-10, August, Garamado,Brazil.Huang, X., and Fang, D., 2003, Construction Safety Training and Education inChina, Special Issue article in: Construction Safety Education and Training - AGlobal Perspective, China.187

Jannadi, M. O., 1995, Impact of Human Relations on the safety of constructionworkers, The International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 383 –386.Jannadi, M.O., and Assaf, S., 1998. Safety assessment in the built environment ofSaudi Arabia, Safety Science, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 15–24.Jannadi, O.A., and Bu-Khamsin, M.S., 2002. Safety factors considered byindustrial contractors in Saudi Arabia. Building and Environment Vol.. 37, No.5, pp. 539–547.Janssen, J., 2000, The European construction industry and its competitiveness: aconstruct of the European Commission, Vol. 18, No. 6, pp. 711-720Jaselkis, E., and Ashley, D., 1999, Preliminary Study on Contractor Success inDeveloping Countries, 1 st Conference of CIB TG 29 on Construction inDeveloping Countries, pp. 27-29, October, The Pan Pacific, SingaporeKaliher, T., 2003, Improve safety, health, and environmental protection through theintroduction of six sigma, Unpublished MSc. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Stout, USAKaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P. O., Holt, G. D. and Harris, F. C., 1997a, Factorsinfluencing craftsmen's productivity in Indonesia. The International Journal ofProject Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 21 30.Kaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P. O., Holt, G. D. and Harris, F. C., 1997b, Factorsinfluencing time and cost overruns on high-rise projects in Indonesia.Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 83-94Kartam, N.A., 1997, Integrating safety and health performance into constructionCPM, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management ASCE, Vol. 12No. 2, pp. 121–126.Kartam, N.A., Flood, I., and Koushki, P., 2000, Construction safety in Kuwait:issues, procedures, problems, and recommendation, Safety Science, Vol. 36, pp.163–184.Kazaz, A. and Ulubeyli, S., 2004, A different approach to construction labor inTurkey: comparative productivity analysis. Building and Environment, Vol. 39,pp. 93 – 100.188

Koehn, E., Kothari, R., and Pan, C.S., 1995, Safety in developing countries:professional and bureaucratic problems. Journal of Construction Engineeringand Management ASCE, Vol. 121, No. 3, pp. 261–265.Kumaraswamy, M.M., and Chan, D.W.M, 1998, Contributors to constructiondelays, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 17 – 29.Lam KC, Lee D, and Hu T. 2001, Understanding the effect of the learning–forgetting phenomenon to duration of projects construction. InternationalJournal of Project Management; Vol. 19, pp. 411–420.Langford, D.A., El-Tigani, H. and Marosszeky, M., 2000, Does quality assurancedeliver higher productivity?, Construction Management and Economics, Vol.18, pp. 775-782.Levitt R.E., and Samelson, N.M., 1993, Construction safety management, JohnWiley & Sons, USA.Lim, E. C. and Alum, J., 1995, Construction productivity: issues encountered bycontractors in Singapore. The International Journal of Project Management, Vol.13, No. 1, pp. 51 58.Long, N.D, Ogunlana, S., Quang, T., and Lam, K., 2004, Large constructionprojects in developing countries: a case study from Vietnam, InternationalJournal of Project Management, Vol. 22, No. 7, pp. 553-561.Love, P., and Irani, Z., 2003, A project management quality cost information systemfor the construction industry, Information & Management, Vol. 40, pp. 649–661Low, S. P., 2001, Quantifying the relationships between buildability, structuralquality and productivity in construction, Structural Survey, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp.106 – 112.Map Overview, 2001, Survey of the Construction Services Industry, West Bank andGaza, Palestine.McWilliams, G., Rechnitzer, G., Deveson, N., Fox, B., Clayton, A., Larsson, T.,and Cruickshank, L., 2001, Reducing serious injury risk in the constructionindustry, Policy Research Report No. 9, Australia.189

Mohamed, S. and Srinavin, K., 2002, Thermal environment effects on constructionworkers’ productivity. Work Study, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 297 – 302.Navon, R., 2005, Automated project performance control of construction projects,Automation in Construction, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 467 – 476.Odeh AM, and Battaineh HT., 2002, Causes of construction delay: traditionalcontracts. International Journal of Project Management; Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 67–73.Odusami, K.T., 2002, Perceptions of Construction Professionals ConcerningImportant Skills of Effective Project Leaders, Journal of Management inEngineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 261 – 267.Pheng, L. S. and Ke-Wei, P., 1996, A framework for implementing TQM inconstruction, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 39 – 46Proverbs DG, Holt GD, Olomolaiye PO., 1999, A method for estimating labourrequirements and costs for international construction projects at inception.Building and Environment, Vol. 34, No. 1, 43–48.Proverbs, D. G., Holt, G. D., and Olomolaiye, P. O., 1998a, a comparativeevaluation of concrete placing productivity rates amongst French, German andUK construction contractors, Engineering, Construction and ArchitecturalManagement Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 174 – 181.Proverbs, D. G., Holt, G. D., and Olomolaiye, P. O., 1998b, a comparativeevaluation of reinforcement fixing productivity rates amongst French, Germanand UK construction contractors, Engineering, Construction and ArchitecturalManagement, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 350– 358.Radosavljevic, M. and Horner, R. M. W., 2002, The evidence of complexvariability in construction labour productivity. Construction Management andEconomics, Vol. 20, Bo. 1, pp. 3-12Raufaste, N., and Callahan, J., 2002, Map Overview, A Draft Strategic Plan toImprove the Competitiveness of the West Bank and Gaza Strip ConstructionSector, Palestine.Salaheldin, I. S., 2003, The implementation of TQM strategy in Egypt: a field-forceanalysis, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 266 - 274190

Salminen, S. and Saari, J., 1995. Measures to improve safety and productivitysimultaneously, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 15, No. 1,pp. 261-269.Sawacha, E., Naoum, S., and Fong, D., 1999, Factors affecting safety performanceon construction sites, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 17, No.5, pp. 300 – 315.Smithers, G. L., and Walker, D. H. T., 2002, The effect of the workplace onmotivation and demotivation of construction professionals, ConstructionManagement & Economics, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp.833-841Sohail, M., 1999, Review of Safety in Construction and Operation for the WS&SSector – a literature review: Part II, Well Study, UK.Srinavin, K. and Mohamed, S., 2003, Thermal environment and constructionworkers’ productivity: some evidence from Thailand. Building andEnvironment, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 339 – 345.Tam, C.M., Deng, Z.M., Zeng, S.X., and Ho, C.S., 2000, Quest for continuousquality improvement for public housing construction in Hong Kong,Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 437–446.Tang, S. L., Ying, K. C., Chan, W. Y., and Chan, Y. L., 2004, Impact of socialsafety investments on social costs of construction accidents, ConstructionManagement and Economics, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 937–946.Teicholz, P., 2001 Discussion: US Construction Labor Productivity Trends, 1970–1998. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management ASCE, Vol. 127,No. 5, pp. 427–429.U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004, Occupational injuries and Illnesses in theUnited States by Industry, annual report, USAWikipedia Encyclopedia, http://www.wikipedia.comWWW resources, http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.comXiao, H. and Proverbs, D., 2002, The performance of contractors in Japan, the UKand the USA: An evaluation of construction quality, International Journal ofQuality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 672-687.191

Yeow, P.H.P. and Sen, R.N, 2003, Quality, productivity, occupational health andsafety and cost effectiveness of ergonomic improvements in the testworkstations of an electronic factory, International Journal of IndustrialErgonomics, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 147 – 163.Zakeri M, Olomolaiye P, Holt GD, and Harris FC., 1997, Factors affecting themotivation of Iranian construction operatives. Building and Environment; Vol. 32,No. 2, pp. 161–166.192

Annex 1: Questionnaire in English193

QuestionnairePART I: COMPANY DETAILS1. Company CVYear of establishment _________2. Company work fieldBuildings Senior Junior Not specifiedSewage Senior Junior Not specifiedRoad Senior Junior Not specified3. Contractor SpecificationBuildings 1 st 2 nd 3 rdSewage 1 st 2 nd 3 rdRoad 1 st 2 nd 3 rd4. Number of projects implemented during last 5 yearsLess than 10 10-20 21-30 31-40 more than 405. Cost of projects implemented during last 5 years (in millions $)Less than 1 1-2 2.1-3 3.1-4 more than 46. Capital of Company (in thousand $)?Less than 100 100-250 251-500 more than 5007. Number of fixed engineers1-2 3-5 6-10 10-20 more than 208. Number of Administrative employees1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 more than 209. Number of workers1-5 6-15 16-30 31-50 more than 50Personal information of who fills the questionnaire10. Job title ___________11. Age20-25 26-30 31-40 41-50 more than 5012. QualificationBSc MSc PhD Other13. SpecializationCivil Eng. Arch. Mech. Elec. Elec. Other194

14. Years of experience in the field of Safety?1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 more than 2015. Years of experience at the company you work with?1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 more than 2016. Have you received training courses in Occupational Safety and Health?Yes No17. If answer to previous question was Yes, Please list training courses below:1. 2.3. 4.5. 6.7. 8.PART II: OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH1. Occupational safety forms a part of company policies?Yes No2. Does the company have a safety program for each program?Yes No3. If answer was yes, attach a copy4. If answer was NO, why?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________5. Does company provide project employees safety training?Yes No6. If NO, why?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________7. If yes, please fill the following:a. Who joined? Engineer project manager workersb. Duration one week two weeks one month more than onemonthc. Who developed training program? Company manager projectmanager safety engineer8. Is the project planned and implemented according to safety measures?Yes No Sometimes9. Do you think top management commitment towards safety is an importantfactor to strengthen safety concepts at project employees?195

Yes No10. If answer was YES, why?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________11. Does company have accident reports at projects?Yes No Sometimes12. If Yes, what is position of report writer? _____________________13. Number of causalities at projects within last five years1-3 4-7 8-12 13-20 more than 2014. Number of injuries at projects within last five years?1-5 6-15 16-25 26-40 more than 4015. Please distribute number of injuries above as follows:Injury NumberHandicappedDangerousModerateLight16. Accident reports are sent to:Position / Duration Monthly Quarterly Annually Not SentProject managerCo. President DeputyCo. President(Please attach two latest accident reports)17. Safety meetings including Owner and Contractor are held?weekly biweekly monthly quarterly annually Not Held18. Rate of accident at your company?Increasing decreasing same rate19. If it is increasing, indicate most common reasonProject nature site nature relationship between project partiesclosures incompliance with safety regulations20. Is there any safety actions taken to prevent recurrence of accidents?Yes No21. Is there inspection on safety on-site by Ministry of Labor?Yes No196

22. If Yes, indicate periodweekly biweekly monthly quarterly annually NoInspection(Please attach any related documents if found)23. Please arrange following accidents according to its occurrence (1 means most,6 means least)1. Fall2. Struck against3. Struck by object4. Caught in, on or between5. Electrocution6. Other197

PART III: LINKAGE BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND QUALITY INCONSTRUCTION PROJECTPlease excerpt your opinion about relationship between safety and quality ( Put X inbox next to your preferred opinion)Study on relationship between safety andquality1. safety and health policya) The safety & health policy forms a part ofthe company core valuesb) The safety and health policy containsobjectives for safety and health commitmentrelevant to organizational goalsc) Quality assurance referring to internationalstandards improves safetyd) Existence of written policy for qualitystandards supports commitment to safetye) Top management commitment to safetyimproves quality2. Safety Organizationa) The safety organization is formed withknowledgeable personnel which exhibitscharacteristics necessary to achieve worksafety objectivesb) The safety organization is formed withculture at community considers safety avital need for peoplec) The safety organization is formed withpositive behavior at workers and topmanagement towards safety3. Safety Traininga) All managers should go through propersafety management trainingb) All engineers should go through propersafety management trainingc) All workers should go through proper safetymanagement training4. In-house Safety Rulesa) Company should formulate worker andequipment safety rules through assistance ofexperts of safetyb) Company should use safety rules ofMinistry of Labor or international andregional companies to formulate its ownrulesc) Safety rules could change according toproject natured) Safety program supports quality of project5. Safety Inspectiona) Safety engineer at workplace improvessafetyb) Absence of inspection team leads tononcompliance of both quality and safetyc) Over-inspection of safety from site engineerdecreased qualityd) Rework due to inspection increase accidentsStronglydisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyagree198

Study on relationship between safety andquality6. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)a) Use of PPE (gloves, helmet, etc.) decreasesinjuriesb) Lack of top management commitment toproviding PPE leads to lack of attention ofworkers and engineers to safetyc) Worker use of PPE improves quality7. Accident Documentationa) Regular analysis of accidents improvessafety and decreases future accidentsb) Regular documentation of accidentsimproves safety and decreases futureaccidents8. Emergency Preparednessa) Emergency plans at company decreasesaccidentsb) First Aid at workplace improves safetyc) First Aide improves safety9. Evaluation, Selection and Control ofSubcontractorsa) Evaluation, selection and control ofsubcontractors have been conductedthrough matching with or alignment ofcompany safety objectivesb) Following-up of subcontractors bycontractor improves safetyc) Owner should consider subcontractor whosesafety record is cleand) No preconstruction site visit by contractorincreases risks and decreases quality due tounexpected conditions10. Safety committeesa) Safety committee is formed to monitorsafety performanceb) The safety committee is an arena ofdifferent interests groups of safetyc) The company senior manager always chairsthe safety committee11. Safety and Health Promotiona) All employees know the results of accidentand injury investigations and follow upactionsb) The values of safety and health areadequately definedc) Current negative culture dominating localcommunity decreases qualityd) Top management support improves safetya) Foreman given schedule for task completionmotivates him to pressure workers tocomplete faster thus affecting negatively thequality and safety12. Health Assurance Programa) Health assurance program helps reducinginjuriesStronglydisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyagree199

Study on relationship between safety andqualityb) Health assurance program increases concernof contractor towards worker safety13. Safety Resourcesa) The allocation of safety resources istypically depended on contract value14. Project Planning and Designa) Taking safety into account when planningand designing a project improves safety15. Project Implementationa) Implementation according to agreedspecification in contract improves safetyb) Many change orders during implementationdecreases productivity and increasesaccidents and injuriesc) Increase of material price leads to use oflow quality material thus harms workers16. Workmanshipa) Lack of worker experience decreasesquality and exhibits him to more accidentsb) The older the worker, the better the qualityand the less accidents he is exposedc) Absence of one or more of workers resultsin replacement of new worker temporarilywhich decreases quality and increasesaccidentsd) Non-orientation of new workers decreasesquality and increases risk they facee) Worker working with same crew (friendsrelatives, etc.) increases quality,productivity, and safetyf) Lack of sufficient workers decreases qualityand also decreases safety due to pressure onworkersg) Personal problems decreases concentrationand thus decreases quality and safety17. Contract Documentsa) Inclusion of contractor safety and qualityrecords into bid awarding process decreasesaccidentsb) Specifications required which are higherthan local experience increases risksassociatedc) Inclusion of safety into contract clausesimproves safety and ensures compliancewith safety regulationsStronglydisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStronglyagreePART IV: LINKAGE BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND PRODUCTIVITYIN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTStudy on relationship between safety andproductivity1. Factors improving productivitya) Increase of productivity is on the expense ofStronglydisagreeDisagree Neutral Agree Stronglyagree200

Study on relationship between safety andproductivitysafetyb) Increase of work hours affects safetyc) Skillfulness of worker improves safetyd) Rework negatively affects safetye) Incentives based on productivity decreasessafety2. Inspectiona) When foreman allocates tasks to workers,he considers safety measuresb) Delegation given to foreman so that hecontributes to time schedule preparation,would increase productivity and safetyc) Over-inspection by foreman decreasesproductivity and safety3. Local conditionsa) Strikes and non-default nonworking daysaccelerates work thus affecting safetynegativelyb) Putting much concern on regulations ofsafety decreases productivityc) In order to overcome delays resulting fromclosures productivity increases which wouldincrease accidentsd) Current security conditions affect workersnegatively which would decrease bothproductivity and safety.e) In order to avoid closure, workers tend toleave early which would decrease safety,quality and productivity.4. Worker problemsa) Personal and family problems of workeraffect safety and productivity negatively.b) Turnover creates unusual relation betweenworkers which would decrease productivityand increase accidentsc) Workers performing works withoutreferring to foreman affects safety andproductivity negatively.d) Illustrating daily activities to workers beforestart of activity would contribute toimproving safety5. Subcontractorsa) When subcontractor performs works,accidents increase.b) Main contractor would hire moresubcontractors to increase productivity,creating lack of coordination which leads toless safety attention.c) Accidents frustrate workers which woulddecrease productivityd) Subcontractor lack of safety concerns,decreases productivity6. Safety programSafety program contributes to increasingproductivityIn order to avoid accidents, anticipated risks areStronglydisagreeDisagree Neutral Agree Stronglyagree201

Study on relationship between safety andproductivityincluded in safety program which wouldincrease productivity.Training new and old workers on preventiveactions and first aid increases productivity.Defining schedule of safety meetings contributesto increasing productivity.7. Safety committeesa) Regular safety meetings decreaseproductivity because it wastes time.8. Personal protective equipments (PPE)a) Using PPE constrains worker movementwhich decreases productivityb) Hot weather decreases productivity andexhausts workers which exposes them tomore accidentsc) When workers are not adapted with PPE,safety and productivity are affectednegatively9. Work conditions at workplacea) Crowded workplace affects safety andproductivity negativelyStronglydisagreeDisagree Neutral Agree StronglyagreePART V: LINKAGE BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND COST INCONSTRUCTION PROJECTStudy on relationship between safety and cost1) Financial loss of contractor negativelyaffects safety2) Occupational safety increases project cost3) Incentives improve safety and productivity4) Worker satisfaction of daily rate decreasespsychological pressure which improvessafety and productivity5) Compensations make contractors pay moreattention to safety6) Contractors neglecting safety are expectednot to win future bids due to bad reputations7) Hiring safety engineer contributes todecreasing accidents in workplace8) Safety expenditures are very much less thanlosses due to accidents9) There is a need towards existence of annualsubscription to support national safetymonitoring committee10) Fines should be imposed by Ministry ofLabor on workers not using PPEStronglydisagreeDisagree Neutral Agree StronglyagreeDoes your company pay compensations to workers in case of injuries or casualties/YES NOIf Yes, how much compensations were paid during last five years (in thousand $)0 – 10 10.1 – 20 20.1 – 30 30.1 – 5050.1 – 100 More than 100202

PART VI: LINKAGE BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND TIME INCONSTRUCTION PROJECTStudy on relationship between safety and time1) Short time schedules provided to foremanaffects safety negatively because foremanmay stress on workers to comply withschedule2) Discussion between top management andforeman on time schedule improves safetyand productivity3) Overtime (shiftwork) affects safety andproductivity negatively because it stressesworker4) Preparation of short time schedule byproject manager improves safety andproductivity5) Preparation of short time schedule byforeman improves safety and productivity6) Applying safety regulations increasesproject duration7) In short projects (e.g. 2 months), workersdoesn't have enough time to anticipate risksthus increases accidents8) Safety meetings are waste of time9) Working in noon times, reducesproductivity and exposes worker to HeatStroke10) Short time schedules provided to foremanaffects safety and quality negativelybecause foreman may stress on workers tocomply with schedule11) Forcing workers to finish their tasks fastaffects safety negativelyStronglydisagreeDisagree Neutral Agree StronglyagreePART VII: LINKAGE BETWEEN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND RELIGION INCONSTRUCTION PROJECTStudy on relationship between safety andreligion1) Religious values and beliefs increasesworker concern in his own safety2) Religious values and beliefs increasesworker concern in his colleagues' safety3) It is vital to consider safety as value not aspriority4) Not complying with safety regulations isconsidered as an act against religious beliefs5) Everyone at project is committed to hiscolleague's safety6) Religious belief in Allah affects human'svalues too much7) Safe and healthy workplace providesenvironment of justice and equityStronglyagreeAgree Neutral Disagree Stronglydisagree203

8) Safe and healthy workplace provides deepworker dignity9) Belief in Allah helps avoiding much ofaccidents10) Compensations don't confront with religion11) Depending on fate and beliefs, worker is lescareful to safety12) Islam has strengthened principle ofpreventive actions throughPART VIII: IMPORTANCE OF STUDYING THE RELATION BETWEEN SAFETY,QUALITY, AND PRODUCTIVITYStudy on relationship between safety,quality, and productivity contributesto:1) Improving work environment atworkplace2) Setting practical and applicablepolicies for safety, quality andproductivity3) Improvement of safety and healthof personnel of company4) Increasing productivity of work5) Increasing quality of work6) Good reputation of contractorlocally and regionally7) Improving classification ofcontractor at governmental andprivate sector8) Decreasing cost of project (e.g.compensations)9) Providing new opportunities forspecialized engineers in fields ofsafety, quality, and productivity10) Decreasing accidents during workat projectsVeryimportantImportant Neutral NotimportantNot veryimportantRECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVINGOCCUPATIONAL SAFETY IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS (THISPART IS VERY IMPORTANT)For setting safety regulations in GazaStrip there should be:1) A safety engineer at projects whosecost is more than 100,000$2) Written and clear policy of safety3) Coordination between contractorand Ministry of Labor to applysafety regulations4) Allocation of part of projectexpenditures for applying safetyregulationsVeryimportantImportant Neutral NotimportantNot veryimportant204

5) Safety program for each project6) Good attitude of workers towardsusing PPE7) Safety regulation in workplace withforeman or safety supervisor8) Training for workers especiallynewly hired to avoid risks9) Evaluating contractors with regardto his safety records10) Health insurance of workers11) Worker participation in safetyprogram considering it part f hiswork because he is highly exposedto risks12) Local commission of safety forcoordinationMain reason for not concerning insafety at workplace1) Cost of PPE2) No safety engineers at workplace3) Workers are not concerned in theirown safety4) There is no lime authority for safety5) There is compensation andprotection laws for workersVeryimportantImportant Neutral NotimportantNot veryimportant205

Annex 2: Questionnaire in Arabic206

بسم االله الرحمن الرحيمالجامعة الإسلامية - غزةكلية الهندسة – قسم الهندسة المدنيةتطوير نموذج تكاملي بيناستبيان حول دراسةالسلامة المهنية والجودة والإنتاجية في مشاريع البناءقطاع غزةفياستكمالاً‏ لمتطلبات الحصول على درجة الماجستير في إدارة المشاريعم.‏الباحثمهيب عبد أبو القمبزالمشرفأستاذ دكتور/‏ عدنان إنشاصيأستاذ إدارة المشاريع الهندسية2006 فبراير207

بسم االله الرحمن الرحيمالأخوة الأفاضل/‏ استشاريين ومهندسين ومقاولين ومالكينحفظهم االلهالسلام عليكم ورحمة االله وبركاتهبداية أتوجه لكم بالشكر العميق لتخصيصكم جزءا من أوقاتكم وجهودكم المهمة من أجل تعبئة هذه الإستبانة،‏وهذا إن دل َّ على شئ فإنما يدل على مدى روح التعاون والمسئولية الأدبية والاكاديمية التي تتمتعون بها،‏فجزاكم االله خير ما جزى به عبدا من عباده.‏هذه الإستبانة هي عبارة عن أحد أهم أجزاء رسالة الماجستير التي أسعى بإذنه تعالى لنيلها.‏ وهي دراسةلواقع المشاريع الهندسية وما تعانيه من مشاكل مثل السلامة المهنية والجودة والإنتاجية والتكلفة،‏ إلى أخرذلك.‏ وتتكون هذه الإستبانة من عدة عناصر كما يلي:‏الجزء الأول:‏ بيانات شخصيةالجزء الثاني:‏الجزء الثالث:‏الجزء الرابع:‏الجزء الخامس:‏الجزء السادس:‏الجزء السابع:‏الصحة والسلامة المهنيةعلاقة الجودة بالسلامة المهنيةعلاقة الإنتاجية بالسلامة المهنيةعلاقة التكلفة بالسلامة المهنيةعلاقة الزمن بالسلامة المهنيةعلاقة المعتقدات الدينية بالسلامة المهنيةوأحب أن أنوه إلى أن جميع البيانات الواردة في هذه الإستبانة سوف تستخدم فقط من أجل خدمة أغراضالبحث من حيث مراجعة وتقييم مشاكل السلامة المهنية في المشاريع الهندسية.‏ وهذا يعني سرية المعلوماتالمقدمة مع ضمان عدم اطلاع أي شخص أخر عليها بإذن االله تعالى.‏أخوكمم.‏ مهيب عبد أبو القمبز208

الجزء الأول:‏السيرة الذاتية للشرآةبيانات عن الشركةسنة التأسيس_________.1مجال عمل الشركةمبانيأعمال مياه ومجاريطرق.2.3ثانويأساسيثانويأساسيثانويأساسيتصنيف الشركة حسب تصنيف اتحاد المقاولين الفلسطينييندرجة ثانيةدرجة أولىمبانيدرجة ثانيةدرجة أولىأعمال مياه ومجاري درجة ثانيةدرجة أولىطرقغير متخصصغير متخصصغير متخصصدرجة ثالثةدرجة ثالثةدرجة ثالثة40 أكثر من.4عدد المشاريع التي تم تنفيذها خلال الخمس سنوات السابقةأقل من40-3130-2120-10101.5تكلفة المشاريع التي تم تنفيذها خلال الخمس سنوات السابقة ‏(مليون دولار)‏أقل من4 أكثر من4-3.13-2.12-12 – 11 – 0.5رأس مال الشركةأقل من‏(مليون دولار)‏2 أكثر من0.5-0.10.1.620 – 1110 – 6.7عدد المهندسين الدائمين20 أكثر من5 – 32 - 120 – 1615 – 11.8عدد الموظفين الإداريين20 أكثر من10 – 65 - 150 - 3130 – 1615 - 6.95 – 1عدد العمال50 أكثر من.10.11البيانات التالية خاصة بالشخص الذي سيملأ الإستبيانالمسمى الوظيفي ____________________________________.السن50 أكثر من50-41 40-31 30-2625-20الدرجة العلميةثانوية بكالوريوسالتخصصهندسة مدنية هندسة معمارية.12ماجستير دكتوراةهندسة ميكانيكيةدبلومهندسة كهربيةأخرى.1314. عدد سنوات العمل في مجال السلامة المهنية209

أكثر من 2020 - 1615 – 1110 - 65 – 115. عدد سنوات العمل مع الشركة التي تعمل فيها الآن20 أكثر من20 - 16 15 – 11 10 - 6 5 – 116. هل تلقيت دورات تدريبية في السلامة المهنية والصحة المهنيةنعملا.2.4.6.817. إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم،‏ الرجاء ادراجها هنا:‏.1.3.5.7الجزء الثاني:‏الصحة والسلامة المهنيةهل تشكل السلامة المهنية جزءا من سياسة الشركة؟هل يوجد لدى الشركة برنامج سلامة خاص بكل مشروع؟نعمنعملاأحيانا لا.1.23. إذا كان الجواب نعم،‏ الرجاء إرفاق نسخة منه4. إذا كان الجواب لا،‏ فما هو السبب؟هل يوجد تدريب حول السلامة المهنية موجه للعاملين في المشروع؟نعمإذا كان الجواب لا،‏ وضح السببلا.5.6.7.8.9إذا كان الجواب نعم،‏ الرجاء تعبئة التالي:‏الفئة التي إلتحقت بالدورة ‏(مهندسما هي مدة التدريب؟ ‏(أسبوع أسبوعينمن الذي يحدد برنامج التدريب؟ ‏(مدير الشركةالعمالمدير المشروع أكثر من شهرشهرمهندس السلامةمدير المشروع (((هل يتم تخطيط وتنفيذ أنشطة المشروع وفقا لمعايير السلامة المهنية؟ نعم لا حياناهل تعتقد بأن إلتزام الإدارة العليا للشركة ‏(رئيس الشركة)‏ تجاه السلامة المهنية هو عامل مهملامن أجل تعزيز مفهوم السلامة المهنية لدي أفراد المشروع؟ نعم10. إذا كان الجواب نعم،‏ فلماذا؟11. هل توجد تقارير بالحوادث التي تحدث في مشاريع الشركة؟أحيانا لا نعم210

12. إذا كان الجواب نعم،‏ فمن يقوم بإعدادها؟ ‏(المسمى الوظيفي)‏ _____________7-413. عدد الوفيات التي نتجت عن حوادث في مشاريع نفذت من قبل الشركة في الخمس سنوات20-1312-8السابقة؟3-120 أكثر من14. عدد الإصابات الناجمة عن حوادث في مشاريع نفذت من قبل الشركة في الخمس سنواتالسابقة؟40 أكثر من40-2625-1615 – 65 – 1الرجاء توزيع عدد الإصابات المذكورة أعلاه حسب التصنيف التالي:‏نوعية الإصابة العددإعاقةخطيرةمتوسطةبسيطة.15.1.2.3.416. هل يتم إرسال تقارير بالحوادث إلى:‏شهرياالفترةالوظي مدير فة المشروعنائب رئيس الشركةرئيس الشركة‏(الرجاء إرفاق نموذج تقرير لأخر حادثتين)‏.17كل ثلاث أشهريتم عقد لقاء بين فريق المالك وفريق المقاول حول السلامة المهنية؟أسبوعيا كل أسبوعين شهريا كل سنويا‏(الرجاء إرفاق نموذج محضر اجتماع لأخر لقاءين)‏18. هل معدل الحوادث في شركتكم؟يتناقصيتزايد3 أشهر.19نفس المعدلسنويالا يتم عقد لقاءإذا كانت هناك زيادة،‏ ما السبب الأكثر شيوعا لهذه الزيادة في رأيك؟العلاقة بين أطرافطبيعة موقع العملطبيعة المشروععدم الإلتزام باجراءات السلامة المهنية والوقايةالمشروعالإغلاقات20. هل هناك اجراءات تتخذ لتفادي تكرار الإصابات؟نعم21. هل يتم اجراء تفتيش حول السلامة المهنية من وزارة العمل؟إذا كانت الإجابة نعم،‏ حدد الفترة التي يتم فيها التفتيشأسبوعيا كل أسبوعين شهريا كل3 أشهر.22‏(الرجاء إرفاق تقريرين أو أي توثيق أخر متعلق بالتفيش)‏.23••••••نعمسنويالالاالرجاء ترتيب الحوادث حسب تكرار حدوثها (1 يعني أكثر حدوثا،‏ 6 تعني أقل حدوثا)‏السقوط ‏(من أعلى أو داخل حفرة)‏الإرتطام بجسمصدمةالإنحشار داخل شئ ماصعقة كهربيةأخرىلا يوجد التفتيشلا يرسل إليه211

الجزء الثالث:‏ علاقة السلامة المهنية بالجودة في المشروعالرجاء ابداء رأيك حول مدى علاقة السلامة المهنية بمعايير الجودة:‏ ‏(ضع علامة X داخل المربع الذي يعبرعن رأيك)‏أ)‏دراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية والجودةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدةلا أعلم.1.2سياسة الصحة والسلامة المهنيةأ)‏ سياسة الصحة والسلامة المهنية تشكل جزءا رئيسيا منقيم الشركةب)‏ أهداف سياسة الصحة والسلامة المهنية تتعلق بالأهدافالتنظيمية للشركةج)‏ قيام الشركة بقياس الجودة من خلال المعايير الدوليةيسهم في تحسين السلامة المهنية في مواقع العملد)‏ وجود سياسة مكتوبة داخل الشركة لتطبيق معايير الجودةيدعم الإلتزام تجاه السلامة المهنيةه)‏ إلتزام إدارة الشركة تجاه السلامة المهنية يحسن الجودةمنظومة السلامة المهنيةأ)‏ تتشكل منظومة السلامة المهنية الناجحة من وجود خبراءداخل الشركة مما يساعد على تحقيق أهداف السلامةب)‏ تتشكل منظومة السلامة المهنية الناجحة من وجود ثقافةعامة في المجتمع ت َعتبِر السلامة المهنية مطلبا حيويا لكلفردج)‏ تتشكل منظومة السلامة المهنية الناجحة من وجود سلوكإيجابي لدى العمال والإدارة العليا للشركة تجاه السلامةالمهنية3. التدريب الخاص بالسلامة المهنيةأ)‏ يجب أن يتلقى جميع المدراء تدريبا حول إدارة السلامةالمهنية في مواقع العملب)‏ يجب أن يتلقى جميع المهندسين تدريبا حول إدارةالسلامة المهنية في مواقع العملج)‏ يجب أن يتلقى جميع العمال تدريبا حول تطبيق السلامةالمهنية في مواقع العمل4. قوانين الشركة الداخلية الخاصة بالسلامة المهنيةب)‏ج)‏د)‏على الشركة القيام بصياغة نظم وقواعد داخلية خاصةبسلامة العمال والمعدات من خلال الإستعانة بخبراء فيمجال السلامة المهنيةيمكن للشركة الإستعانة بلوائح وزارة العمل أو الإطلاععلى قواعد السلامة المهنية لشركات عالمية وإقليمية لسنقواعد السلامة المهنية الخاصة بهاقواعد السلامة المهنية يمكن لها أن تختلف حسب طبيعةالمشروعوجود برنامج للسلامة في كل مشروع يعمل على تعزيزمفهوم الجودة في المشروع212

أ)‏دراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية والجودةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدةلا أعلم.5مراقبة السلامة المهنيةأ)‏ وجود مهندس خاص بالسلامة المهنية في موقع العمليسهم بشكل كبير في تحسين السلامة المهنيةب)‏ غياب جهاز الإشراف يؤدي إلى إهمال في تطبيق معاييرالجودة كما يؤدي إلى إهمال جانب السلامة المهنيةج)‏ الرقابة والمتابعة المبالغ فيها من قِبل مهندس الموقع حولالسلامة المهنية يقللان من جودة العملد)‏ إعادة العمل بسبب رفض العمل من قبل الإشراف يزيدمن احتمالية الإصابة في حوادث عمل6. أدوات الوقاية الشخصيةأ)‏ استخدام العمال أدوات الوقاية ‏(مثل القفازات والقبعة إلخ)‏يسهم في التقليل من الإصاباتب)‏ عدم إلتزام إدارة المشروع بتوفير أدوات السلامة المهنيةوالوقاية يؤدي إلى عدم إهتمام العمال والمهندسينبالسلامة المهنيةج)‏ استخدام العامل لمعدات الوقاية والسلامة المهنية يحسنمن جودة العمل7. توثيق الحوادث والإصاباتأ)‏ تحليل الحوادث بشكل منتظم ومستمر يساعد على تحسينالسلامة المهنية وتفادي حوادث مستقبليةب)‏ توثيق الحوادث بشكل منتظم ومستمر يساعد على تحسينالسلامة المهنية وتفادي حوادث مستقبلية8. الاستعداد للطوارئأ)‏ توجد خطط طوارئ معدة مسبقا داخل الشركة في حالةوقوع حوادث عملب)‏ وجود إسعافات أولية في موقع العمل يسهم في تحسينالسلامة المهنية9. تقييم واختيار ومتابعة مقاولي الباطنب)‏ج)‏د)‏تم تقييم واختيار ومتابعة مقاولي الباطن وفقا لمدىاهتمامهم بالسلامة المهنية أو سجلهم الخاص بالسلامةالمهنيةمتابعة مقاول الباطن من قبل المقاول الرئيسي أثناء العملتحسن السلامة المهنيةيهتم المالك بالمقاول الباطن ذو السجل الخالي منالحوادثعدم زيارة موقع العمل من قِبل المقاول قبل ترسيةالعطاء يعرض العمال لمخاطر لم يتم أخذها بالحسبانكما ويقلل من جودة العمل بسبب الظروف الغير متوقعة10. لجان السلامة المهنيةأ)‏ لجنة السلامة المهنية شكلت من اجل مراقبة أداء السلامةالمهنيةب)‏ لجنة السلامة المهنية هي ملتقى لمجموعات ذات213

دراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية والجودةج)‏أ)‏أ)‏أ)‏اهتمامات بالسلامة المهنية لمناقشة مواضيع تخصالسلامة المهنيةمدير الشركة يترأس عادة لجنة السلامة المهنيةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدةلا أعلم.11دعم الصحة والسلامة المهنيةأ)‏ كل العاملين لديهم دراية بنتائج توثيق الإصابات وتحليلهاوردود الفعل المتخذة من أجل تلافيهاب)‏ قيم ورسالة الصحة والسلامة المهنية معرفة وواضحةجيداج)‏ الثقافة السلبية السائدة في مجتعمنا تجاه السلامة المهنيةتعمل على خفض جودة العملد)‏ دعم الإدارة العليا للشركة للسلامة والصحة المهنية يسهمفي تحسين السلامة المهنية12. برنامج التأمين الصحياعداد برنامج التأمين الصحي للعمال يقلل الحوادثب)‏ التأمين على العمال يزيد من حرص المقاول علىالسلامة المهنية13. موارد السلامة المهنيةيتم توزيع موارد السلامة المهنية حسب قيمة العقد.14طرق تصميم وتخطيط المشروعأخذ السلامة المهنية في الحسبان عند التصميم والتخطيطيسهم في تحسين السلامة المهنية15. طرق تنفيذ المشروعأ)‏ تنفيذ المشروع حسب المواصفات المتفق عليها في العقديسهم في تحسين السلامة المهنيةب)‏ كثرة الأوامر التغييرية أثناء التنفيذ تقلل الإنتاجية كماوتزيد نسبة الحوادث والإصابات بين العمالج)‏ ارتفاع سعر المواد يؤدي إلى استعمال مواد رديئة قديكون لها تأثيرات ضارة على العمال16. الأيدي العاملةأ)‏ قلة خبرة العامل تعمل على تقليل من جودة العمل كمايزيد من نسبة تعرضه للحوادثب)‏ كبر سن العامل مع خبرته الطويلة يزيد من جودة عملهويقلل من تعرضه للحوادث بسبب حرصهج)‏ غياب أحد او بعض العمال في المشروع والذي يؤديإلى إحلال عامل جديد يقلل من الجودة ويزيد مناحتمالية تعرضه لحوادث داخل العملد)‏ عدم توجيه العمال الجدد للتأقلم مع المشروع يؤدي إلىخفض الجودة وزيادة المخاطر التي يجهلونهاه)‏ معرفة العمال بعضهم البعض مسبقا يحافظ على التفاهمبينهم مما ينعكس إيجابيا على كل من الجودة والإنتاجيةوالسلامة المهنية214

دراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية والجودةو)‏ عدم توفر أيدي عاملة كافية يقلل من الجودة كما ويزيدمن المخاطر بسبب تكليف العامل فوق احتمالهز)‏ المشاكل العائلية التي يتعرض لها العامل تشتت ذهنه ممايؤثر سلبا على كفاءته وسلامته17. وثائق العقدأ)‏ إدراج أداء المقاول من حيث الجودة والسلامة المهنيةضمن معايير ترسية يقلل من الحوادثب)‏ ارتفاع معايير جودة العمل المطلوب تنفيذه عما هومتعارف عليه محليا يزيد من المخاطر التي تواجه العمالج)‏ إضافة شروط خاصة بالسلامة المهنية في العقد يسهم فيتحسين السلامة المهنية والإلتزام بإجراءاتهاأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدةلا أعلمالجزءالرابع:‏ علاقةالسلامة المهنية بالإنتاجية في المشروعدراسة العلاقة بينالسلامة المهنية والإنتاجيةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدة.1.2.3عوامل تحسين الإنتاجيةزيادة الإنتاجية يتم على حساب سلامة العمالزيادة عدد ساعات العمل يؤثر على السلامة المهنيةمهارة الأيدي العاملة تعمل على تحسين السلامة المهنيةإعادة العمل الذي تم تنفيذه خطأُ‏ يؤثر سلبا على السلامة المهنيةالحوافز المقدمة للعمال لدي تحسن الإنتاجية تؤدي إلى إهمالجانب السلامة المهنية أثناء التنفيذالإشراف العلويعند توزيع المهام بين فرق العمال يأخذ مشرف الموقع بالحسبانعوامل السلامة المهنيةتفويض رئيس العمال بعض الصلاحيات بحيث يشارك في صياغةالجدول الزمني يزيد من الإنتاجية والسلامة المهنيةالمتابعة المبالغ فيها من قبل رئيس العمال تقلل من الإنتاجيةوالسلامة المهنية.‏الظروف المحليةالإضرابات والعطل الغير الرسمية تؤدي إلى تسريع العمل ممايؤثر سلبا ً على السلامة المهنية‎10‎‏.الإهتمام بالتعليمات واللوائح الخاصة بالسلامة المهنية تؤدي إلىتقليل الإنتاجية‎11‎‏.الإغلاقات والحصار يؤديان إلى تسريع الإنتاجية لموافقة الجدولالزمني مما يزيد من احتمالية الحوادث‎12‎‏.الوضع الأمنى الحالي يؤثر سلبا على نفسية العامل مما يقلل منالإنتاجية والسلامة المهنية‎13‎‏.حرص العمال على الإنتهاء المبكر من العمل للعودة لمنازلهمخوفا من الإغلاقات يؤثر سلبا على السلامة المهنية والجودة.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9215

دراسة العلاقة بينالسلامة المهنية والإنتاجيةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدة.4.5.6.7.8.9والإنتاجيةمشاكل العمال‎14‎‏.المشاكل الشخصية والعائلية لدي العمال تؤثر سلبا على الإنتاجيةوالسلامة المهنية‎15‎‏.نقل العمال من موقع إلى آخر يخلق جوا من الغربة بين العمالمما يقلل من الإنتاجية ويزيد من معدل الحوادث‎16‎‏.تأدية العامل لبعض المهام بدون الرجوع إلى مراقب الموقع يؤثرسلبا على الإنتاجية والسلامة المهنية‎17‎‏.توضيح مهام العامل اليومية قبل بدء تنفيذ أي نشاط يساهم فيتحسين السلامة المهنيةمقاول الباطن‎18‎‏.اسناد أنشطة المشروع لمقاول الباطن تزيد من نسبة الحوادث‎19‎‏.زيادة عدد مقاولي الباطن من أجل رفع مستوى الإنتاجية يزيد منقلة التنسيق بينهم مما يقلل من الإهتمام بسلامة العمال‎20‎‏.الحوادث الناتجة عن عدم الإهتمام بالسلامة المهنية تعمل علىخفض الإنتاجية بسبب غياب العامل أو فقدانه الحماس للعمل‎21‎‏.عدم إهتمام مقاولي الباطن بالسلامة المهنية يقلل الإنتاجيةبرنامج السلامة المهنية‎22‎‏.اعداد برنامج للسلامة يساعد في تحسين الإنتاجية ضمنا‎23‎‏.إعداد قائمة بالمخاطر المحتملة الخاصة بكل مشروع ضمنبرنامج السلامة المهنية ليتم تفاديها يسهم في تحسين الإنتاجية‎24‎‏.تدريب العمال الجدد والقدامى على طرق الوقاية والإسعافاتالأولية يسهم في تحسين الإنتاجية‎25‎‏.تحديد أيام وأوقات إجتماعات السلامة المهنية لمناقشة تدابيرالوقاية والعلاج يسهم في تحسين الإنتاجيةلجان السلامة المهنية‎26‎‏.اجتماعات السلامة المهنية المنعقدة الدورية تقلل الإنتاجية كونأنها تنعقد على حساب وقت المشروعأدوات الوقاية الشخصية‎27‎‏.استعمال أدوات الوقاية والسلامة المهنية يحد من حركة العاملمما يقلل من الإنتاجية‎28‎‏.الأجواء الحارة تقلل من الإنتاجية كما ويؤدي ذلك إلى الشعوربالإعياء مما يزيد من احتمالية تعرض العامل للحوادث‎29‎‏.عدم تأقلم العمال على إستعمال أدوات الوقاية يؤثر سلبا علىالإنتاجية والسلامة المهنيةظروف العمل داخل الموقع‎30‎‏.ازدحام الموقع بالعمال يؤثر سلبا على انتاجية وسلامة العمال216

الجزءالخامس:‏ علاقةالسلامة المهنيةوتكلفة المشروعدراسة العلاقة بينالسلامة المهنية والتكلفةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدة.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9تعرض المقاول لخسارة مالية فإن ذلك يؤثر سلبا على السلامةالمهنيةالسلامة المهنية تزيد من تكلفة المشروعشركتكم تأخذ تكاليف السلامة المهنية بالحسبان أثناء التخطيطللمشروعالحوافز تعمل على تحسين السلامة المهنية والإنتاجيةأجر العامل اليومي مرتبط بشكل كبير بالسلامة المهنيةالرضا بالأجر اليومي للعامل يقلل من الضغط النفسي عليه ممايحسن السلامة المهنية والإنتاجيةالإنفاق على إدارة السلامة المهنية يعمل على تقليل التكلفة الفعليةللمشروعالتعويضات التي يدفعها المقاول للعامل المصاب تجعل المقاولأكثر اهتمام بسلامة العمالإهمال السلامة المهنية من جانب المقاول يكلفه إجتماعيا مما يؤثرسلبا على فرصة حصوله على عطاءات مستقبلا10. وجود مهندس خاص بالسلامة المهنية يسهم بشكل كبير في خفضتكلفة الحوادث في موقع العمل11. التكلفة المالية لضمان السلامة المهنية في المشروع أقل بكثير منالخسائر التي يتكبدها المقاول في حالة وقوع حوادث12. سن قوانين لفرض غرامات عالية على المقاول الذي يقع فيمشروعه حوادث،‏ يسهم في تقليل الحوادث13. هناك ضرورة لوجود اشتراك سنوي يدفعه المقاول من أجل دعملجنة مراقبة للسلامة على مستوى الوطن14. العلاوات الممنوحة لمراقب العمال قد تؤدي إلى الإضراربالسلامة المهنية ذلك أنه قد يخفي حوادث بسيطة لنيل العلاوة15. حياة الإنسان لا تقدر بمالالتركيز على الجانب المادي في تسعير المشروع يسهم في تحسينالسلامة المهنية درءا لدفع تعويضات17. يجب فرض غرامات على المشروع من قبل وزرة العمل في حالعدم إستخدام العمال لأدوات السلامة المهنية.1624. هل تدفع شركتكم تعويضات للعمال في حالة الإصابات او الوفيات؟أحيانا.25إذا كانت الإجابة نعم،‏ ما مقدار التعويضات التي دفعتلا نعمفي الخمس سنوات الماضية-50.1100-30.150-20.130دولار)؟20-10أكثر من‏(بالألف100217

الجزءالسادس:‏ علاقةالسلامة المهنيةومدة المشروعدراسة العلاقة بينالسلامة المهنية ومدة المشروعأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدة.1.2.3.4.5.6.7توفير جداول زمنية مصغرة لمراقب العمال يؤثر سلبا علىالسلامة المهنية وذلك بسبب عامل الضغط الذي يفرضهوجود جدول زمني بين يديهمناقشة جدولة المشروع بين الإدارة العليا ورئيس العماليحسن الإنتاجية والسلامة المهنيةساعات العمل الإضافية تؤثر سلبا على السلامة المهنيةوالإنتاجية بسبب الإجهاد الذهني والبدني الذي يصيبالعمالاعداد الجداول الزمنية القصيرة من قبل مدير المشروعيحسن الإنتاجية والسلامة المهنيةاعداد الجداول الزمنية القصيرة من قبل رئيس العمال يحسنالإنتاجية والسلامة المهنيةتطبيق القواعد واللوائح الخاصة بالسلامة المهنية يعمل علىزيادة مدة المشروعقصر مدة المشروع ‏(مثلا شهرين)‏ لا يساعد العامل علىاستيعاب المخاطر مما يزيد من إحتمال الإصابةإجتماعات السلامة المهنية تعمل على إهدار الوقتالعمل في ساعات الظهيرة في الجو الحار يقلل من الإنتاجيةويزيد مخاطر الإصابة بضربات الشمس‎10‎‏.اعطاء مراقب الموقع نسخة من جدول الكميات والجدولالزمني يدفع المراقب لتسريع العمل خشية التأخير مما يؤثرسلبا على الجودة والسلامة المهنية‎11‎‏.إلزام العمال بسرعة إنهاء العمل يؤثر على السلامة المهنية.8.9الجزء السابع:‏ علاقةالسلامة المهنية والمعتقدات الدينيةعلاقة دراسةالسلامة المهنية والمعتقدات الدينيةأوافقبشدةمحايد أوافقأعترضأعترضبشدةالقيم والمعتقدات الدينية تزيد من إهتمام العامل بسلامتهالقيم والمعتقدات الدينية تزيد من إهتمام العامل بسلامة زملائههناك ضرورة لجعل السلامة والصحة المهنية قيمة وليس أولويةعدم الإلتزام بقواعد وتشريعات السلامة المهنية يعتبر عملا منافياللقيم والمعتقدات الدينيةكل فرد في المشروع يشعر بالتزام تجاه سلامة زملائه في العملالمعتقدات الدينية والإيمان باالله يؤثر بشكل كبير في قيم الإنسانمكان العمل الآمن والصحي يوفر بيئة عمل تنعم بالعدل والمساواةمكان العمل الآمن والصحي يوفر شعورا أعمق بكرامة العمالالإيمان باالله يعمل على تجنب الكثير من الحوادث.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9218

"‎10‎‏.لا يتعارض مبدأ دفع التعويضات في حالة الإصابة مع الدين‎11‎‏.الإيمان بالمعتقدات الدينية والإتكال عليها يجعل العامل أقل حرصامعتبرا أن االله يحميه‎12‎‏.الشريعة الإسلامية أقرت مبدأ الوقاية من الحوادث من خلال الآيةالقرآنية ولا َ ت ُل ْق ُوا ْ بِأَيدِيك ُم إِل َى الت َّهل ُك َةِ"‏أهمية دراسة العلاقة بينالسلامة المهنية والجودة والإنتاجيةدراسة العلاقة بين السلامة المهنية والجودة والإنتاجية يسهم فيالتالي:‏غير حيادي هام هام جداهامغير هامعلى الإطلاق.1.2.3تحسين بيئة العمل في المشروعوضع سياسات عملية وقابلة للتطبيق من أجل إدارة السلامة المهنيةتطوير خطط وسياسات الشركة تجاه ‏(السلامة المهنية و الجودةوالإنتاجية)‏تحسن في سلامة وصحة العاملين في مشاريع الشركةزيادة الإنتاجية في العملزيادة في جودة العملخلق سمعة طيبة للمقاول محليا ودوليازيادة درجة تصنيف المقاول لدى المؤسسات الحكومية والخاصةخفض نفقات المشروع ‏(التعويضات وغياب العامل المصاب.إلخ)‏‎10‎‏.تقديم فرص جديدة لمهندسين متخصصين في ‏(السلامة المهنية والجودة والإنتاجية)‏ للعمل في المشاريع‎11‎‏.تقليل الإصابات أثناء العمل في المشروع.4.5.6.7.8.9توصيات ومقترحات من أجل تحسين السلامة المهنية في مشاريع البناءمقترحات وتوصيات من أجل وضع سياسة عامة للسلامة المهنية فيقطاع غزةهامجداهام‏(هذا الجزء مهم جدا)‏غير حياديهامغير هامعلى الإطلاق.1وجود مهندس سلامة مهنية في المشاريع التي تزيد قيمتها عن$100,000.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9ضرورة وجود سياسة مكتوبة وواضحة خاصة بالسلامة المهنيةضرورة وجود تنسيق بين المقاول ووزارة العمل من أجل تطبيققواعد السلامة المهنيةضرورة تخصيص جزء من نفقات كل مشروع لتطبيق قواعد السلامةالمهنيةضرورة وجود برنامج سلامة خاص بكل مشروعضرورة التأكيد على تجاوب العمال مع أدوات الوقاية والسلامة المهنيةضرورة وجود تعليمات خاصة بالسلامة المهنية في ميدان العمل لدىمراقب العمال أو مشرف السلامة المهنيةضرورة القيام بتدريب العمال وخاصة الجدد منهم للوقاية من المخاطرتقييم المالك أو الممول للمقاول آخذا بالإعتبار تطبيقه لقواعد السلامةالمهنية219

‎10‎‏.ضرورة تطبيق قواعد التأمين الصحي للعمال من قٍبل وزارة العملوذلك من أجل حث المقاول تطبيق قواعد السلامة المهنية‎11‎‏.اعتبار مشاركة العامل في برامج السلامة المهنية جزء من عملهخاصة أنه أكثر أفراد المشروع تعرضا للحوادث‎12‎‏.ضرورة وجود هيئات محلية خاصة بالسلامة المهنية من اجل التنسيقلتطبيق قواعد السلامة المهنيةالسبب الرئيسي لعدم الإهتمام بالسلامة المهنية في مواقعالعمل؟حيادي هام هام جداغير هامغير هام علىالإطلاق.1.2.3.4.5تكلفة أدوات السلامة المهنيةعدم وجود مهندسي سلامة في الموقععدم اكتراث العمال بسلامتهم الشخصيةعدم وجود سلطة تنفيذية مخاصة بالسلامة المهنيةعدم وجود قانون حماية وتعويضات للعمالأشكر لكم تعاونكم وبارك االله فيكم220

Annex 3: Images of safety problems from miscellaneous sites221

Figure 3: Ambulance evacuating an injured workerFigure 4: Workers are heating bitumen without any safety protection222

Figure 5: Exacavation activities while people are watching without safety protection223

Figure 6: Excavator is working over a worker fixing pipes with no safety actions takenFigure 7: Worker is cutting manhole by a saw without gloves, glasses, or safety helmets224

Figure 8: Worker is fixing house connections without shutteringFigure 9: There is no safety precautions at high elevations225

Figure 10: Dirty conditions without safety shoesFigure 11: Worker cleaning water channel without safety precautions226

Figure 12: Piping works without safety precautionsFigure 13: Lack of shoes, helmets, gloves, and caution227

Figure 14: Bitumen painting without masks, glasses, or helmetsFigure 15: No safety shoes, helmets or gloves228