2019 Volume 44 Issue 263 Pages 19-26
In this study, sample risk prediction training sheets (hereafter, risk prediction sheets) illustrated with work scenes that are quite common to construction sites are proposed to train onsite operators for improving their risk prediction ability, by letting them envisage and freely describe the potential hazards in the sheets. The supervisors and workers were trained in order to comprehend the degree of their risk prediction ability by occupation, experience and age. A total of 943 subjects from building contractors and their affiliates participated in this survey. The ratio of supervisors to workers was 1:1.3. The total number of risk prediction sheets filled by the subjects was 943: 81 sheets by inexperienced supervisors, 325 sheets by experienced supervisors and 537 sheets by workers. The results were analyzed by occupation, experience and age. The major findings from this survey are summarized below. (1)For the analysis by occupation, the experienced supervisors scored the highest on most sheets followed by the workers and then the supervisors length. Regarding the experience, the workers’ score increased with an increase in the years of their experience length. It is assumed that a vast experience has developed their empirical knowledge, which is eventually shown as their risk prediction ability. In the case of the experienced supervisors, it cannot be simply said that their scores increased as their length of experience increased. Because the work load varies depending on the section and the number of foremen, the length of experience does not necessarily correspond to the risk prediction ability. (2)To examine the risk sensitivity and safety awareness, the same risk prediction sheets were shown to students majoring in architecture at Universities A and B. The differences in the responses studied. (3)Four risk prediction sheets, which presented major equipment installation activities, were used to test a cumulative total of 10,032 workers, supervisors (both experienced and inexperienced) and students. Their responses were compared. (4)As a result of the aggregate analysis of the risk prediction sheets, the accuracy rate was found very low among students and newly employed supervisors (i.e. inexperienced supervisors) on most items in all four sheets, compared to the accuracy rate of the supervisors (with experience) and the workers. The experienced supervisors may have accumulated safety knowledge and quick wits to take suitable measures for each occasion, on the basis of safety education and past experience. The accuracy rate of the supervisors exceeded that of the workers only for two items. This is understandable, because the supervisors are required to oversee the work site thoroughly and shoulder many responsible tasks in addition to inspection and installation. The accuracy of the workers was higher than that of the supervisors on many items in most sheets. This can be attributed to their strong sense of safety fostered while they commit themselves to onsite work.
