Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published January 2004

Organizational Competence in Strategic Safety Management: Self-Assessment in U.K. Rail Industry

Abstract

Competence Assurance Solutions Ltd. (CAS) produced the Good Practice Guide in 2000, the first version of Railway Safety’s Good Practice Guides for strategic safety management. The guides and accompanying software contain a self-assessment process that enables the top management teams of railway companies to determine whether the team and the organization are sufficiently competent to discharge their strategic safety management responsibilities. To support the Good Practice Guides, CAS provides, on behalf of the Rail Safety and Standards Board (which succeeded Railway Safety on April 1, 2003), a mentoring process to guide top management teams through the self-assessment process. The findings and conclusions from the ongoing mentoring process are presented. At present, 27 leading U.K. rail companies are being mentored. They are in different stages of the process, although many have completed a self-assessment in all four of the key strategic areas considered: policy and strategy, risk assessment and control, organizational resourcing and support, and operational control. Already, a pattern has emerged among those companies that have completed the assessment. Almost all consider themselves stronger in the areas of strategy and policy and operational control and weaker in the areas of risk control and resourcing and support. The weaknesses are particularly marked for human factors. Furthermore, companies differ significantly in their self-ratings, with these differences being reflected in some aspects of safety performance. Consideration is given to the safety issues that dominate the minds of senior teams, their areas of strength and weakness, the characteristics of high- and low-scoring companies, and the sources of unrealistic self-assessments.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Nelson A. Railway Group Year End Safety Performance Report 1999/2000. Safety and Standards Directorate, Railtrack PLC, London, May 2000.
2. SPAD Investigation: A Good Practice Guide, 2nd ed. Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, July 2002.
3. Safety Tours: A Good Practice Guide, Issue No. 2. Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, Dec. 2001.
4. A. D. Little Ltd. Strengthening Safety Culture and Competency Across the UK Rail Industry. Railway Safety Ltd., London, July 2002.
5. Committed to Safety: Safety Leadership Training. Policy and Standards Directorate, Rail Safety and Standards Board, London, 2003.
6. Good Practice Guides. Part 1: Assessing and Developing the Competence of Senior Management Teams in Strategic Safety Management. Part 2: Reviewing and Developing the Safety Performance of Managers, 3rd ed. Policy and Standards Directorate, Rail Safety and Standards Board, London, 2003.
7. Lord Cullen. Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry Report, Parts 1 and 2. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, 2001.
8. DuPont Safety Resources. Safety Management in the Railway Group. Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, 2000.
9. Health and Safety Executive. Hatfield Derailment Investigation: Interim Recommendations of the Investigation Board. HSE Books, Sudbury, United Kingdom, Aug. 2002.
10. The Institute of Chartered Accountants. Internal Control—Guidance for Directors on the Combined Code. Accountancy Books, London, Sept. 1999.
11. Health and Safety Executive. Safety Case Acceptance Criteria. April 2003. www.hse.gov.uk/railways/rsc/criteria/index.htm. Accessed April 2003.
12. Railway Group Safety Plan 2000/01. Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, 2000.
13. Strategic Safety Management Software, Version 2 (CD-ROM). Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, Feb. 2003.
14. Boyatzis R. E. The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom, 1982.
15. Competence Management in the Rail Industry; Railway Safety's Decision-Making Policy. Policy and Standards Directorate, Railway Safety, London, Feb. 2003.
16. Barling J., Kelloway E. K., and Iverson R. D. High Quality Work, Job Satisfaction, and Occupational Injuries. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, No. 2, 2003, pp. 276–283.
17. Bradford D. M., and Ryan R. F. Behind the Mirror of Safety. Professional Safety, Dec. 1996, pp. 34–36.
18. Goldberg A. T. How Many Stitches Are Boots Worth? The True Effect of Safety Incentive Programs. Professional Safety, Jan. 1997, pp. 37–38.
19. Wall T. D., Cordery J. L., and Clegg C. W. Empowerment, Performance, and Operational Uncertainty: A Theoretical Integration. Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2002, pp. 146–169.
20. Lewis J. F. Strategic Management. Report A1A07. Committee on Strategic Management, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000. gulliver.trb.org/publications/millenium/00110.pdf. Accessed June 2002.
21. Safety, Health & Environment Progress Report. Exxon Mobil, Irving, TX, 2001.
22. Management Leadership. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 2003. www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/safetyhealth/mod4_factsheets_mgtleader.html. Accessed June 26, 2003.
23. Health and Safety Executive. Successful Health and Safety Management, HSG65. HSE Books, Sudbury, United Kingdom, 2000.
24. Katzenbach J., and Smith D. The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass., 1993.
25. Naquin C. E., and Tynan R. O. The Team Halo Effect: Why Teams Are Not Blamed for Their Failures. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, No. 2, 2003, pp. 332–340.
26. Barrick M. R., Stewart G. L., Neubert M. J., and Mount M. K. Relating Member Ability and Personality to Work-Team Processes and Team Effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83, No. 3, 1998, pp. 377–391.
27. Brodbeck F. C. Criteria for the Study of Work Group Functioning. In The Handbook of Work Group Psychology (West M. A., ed.), John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom, 1996.
28. Belbin R. M. Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, United Kingdom, 1981.
29. Mullen B., and Copper C. The Relation Between Group Cohesiveness and Performance. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 115, No. 2, 1994, pp. 210–227.
30. Steiner I. D. Group Processes and Productivity. Academic Press, New York, 1972.
31. Cronbach L. J. Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika, Vol. 16, 1951, pp. 297–334.
32. Schmitt N. Use and Abuses of Coefficient Alpha. Psychological Assessment, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1996, pp. 350–353.
33. Prochaska J. O., Redding C. A., and Evers K. The Transtheoretical Model of Change. In Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice (Glanz K., Lewis F. M., and Rimer B. K., eds.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 1997.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published: January 2004
Issue published: January 2004

Rights and permissions

© 2004 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Charles Johnson
Competence Assurance Solutions Ltd., 9 Lawford Road, Rugby CV21 2DZ, United Kingdom
Aidan Nelson
Policy and Standards, Rail Safety and Standards Board, Evergreen House, 160 Euston Road, London NW1 2DX, United Kingdom

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 27

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 2

  1. Trust managers and respect workmen: What does it mean to be competent ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Railway-controller-perceived competence in incidents and accidents
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub