FRAMEWORK PARA APLICAÇÃO DA ABORDAGEM SAFETY-II NO NÍVEL OPERACIONAL NA CONSTRUÇÃO
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46421/entac.v18i.1163Keywords:
Safety-II, Construction Industry, Framework, Operational LevelAbstract
The construction industry still predominantly uses the Safety-I approach, despite an increase in the complexity of the systems. Although it has shown an improvement in safety performance in recent years, it shows a high fatality rate. In this context, there is a shortage of models based on the new Safety-II approach, which applies analysis and assessment tools to learn from successes and failures in daily tasks. Therefore, this paper aims to propose a framework to apply the Safety-II approach to the construction industry's operational level. The research strategy is the Design Science Research (DSR), and this study is part of a master's thesis that is still in progress. Thus, the DSR in this study consists of Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and exploratory study, in the stage of awareness of the problem, and proposition of the framework, in the suggestion and development stage. As a result, an easy-to-use structure was developed to guide the operationalization of the Safety-II approach and contribute to a better knowledge of occupational safety and health professionals regarding this new approach.
References
BRISTOW, Michele; FANG, Liping; HIPEL, Keith W. System of Systems Engineering and Risk Management of Extreme Events: Concepts and Case Study. Risk Analysis. v. 32, n. 11, p. 1935-1955. jul. 2012.
COSTELLA, Marcelo Fabiano; STANISCI, Rodrigo Barcelos; MARTINS, Jéssica Barros; LANTELME, Elvira Maria Vieira; PILZ, Silvio Edmundo. Exploring Safety-II in practice: a study in the construction industry. Relatório de projeto de pesquisa conjunto Unochapecó/IMED, 2019.
HALE, A.R.; SWUSTE, P. Safety rules: procedural freedom or action constraint? Safety Science.
v. 29, n. 3, p. 163-177. ago. 1998.
HOLLNAGEL, Erik. Safety-I and Safety-II: The past and future of safety management. London: Ashgate, 2014. 187 p.
HOLLNAGEL, Erik. Safety-II in practice: Developing the resilience potentials. New York: Routledge, 2018. 130 p.
LUKKA, Kari. The constructive research approach. In: OJALA, Lauri; HILMOLA, Olli-pekka. Case study research in logistics. Publications of the Turku School Of Economics And Business Administration, 2003. p. 83-101. (Series B1).
MCNAB, D; BOWIE, P; MORRISON, J; ROSS, A. Understanding patient safety performance and educational needs using the ‘Safety-II’ approach for complex systems. Education For Primary Care. v. 27, n. 6, p. 443-450. nov. 2016.
MOHER, David; LIBERATI, Alessandro; TETZLAFF, Jennifer; ALTMAN, Douglas; PRISMA, Group.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the prisma statement: The PRISMA Statement. Annals Of Internal Medicine. v. 151, N. 4, p. 264-269. ago. 2009.
MORRISON, John E.; MELIZA, Larry L. Foundations of the After Action Review Process. Special Report 42. United States: U.s Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1999. 82 p.
PARK, J; KIM, J; LEE, S; JONGHYUN, K. Modeling Safety-II based on unexpected reactor trips.
Annals Of Nuclear Energy. v. 115, p. 280-293. 26 jan. 2018.
SUJAN, Mark A.; HUANG, Huayi; BRAITHWAITE, Jeffrey. Learning from incidents in health care: Critique from a Safety-II perspective. Safety Science. v. 99, p. 115-121. nov. 2017.
VAISHNAVI, Vijay K.; KUECHLER, William. Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology. New York: Auerbach Publications, 2007. 415 p.
ZHOU, Zhipeng; GOH, Yang Miang; LI, Qiming. Overview and analysis of safety management studies in the construction industry. Safety Science. v. 72, p. 337-350. fev. 2015.
