Upload
aurora-witt
View
28
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Hans Jørgen Limborg, [email protected] Sisse Grøn, [email protected]. Nordic Work Life Conference 2014 Göteborg. Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises to promote health and safety. W hat are the lessons to learn?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises to promote health and safety What are the lessons to learn?
Hans Jørgen Limborg, [email protected] Grøn, [email protected]
Nordic Work Life Conference 2014Göteborg
BACKGROUND OF THEPROJECTCURRENT RESEARCH ON SME’S AND OHS
Reasonable knowledge about regulation – but difficulties to meet demands for formalised OHS practise (Hasle et al 2004, Forteyn et al 97)
They have few ressources but responses to external pressure (Champoux & Brun 2003, Hasle & Limborg 2006)
Questions of OHS are approached with the same informal approach as the task of management (Walters 2001, Axelsson 2002)
Local and sectorial networks are important to them (Birgersdottir 2002, Johansson 98, Limborg & Mathiessen 2010)
THE PTHE PROJECTROJECT - IDEA, DATA AND METHODOLOGY
Three networks; a group of small diaries (21) and microbreweries (26) received funding for development projects aimed to reduce MSD + a group of demolishersOur hypothesis is that SME’s are influenced stronger by their networks than other external actors, but we need to identify the mechanisms the ‘drive’ the processData: Interviews with key persons, documents, company visits and project evaluations.
THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT AND THE PAPER
To provide knowledge on how networks among SME’s can be a catalyst for general policy instruments aiming to improve OHSTo pinpoint effective network mechanisms
5
NETWORKING AND MECHANISMS
•Critical realismCombines a realist ontology with a
constructuvist epistemiology (Maxwell)‘…I assume that the real world is out there
– but that our representations of that world are constructions’ (Fredrik Barth)
•Analysis: Bygstad & Munkvolds framework for identifying causal structures (IT)Mechanism: a causal structure that
explains a phenomenon
19-04-2023
6
THE DAIRIES CASE
• 21 small dairies• Applied for funding jointly• Project to develop technical aids• Aided by private consultant• Cases and controls openly selected
• One major competitor• Pressure from labor inspection• Pioneer figure• Agreement on power relations• Openess pact• Outcome:
PrizeTechnical aids developed and implemented in case dairiesSome dissermination of ideas
19-04-2023
Billede fra: http://www.st-clemens.dk/
7
THE BREWERIES CASE
• 25 small breweries• Applied for a similar project• Case breweries selected themselves…• Aided by a consultant
• One major competitor• Entrepreneurs• Driven by enthusiasm
• Outcome:Equipment implemented in control breweriesA booklet
19-04-2023
8
THE DEMOLISHERS CASE
• 25 enterprises in the group• Need to become a profession• Decision to provide vocational training• Aided by a consultant
• Need to distinguish between top and bottom• Pioneer
• Outcome: Well functioning trainingKnowledge sharing on employees levelStratification
19-04-2023
Billede fra http://www.brandis.dk/billeder
9
KEY COMPONENTS
•Need for distinktion•External pressure•Funding•Professional support•Pioneer figure (s)•Assymtry
19-04-2023
PROGRAM THEORYTHEORY OF BOTH PREVENTION PROJECTS
The network as context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation, organised meeting opportunity ,
limited resources, a “we” in opposition to the large company, focus on quality
Project
group
Screening and
priority of
problems
Nomination
of frontrunner
companies
Development and
implementa-tion of
solutions
Improved
working conditi
ons
Distribution of
ideas to the
network
Fund
ing
(P
rev
en-
tion
Fund
)
External mechanism
The network
Skilled consul-tants
IMPLEMENTATION
Control and
possible
enforce-
ment
Funding
KnowledgeProcesDevelop-ment
Policy instruments:
Prevention project
The network
The network context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation,
organised meeting opportunity , limited resources, a “we” in opposition to the
large company, focus on quality
Skilled advisor
s
External mechanisms:
Prevention fund
Labour Ínspectio
n
Project
group
Screenin
g and priority
Nomination of
frontrunn
er
Develop
-men
t and implemen-
tation
Improved
working conditions
Distribution of ideas
to the network
Financial support from Prevention Fund
2020- actionplan reduction of MSD
•Projectorganisation
•Mapping of exposure
•Catalogue of good ideas
Committee”Firebrand”
• Development of prototypes
• Real time testingTest companies
Followers,Supplyer
• Implementation of aids
• Utilisation• ”Open house” dissemination of experience
Safety commitee
•Fewer notes from L.I.
• Price for best project 2011
•New generally accepted standard
•Reduced number of heavy lifts
•Reduced sick leave Outcome
Mechanism 1: External support to project & presure from L.I.
Mechanism 2:• “Handshake” - trust among
network participants• Skillful Consultant – able to
push
Mechanism 3:Development and testning in real lifeWorkers participationGood relation to supplyer
Mechanism 4:• Curiosity from peers• Accessibility to experiences – “Pact on openness”•Willingness to share
Mechanism 5:Sustainability
Internal context: History, knowledge and experience related to OHS
Primary context: The network
Secondary context: Labour inspection, unions
and society
MECHANISMS
National regulationLabour inspection
I SPITMECHANISMSPROGRAMME THEORIES THE PROJECTS DEVELOPED VERYMECA DIFFERENT.
Mechanism Dairies (1) Breweries (2) Demolishers (3)
External External pressure from Labour Inspection
Active Limited Active
Need for distinction
Active Active Active
External funding
Active Active Active
Professional support (consultant)
Active Partly Active
Internal Pioneer figure Active Partly Partly
Recognition of asymmetry
Agreed None None
14
DISCUSSION
•Power relations
•Pioneers, but with what mandate?•The limitations of causality•The limitations of measurable outcome•Research in less than perfect circumstances
19-04-2023
Trust in networks
Thank you for [email protected]