Loading…

Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design

•Qualitative study of design safety in the process industries.•Conflict on safety is institutionalized in typical design team structures.•Power balance is important to achieve best outcomes.•Discipline engineers use emotive language to highlight potential outcomes.•Discipline engineers influence via...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Safety science 2015-10, Vol.78, p.25-34
Main Author: Hayes, Jan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313
container_end_page 34
container_issue
container_start_page 25
container_title Safety science
container_volume 78
creator Hayes, Jan
description •Qualitative study of design safety in the process industries.•Conflict on safety is institutionalized in typical design team structures.•Power balance is important to achieve best outcomes.•Discipline engineers use emotive language to highlight potential outcomes.•Discipline engineers influence via their professional standing. Converting an idea into a complex facility such as an offshore platform, an oil refinery or a petrochemical plant requires many individuals and groups with differing professional norms and organizational interests to contribute their effort and expertise over an extended period of time. Despite the complexity of this social system, little research has investigated the social processes in those workplaces where the physical form of these potentially hazardous facilities is determined. Based on 34 interviews plus workplace observation and document review in six organizations, this article addresses social relationships and attitudes within and around design teams, and factors that influence outcomes. Using concepts of power and conflict drawn from sociology and organizational psychology, the research findings address structural contributions to conflict between discipline engineers and project managers and the influence of discipline engineers on senior management decision making. In the design environment, primary responsibility for differing project goals is divided between discipline engineers (safety and quality) and project managers (cost and schedule). This research suggests that the best long-term safety outcomes are likely to be fostered where these groups have similar levels of power over key decisions so that competing goals can be openly discussed. An ethnographic study such as this necessarily provides data with depth, rather than breadth. Nevertheless, it has brought to the attention of the safety community some key issues regarding design team dynamics that have, to date, been largely ignored by social science researchers.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.012
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1770370149</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0925753515001046</els_id><sourcerecordid>1770370149</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwB5gysiTc2Y6dSDCgio9KlVhgtlznUly1SbDTSv33uGpnpveG5z3dPYzdIxQIqB7XRYzOFxywLEAWgPyCTbDSdY4g-SWbQM3LXJeivGY3Ma4BAIXCCXued3uKo1_Z0XerrKHoV13Wt613lDWHzm69i9n4Y8cs7oahDyltS2fwll21dhPp7pxT9v32-jX7yBef7_PZyyJ3Qogxx4pUWbYgK7VEp5xtbRqRc1VjC1YDOa1RS1HWtpJaS82dqqVekq6UEiim7OG0dwj97y7da7Y-OtpsbEf9LhrUGoQGlHVC-Ql1oY8xUGuG4Lc2HAyCOboya3N0ZY6uDEiTXKXS06lE6Ym9p2ASQZ2jxgdyo2l6_1_9D6iqcRk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1770370149</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Hayes, Jan</creator><creatorcontrib>Hayes, Jan</creatorcontrib><description>•Qualitative study of design safety in the process industries.•Conflict on safety is institutionalized in typical design team structures.•Power balance is important to achieve best outcomes.•Discipline engineers use emotive language to highlight potential outcomes.•Discipline engineers influence via their professional standing. Converting an idea into a complex facility such as an offshore platform, an oil refinery or a petrochemical plant requires many individuals and groups with differing professional norms and organizational interests to contribute their effort and expertise over an extended period of time. Despite the complexity of this social system, little research has investigated the social processes in those workplaces where the physical form of these potentially hazardous facilities is determined. Based on 34 interviews plus workplace observation and document review in six organizations, this article addresses social relationships and attitudes within and around design teams, and factors that influence outcomes. Using concepts of power and conflict drawn from sociology and organizational psychology, the research findings address structural contributions to conflict between discipline engineers and project managers and the influence of discipline engineers on senior management decision making. In the design environment, primary responsibility for differing project goals is divided between discipline engineers (safety and quality) and project managers (cost and schedule). This research suggests that the best long-term safety outcomes are likely to be fostered where these groups have similar levels of power over key decisions so that competing goals can be openly discussed. An ethnographic study such as this necessarily provides data with depth, rather than breadth. Nevertheless, it has brought to the attention of the safety community some key issues regarding design team dynamics that have, to date, been largely ignored by social science researchers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0925-7535</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1042</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.012</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</publisher><subject>Conflict ; Design engineering ; Dynamic tests ; Dynamics ; Norms ; Offices ; Organizational safety ; Power ; Project management ; Safety ; Safety in design ; Schedules ; Workplaces</subject><ispartof>Safety science, 2015-10, Vol.78, p.25-34</ispartof><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hayes, Jan</creatorcontrib><title>Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design</title><title>Safety science</title><description>•Qualitative study of design safety in the process industries.•Conflict on safety is institutionalized in typical design team structures.•Power balance is important to achieve best outcomes.•Discipline engineers use emotive language to highlight potential outcomes.•Discipline engineers influence via their professional standing. Converting an idea into a complex facility such as an offshore platform, an oil refinery or a petrochemical plant requires many individuals and groups with differing professional norms and organizational interests to contribute their effort and expertise over an extended period of time. Despite the complexity of this social system, little research has investigated the social processes in those workplaces where the physical form of these potentially hazardous facilities is determined. Based on 34 interviews plus workplace observation and document review in six organizations, this article addresses social relationships and attitudes within and around design teams, and factors that influence outcomes. Using concepts of power and conflict drawn from sociology and organizational psychology, the research findings address structural contributions to conflict between discipline engineers and project managers and the influence of discipline engineers on senior management decision making. In the design environment, primary responsibility for differing project goals is divided between discipline engineers (safety and quality) and project managers (cost and schedule). This research suggests that the best long-term safety outcomes are likely to be fostered where these groups have similar levels of power over key decisions so that competing goals can be openly discussed. An ethnographic study such as this necessarily provides data with depth, rather than breadth. Nevertheless, it has brought to the attention of the safety community some key issues regarding design team dynamics that have, to date, been largely ignored by social science researchers.</description><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Design engineering</subject><subject>Dynamic tests</subject><subject>Dynamics</subject><subject>Norms</subject><subject>Offices</subject><subject>Organizational safety</subject><subject>Power</subject><subject>Project management</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Safety in design</subject><subject>Schedules</subject><subject>Workplaces</subject><issn>0925-7535</issn><issn>1879-1042</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwB5gysiTc2Y6dSDCgio9KlVhgtlznUly1SbDTSv33uGpnpveG5z3dPYzdIxQIqB7XRYzOFxywLEAWgPyCTbDSdY4g-SWbQM3LXJeivGY3Ma4BAIXCCXued3uKo1_Z0XerrKHoV13Wt613lDWHzm69i9n4Y8cs7oahDyltS2fwll21dhPp7pxT9v32-jX7yBef7_PZyyJ3Qogxx4pUWbYgK7VEp5xtbRqRc1VjC1YDOa1RS1HWtpJaS82dqqVekq6UEiim7OG0dwj97y7da7Y-OtpsbEf9LhrUGoQGlHVC-Ql1oY8xUGuG4Lc2HAyCOboya3N0ZY6uDEiTXKXS06lE6Ym9p2ASQZ2jxgdyo2l6_1_9D6iqcRk</recordid><startdate>201510</startdate><enddate>201510</enddate><creator>Hayes, Jan</creator><general>Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201510</creationdate><title>Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design</title><author>Hayes, Jan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Design engineering</topic><topic>Dynamic tests</topic><topic>Dynamics</topic><topic>Norms</topic><topic>Offices</topic><topic>Organizational safety</topic><topic>Power</topic><topic>Project management</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Safety in design</topic><topic>Schedules</topic><topic>Workplaces</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hayes, Jan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Safety science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hayes, Jan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design</atitle><jtitle>Safety science</jtitle><date>2015-10</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>78</volume><spage>25</spage><epage>34</epage><pages>25-34</pages><issn>0925-7535</issn><eissn>1879-1042</eissn><abstract>•Qualitative study of design safety in the process industries.•Conflict on safety is institutionalized in typical design team structures.•Power balance is important to achieve best outcomes.•Discipline engineers use emotive language to highlight potential outcomes.•Discipline engineers influence via their professional standing. Converting an idea into a complex facility such as an offshore platform, an oil refinery or a petrochemical plant requires many individuals and groups with differing professional norms and organizational interests to contribute their effort and expertise over an extended period of time. Despite the complexity of this social system, little research has investigated the social processes in those workplaces where the physical form of these potentially hazardous facilities is determined. Based on 34 interviews plus workplace observation and document review in six organizations, this article addresses social relationships and attitudes within and around design teams, and factors that influence outcomes. Using concepts of power and conflict drawn from sociology and organizational psychology, the research findings address structural contributions to conflict between discipline engineers and project managers and the influence of discipline engineers on senior management decision making. In the design environment, primary responsibility for differing project goals is divided between discipline engineers (safety and quality) and project managers (cost and schedule). This research suggests that the best long-term safety outcomes are likely to be fostered where these groups have similar levels of power over key decisions so that competing goals can be openly discussed. An ethnographic study such as this necessarily provides data with depth, rather than breadth. Nevertheless, it has brought to the attention of the safety community some key issues regarding design team dynamics that have, to date, been largely ignored by social science researchers.</abstract><pub>Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.012</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0925-7535
ispartof Safety science, 2015-10, Vol.78, p.25-34
issn 0925-7535
1879-1042
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1770370149
source Elsevier
subjects Conflict
Design engineering
Dynamic tests
Dynamics
Norms
Offices
Organizational safety
Power
Project management
Safety
Safety in design
Schedules
Workplaces
title Investigating design office dynamics that support safe design
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T12%3A13%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Investigating%20design%20office%20dynamics%20that%20support%20safe%20design&rft.jtitle=Safety%20science&rft.au=Hayes,%20Jan&rft.date=2015-10&rft.volume=78&rft.spage=25&rft.epage=34&rft.pages=25-34&rft.issn=0925-7535&rft.eissn=1879-1042&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1770370149%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-18e655f0486b1c6cafa486122691f0a70ec77174359a8477472c6947be7866313%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1770370149&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true