1. Industry’s Perspective of Design for Safety Regulations John Gambatese, Oregon State University, USA Alistair Gibb, Loughborough University, UK Phil Bust, Loughborough University, UK Michael Behm, East Carolina University, USA CIB W099 Conference Working Together: Planning, Designing and Building a Healthy and Safety Construction Industry Melbourne, Australia October 21-23, 2009

2. Prevention through Design (PtD) “Addressing occupational safety and health needs in the design process to prevent or minimize the work-related hazards and risks associated with the construction, manufacture, use, maintenance, and disposal of facilities, materials, and equipment.” “Addressing occupational safety and health needs in the design process to prevent or minimize the work-related hazards and risks associated with the construction, manufacture, use, maintenance, and disposal of facilities, materials, and equipment.” (http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/PTD/)

3. Implementing PtD in Construction Why design for construction safety? Why design for construction safety? Connection between design and site hazards Connection between design and site hazards Ethical responsibility Ethical responsibility Ability to influence safety (hierarchy of controls) Ability to influence safety (hierarchy of controls) Makes good business sense Makes good business sense Contractually obligated Contractually obligated Required by statute (some countries) Required by statute (some countries) Other… Other…    ? ? ?

4. Research Study Assess the effects of the CDM regulations on the construction industry in the UK Assess the effects of the CDM regulations on the construction industry in the UK Affect of CDM regulations on: Affect of CDM regulations on: Design, construction, and safety Design, construction, and safety Perceptions of safety, roles on the project, and organizational and professional culture Perceptions of safety, roles on the project, and organizational and professional culture Management of projects Management of projects Presence of innovative processes and products Presence of innovative processes and products

5. Research Study Focus group interviews Focus group interviews 6 professional “communities”: 6 professional “communities”: Architects, design engineers, facility owners/developers, constructors, manufacturers/suppliers, and H&S consultants Architects, design engineers, facility owners/developers, constructors, manufacturers/suppliers, and H&S consultants 13 focus group interviews 13 focus group interviews Total of 61 participants in interviews Total of 61 participants in interviews Experience with CDM regulations: 1-18 years (mean = 11.1) Experience with CDM regulations: 1-18 years (mean = 11.1) 46% from firms with >1,000 employees 46% from firms with >1,000 employees 26% H&S consultation, 22% project management, 20% construction, 18% engineering, and 14% architecture 26% H&S consultation, 22% project management, 20% construction, 18% engineering, and 14% architecture Industry sectors: 36% commercial, 35% industrial, 29% infrastructure, and 28% residential Industry sectors: 36% commercial, 35% industrial, 29% infrastructure, and 28% residential

6. Results: What is done differently now? Changes since introduction of CDM regulations: Changes since introduction of CDM regulations: More safety notes/symbols on drawings More safety notes/symbols on drawings More pre-fabrication More pre-fabrication More consideration of construction earlier in project More consideration of construction earlier in project Safety constructability, not just constructability Safety constructability, not just constructability More paperwork!! More paperwork!! Designer change in perspective regarding safety Designer change in perspective regarding safety More communication/collaboration as a team More communication/collaboration as a team Causing them to “just do what they should do as professionals” Causing them to “just do what they should do as professionals” “This is the real driver. CDM was just the catalyst.” “This is the real driver. CDM was just the catalyst.”

7. Results: Impact on Projects Change as a result of implementing PtD Change as a result of implementing PtD (% of respondents) ItemDecrease No Change Increase Design cost (n=35)6%46%49% Construction cost (n=38)34%24%42% Design duration (n=37)8%57%35% Construction duration (n=39)38%44%18% Construction quality (n=39)8%28%64% Construction worker productivity (n=30)13%33%53% Construction worker health & safety (n=45)4%9%87% End-user health and safety (n=42)5%10%86%

8. Results: Barriers and Enablers Barriers: Barriers: Designer education and training Designer education and training Difficult for designers to assess risks Difficult for designers to assess risks Also differences in risk thresholds Also differences in risk thresholds Lack of knowledge of CDM regulations Lack of knowledge of CDM regulations Too much paperwork!! Too much paperwork!! Separation of design and construction Separation of design and construction Competing priorities (safety vs. cost/schedule) Competing priorities (safety vs. cost/schedule) Enablers: Enablers: Construction experience of A/Es Construction experience of A/Es Integrated project delivery methods (e.g., design-build) Integrated project delivery methods (e.g., design-build) A good CDM Coordinator and early involvement A good CDM Coordinator and early involvement

9. Results: Desired Changes Desires/Needs: Desires/Needs: Less paperwork!! Less paperwork!! Guidance on what designers should do in practice and what is better left up to the contractor Guidance on what designers should do in practice and what is better left up to the contractor Improvements in safety and design culture Improvements in safety and design culture Make CDM Coordinator a more “professional” position, on the same level as the A/E Make CDM Coordinator a more “professional” position, on the same level as the A/E

10. PtD Regulations: Issues to Consider Issues/concerns: Issues/concerns: Small projects vs. large projects Small projects vs. large projects Involvement/impact depends on industry sector Involvement/impact depends on industry sector On some projects: On some projects: Just “doing the paperwork” (depends on CDM Coordinator) Just “doing the paperwork” (depends on CDM Coordinator) Alienating designers instead of engaging them Alienating designers instead of engaging them Focus on “commercially practicable” Focus on “commercially practicable” Just documenting the risk and managing it as usual? Just documenting the risk and managing it as usual? Minimal pushing of interventions up the hierarchy of controls Minimal pushing of interventions up the hierarchy of controls Designing for operations and maintenance safety viewed as satisfying CDM regulations? Designing for operations and maintenance safety viewed as satisfying CDM regulations? Construction safety still “passed on” to contractor Construction safety still “passed on” to contractor

11. PtD Regulations: Issues to Consider Issues/concerns: Issues/concerns: “Whatever I do won’t help.” “Whatever I do won’t help.” Planning Supervisor credibility Planning Supervisor credibility Design already optimized on standard projects? Design already optimized on standard projects? PtD message lost amid need to meet CDM regulations PtD message lost amid need to meet CDM regulations Where does designer’s responsibility end? Where does designer’s responsibility end? By doing PtD, is there now less of a need to do downstream risk management? By doing PtD, is there now less of a need to do downstream risk management? Yes and No Yes and No If no CDM, then PtD would not happen? If no CDM, then PtD would not happen? Yes and No Yes and No

12. Thanks for Listening Questions? Comments? Questions? Comments? For more information: For more information: john.gambatese@oregonstate.edu john.gambatese@oregonstate.edu john.gambatese@oregonstate.edu A.g.gibb@lboro.ac.uk A.g.gibb@lboro.ac.uk A.g.gibb@lboro.ac.uk P.d.bust@lboro.ac.uk P.d.bust@lboro.ac.uk P.d.bust@lboro.ac.uk behmm@ecu.edu behmm@ecu.edu behmm@ecu.edu