Safety Intelligence: Senior
Leadership and Safety
Laura Fruhen
University of Aberdeen
Outline
• What is leadership?
• Leadership and safety
– Full range Leadership
– Leader-Member-Exchange
• Top Level Leadership and Safety
– Leadership activities
– Safety Intelligence
What is leadership?
Fleishman et al (1991)
What is leadership?
• Leadership =
“[…] constituting a process of social influence that is
enacted by designated individuals who hold formal
leadership roles in organizations”
(Kelloway & Barling, 2010; p. 261)
• Leadership =
“…the process of facilitating individual and collective
efforts to accomplish shared objectives”
(Yukl, 2002 ; p. 7)
Process Definition of Leadership
Trait Definition of Leadership
Leader
Leadership is determined by
•Height
•Intelligence
•Extraversion
•Masculinity
•Dominance
•Etc
Interaction
(e.g. Lord et al. 1986)
Followers
Theoretical approaches to
leadership
• The Trait Approach (1920-1930)
– Leaders’ characteristics are different from nonleaders
• The Behavioural Approach (1950s)
– Behaviour leaders engage in
• The Contingency Approach (1970s)
– Takes the situation into account
• New Leadership Approaches
Leadership and Safety: What do we know?
• Leadership style has an
impact on safety (e.g. Kelloway, Mullen
& Francis, 2006; Clarke & Ward, 2006)
• Two examples
– The full range leadership
model (Bass, 1985)
– Leader-member exchange
(Dansereau, Cashman, & Graen, 1973)
Leadership and Safety:
The full range of Leadership Model
(Bass, 1985)
Transformational
Leadership
Transactional leadership
Laissez Faire Leadership
Leadership and Safety:
The full range of Leadership Model
(Bass, 1985)
Transformational
Leadership
Transactional leadership
Laissez Faire Leadership
•Lowest level of leadership
•Absence of leadership
Leadership and Safety:
The full range of Leadership Model
(Bass, 1985)
Transformational
Leadership
Transactional leadership
Laissez Faire Leadership
•Contingent reward
•Management by exception
Leadership and Safety:
The full range of Leadership Model
(Bass, 1985)
Transformational
Leadership
Transactional leadership
Laissez Faire Leadership
•Idealised influence
•Inspirational motivation
•Intellectual stimulation
•Individualised consideration
The full range of Leadership Model and
Safety
+
• Transformational Leadership
Safety
– (e.g. Zohar, 2002)
• Laissez faire leadership
-
Safety
– (e.g. Zohar, 2002)
• The effects of transformational leadership style
on performance are stronger in maximum
contexts (Lim & Ployhart, 2004).
Leadership and Safety:
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX)
(Danserau, Graen & Haga, 1975)
• LMX focuses on the relation of the
leader to each of their followers
– Followers are divided into in-group and
out-group members
• Task of the leader:
– drive the relationship from a tentative
first stage to a deeper more meaningful
one
Leader Member Exchange
Out Group
In Group
L
L
L
L
L
L
F2
F3
F1
F4
F5
F6
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and
Safety
+
• LMX
safety citizenship
behaviour
+
• LMX
safety citizenship role
definitions
– These relations are moderated by safety
climate
(Hofmann, Morgeson & Gerras, 2003)
So far,
• Leadership has been established as
related to safety at lower organisational
levels
What about Senior level
leadership?
Are Senior managers positions different?
Senior Managers and Safety
• Senior Managers:
– change and improve existing corporate culture (German
Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Investigation, 2004)
– One of the most frequent employed safety climate
factors (Guldenmund, 2000)
– Commitment is one of the main drivers of employees
safety performance (Michael, Evans, Jansen & Haight, 2005)
• Only 5% of leadership literature focuses on senior
management (Horn & Zaccaro, 2003)
Can interpersonal theories also be applied to senior
leadership?
Interpersonal theories of leadership do not
readily apply to executive forms of influence
Horn & Zaccaro (2003)
Strategic Leadership research should
focus on the “substance in relation to
leadership“ Day &Lord (1988)
Executive leaders operate at a system wide
and indirect level and in some cases never
meet all their followers
Zaccaro (2001)
Senior leadership and safety programs
Harper et al. (1996)
Can you guess
what patterns
were described
in the
questionnaire?
Personable communication Priority given to safe production
• The quality of face-to-face • The attitude that the cost of
contact between managers
safety detracts from productivity
and employees
• being explicit that they are in
• Perceived friendly
the business of safe production
communication
• showing that production without
• being interested in the
safety is unacceptable
employee as an individual
• inquiring the employee’s
health and general welfare
or that of their family
Another way of looking at senior managers
and safety: Safety Intelligence
• Skills and traits of senior
executive managers in relation
to safety
• Abilities and Understanding
regarding
– Information
– Safety risks to the
organization
– Decision making
(Kirwan, 2008)
What we don’t know so far!
• What are the characteristics of the
people at the top of an organisation
who achieve high quality safety
performance?
The Skill Based Leadership Model
adapted from Mumford et al. (2000)
Investigation of Safety Intelligence
Questionnaire study
Aim: What constructs identified from the literature review are
really relevant?
Sample:
• Subject matter experts (n=38)
– senior managers
– other managers that frequently interact with CEOs
Measures
• Questionnaire with two open questions
How would you answer these two
questions?
– ‘What kind of person would you like an ideal CEO to be
regarding his or her effect on safety?’
– ‘What behaviour would you like an
ideal CEO to demonstrate regarding
his or her effect on safety?’.
How did we analyse the data?
• Qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2000)
– Carried out by two independent coders
– Interrater Agreements:
• Behaviours: Kripp α = .664
• Characteristics: Kripp α = .776
Results of Questionnaire Analysis
Social Competence
Derived from
Literature
X
Safety Knowledge
X
Problem Solving
X
Personality
Motivation/ Safety
Prioritisation
X
X
Leadership
Emerged from
Dataset
X
X
Results of Content Analysis
(Percentage)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Behaviour
Characteristics
For further Exploration: Interview Study
Sample:
• CEOs and Board members (N =9)
Measures
• Exploratory Semi Structured Interview
– Open questions & Probing questions
– Scenarios
Analysis
• Qualitative content analysis
– Carried out by two coders
– Krippendorf’s α = 0.725
Results interview study
How do you show your commitment to safety?
– engagement in terms of ‘talking about safety and
publishing material about safety’
– being ‘clear about one’s safety goals and safety itself’
– having safety on the top of the agenda
– being proactive
– be safe
– give positive feedback and rewards
The next step…
Aim: How do the identified constructs
affect safety outcomes?
Sample:
• CEOs and Board members (n = 1215 ANSPs)
Measures
• Semi Structured Interviews
– Open questions
– Scenarios
• Questionnaires
• Outcome Variables
– Management commitment
From your point of view
• How would you transfer findings
regarding senior managers and
safety into the organisation?
Thank you for your
attention!