Submitted by,

MD. BANI AMIN

CUB Student ID: 20311012
Course Code: SMS 4203
Exam: Final, Spring 2021.
Lecturer(CT): : Mohammad Tameem Hossain Azmi
Course Name: : Environmental Science And
Technology.
Department: Shipping And Maritime Science (Major In
Engineering).
Section: Engineering (01).
Submission Date: 14/06/2021.
Assignment On: Trust issue in maritime sector and mental
help of the seafarers in Bangladesh.

Trust issue in maritime sector and mental help

of the seafarers in Bangladesh

Shipping is considered as a high-risk industry, and working in this industry is

recognized as one of the most dangerous occupations (Nielsen 1999). Even if the
industry has been improving the reliability of the ship systems in order to reduce
accident rate and increase efficiency, the accident rate is still high (Rothblum et al.
2002), and, e.g. the number of ship accidents in Norway has increased 5.2% from
2010 to 2015 (Norwegian_maritime_authority 2016). Increased safety in the shipping
industry is therefore of great concern.

Trust is called the missing piece in the safety puzzle, and the importance of trust with
respect to safety has long been recognized by practitioners (Conchie et al. 2006), and
has lately also been acknowledged by researchers. Trust is, among other factors,
found to facilitate open and safety communication (Reason 1998), to promote
effective safety leadership (Conchie and Donald 2006) and to be a major aspect of
accuracy of work (Galford and Drapeau 2002). Interpersonal trust affects knowledge
sharing and learning (Matzler et al., 2011) and enables organizations to capture,
reuse and share information and lessons learned from past mistakes with employees
and newcomers (Dirks 2000).

In addition to the high-risk implications, the shipping industry has some particular
characteristics that may influence trust-building like, for example, physical distance
and a lack of face-to-face communication. The management of the companies works
onshore at the office, while the crew works offshore on the ships. It is common to re-
organize the crew between each voyage and to outsource the manning of the ships
to crewing agencies in third world countries (Berg et al. 2013). About 70–80% of the
global fleet has multicultural crew, and subordinate crews often work on less
favorable conditions than the officers (Berg et al. 2013).

Although some researchers have studied the impact of trust on safety culture within
high-risk industries, few studies are concerned with the influence of trust on safety
within the shipping industry: “Trust remains a neglected area of empirical
investigation” (Conchie and Donald 2006, p. 1098), and most of the existing studies
are quantitative. This conceptual paper aims to contribute in filling these gaps
through the following research question: In what way is safety on board influenced
by trust, and what are the main obstacles to trust-building within the shipping
industry? To answer this question, a literature review and a pilot study in the form of
a qualitative case study within a Norwegian shipping company have been conducted.
Moreover, a framework has been devised to illustrate how safety onboard is
influenced by trust, and to identify the main obstacles to trust within the shipping
industry.

Safety climate is the sum of workers “common perceptions regarding safety in their
organization” (Zohar 1980, p. 98). Although the link between safety climate and
injuries has been thoroughly examined, there is still no clear answer to this
relationship (Kath et al., 2010). But in a comprehensive study of a grocery store chain,
Kath et al. (2010) identified organizational trust, measured at the individual level, as
a mediator of the relationship between safety climate and organizational outcome,
and the influence was stronger when job safety relevance was high. Because job
safety relevance is high onboard, these findings are highly relevant here. Our
hypothesis (H1) is therefore that interpersonal trust may be an indirect factor, or
mediating variable, influencing safety-related organizational outcomes positively.
Communication and cooperation are important for maritime safety (Berg et al. 2013),
and leading theorists also agree that there is a connection between interpersonal
trust, communication and cooperation (Dirks and Ferrin 2002; Hardin 2002).
About 80% of the accidents in the shipping industry happen due to human errors
(Berg et al. 2013), which is operationalized as incorrect decision, improperly
performed action or an improper lack of action (Rothblum et al. 2002). One reason
for incorrect decision may be lack of knowledge sharing; one type of lack of action is
not asking for advice. Interpersonal trust is considered essential in the sharing of
knowledge in a reciprocal way, as it is a significant factor in sharing and absorbing
tacit knowledge (Krogh et al., 2000). Such tacit knowledge is crucial for the creation
of new knowledge (Nonaka 1994), and it is also an important prerequisite for asking
for advice (Abrams et al. 2003). Lack of knowledge sharing and not asking for advice
may be seen as minor errors, but since minor errors may lead to serious casualties
(Wagenaar and Groeneweg 1987), such errors are of great interest for the purpose
of safety improvement. Our hypothesis (H2) is therefore that interpersonal trust may
influence human errors negatively.
The effect of trust on safety may, however, be situational. Mischel (1977)
distinguishes between “strong” and “weak” situations: Strong situations, e.g. when a
ship is close to collision or goes alongside the port, provide guidance and incentives
to behave in a particular way, and lead everyone to construe the particular events in
a similar manner. In weak situations, e.g. sailing on high seas in good weather, no
exact guidance or incentives to behave in a particular way are needed, nor clear or
powerful cues that lead individuals to interpret the events in a similar manner. Dirks
and Ferrin (2002) propose that trust within organizations has a significant effect in
weak situations, but no effect in strong situations. In a crisis, on the other hand,
people need trust in order to reduce the complexity they are facing (Luhmann 1979).
Our hypothesis (H3) is therefore that interpersonal trust is positively influencing
safety in weak situations.
As middle managers, the company managers are identified as the most significant
predictive factor for promoting a safety culture that induces safe behaviours (Wu et
al. 2011). Managers’ trust and concern about crew’s safety, as well as active
encouraging of safe behaviours, contribute to increase safety onboard (Lu and
Tsai 2008). Trust enhances care for the safety of employees, and if employees trust
the management, they are more likely to share the manager’s opinion about the
importance of safety (Luria 2010). Interpersonal trust occurs at different levels. Trust
in management has a significant impact on safety at the industry level (Conchie and
Donald 2006), and in organizations where employees can report errors and near
misses without fear to be blamed for them, trust is also found to promote the safety
climate (Reason 1998). This means that trust in addition to mediate the relationship
between safety climate and outcome may influence the safety climate directly. Pre-
existing trust between employees and management seems to be central to effective
offshore safety modification programs (Fleming and Lardner 2001). Trust between
employees and managers is also found to be critical to the success of behavioural
safety within the nuclear industry, also a high-risk one (Cox et al. 2004). Another
study claims that the provision of safe operations needs clear communication
between offshore employees and management, even if it is of negative character,
otherwise the hiding of specific information will lead to the impairing of the problem
(Conchie and Burns 2008). If employees trust their leaders, they believe in the
information they are receiving because they evaluate it cognitively (Luria 2010). Thus,
they are more likely to reach the same conclusions about safety and its importance
as the management communicates. It is also essential to develop social coherence
based on trust and reciprocity. A relevant example in this context is reported by Grøn
and Svendsen (2013, p. 191):
Within the shipping sector, take the example of a captain who is two-faced and says
that safety is his top priority, while in reality he encourages the crew to cut corners.
As this is gradually discovered by crew members, general distrust, conflicts and lack
of coordination and cooperation on board may well arise and destroy social capital.
In light of the argumentation above, our hypothesis (H4) is that employees’ trust in
their managers is positively related to safety.
Trust (and low conflict) among seafarers is associated with superior safety
performance (Theotokas and Progoulaki 2007) and is also recognized as the most
important factor for safety at local installations (Conchie and Donald 2006). Our
hypothesis (H5) is therefore that trust among seafarers is positively related to safety.
Procedures and control constitute an important feature of the shipping industry and
its way to increase safety. Control and trust are found to be both substitutes and
complements (Nooteboom 2002); in the words of Möllering (2015, p. 171), “You
need control to manage risks. Nevertheless, if you have more trust, there can be less
control. But blind trust, without any control at all as something to fall back on, is not
wise”. Trust therefore seems to somewhat reduce the importance of control for
safety reasons, and the level of trust may be too high. Trust is also identified to have
a situational optimal level: This optimal level is “the degree of fit between trust levels
and interdependence levels in a given firm-stakeholder relationship” (Wicks et
al., 1999, p. 105). Interdependence is here “the degree to which both parties are
dependent on each other to achieve their desired outcomes” (Wicks et al. 1999, p.
104). National cultures with high levels of power distance (Hofstede 1984), e.g.
Philippines, may have very high level of trust to their leader. Too high level of trust
may lead to reducing the responsibility of the employees (Conchie et al. 2006), and
may also have a negative influence on safety because of groupthink and overreliance
on others (Conchie and Donald 2006; Erdem 2003; Janis 1982). Our hypothesis (H6)
is therefore that an optimal level of trust exists onboard, and because of the high-risk
environment, all seafarers onboard are highly interdependent on each other related
to their joint safety. Therefore, the optimal level of trust is relatively high.
A new research study urges ship operators to provide greater support to seafarers to
help prevent anxiety and depression. The recommendations include the provision of
on-board amenities such as internet access, improved accommodation and
recreational activities.
Amid growing concerns about mental health and wellbeing at work in general, a
recent research study explored the mental health and wellbeing among seafarers
working in the international cargo shipping industry. The study, conducted by Cardiff
University and funded by the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH),
combined the use of questionnaires, interviews, literature and claims data from P&I
clubs to clarify:
whether key stakeholders consider mental ill health among seafarers to be a
significant problem;
which factors seafarers identify as supporting or undermining mental health and
wellbeing onboard cargo ships; and
the policies and practices that could be implemented by ship operators in order to
provide better support for seafarers’ mental health and wellbeing.
In this article, the second in a series of Gard Insights covering the topic of mental
health of seafarers, we highlight some of the key findings from the study. The report
in its entirety is available on the IOSH website and includes a number of
recommendations on how ship operators can take steps to improve mental health
and wellbeing among seafarers.

The problem
Seafaring is characterised by a unique set of features which sets it apart from other
occupations. This includes demanding physical working conditions, potentially
hazardous tasks, long hours of work and high levels of stress and fatigue. Seafaring is
also described as a ‘lonely life’. Not only are seafarers away from family and friends
for very long periods of time, many seafarers live isolated lives while onboard. An
increasing degree of automation onboard ships has led to smaller crews and crew
members may have very different cultural and ethnic backgrounds. In this context,
the workforce may be regarded as particularly vulnerable to mental ill health.

The status of seafarers’ mental health

While the study found no clear evidence of a worsening situation related to serious
mental ill health among seafarers, it concludes that there is some evidence that
mental health problems are generally higher among seafarers than non-seafarers and
that recent-onset psychiatric disorders have become more common onboard cargo
vessels in recent years.
When looking at Gard’s data for mental illness and suicide, we see that the number
of cases of mental illness and suicide have remained somewhat unchanged over the
last 10 years, although some underreporting is anticipated. The study found similar
results when analysing other P&I clubs’ data and on an overall level, P&I clubs’ data
do not reveal any discernible increase or decrease in mental health repatriations as
a percentage of overall ill health repatriation cases. The data also indicates that
mental health claims constitute a very small proportion of overall repatriation cases
on the grounds of illness.

Key stakeholders’ attitude

The study concludes that “it is appropriate for industry stakeholders to be concerned
about seafarers’ mental health and wellbeing and that such worries may be
somewhat overdue”. In fact, 55% of employer respondents stated that their
companies had not introduced any policies or practices aimed at addressing issues of
seafarers’ mental health in the last 10 years. Going forward, there needs to be much
more emphasis placed on proactive measures aimed at improving the conditions of
work and life onboard for seafarers and less placed on reactive and self-help
strategies for employers and seafarers.

Factors undermining seafarers’ mental health

There are many factors that may be seen as undermining seafarers’ mental health
and wellbeing. Some of these factors are generic across the occupation, others may
be more related to specific ship types/trades, shipboard positions and company
procedures.
The study found that generic predisposing factors that may be regarded as inherent
to the seafaring profession overall include isolation and loneliness, lack of shore
leave, fear of criminalisation, fear of job loss and separation from family all
predispose seafarers to mental ill health. In addition, various ship specific factors, e.g.
too much work and poor food, and crew related factors, e.g. having a ‘bossy captain’,
experiencing discrimination, being blamed for things and falling out with superiors
and other colleagues, were all reported as causes for seafarers to feel ‘down’ or
depressed while onboard.

The issue of mental illness is a vast subject and ship operators are urged to spend
more time on understanding the problem. As a starting point, it is important to
accept that seafarers have the same challenges, feelings and motivations in their day-
to-day life as anyone else. In addition, they also have the challenge of being
constrained 24/7 onboard a ship for long periods of time and far away from friends
and family. It is important to be aware that seafarers’ mental health can be affected
by the working environment onboard the ships, in particular where this is
characterised by behaviours such as conflict and bullying.
The study emphasises that strategies to support good mental health must “be
orientated towards proactive ship-board improvements designed to stimulate
positive social interaction (with those onboard and those ashore) and to improve
opportunities for seafarers to relax, recharge and uplift their mood”. While provision
of free internet access was identified as the most significant contribution that would
improve happiness and mental health and wellbeing on board, terms and conditions
of work, relationships onboard, physical health, accommodation and recreation were
also identified as areas where ship operators could take action.
Gard recommends encouraging seafarers to talk about mental health and wellbeing
to bring normality to the issue. Mental health should be discussed routinely in office
meetings as well as safety meetings on board,“Mental health and seafarers: It’s time
to talk” and “Everyone should be treated with dignity and respect at work”.

The End