Introduction: Unsafe behaviors persist as a primary cause of workplace accidents in manufacturing,
critically undermining occupational safety. While existing studies address fragmented
aspects of human error, the interaction between individual traits (e.g., psychological
factors, demographics) and organizational systems (e.g., leadership, safety protocols)
remains underexplored. This study bridges this gap by applying Grounded Theory Method
(GTM) to analyze multifactorial drivers of unsafe acts. Findings aim to inform targeted
interventions, revealing how personal vulnerabilities and systemic pressures jointly
shape risk-related decisions in high-risk industrial environments.
Methods: A qualitative approach was used, involving semi-structured interviews with 40 participants
from steel industries, safety experts, and academics. Data analysis followed Strauss
and Corbin's Grounded Theory Method framework, using open, axial, and selective coding
to identify themes. This method ensured a systematic and rigorous exploration of the
data.
Results: Demographic Characteristics: Five themes emerged, including age, experience level,
and educational background. Older workers with extensive experience demonstrated lower
risk-taking tendencies, aligning with findings on workforce composition and safety
performance. General Health: Physical fitness and chronic health conditions (e.g.,
sleep disorders) directly influenced risk perception and decision-making accuracy.
Poor sleep quality correlated with increased errors, corroborating studies on fatigue-related
safety compromises. Individual Competencies: Safety knowledge, situational awareness,
and procedural adherence were critical. Gaps in formal training exacerbated unsafe
acts, emphasizing the need for high-quality competency development programs. Personality
Traits: Five traits significantly impacted behavior: Risk tolerance, conscientiousness,
stress resilience, attentional control and peer influence dynamics. Psychological
Factors: Motivational deficits, cognitive overload, complacency, perceived time pressures,
and emotional states (e.g., anxiety) emerged as key contributors. These align with
organizational research on mental workload and safety culture. Organizational Interactions:
The study revealed that organizational factors such as leadership quality, resource
allocation for safety, and production-safety balance amplified or mitigated individual
risks. For instance, time pressures from inefficient scheduling directly exacerbated
estimation errors, while robust safety communication channels improved situational
awareness.
Conclusion: This study presents an integrated framework connecting individual vulnerabilities
(e.g., cognitive biases, health limitations) to organizational safety systems. Prioritized
strategies include competency-based training targeting estimation errors; workflow
redesign aligned with fatigue patterns; personality-tailored safety coaching; and
leadership- driven safety culture enhancements via resource allocation. These measures
address systemic roots of unsafe behaviors, bridging gaps between worker decision-making
flaws and organizational pressures to foster proactive risk mitigation in high-hazard
industries.
