BEHAVIORAL CONCEPTS AND COGNITIVE VARIABLES IN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY Jeyhun Aliyev

The lack of universally adopted concepts to predict factors that trigger accidents is deemed as one of the most important problems known today in occupational safety. It becomes extremely hard to prevent occurrences and accidents without going into subtleties of the reasons that generate it. Despite a sufficient number of causes already known in making incidents to happen in workstations, it is difficult sometimes to ensure its prevention, and the link is missed between obvious reasons and conditions that made this event happen.

?For the time being, the following principal shortcomings in the comprehensive system of occupational safety can be singled out:

?-??????? Absence of systemic perception of safety issue as a whole set of not only technical, but also social, economic, legal and other aspects;

-??????? Mere formality of adopted norms that do not ensure cohesion of interests between employees and employers, their full interaction and shared responsibility for safety;

-??????? Existence of contradictions in motivating people to respect safety rules and increase productivity of work done by employees (as a factor of increasing prosperity and career development);

-??????? High assessment of technical and technological factors impacting on the safety level (70%) while low assessment of a role played by the safety system in general when the influence of people is not regarded as important;

-??????? Key communication processes are characterized as ineffective by making production a priority over safety;

-??????? Safety management system is traditional in many businesses and is not biased for innovations by being predominantly aimed at the formation of safe working conditions rather than the safe behavior of people;

?It leads us to say that the systemic notion of safety does not exist as such, and it is overwhelmed by an aspect-like vision and approaches in the form of ‘cognitive dissonance’, ‘safety culture’, ‘behavioral approach’ that do not create a comprehensive ontological picture of this phenomenon. Today, the use of behavioral approach is deemed important. This pragmatic approach to apprehend safe forms of human behavior are accentuated on external factors of behavior and its integral elements such as actions and reactions in accordance with Watson’s formula: ‘Stimulation – Reaction’ (S - R); the role of opposite category – ‘conscience’ – is also important, and however, indeed it is responsible in emerging spontaneously formed behavioral reaction.

As a system of individual human behavior, the behavioral approach is directed at maintaining human health, life and labor resources. In other words, this method of reaching occupational safety conditions based on behavioral analysis and containing all the answers to questions on probability of potential incidents and forming the suitable conscience of employees and a safe approach to performed operations. As it goes with all concepts of protection, the main role is played by human awareness of an integral process of working activities, the understanding of hazard level, and deeper knowledge of obligations, functions and rights while performing different unsafe tasks.

As a psychological system, any behavioral approach should stem out of a clear perception of the following principle: a job is the source of income, and not of injuries. Amongst serious shortcomings in the system of the safe behavior of employees, we can underline some so-called psychological impulses, or ‘false apprehensions and misgivings’ that lead to the adoption of incorrect decisions at workstations. This system is focused on the predictability of human behavior in different situations, based on motivational and cognitive factors to ensure human perception, via interaction with other people and elements surrounding the working environment. In accordance with the Theory of Social Learning of Rotter, a behavior is defined as a unique human ability to think and foresee, and in order to predict what people will do in a specific situation, such cognitive variables as perception, expectation and values should be taken into account.

In the principles of occupational safety management given by N.N.Karnaukh, the fifth principle reflects the introduction of a regular behavioral audit of safety, e.g. the assessment of safety biased behavior of employees. Its goal is to define, detect and exclude deviations caused by unsuitable and/or dangerous behavior of personnel. At the same time, the behavioral audit does not exclude other types and forms of control.

All behavioral concepts treated in the present article are elaborated on the basis of the behavioral audits carried out in several businesses with different level HSE in accordance with the structure of ‘safe behavior’ proposed by Doctor Bill Rob.

1) One of the most frequent cases in a working environment is explained by the reluctance of an employee to be perceived as a layman due to the lack of knowledge to answer an elementary question; many feel embarrassed by a probability of asking a question which could seem obvious for others at first sight and portraying themselves as weak in front of colleagues, and therefore, opting simply to keep silence when they face a case previously unknown. Whilst asking this or that question, there is always a threat of its wrong form to formulate and ask something that seems extra obvious prompting others to make conclusions about our lack of professionalism. In this case, we can apply the fourth variable of Rotter used to predict behavior – it is the psychological situation from an individual point of view. According to Rotter’s suggestion, social situations look as observers perceive them. In this regard, his view is very close to the phenomenal approach of Karl Rogers that also perceives that, if given surrounding consequences are perceived by a man in some manner, so the latter will see it exactly as he perceives it, notwithstanding how strange its interpretation could seem to others. It is necessary to note an important role played by situational context and its impact on human behavior. A whole set of key drivers in this social situation makes people expect results of behavior – a substantiation. Thus, we can predict the behavior of an employed person who would certainly not ask a question to prevent an expected unpleasant result;

According to the Law of Gardner, 85 percent of people of any profession are incompetent. Indeed, a fear to seem incompetent prevents us sometimes to ask the things that we are not aware of. This is particularly felt for employees of industrial and construction sites. The incorrect nature of such a situation can be defined by the following formula: ‘It is better to ask and look incompetent, than to keep silent and remain so’ because our incompetence in any concrete question will continue unless we will ask about it:

C = I+Q

where,

C – Competence

I – Incompetence

Q – Question (a breaking moment in incompetence line)

The chart given above shows that the total value of variable X (questions that concern us) leads to the drastic reduction of risk levels and to the increase of the level of competence.

?2) Apprehension to be considered as physically weak or apprehensive. Many people, and particularly, newly recruited ones, are aware of the following: ‘If someone has succeeded to move a weight, so will I. I do not wish to seem weaker in any case, and therefore, I will move it at any cost and even if it hurts my health’.

3) Apprehension about being considered as a lazy person, or a desire to be distinguished from others, often causes a faster pace to be set in order to perform a task. As a concrete example, we can review the case of a supervisor who disregards all safety rules, takes care only about the volume of work done and compensates all other shortcomings by his excessive ‘workaholic’ habits. The result is obvious: one incident and two rude violations of safety rules.

4) Apprehension of being fired from the work place is considered as the biggest and the most negative of all factors described by us. Often, it seems to us that if we ask a lot of questions, then we become a problematic employee whom it is easier to fire than be taught. We fear asking questions expecting the negative reaction of the people around us.

Example: a manager of a department preferred to simply ignore, keep secret and fail to disclose complaints and requests, frequently made by his subordinates about existing problems, to management, as he was frightened of their possible displeasure. As a result, the systematic use of uncomfortable equipment jeopardized the status of occupational safety.

5) Unpreparedness (lack of HSE Training) is the main reason for 20% of the cases of the total number of fatal industrial accidents. The absence of the relevant training, as well as its low quality, represent an acute problem and a source of ‘hazardous’ behavior in a work place.

6) The psychology of some employees also has a feeling of apprehension of simply disappointing their colleagues; an unwillingness to argue with them or disagree over some questions, which lead them to impose others’ views on themselves, which can result in the violation of safety rules.

As well as the recorded apprehensions and misgivings, there are also other elements that do not depend on employees, and factors imposed on them that cause their activities to move beyond the safety boundaries.

The majority of incidents and accidents occur due to unintended pressure on an employee. In other words, the management, without realizing it, pressurizes employees. In accordance with Skinner’s theory, human behavior is divided into two types: responsive and operative;

The first type represents a specific reaction caused by the stimulus that always precedes this reaction, whilst the second type expresses the form of behavior defined by events following such reaction. Once consequences are favorable, then the probability of operative repetition increases. And, on the contrary, if the effects of reaction are not favorable and not substantiated, then the probability of getting an operative decreases. In this case, we can conclude that a respondent behavior of employees will last until the moment of the unpleasant events that define other operant response.

Thus, the management of a company which ran its activities in closed premises paid bonuses for additional volumes of work, encouraging supervisors to increase productivity. On such a basis, some of these employees did not pay attention to safety levels, as they hurried to do more work per shift. As a result, one incident with injury occurred in a two month period, whilst the work was being monitored: this was accompanied by nearly 12 non-conformity cases of various types, and 3 rude violations of “the golden rule” of closed premises – that work is performed by one employee, while the minimum number of employees inside these premises should be at least two people. To use human resources in a more “rational” manner, the supervisor decides to assign each employee to different tasks. And, this is done with the existence of all the necessary documents that prove the awareness of employees about risks and hazards. Thus, according to Skinner’s theory, the operant behavior of management is defined by a favorable nature of events, which became the source for respondent reaction of a supervisor and the reason for the unintended pressure on employees.

Another problem that serves as a source of unsafe behavior and a form of unintended pressure of management is a tough schedule. First of all, it is necessary to consider the flexibility of temporary scale. Though it is quite obvious, nevertheless, many incidents become knowingly “planned before” in its contracting stage while the work schedule is being elaborated. Many employed people start to work on site and face serious time limitations. Often, they immediately start to perform a job, instead of its preliminary discussion, and this leads subsequently to unpleasant results. Accordingly, when the work is being started, it is necessary to analyze whether the time framework assigned for the work performance will be sufficient for its safe realization. The management should agree the plan of work performance, with the directly responsible people, by timely providing the schedule of time framework. As a result, those who perform the work can make their own corrections, allowing them to do the work in a safe manner with quality. Regrettably, in many cases, the elaboration of schedules does not overpass the limits of simple planning. As a recommendation, we can consider the creation of a so-called “passive interval”, which would envisage some period of a working plan, with less intensive activities, that allows revising the planned actions and, if necessary, the course of work. This may take from one week up to several weeks.

Despite this step, at first sight, an obvious delay in the active phase of work performance is aimed at guaranteeing its safe and timely execution on the basis of quality. Stemming out from this argument, we can offer the option that excludes the start-up of work performance in a situation when it is known since the onset that the time framework will fail. This issue should be raised at the very beginning, when the time framework of performance is being studied. This is mainly applied to supervisors, who are not supposed to start the work if they know in advance about impossibility of meeting the time constraints. It is much better than hastily adapting work results to a time framework of hazard (value assigned to the final period of process of job performance in accordance with time schedule).

?We can see from the (relative) chart given below that the main workload lies in the final phase of the job performed.

This situation could have become even worse if this adaptation had started immediately at the project start-up. In such a case, the part of the hazard will move to the earlier stage of the schedule or fluctuate all along the process. The best way to sort out such a situation is to timely inform the management about the existing shortage of time and provide a real time framework for the job’s performance.

A huge number of accidents occur to people who start a job, knowing in advance about the impossibility to meet the time constraints. They are driven by a desire to hastily complete the job they have started. It presses them to cut out usual processes and bypass the SPJ line, thus causing accidents, injuries and incidents.

However, if the job has already started, then you feel the lack of time as you progress. In this case, it is not advisable to speed it up and altering HSE rules. You should solicit to be permitted to extend the time framework to complete the job already started. It is extremely simple to so do, by citing the facts that have emerged in the process of the job performance which have taken it beyond the time limits.

Another reason which is often faced in job performance and impacts negatively on the entire work process is the fatigue that serves as a source of accidents and incidents. Its main hazard is the decreasing vigilance during working operations. This fatigue can have many reasons. However, it is divided into two main groups: internal and external reasons.

External reasons consist of an incorrectly organized workstation, tiny working space, lighting problems, access to fresh air and temperature regime, risk of being misunderstood by colleagues and psychological incompatibility. All of them make working environment more complicated and tense. However, main types of external reasons are defined by chronic fatigue, physical fatigue, lack of sleep as a result of incorrect elaboration of shift schedule and a huge number of overtimes. The best way to sort out from this situation is to pay more attention to a proper elaboration of working schedule by management; and, if there is a lack of its attention to this issue, you can reveal these reasons and ask the management to review shift schedule.

Internal reasons can consist of following: psychological fatigue – homogeneity of work being done; internal conflict, apprehension of a task non-fulfillment, inability to realize own creative potential, constant doubts over own knowledge and skills when people always try to conceal own ‘incompetence’. The best way to sort out of the situation is a simple step aimed at perfecting own qualifications by attending relevant training and courses, accumulating gradually an experience and plunging into details to get more competitive and suitable at labor market to restore self-confidence.

A passion to be the first ruins more than overloaded schedule. Instead of a full-time rest in free time as done usually by other employees, a person with reputation of “the best man” is obliged to work constantly to fit own image created by his/her efforts. For this reason, sometimes one should sacrifice not only by own amusements, but also the time that could be elementarily dedicated to a sleep. After having a rest of two days, it becomes simpler and faster to perform a job when you are fresh than to be obliged to spend all time. A break in working process can help to restore strength, and after two days of full-scale rest, you would be able to do more with a considerably less consumption of your nerve cells. A tough racing to be the first will undoubtedly impact on (negatively) on health status of an employee and quality of work done by him.

Summing up all mentioned above, we can evaluate the degree of importance in applying the analysis of safe behavior at work via various polls to retrieve information which is necessary when analyzing occupational safety problems. It is also necessary to study thoroughly issues of motivation of employees, and in this regard, it is important to create both material and non-material stimulus packages for occupational safety. The foreign practice which envisages the introduction of a flexible system to encourage occupational safety is suitable for the resolution of this problem. In these circumstances, it is imperative to apply this system in all fields where it becomes possible. It is necessary to favor the formation of thinking about safety in the minds of employees via creation of conditions for realization of working potential and needs in self-realization, self-perfection and stimulation of initiative.

The Article is published in the "Scientific Perspective", and can be accessed via the following link: https://naupers.ru/wp-content/uploads/arhive/2013/Naupers%202-2013.zip

Page 83

List of references:

1.????? Nemov, R.S. - Psychology. Book 1.? Fundamentals of Psychology – 2003, edition 4;

2.????? Rubinstein. - Fundamentals of General Psychology, 1946, edition 2;

3.????? Dr Bill Rogers. - Behaviour Management;

4.????? Vestnik Psixoterapii (Herald of Psychotherapy), 2009 No 31(36);

5.????? Simonov. - ?Motivated Brain. Science, 1987;

6.????? Skinner. - Science and human behavior, 1953;

7.????? ?Julian Rotter. -? Social Learning Theory, 1982;

8.????? ?Subbotina. – Motivation of labour activity. Labour psychology - Tutorial for students of higher educational institutions, edited by Professor Karpov, publishing center “Vlados”, 2008;

9.????? V. Khaker. Engineering Psychology and Labor Psychology, German edition. Mechanical engineering, 1985;

10. Gavriel Salvendy. The?Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2012;??