Journal Pre-proof

Fostering a Safety Culture in Manufacturing Industry through Safety Behavior: A

Structural Equation Modelling Approach

Noor Aina Amirah, Nik Fadhilah Nik Him, Aamir Rashid, Rizwana Rasheed, Tengku
Noor Zaliha, Asyraf Afthanorhan

PII: S2949-9267(24)00009-X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsasus.2024.03.001
Reference: JSASUS 9

To appear in: Journal of Safety and Sustainability

Received Date: 4 October 2023

Revised Date: 4 February 2024
Accepted Date: 8 March 2024

Please cite this article as: Amirah NA, Nik Him NF, Rashid A, Rasheed R, Zaliha TN, Afthanorhan A,
Fostering a Safety Culture in Manufacturing Industry through Safety Behavior: A Structural Equation
Modelling Approach, Journal of Safety and Sustainability, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsasus.2024.03.001.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Central South University.
 Fostering a Safety Culture in Manufacturing Industry through Safety Behavior: A
Structural Equation Modelling Approach

Noor Aina Amirah 1

Faculty of Business and Management
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
Email: ainaamirah@unisza.edu.my

Nik Fadhilah Nik Him 2

Faculty of Business and Management
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
Email: nikfadhiey@gmail.com

of
ro
Aamir Rashid 3*
1
Faculty of Business and Management
2
-p
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
Department of Business and Economics
re
School of Business and Information Systems
York College, The City University of New York (CUNY)
lP

Jamaica, New York, United States

*Email: arashid6@york.cuny.edu
na

Rizwana Rasheed 4*
ur

Faculty of Business Administration

Iqra University, Main Campus, Karachi, Pakistan
Jo

Email: prof.rizwana1@gmail.com

Tengku Noor Zaliha 5

Faculty of Business and Management
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
Email: tengkuzaliha.tuanabdullah@gmail.com

Asyraf Afthanorhan 6
Faculty of Business and Management
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia
Email: asyrafafthanorhan@unisza.edu.my

*Corresponding emails: arashid6@york.cuny.edu & Prof.rizwana1@gmail.com

 Fostering a Safety Culture in Manufacturing through Safety Behavior: A Structural

Equation Modelling Approach

Abstract
Creating a robust safety management system is crucial for fostering a culture of safety in the

workplace, particularly in industries like manufacturing where improvements are still needed. This

study aimed to assess the impact of safety behavior on safety culture within the manufacturing

sector. Employing a quantitative approach, questionnaires were distributed to 342 employees in

of
manufacturing firms during data collection. The collected data underwent analysis using Structural

ro
Equation Modeling through IBM-SPSS-AMOS 24.0 to test the proposed model. The study

-p
findings revealed that components of safety behavior, specifically safety compliance and safety
re
leadership, have a significant influence on safety culture. This implies that prioritizing safety
lP

behavior and culture is vital for occupational safety and health, aligning with guidelines set by

responsible entities to ensure a secure work environment. The insights gained from this research
na

can be instrumental in highlighting the importance of safety culture, the pivotal role of leadership,
ur

the complex nature of safety culture, and the potential for measuring and enhancing it. By
Jo

understanding these implications, organizations can foster a safety-centric culture that not only

protects employees but also enhances overall performance. Additionally, this research contributed

to the existing literature by examining an integrated higher-order construct model using the SEM

technique, predicting the model by 53 percent. The insights garnered from this study are applicable

to various types of firms, emphasizing the integral role of safety culture in any organization.

Keywords: Safety leadership, Management commitment, Safety compliance, Safety motivation,

Training education, Employee involvement, Manufacturing industry

1. Introduction

Malaysia began its journey toward industrialization in the early 1980s. The country’s

economy transformed from one based on agriculture to industry (Hassan et al., 2020). Since then,

the manufacturing sector in Malaysia has experienced a remarkable boom and has taken the lead

in developing the country's economy. The Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM) reports that

the total number of 2.33 million employees were employed in the manufacturing sector in

November 2022, an increase of 3.3 per cent year over year (DOSM, 2023). As of December 2022,

of
manufactured goods’ sale increased by 8.6% yearly, with total output reaching RM1.8 trillion

ro
(DOSM, 2023). This positive performance proves that the industrial sector is one of the main

-p
contributors to the country's economy. This contribution can generate growth and recovery of the
re
national economy (Amar & Pratama, 2020).
lP

Manufacturing is one of Malaysia's most important economic sectors (Idris et al., 2021).
na

This economic sector is responsible for many of the country's exports, employment, safety

workplace culture concerns. However, manufacturing requires a variety of issues to be addressed,

ur

including safety. This safety comes with a safety culture that refers to a shared vision, core values,
Jo

and behaviors that prioritize safety in the workplace. It is the result of a combined effort of both

individuals and the organization, where all levels of management are committed to workplace

safety. This robust safety culture is characterized by effective communication, engagement, and

leadership commitment. It is built around the people and their commitment to safety, not just rules

or equipment. A positive safety culture enhances productivity, builds morale, and improves overall

employee health, making it a central company value that is observed consistently (Amirah et al.,

2017).

Paying more attention to safety workplace culture concerns will move the manufacturing
industry in the right direction. However, there is an evidence that the number of reported incidents

in the manufacturing industry is concerning. Workplace accidents occur increasingly frequently,

and employee safety is still a significant issue in manufacturing (Memon et al.,2021; Amirah et

al., 2013). This increasing number results from rapid economic growth due to industrialization

(Amirah et al., 2013). According to statistics from the International Labor Organization (ILO),

each year, more than 160 million cases of work-related diseases and 340 million occupational

accidents worldwide (ILO, 2023).

of
Manufacturing is one hazardous industry (Amirah et al., 2013). Due to the nature of work

ro
in the manufacturing industry, significant safety and health problems have been discovered, and

-p
occupational health and safety management methods were used to assess the components that
re
contributed to occupational health hazards that affected employee productivity and well-being
lP

(Sileyew, 2020). As per the 2023 report from the Department of Occupational Safety and Health
na

(DOSH), the manufacturing sector persists in experiencing a higher-than-average occurrence of

workplace incidents, with injuries remaining prevalent despite ongoing calls for the industry to
ur

adhere to regulations and adopt risk management measures. These statistics undermine all national
Jo

efforts to achieve the intended goals. In addition, a study found that employers, especially in the

manufacturing industry, do not care about the safety of their employees (Hong et al. et al., 2018;

Amirah et al., 2017). According to Sileyew (2020) and Abdullah et al. (2016), the manufacturing

industry in Malaysia has a higher accident rate than other industries, which could be due to a lack

of safety culture among middle and lower-group employees. The increasing number of worker

accidents and deaths shows that these accidents are alarming (Nik et al., 2023).

Employee behavior and compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)

of 1994 can lead to a positive safety culture and a reduction in the number of accidents in industries
in Malaysia. A study on the influence of communication determinants on safety commitment in

high-risk workplaces found that occupational accidents result from factors such as unsafe behavior,

and safety performance indicators provide measurable insights into organizational safety

performance (Zara et al., 2023). Additionally, a three-year nationwide study explored the effects

of corporate culture on the level of safety performance, indicated a strong link between safety

culture and safety performance. Furthermore, an analysis on the relationship between safety

awareness and safety behaviors of healthcare professionals concluded that an increase in safety

of
awareness leads to an increase in safety behavior (Uzuntarla et al., 2020). Finally, a study on the

ro
impact of safety culture on safety performance found that safety culture has a positive impact on

employee safety performance (Naji et al., 2021).

-p
re
According to Koo et al. (2012), the connection between high accident rates and the lack of
lP

safety behavior and culture in the manufacturing industry is significant. A conceptual research
na

framework on the integration of a behavior-based safety program into engineering laboratories and

workshops highlighted the importance of safety education and knowledge of occupational safety
ur

and health in preventing occupational accidents. Additionally, a study on national culture and safe
Jo

work behavior of construction workers emphasized the significance of safety culture and safety

behavior in the workplace. Therefore, industrial accident prevention must focus on safety behavior

to ensure the effectiveness of safety culture in the workplace. Hence, industrial accident prevention

must emphasize the components of safety behaviors consisting of management commitment,

safety leadership, safety compliance, safety motivation, and employee participation to achieve

workplace safety culture effectiveness (Fruhen et al. et al., 2022; Mohd Said et al., 2020; Amirah

et al., 2020). Based on the above discussion, this study would determine the significance of safety

behavior on safety culture.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Theoretical Background

The theory that applies to safety behavior and safety culture is social identity theory. Social

identity theory suggests that individuals' propensity for safety citizenship behavior is related to

their understanding of safety culture in the organization (Tear & Reader, 2023). Social identity

theory posits that individuals' behavior is influenced by their identification with a particular group

or organization, and that this identification can lead to positive or negative behaviors (Cooper,

of
2018). In the context of safety culture, social identity theory suggests that individuals who identify

ro
strongly with a safety culture are more likely to engage in safety citizenship behavior, such as

-p
reporting near-misses and hazards, following safety procedures, and promoting safety in the
re
workplace (Tear & Reader, 2023).
lP

Safety culture is a social construct used by industry and academia to describe the way that
na

safety is being managed in organizations to avoid accidents and injuries (Cooper, 2018). Safety

culture is seen as a way of ensuring high levels of safety performance in organizations, in contrast
ur

to the systematic engineered management of safety (Cooper, 2000). According to Tear and Reader
Jo

(2023), safety is impacted by culture in two ways: firstly, by the frameworks of reference that

shape how risks are acknowledged, assessed, or disregarded; and secondly, through the impact of

culture on the values, attitudes, perceptions, skills, and behavioral patterns of individuals and

groups. These elements collectively determine the dedication to, and the effectiveness and style

of, an organization's health and safety management.

2.2 Safety Culture in Manufacturing Industries

Safety culture is often defined as an organization’s (safety-related) shared underlying

values, assumptions, and beliefs (Amirah et al., 2020; Guldenmund, 2018; Cooper, 2018).
Fleming, Harvey, and Bowers (2022) stated that safety culture is the attitudes, values, norms, and

beliefs of supervisory staff regarding safe and effective supervision. Inadequate safety culture is

often cited as a factor in serious incidents (Idris & Ayob, 2021). According to the current safety

literature, there appears to be an inverse relationship between the frequency of accidents in an

organisation and the maturity of its safety culture. Accidents and safety culture have been linked

since the late 1970s (Goncalves et al., 2018). Therefore, more research has been conducted on

safety culture and its improvement to improve safety performance.

of
Therefore, implementing a safety culture in the manufacturing industry effectively reduces

ro
the risk of accidents (Mohd Said et al., 2020). Cooper (2018; 2016) stated that to prevent serious

-p
safety incidents, companies should focus at least 80% of their efforts on changing their safety
re
culture through situational (e.g., safety management systems) and behavioral aspects. Top
lP

management can play a critical role in positively influencing safety culture by paying attention to
na

safety management system development, execution, and performance; asking managers about

safety issues during routine meetings; and visiting business units frequently to discuss safety
ur

issues.
Jo

This proves that introducing a safety culture in the industry positively impacts the

prevention of occupational accidents (Fleming et al., 2022). According to Arzahan et al. (2022),

safety culture is essential to improving safety performance outcomes. Safety culture aims to create

a positive work environment where employees know potential hazards and focus on preventing

accidents.

2.3 The Relationship between Safety Behavior and Safety Culture

Safety behaviors refer to the actions or behaviors that individuals engage in at various

workplaces to promote the health and safety of workers, customers, the public, and the
environment. Safety behaviors include preventing accidents, injuries, or harm in the workplace or

other environments (Yang et al., 2023). According to Schopf et al. (2021), safety behaviors play a

crucial role in organizations as their absence can result in physical harm and have adverse impacts

on the organization, society, and the economy. Essentially, the authors argue that safety behaviors

are essential not only because they prevent physical harm but also because they can impact various

aspects of an organization's performance and the broader community.

A focus can reflect the effectiveness training education, which is recognized as the primary

of
means of improving safety culture. Research has consistently shown that safety training can

ro
positively influence employee safety culture (Sherratt et al., 2022; Arzahan et al., 2022). Wang,

-p
Jiang, and Blackman (2021) found that the effectiveness of training education depends on
re
implementing employees' safety culture. In addition, Amirah et al. (2017) reported that training
lP

education positively impacts safety culture. These studies demonstrate that training education is
na

critical to cultivating a safe work culture in the manufacturing industry.

Encouraging employee involvement is one of the practices that demonstrate the

ur

effectiveness of a safety culture in an organization. Tappura et al. (2022) found that employee
Jo

involvement is vital in safety programs to reduce work-related injuries. Employee participation

refers to how workers influence and regulate health and safety management matters. Naji et al.

(2021) studied 380 oil and gas sector workers in three Malaysian states and found a positive

correlation between employee involvement and safety culture. Buniya et al. (2023; Tear et al.,

2020) also demonstrated the influence of employee involvement on workplace safety culture. This

highlights the importance of employee participation in promoting a safety culture in the

manufacturing industry.

Bensonch et al. (2022) defined safety compliance as how workers adhere to workplace
safety policies, rules, regulations, and conditions. Isa et al. (2023) found that employee compliance

with safety regulations improves organizational safety culture. Also, Kalteh et al. (2021) analyzed

31 studies to assess the impact of safety culture and safety climate on improving safety

performance. The research shows that safety compliance and reactive actions are related to safety

culture and safety climate. Hence, the following six hypotheses were formulated.

Khalid et al. (2022), Sherratt and Aboagye-Nimo (2022), Qayoom and Hadikusumo

(2019), and Ismail et al. (2017), emphasized the significance of assessing safety culture. They

of
suggested that identifying crucial elements that foster a safe work environment, including

ro
management commitment, safety compliance, safety leadership, training and education, employee

-p
involvement, and safety motivation. According to Advizor et al. (2022) and Berhan (2020),
re
management commitment plays an important role in enhancing safety culture within the
lP

manufacturing industry. This finding is consistent with the findings of Hong et al. (2016), who
na

utilized regression analysis to demonstrate that management commitment is positively related to

the safety culture. Abdullah et al. (2016) also found evidence suggesting that management
ur

commitment leads to improvements in safety culture among manufacturing workers. Advizor et

Jo

al. (2020) concurred, highlighting that management commitment fosters a safe work environment

and provides opportunities to devise strategies for augmenting safety and preventing workplace

accidents.

Adzivor et al. (2022) and Cooper (2018) asserted that safety leadership is crucial for

improving workplace safety culture. Numerous studies have explored the relationship between

safety leadership and safety culture, consistently indicating a positive and significant association

(Tawfik et al., 2023; Maharani et al., 2019). In a comprehensive literature review, Nasim et al.

(2022) identified transformational, transactional, delegate, and democratic leadership styles as

having positive and significant relationships with safety culture. A recent study by Xue et al.

(2023) on six attributes of safety leadership in the petrochemical industry found that the safety

leadership of managers positively contributes to improving safety behavior. Among the various

aspects of safety leadership, safety concern has the most significant positive influence on safety

behavior in the workplace. These findings highlight the potential of safety leadership in cultivating

a safety culture in the workplace, which has also been highlighted in previous research by

Subramaniam et al. (2023).

of
The implementation of an influential safety culture is also influenced by safety motivation.

ro
Safety motivation is a fundamental factor in shaping safety behavior in the workplace

-p
(Subramaniam et al., 2023; Zhao & Yan, 2023). The results of a study conducted by Peker et al.
re
(2022) on 383 Turkish factory workers show that safety motivation is positively related to safety
lP

culture. Researchers also emphasize the integrity of supervisors' behavior as a critical factor in
na

improving safety culture and preventing workplace accidents. Furthermore, the manufacturing

sector must comply with established safety regulations so that safety motivation can increase the
ur

effectiveness of an influential safety culture (Bruhn et al., 2023; Neal & Griffin, 2006).
Jo

H1: Training education has a significant effect on safety culture.

H2: Employee involvement has a significant effect on safety culture.

H3: Safety compliance has a significant effect on safety culture.

H4: Management commitment has a significant effect on safety culture.

H5: Safety leadership has a significant effect on safety culture.

H6: Safety motivation has a significant effect on safety culture.

3. Research Methodology

This study used a quantitative research approach to gather data from the designated

population to test the hypotheses (Rashid et al., 2021; Rashid and Rasheed, 2023a). Quantitative

research method is common in verifying theoretical concepts, enabling researchers to produce

reliable and precise knowledge (Hashmi et al., 2020). The primary objective was to clarify

theoretical concepts and empirical discoveries, making it an explanatory study (Rasheed et al.,

2023). Figure 1 illustrates the methodological flow scheme of this research.

of
Quantitative Explanatory

ro
Research
Methodology research research

Research Survey Structured

-p
re
Strategy method questionnaires
lP

Cluster and
Population Determining
Data Collection then simple
and sampling sample size
Procedure random
stratey (n=342)
sampling
na

Data Analysis EFA CFA SEM

Technique &
ur

(IBM SPSS (IBM SPSS (IBM SPSS

Tools 24.0) AMOS 24.0) AMOS 24.0)
Jo

Figure 1: Methodological Flow Scheme

3.1 Sampling and Data Collection

This research focused on analyzing organizational employees and collected data from

managers working in manufacturing companies situated in a developing economy, specifically

Malaysia. A questionnaire was designed to survey manufacturing companies in Peninsular

Malaysia. Data was collected through a self-administered questionnaire and direct mail (Rashid et

al., 2022a; 2022b). The survey was conducted among randomly selected manufacturing

companies. The questionnaire was formed on seven constructs: safety: safety compliance,

management commitment, training and education, safety leadership, employee involvement, and
safety motivation. The constructs were measured on an interval scale ranging from 1 = strongly

disagree to 10 = strongly agree.

The scope and sampling procedures of a study of manufacturing firms in Peninsular

Malaysia employing at least 100 employees and registered with the Federation of Malaysian

Manufacturers (FMM). The study included 1080 firms selected using cluster and simple random

sampling. In the cluster sampling method, the companies were divided into four zones, Eastern

Zone (Terengganu, Kelantan and Pahang), Southern Zone (Johor, Melaka and Negeri Sembilan),

of
Klang Valley Zone (Kuala Lumpur and Selangor) and Northern Zone (Perak, Perlis, Kedah and

ro
Penang), and in the simple random sampling method, the companies were selected from these

-p
zones. These sampling method was chosen to avoid over-representing certain states or zones with
re
many organizations. According to Krejcie and Morgan (1970), a sample size of 285 is sufficient
lP

to represent the population of 1080 manufacturing firms in Peninsular Malaysia. However, the
na

researcher decided to increase the sample size by 20% to 342 to improve the response rate among

the participants. The selection criteria for respondents were employees directly involved in
ur

manufacturing and middle to lower-level employees. The initial questionnaire was successfully
Jo

organized as an online survey (Google Form). A clear, concise statement outlining the research

goals and guaranteeing participant confidentiality accompanied the survey.

The two main criteria for selecting respondents in the study were based on their level of

involvement in production and their position as middle to lower-level employees. Respondents

were selected from several categories, including production operators, technicians, supervisors,

and executives or their equivalents from the production, maintenance, and quality departments.

These categories were selected because employees in these departments are directly involved in

the production line and are at higher risk than those in other departments, such as administration
and finance.

4. Data Analysis

The research used empirical data to conduct a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to

validate the latent construct measurement model. CFA is a statistical method used to evaluate the

measurement model in structural equation modeling (SEM). It assesses the degree to which a set

of indicators or items measure the latent constructs they are supposed to measure. CFA is

commonly used to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement model

of
(Hashmi et al., 2021a). Cheung et al. (2023) suggested CFA procedure examines the construct

ro
validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and composite reliability. After completing the

-p
CFA process, a structural model was developed, and the study used Structural Equation Modeling
re
(SEM) to estimate the relationships among the constructs in the model. Based on the results of
lP

SEM, the study tested the proposed hypotheses. Both the CFA and SEM were conducted using
na

IBM-SPSS-AMOS version 25.0.

The data analysis was conducted using Analysis Moment of Structure (AMOS 25.0)
ur

software. AMOS software was preferred over the others because it can combine various
Jo

conceptualized measures and estimation techniques such as Maximum Likelihood (ML),

Generalized Least Squares (GLS), Unweighted Least Squares (ULS), Asymptotic Distribution

Free (ADF), and Scale Free Distribution (SFD) using a graphical user interface that is convenient

for the empirical purpose. In addition, this method can quickly generate results and has become

one of the most prominent software across research fields such as tourism, transportation,

marketing, hospitality, etc. The bootstrap application can also generate the standard error of

estimates (Hashmi et al., 2021b).

4.1 Measure Model

The Pooled Confirmatory Factor Analysis (PCFA) is performed to evaluate the

measurement model. Pooled CFA is recommended over an individual CFA because it can estimate

all construct correlations and factor loading for each item. Using standard practice, as Anderson

and Gerbing (1998) suggested, the poor factor loading should be dropped from further analysis as

it does not measure the corresponding construct. Thus, the factor loading below 0.60 was deleted.

In this case, 8 items (MC9, SC4, SC5, SC7, SC11, MO8, TR8, and EM9) were deleted. The final

of
model is shown in figure 2 after deleting items.

ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo
 of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

Figure 2: Measurement Model

Source: AMOS graphics

Consequently, the final Pooled CFA analysis model signifies that the research model

satisfied its multidimensionality and accomplished all the required fitness indexes. Explicitly, the

authors discovered that the factor loadings for this model transcend the minimum threshold values

of 0.6. Moreover, the authors follow Hair et al. (2014) proposition that a study should at least

report one index from each of the three model fitness values: Absolute Fit, Incremental Fit, and
Parsimonious Fit, to prove the construct's validity. This study indicates that all fitness indexes have

achieved the required level, as presented in Table 1.

Table 1: The Summary of Fitness Indexes for Measurement Model

Name of category Name of index Index value Level Comments
Absolute fit RMSEA 0.039 ≤ 0.08 Achieved
Incremental fit CFI 0.920 ≥ 0.90 Achieved
TLI 0.916 ≥ 0.90 Achieved
IFI 0.920 ≥ 0.90 Achieved
Parsimonious fit Chisq/df 1.529 1.00 – 5.00 Achieved

The reliability and validity of a SEM can be assessed through various methods. Reliability

of
refers to the consistency of the measurements. In SEM, reliability is typically assessed using

ro
Composite Reliability (CR), which measures how well variables underlying constructs served in

-p
the model. It is estimated based on the factor loading analysis, and a value of CR greater than 0.7
re
is generally required to achieve construct reliability (Rashid et al., 2024). While validity of SEM
lP

models can be assessed through several methods, including goodness-of-fit tests, convergent and
na

discriminant validity (Rashid et al., 2023; Rashid & Rasheed, 2024). Convergent validity can be

assessed using Average Variance Extracted (AVE) criterion, while discriminant validity can be
ur

evaluated through the square root of the AVE of each construct that should be greater than the
Jo

correlation with any other construct in the framework (Hashmi et al., 2021; Rashid et al., 2024a).

Sequentially, the procedure defines the construct reliability and validity using CR, AVE,

and Discriminant Validity, as exhibited in Tables 2 and 3. This procedure is mandatory for the

CFA analysis, and the rule of thumb for CR should be higher than the value of 0.70 and AVE

higher than the threshold of 0.50 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Rashid et al., 2024b). The

reliability and validity values are proportionally related to CR and AVE's values, which means that

higher CR and AVE values indicate higher reliability and validity for that particular construct. In

this analysis, the range value for CR for each construct falls between 0.821 and 0.862 (> 0.70)
(Rasheed & Rashid, 2023). Similarly, the AVE ranging from 0.569 to 0.635 (> 0.50) (Rashid &

Rasheed, 2023b; Khan et al., 2023a). Hence, the test assumptions have been met.

Table 2: Results of Factor Loadings, CR and AVE

Constructs Higher-order Items Loading
Management Commitment Att: MC4 0.758
Loading = 0.922 MC3 0.735
CR = 0.890 CR = 0.821 MC2 0.771
AVE = 0.802 AVE = 0.569 MC1 0.755
Beh: MC8 0.763
Loading = 0.868 MC7 0.781
CR = 0.839 MC6 0.810
AVE = 0.605 MC5 0.756
Safety Leadership Car: SL4 0.808

of
Loading = 0.876 SL3 0.772
CR = 0.824 CR = 0.823 SL2 0.751
AVE = 0.802 AVE = 0.589 SL1 0.739

ro
Coac: SL8 0.823
Loading = 0.933 SL7 0.776

-p
CR = 0.850 SL6 0.762
AVE = 0.614 SL5 0.774
re
Cont: SL12 0.821
Loading = 0.876 SL11 0.799
CR = 0.841 SL10 0.768
lP

AVE = 0.629 SL9 0.761

Safety Culture EmR: SF1 0.805
Loading = 0.875 SF2 0.783
na

CR = 0.909 CR = 0.831 SF3 0.799

AVE = 0.768 AVE = 0.606 SF4 0.725
PerR: SF5 0.824
ur

Loading = 0.870 SF6 0.761

CR = 0.843 SF7 0.789
Jo

AVE = 0.622 SF8 0.780

EmpS: SF9 0.815
Loading = 0.884 SF10 0.754
CR = 0.840 SF11 0.774
AVE = 0.611 SF12 0.784
Training Education Stra: TR4 0.787
Loading = 0.927 TR3 0.763
CR = 0.899 CR = 0.849 TR2 0.779
AVE = 0.816 AVE = 0.609 TR1 0.794
Eme: TR9 0.829
Loading = 0.879 TR7 0.762
CR = 0.858 TR6 0.818
AVE = 0.635 TR5 0.777
Safety Motivation Healt: MO5 0.798
Loading = 0.931 MO6 0.783
CR = 0.943 CR = 0.843 MO7 0.777
AVE = 0.816 AVE = 0.597 MO9 0.733
OC: MO1 0.815
Loading = 0.875 MO2 0.792
CR = 0.838 MO3 0.729
AVE = 0.595 MO4 0.747
Safety Compliance Ref: SC1 0.784
 Loading = 0.852 SC2 0.765
CR = 0.845 CR = 0.862 SC3 0.731
AVE = 0.732 AVE = 0.597 SC6 0.785
SC8 0.797
Prcd: SC9 0.807
Loading = 0.859 SC10 0.770
CR = 0.856 SC12 0.731
AVE = 0.580 SC13 0.758
SC14 0.741
Work: EM8 0.784
Loading = 0.864 EM7 0.820
CR = 0.846 EM6 0.786
AVE = 0.619 EM5 0.758
Proc: EM4 0.782
Loading = 0.921 EM3 0.719
CR = 0.835 EM2 0.796

of
AVE = 0.586 EM1 0.764
Source: AMOS output

ro
As depicted in Table 3, the AVE squared (bold value) value is higher than the correlation

-p
construct in its row and column (Hashmi et al., 2021a; Khan et al., 2023b). To assess discriminant
re
validity, the researchers followed the Fornell and Larcker’s suggested method and compared the
lP

square root average variance extracted with construct correlations. The discriminant validity is
na

established when all values of square root AVE are higher than all correlations.

Table 3: Discriminant Validity

ur

Construct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Management Commitment 0.896
Jo

2. Safety Leadership 0.529 0.896

3. Training Education 0.595 0.560 0.903
4. Employee Involvement 0.573 0.515 0.627 0.894
5. Safety Motivation 0.506 0.483 0.573 0.536 0.903
6. Safety Compliance 0.579 0.522 0.606 0.577 0.560 0.856
7. Safety Culture 0.571 0.567 0.594 0.558 0.508 0.627 0.876

4.2 Structural Equation Modeling

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is considered the preferred method for analyzing

constructs that are measured using item indicators. Unlike exploratory approaches, SEM takes a

confirmatory approach and is particularly suitable for examining measurement errors, estimating

covariance, and modeling latent variables (Kumar, 2019). SEM analysis using AMOS was
performed because of its capabilities in analysing the relationships between complex indicators

and a construct, as well as its ability to analyse mean and covariance structures.

4.3.1 SEM assessment

After developing the measurement model using AMOS, the researchers examined the

output section "Notes for Model" to assess any warnings or errors. In this case, AMOS reported

that the model achieved the minimum, indicating no warnings or errors. The output section also

provided information on the probability value, degrees of freedom, and the Chi-Square test value,

of
suggesting a good fit between the observed data and the hypothesized model. Table 4 presents the

ro
SEM results for hypothesis H1, H2, H4, and H6, which indicates that training and education,

-p
employee involvement, management commitment, and safety motivation insignificantly predicts
re
safety culture. Whereas, the safety compliance (H3) and safety leadership (H5) significantly and
lP

positively predicts safety culture. The Critical Ratios (CR) values for H3 and H5 are greater than
na

1.96, indicating the significance of these relationships. Hence, H1, H2, H4, and H6 were not

supported. However, H3 and H5 were supported. Figure 3 illustrated the structural model with
ur

standardized beta coefficients along with the R2 values.

Jo

Table 4: Regression Weight

Hypotheses Path Estimate S.E. C.R. P Supported
H1 Safety Culture <--- Training Education 0.142 0.085 1.688 0.091 No
H2 Safety Culture <--- Employee Involvement 0.104 0.081 1.321 0.187 No
H3 Safety Culture <--- Safety Compliance 0.267 0.091 3.176 0.001 Yes
H4 Safety Culture <--- Management Commitment 0.146 0.078 1.839 0.066 No
H5 Safety Culture <--- Safety Leadership 0.193 0.065 2.858 0.004 Yes
H6 Safety Culture <--- Safety Motivation 0.056 0.070 0.788 0.430 No
Source: AMOS output
 of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

Figure 3: Structural Model

Source: AMOS graphics

4.4 Coefficient of Determination

The results of the analysis indicate that the constructs in the model account for a substantial

amount of variance in the safety culture variable. In Figure 2, the R2 value of 0.53 indicates that

53% of the variability in safety culture can be accounted for by the latent constructs incorporated

in the model. This high R2 value suggests a robust relationship between the predictor variables

and the outcome variable, thereby supporting the model's importance in elucidating safety culture.

This finding aligns with Cohen's (2013) recommendation that an R2 value greater than 0.26
signifies a substantial explanation of variance. Overall, these results emphasize the significant

impact of the latent constructs included in the model, underscoring their relevance in

comprehending and enhancing safety culture in the manufacturing sector.

4. Discussion

The findings indicate the significance of safety compliance (H3) and safety leadership (H5)

in fostering safety culture. The positive relationship between safety compliance and safety culture

aligns with earlier studies by Ramayah and Subramanian (2023; 2018), which emphasized the

of
importance of prioritizing safety compliance for enhancing workplace safety culture. Likewise,

ro
the results of H5 support the idea that safety leadership plays a crucial role in creating a safe

-p
working environment, consistent with previous research by Subramaniam et al. (2023)
re
demonstrating the significant influence of safety leadership on safety culture. Other studies,
lP

including Tawfik et al. (2023) and Maharani et al. (2019), also supported this relationship, which
na

documented a positive relationship between safety leadership and workplace safety culture.

Meanwhile, the path analysis results show that the four hypotheses' (H1, H2, H4, and H6)
ur

direct effects are not significant. This result is because the variables of training education,
Jo

employee involvement, management commitment, and safety motivation have a detrimental effect

on safety culture. In particular, H1 is unsupported because workplace training does not promote a

safety culture among factory workers. This finding differs from the results of previous studies

(Sherratt et al., 2022; Arzahan et al., 2022), which found that training education positively

influences employee safety culture. In addition, Wang et al. (2021) showed that the effectiveness

of training education depends on employee adherence to safety culture. However, the context of

the current study suggests that the direct effect of training education on safety culture is negative.

Similarly, H2 and H4 are refuted based on the results of this study, which show that the
attitudes and actions of workers in the manufacturing industry hurt the components of the safety

culture studied, namely employee involvement and management commitment. Therefore,

comprehensive plans are needed for management, especially in the manufacturing industry, to

improve safety culture. Such measures should include employee involvement and management

commitment to promote a safe work environment in the manufacturing industry. These findings

are inconsistent with the research of Berhan (2020), who emphasized the importance of

management commitment and are further supported by Advizor et al. (2022); Abdullah et al.,

of
(2016), who showed that management commitment can facilitate the development of new

ro
strategies to prevent occupational accidents. In addition to management commitment, employee

-p
involvement is critical to creating a robust safety culture. The lack of significant results for H2 are
re
inconsistent with the findings of Tappura et al. (2022) and Tear et al. (2020). They observed a
lP

positive relationship between employee engagement and safety culture. Additionally, Naji et al.
na

(2021) supported the notion that employee engagement can foster a positive safety culture in the

oil and gas industry. Therefore, it is critical to acknowledge the unfavorable outcomes of this study
ur

and emphasize the importance of both management commitment and employee involvement in
Jo

promoting a safety culture.

The study findings indicate that safety motivation also does not have a significant effect on

safety culture, causing in the rejection of H6. The absence of a positive influence from safety

motivation has impeded the implementation of a safety culture within the manufacturing industry.

This result contradicts the claims of Peker et al. (2022), who asserted that safety motivation is

critical to preventing accidents in the manufacturing industry. In addition, Bruhn et al. (2023), and

Neal and Griffin (2006) have shown that safety motivation is critical to implementing an influential

safety culture. Therefore, it is imperative to promote safety motivation among manufacturing

workers to prioritize safety culture practices when performing their work tasks. Increased

motivation can translate into actions that manifest as safety behaviors. An influential safety culture

among manufacturing workers indirectly leads to better safety behaviors and fewer safety

violations (Subramaniam et al., 2023; Peker et al., 2022).

The inconsistencies between the findings of the current study and previous research could

be attributed to differences in the operationalization of variables, the specific measures used to

assess safety culture and safety behavior, and the unique organizational and environmental factors

of
within the manufacturing sector. Additionally, variations in the sample characteristics,

ro
geographical locations, and industry-specific regulations may contribute to differing results. It is

-p
important to note that the field of safety culture research is complex and multifaceted, with various
re
theoretical models and approaches being utilized to understand the dynamics of safety-related
lP

behaviors and outcomes. Therefore, discrepancies in findings are not uncommon and can
na

contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.

5. Research Implications
ur

This research examined an integrated higher-order construct model using IBM-SPSS-

Jo

AMOS 24.0 using SEM technique that would add valuable literature to the existing body of

knowledge. The study tested the social identity theory to validate the relationships of constructs

and the exogenous variables predicted the endogenous variable 53%, that is substantial. Moreover,

this research is useful for all types firms because safety culture is a critical component of overall

organizational culture that is an integral part of an organization's culture and should be prioritized

at every level of the organization. As this research aims to investigate the safety behavior and

safety culture in the manufacturing industry using structural equation modeling (SEM). The gap

in the existing literature that this study addressed is the need for a more comprehensive
understanding of how safety behavior influences safety culture within the specific context of

manufacturing. By employing SEM, the study contributes to the methodological advancement in

analyzing the complex relationships between these variables. The findings of this research can

potentially inform the development of targeted interventions and policies to enhance safety culture

in manufacturing settings, ultimately contributing to improved occupational safety and health

outcomes.

Leadership plays a critical role in creating and maintaining a strong safety culture.

of
Therefore, organizations should actively participate in promoting safety by leading by example

ro
and providing necessary resources and support for safety initiatives. Safety culture is a complex

-p
concept that encompasses the interplay between organizational culture, prevention practices, and
re
safety performance. It is shaped by individual and group values, attitudes, perceptions,
lP

competencies, and behavioral patterns, which collectively influence an organization's commitment

na

to, proficiency in, and style of health and safety management. Various tools and methods can be

used to measure safety culture, and organizations can enhance it by implementing effective safety
ur

policies, conducting regular safety training, and encouraging employee involvement and
Jo

recognition.

An individual's comprehension of safety culture within the organization significantly

influences safety behavior. Organizations can foster safety behavior by establishing a robust safety

culture that emphasizes safety at all levels. Additionally, safety culture positively impacts

employee safety performance by mitigating psychosocial hazards. By prioritizing safety culture,

organizations can enhance safety performance, reduce the likelihood of accidents and injuries, and

improve overall organizational performance.

Consequently, research on safety behavior and safety culture holds several implications for
organizations. These include the need to prioritize safety culture, the crucial role of leadership, the

intricate and multifaceted nature of safety culture, the possibility of measuring and enhancing

safety culture, the influence of safety culture on safety behavior, and the positive impact of safety

culture on safety performance. Understanding these implications enables organizations to cultivate

a safety-oriented culture that safeguards employees and bolsters overall performance.

6. Conclusion

Through a cutting-edge SEM analysis in IBM-SPSS-AMOS 24.0, this research introduces

of
a novel higher-order construct model that bolsters existing knowledge and validates the predictive

ro
power of social identity theory for safety culture in the manufacturing industry. Notably,

-p
exogenous variables explain a substantial 53% of employee safety perceptions, underlining the
re
critical importance of prioritizing safety culture across all organizational levels. This robust
lP

framework offers valuable insights for firms of all sizes seeking to cultivate a stronger sense of
na

employee belonging and optimize their overall performance. Based on the above findings and

discussion, this study highlights the importance of safety behavior in shaping a positive safety
ur

culture. The results show a significant relationship between safety compliance, safety leadership,
Jo

and safety culture. Conversely, training education, employee involvement, management

commitment, and safety motivation negatively affected safety culture. Therefore, a comprehensive

approach is needed to ensure that safety behaviors positively impact safety culture and remain an

essential element of accident prevention. Safety behavior and safety culture play a critical role in

preventing workplace accidents. Moreover, involving various stakeholders in implementing a

safety culture in the manufacturing industry is crucial. Consequently, this study highlights the need

for more focus on safety culture in various industries to achieve the goal of zero accidents.
References

Abdullah, M. S., Othman, Y. H., Osman, A., & Salahudin, S. N. (2016). Safety culture behaviour

in electronics manufacturing sector (EMS) in Malaysia: The case of flextronics. Procedia

economics and finance, 35, 454-461.

Adzivor, E. K., Emuze, F., & Das, D. K. (2022). Indicators for safety culture in SME construction

firms: a Delphi study in Ghana. Journal of Financial Management of Property and

Construction, (ahead-of-print).

of
Amar, S., & Pratama, I. (2020). Exploring the link between income inequality, poverty reduction

ro
and economic growth: An ASEAN perspective. International Journal of Innovation,

Creativity and Change, 11(2), 24-41.

-p
re
Amirah, N. A., Amin, A., Muda, S., Talaat, W. I. A. W., & Rashid, N. M. N. N. M. (2017).
lP

Relationship between behavioural aspects and safety culture in the peninsular Malaysia
na

manufacturing industry. World Applied Sciences Journal, 35(9), 1880-1884.

Amirah, N. A., Asma, W. I., Muda, S., & Amin, A. (2013). Operationalisation of safety culture to
ur

foster safety and health in the Malaysian Manufacturing Industries. Asian Social Science,
Jo

9(7), 283.

Amirah, N. A., Him, N. F. N., Tambi, A. M. A., Haron, N. F., & Badrul, N. S. (2020). Developing

Safety Culture Framework for the Malaysian Port Industries. Journal of Advance Research

in Dynamical & Control Systems, 12(3), 147 - 154.

Arzahan, I. S. N., Ismail, Z., & Yasin, S. M. (2022). Safety culture, safety climate, and safety

performance in healthcare facilities: a systematic review. Safety science, 147, 105624.

Bensonch, C., Argyropoulos, C. D., Dimopoulos, C., Mikellidou, C. V., & Boustras, G. (2022).

Analysis of safety climate factors and safety compliance relationships in the oil and gas

industry. Safety science, 151, 105744.

Berhan, E. (2020). Management commitment and its impact on occupational health and safety

improvement: a case of iron, steel and metal manufacturing industries. International Journal

of Workplace Health Management, 13(4), 427-444.

Bruhn, A. B., Lindahl, C., Andersson, M., & Rosen, G. (2023). Motivational factors for

of
occupational safety and health improvements: A mixed-method study within the Swedish

ro
equine sector. Safety Science, 159, 106035.

-p
Buniya, M. K., Othman, I., Sunindijo, R. Y., Karakhan, A. A., Kineber, A. F., & Durdyev, S.
re
(2023). Contributions of safety critical success factors and safety program elements to
lP

overall project success. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 29(1),
na

129-140.

Cheung, G. W., Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Lau, R. S., & Wang, L. C. (2023). Reporting reliability,
ur

convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-
Jo

practice recommendations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1-39.

Cooper, D. (2016). Navigating the Safety Culture Construct: A Review of the Evidence

Cooper, M. D. (2000). Towards a model of safety culture. Safety science, 36(2), 111-136.

Cooper, M.D. (2018). The Safety Culture Construct: Theory and Practice. In: Gilbert, C., Journe,

B., Laroche, H., Bieder, C. (eds) Safety Cultures, Safety Models. Springer Briefs in Applied

Sciences and Technology. Springer, Cham.

Department of Occupational Safety and Health. (2023). Occupational Accident Statistics.

Retrieved February 10, 2023, from https://www.dosh.gov.my/

Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2019). Monthly Manufacturing Statistics Malaysia. Retrieved

February 13, 2023, from https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php

Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2023). Monthly Manufacturing Statistics Malaysia. Retrieved

February 20, 2023, from https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php

Fernández-Muñiz, B., Montes-Peón, J. M., & Vázquez-Ordás, C. J. (2007). Safety culture:

Analysis of the causal relationships between its key dimensions. Journal of safety

research, 38(6), 627-641.

of
Fleming, M., Harvey, K., & Bowers, K. C. (2022). Development and testing of a nuclear regulator

ro
safety culture perception survey. Safety Science, 153, 105792.

-p
Fruhen, L. S., Andrei, D. M., & Griffin, M. A. (2022). Leaders as motivators and meaning makers:
re
How perceived leader behaviors and leader safety commitment attributions shape
lP

employees’ safety behaviors. Safety Science, 152, 105775.

na

Goncalves Filho, A. P., & Waterson, P. (2018). Maturity models and safety culture: A critical

review. Safety Science, 105, 192-211.

ur

Guldenmund, F. W. (2018). Understanding safety culture through models and metaphors. Safety
Jo

Cultures, Safety Models: Taking Stock and Moving Forward, 21-34.

Hair, J. F., Gabriel, M., & Patel, V. (2014). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling

(CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool. Brazilian Journal of

Marketing, 13(2).

Hashmi, A. R., Amirah, N. A., & Yusof, Y. (2020). Mediating effect of integrated systems on the

relationship between supply chain management practices and public healthcare

performance: Structural Equation Modeling. International Journal of Management and

Sustainability, 9(3), 148-160.

Hashmi, A. R., Amirah, N. A., & Yusof, Y. (2021b). Organizational performance with disruptive

factors and inventory control as a mediator in public healthcare of Punjab, Pakistan.

Management Science Letters, 11(1), 77-86.

Hashmi, A. R., Amirah, N. A., Yusof, Y., & Zaliha, T. N. (2021a). Mediation of inventory control

practices in proficiency and organizational performance: State-funded hospital perspective.

Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 9(1), 89-98.

Hassan, R., Ismail, A. R., & Makhtar, N. K. (2020). A study on the enforcement strategy for safety

of
and health compliance in manufacturing sector in Malaysia. In IOP Conference Series:

ro
Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 788, No. 1, p. 012032). IOP Publishing.

-p
Hong, C. C., Ramayah, T., & Subramaniam, C. (2018). The relationship between critical success
re
factors, internal control and safety performance in the Malaysian manufacturing sector.
lP

Safety Science, 104, 179-188.

na

Hu, X., Yeo, G., & Griffin, M. (2020). More to safety compliance than meets the eye:

Differentiating deep compliance from surface compliance. Safety Science, 130, 104852.
ur

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104852
Jo

Idris, S. M. B. M., Ayob, M. B., & Shahren, N. B. M. (2021). Risk Management: Safe Work

Culture in Manufacturing Industry. International Journal of Accounting, 6(34), 9-18.

International Labour Organization. (2023). The Enormous Burden of Poor Working Conditions.

Retrieved February 10, 2023, from https://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas

Isa, A. A. M., Wahab, W. A., Omar, R. C., Nordin, M. Z. M., Taha, H., & Roslan, R. (2021).

Factors influencing the compliance of workplace safety culture in the government-linked

company (GLC). In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 325, p. 06005). EDP Sciences.
Ismail, F., Ahmad, N., Janipha, N. A. I., & Ismail, R. (2017). The behavioural factors’

characteristics of safety culture. Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies, 2(4), 91-98.

Kalteh, H. O., Mortazavi, S. B., Mohammadi, E., & Salesi, M. (2021). The relationship between

safety culture and safety climate and safety performance: a systematic review. International

Journal of occupational safety and ergonomics, 27(1), 206-216.

Kapp, E. A., & Parboteeah, K. P. (2008). Ethical climate & safety performance design better

programs, improve compliance and foster participation. Professional Safety, 53(07).

of
Khalid, K., Khalid, K., & Davidson, R. (2022). A multi-group assessment of safety culture among

ro
engineering students in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Engineering, Design, and

Technology.
-p
re
Khan, S., Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., & Amirah, N. A. (2023a). Designing a knowledge-based system
lP

(KBS) to study consumer purchase intention: the impact of digital influencers in Pakistan.
na

Kybernetes, 52(5), 1720-1744.

Khan, S. K., Rashid. A., Benhamed, A., Rasheed, R., & Huma, Z. (2023b). Effect of leadership
ur

styles on employee performance by considering psychological capital as mediator:

Jo

evidence from airlines industry in emerging economy. World Journal of Entrepreneurship,

Management and Sustainable Development, 18(6), 799-818.

Koo, K. E., Zain, A. N. M., & Zainal, S. R. M. (2012). Integration of Behaviour-Based Safety

Programme into Engineering Laboratories and Workshops Conceptually. International

Education Studies, 5(2), 88-104.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.

Educational and psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610.

Maharani, S. D. W., Setiawan, M., Irawanto, D. W., & Rahayu, M. (2019). Analysis of Patient

Safety Culture and Work Team in Educating the Effect of Leadership Style on Patients

Safety Performance. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 10(9).

Memon, D. A., Yasof, Y., Adnan, A., Abid, S. K., & Mohamed, N. R. (2021). Occupational

Accident in Malaysian Manufacturing Sector. In Intelligent Manufacturing and

Mechatronics: Proceedings of SympoSIMM 2020 (pp. 1151-1158). Springer Singapore.

Mohd Said, N. S., Mohamad Yusoff, N. A., Omar Ali, S. R., Abdul Manaf, S. M., & Adenan, N.

of
D. (2020). The factors affecting the workplace safety in manufacturing industry. Jurnal

ro
Intelek, 15(1), 63-68.

-p
Naji, G. M. A., Isha, A. S. N., Mohyaldinn, M. E., Leka, S., Saleem, M. S., Rahman, S. M. N. B.
re
S. A., & Alzoraiki, M. (2021). Impact of safety culture on safety performance; mediating
lP

role of psychosocial hazard: An integrated modelling approach. International journal of

na

environmental research and public health, 18(16), 8568.

Nasim, M. A., Yadav, R. S., Dash, S. S., & Bamel, U. (2022). Leadership styles and safety culture–
ur

a meta-analytic study. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, (ahead-of-print).

Jo

Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. (2006). A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety

motivation, safety behaviour, and accidents at the individual and group levels. Journal of

applied psychology, 91(4), 946.

Nik Him, N.F., Amirah, N.A., Tun Ismail, W.N.A & Tuan Abdullah, T.N.Z. (2023). Assessment

Of Safety Management Attitude Practices Toward the Safety Culture of The Construction

Sector. Planning Malaysia, 21 (1), 12 – 23.

Peker, M., Dogru, O. C., & Meşe, G. (2022). Role of supervisor behavioural integrity for safety in

the relationship between top-management safety climate, safety motivation, and safety

performance. Safety and Health at Work, 13(2), 192-200.

Qayoom, A., & HW Hadikusumo, B. (2019). Multilevel safety culture affecting organization

safety performance: a system dynamic approach. Engineering, Construction and

Architectural Management, 26(10), 2326-2346.

Rasheed, R., & Rashid, R. (2023). Role of service quality factors in word of mouth through student

of
satisfaction. Kybernetes, In press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/k-01-2023-0119

ro
Rasheed, R., Rashid, A., Amirah, N. A., & Afthanorhan, A. (2023). Quantifying the moderating

-p
effect of servant leadership between occupational stress and employee in-role and extra-
re
role performance. Calitatea, 24(195), 60-68.
lP

Rashid, A. Rasheed, R., & Amirah, N. A. (2023). Information technology and people involvement
na

in organizational performance through supply chain collaboration. Journal of Science and

Technology Policy Management. In press. DOI: 10.1108/JSTPM-12-2022-0217

ur

Rashid, A., & Rasheed, R. (2023a). Mediation of inventory management in the relationship
Jo

between knowledge and firm performance, SAGE Open, 13(2), 1-11.

Rashid, A., & Rasheed, R. (2023b). Logistics Service Quality and Product Satisfaction. SAGE

Open, In press. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231224250

Rashid, A., & Rasheed, R. (2024). Logistics Service Quality and Product Satisfaction in E-

Commerce. SAGE Open, In press. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231224250

Rashid, A., Ali, S. B., Rasheed, R., Amirah, N. A. & Ngah, A. H. (2022a). A paradigm of

blockchain and supply chain performance: a mediated model using structural equation

modeling. Kybernetes, 52(12), 6163-6178.

Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., & Amirah, N. A., & Afthanorhan, A. (2022b). Disruptive factors and

customer satisfaction at chain stores in Karachi, Pakistan. Journal of Distribution Science,

20(10), 93-103.

Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., & Ngah, A. H. (2024). Achieving Sustainability through Multifaceted

Green Functions in Manufacturing. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing,

In press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-06-2023-0054

Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., & Ngah, A. H. (2024a). Achieving Sustainability through Multifaceted

of
Green Functions in Manufacturing. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing,

ro
In press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-06-2023-0054

-p
Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., Amirah, N. A., Yusof, Y., Khan, S., & Agha, A., A. (2021). A
re
Quantitative Perspective of Systematic Research: Easy and Step-by-Step Initial
lP

Guidelines. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 12(9), 2874-2883.

na

Rashid, A., Rasheed, R., Ngah, A. H., Mahawattage, P. J., Rahi, S., & Tunio, M. N. (2024b). Role

of Information Processing and Digital Supply Chain in Supply Chain Resilience through
ur

Supply Chain Risk Management. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, In
Jo

press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-12-2023-0106

Schopf, A. K., Stouten, J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2021). The role of leadership in air traffic safety

employees’ safety behaviour. Safety Science, 135, 105118.

Sherratt, F., & Aboagye-Nimo, E. (2022). Decolonizing occupational safety management: The

case of construction site safety culture in Ghana. Safety Science, 151, 105732.

Sileyew, K. J. (2020). Systematic industrial OSH advancement factors identification for

manufacturing industries: A case of Ethiopia. Safety Science, 132, 104989.

Subramaniam, C., Johari, J., Mashi, M. S., & Mohamad, R. (2023). The influence of safety

leadership on nurses’ safety behaviour: The mediating role of safety knowledge and

motivation. Journal of safety research, 84, 117-128.

Tappura, S., Jaaskelainen, A., & Pirhonen, J. (2022). Creation of satisfactory safety culture by

developing its key dimensions. Safety Science, 154, 105849.

Tawfik, D. S., Adair, K. C., Palassof, S., Sexton, J. B., Levoy, E., Frankel, A., & Profit, J. (2023).

Leadership Behaviour Associations with Domains of Safety Culture, Engagement, and

of
Health Care Worker Well-Being. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient

ro
Safety, 49(3), 156-165.

-p
Tear, M. J., & Reader, T. W. (2023). Understanding safety culture and safety citizenship through
re
the lens of social identity theory. Safety science, 158, 105993.
lP

Tear, M. J., Reader, T. W., Shorrock, S., & Kirwan, B. (2020). Safety culture and power:
na

interactions between perceptions of safety culture, organisational hierarchy, and national

culture. Safety Science, 121, 550-561.

ur

Uzuntarla, F., Kucukali, S., & Uzuntarla, Y. (2020). An analysis on the relationship between safety
Jo

awareness and safety behaviors of healthcare professionals, Ankara/Turkey. Journal of

occupational health, 62(1), e12129.

Vinodkumar, M. N., & Bhasi, M. (2010). Safety management practices and safety behaviour:

Assessing the mediating role of safety knowledge and motivation. Accident Analysis &

Prevention, 42(6), 2082-2093.

Wang, Z., Jiang, Z., & Blackman, A. (2021). Linking emotional intelligence to safety performance:

The roles of situational awareness and safety training. Journal of Safety Research, 78, 210–

220.
Wu, T. C., Lin, C. H., & Shiau, S. Y. (2010). Predicting safety culture: The roles of employer,

operations manager and safety professional. Journal of safety research, 41(5), 423-431.

Xue, Y., Fan, Y., & Xie, X. (2020). Relation between senior managers’ safety leadership and safety

behaviour in the Chinese petrochemical industry. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process

Industries, 65, 104142.

Yang, J., Ye, G., Zhang, Z., Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2023). Linking construction noise to worker safety

behaviour: The role of negative emotion and regulatory focus. Safety Science, 162, 106093.

of
Zara, J., Nordin, S. M., & Isha, A. S. N. (2023). Influence of communication determinants on

ro
safety commitment in a high-risk workplace: a systematic literature review of four

-p
communication dimensions. Frontiers in public health, 11.
re
Zhang, B., Chu, Z., Cheng, L., & Zou, N. (2019). A quantitative safety regulation compliance level
lP

evaluation method. Safety Science, 112, 81-89.

na

Zhang, S., Hua, X., Huang, G., & Shi, X. (2022). How does leadership in safety management affect

employees’ safety performance? A case study from mining enterprises in

ur

China. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(10), 6187.
Jo

Zhao, X., & Yan, D. (2023). Incorporating technological acceptance model into safety compliance

of construction workers in Australia. Safety Science, 163, 106127.

 Appendix: Questionnaire

Management Commitment (Zhang et al., 2022)

1. Leadership attaches great importance to safety issues.

2. Safety rules and procedures are strictly followed by leaders.

3. Corrective action is always taken when the leaders are told about unsafe practices.

4. In my workplace, managers/supervisors do not show interest in the safety of workers.

5. Leaders consider safety to be equally important with production.

of
6. Members of leadership do not attend safety meetings.

ro
7. I feel that leaders are willing to compromise on safety to increase production.

-p
8. When near-miss accidents are reported, my leaders act quickly to solve the problems.
re
9. My leaders provide sufficient personal protective equipment for the workers.
lP

Safety Leadership (Wu et al., 2010)

na

1. We often talk to employees about health and safety issues.

2. We are pleased when employee complete safety tasks.

ur

3. We often participate in regular health and safety activities.

Jo

4. We personally chair meetings of the health and safety committee.

5. We make clear that health and safety is more important than productivity.

6. We believe in employees’ ability to complete their work safely.

7. We often say that injuries are avoidable.

8. We often say that employee participation in work safety is important.

9. We use their authority to require subordinates to hit safety targets.

10. We appropriately assess and reward safety performance at the management level.

11. We draft and publish written health and safety policy.

 12. We regularly review health and safety performance at the managerial level.

Training (Fernández-Muñiz et al., 2007)

1. Worker given sufficient training period when entering firm, changing jobs or using new

technique.

2. Training actions continuous and periodic, integrated in formally established training plan.

3. Training plans elaborated taking into account firm's particular characteristics.

4. Specific training plans elaborated according to section or job position.

of
5. Training plan decided jointly with workers or their representatives.

ro
6. Training actions carried out during working day.

-p
7. Firm helps workers to train in-house (leave, grants).
re
8. Instruction manuals or work procedures elaborated to aid in preventive action.
lP

Employee Involvement (Fernández-Muñiz et al., 2007; Vinodkumar & Bhasi, 2010)

na

1. Employees involved in creating guidelines for procedures and instruction manuals.

2. Employees participate actively in devising, executing and monitoring safety plans.

ur

3. Employees comply with safety regulations.

Jo

4. Employees provide written suggestions in event of any deficiencies in working conditions.

5. Management always welcomes opinion from employees before making final decisions on

safety related matters.

6. My company has safety committees consisting of representatives of management and

employees.

7. Management promotes employees’ involvement in safety related matters.

8. Management consults with employees regularly about workplace health and safety issues.

Safety Compliance (Zhang et al., 2022; Neel et al., 2000)

 1 Employee maintain safety awareness at work.

2 Employee do not neglect safety, even when in a rush.

3 Employee comply with safety rules and standard operational procedures.

4 Employee wear personal protective equipment at work.

5 Safety compliance is our primary concern during working.

6 In order to complete more work to get more piece-rate income or measurement of income,

employee cannot ignore safety.

of
7 Employee use all the required safety equipment during my working time, such as keeping

ro
on my gloves even if they feel that doing so is inconvenient.

8
-p
Employee comply with the necessary safety rules and procedures during their working
re
time, such as the safety operating instructions for their post.
lP

9 Employee ensure the highest levels of safety during their working time, such as checking
na

the environment to ensure safety.

10 Employee take the appropriate steps if they were prevented from or punished for exercising
ur

their rights under safety rules and procedure, such as arguing with their squad leader.
Jo

Safety Motivation (Kapp & Parboteeah, 2008)

1. Employee are expected to do anything to further the company’s interests

2. Work is considered sub-standard only when it hurts the company’s interests

3. Employee are concerned with the company’s interests – to the exclusion of all else

4. Employee in this company view team spirit as important.

5. Employee are very concerned about what is generally best for employees in the company.

6. It is very important to follow strictly the company’s rules and procedures here.

7. Everyone is expected to stick by company rules and procedures.

 8. Successful employee in this company go by the book.

9. Successful employee in this company strictly obey company policies.

Safety Culture (Wu et al., 2010)

1. All employees understand emergency response equipment.

2. All employees understand emergency response plans.

3. All employees understand injury reporting procedures.

4. All employees understand emergency first aid.

of
5. Employees often fall or slip at work.

ro
6. Employees often cut themselves with equipment at work.

-p
7. Employees often fall from high places at work.
re
8. Employees often receive electric shocks at work.
lP

9. Employees regularly attend safety training.

na

10. Employees regularly receive health checks.

11. Employees contribute to decisions to improve safety.

ur

12. Employees participate in the setting of safety policy

Jo
Declaration of Interest Statement:
The authors declare that there is no financial/personal conflict of interest or belief exists for this
research.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo