Asian Social Science; Vol. 9, No.

3; 2013
ISSN 1911-2017
E-ISSN 1911-2025
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

Safety Culture in Combating Occupational Safety and Health

Problems in the Malaysian Manufacturing Sectors
Noor Aina Amirah1, Wan Izatul Asma1,2, Mohd Shaladdin Muda1 & Wan Abd Aziz Wan Mohd Amin3
1

Faculty of Management and Economics, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia

Institute of Oceanography and Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia

Faculty of Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia

Correspondence: Wan Izatul Asma, Institute of Oceanography and Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu,
Terengganu, Malaysia. Tel: 60-9-668-3620. E-mail: [email protected]
Received: January 1, 2013
doi:10.5539/ass.v9n3p182

Accepted: January 28, 2013

Online Published: February 28, 2013

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n3p182

Abstract
Rapid economic growth via industrialization has given not only a significant impact in terms of income
distributions and quality of life, but it also resulted in increasing number of accidents at workplace. In reducing
risk at the workplace, Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) is an important aspect. It is a standard which are
set in legislation with the aim to eliminate and reduce hazards at workplace. Besides OSH, the term of safety
culture is also an important aspect in reducing risk and accident at workplace. This paper highlights the
problems in the Malaysian manufacturing industries namely the high accident rate in manufacturing industries
which may be due to lack of safety culture and non-compliance of the Malaysian Occupational Safety and Health
Acts (OSHAs) requirements which may inadvertently led to lack of safety culture. The existence of these
problems shows that workers and employers behaviour and compliance to OSHA will lead to positive safety
culture which in turn will lead to reduction of accidents rate in the manufacturing industries in Malaysia.
Keywords: occupational safety and health, safety culture, safety compliance, malaysian manufacturing
industries
1. Introduction
Rapid economic growth via industrialization has given not only significant impact in terms of income
distributions and quality of life, but it has also resulted in increasing number of accidents at workplace.
According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), it is estimated that every year about 2 million workers
are killed due to work-related accidents and diseases, 270 million occupational accidents and 160 million
work-related diseases are occurring (Soehod & Laxman 2007). Occupational safety and health (OSH), which is
the discipline concerned with preserving and protecting human and facility resources in the workplace, is an
important aspect in reducing risk at workplace. OSH is a basically standard which are set in legislation with the
aim to eliminate and reduce hazards at workplace. The focus of OSH is to have a healthy and productive
workforce for the good of the people and the nation (Abdul Rahman, 2006).
According to Rantanen, Lehtinen & Savolainen (2004), there are different priorities regarding safety and health
between industrialized and developing countries. Priorities in industrially countries are stress, aged workers,
workers right to know, chemicals, ergonomics, occupational safety and health management systems and health
services. On the other hand, priorities in safety and health in industrially developing countries are agriculture,
hazardous occupations like construction and mining, major hazard control, small enterprises, informal sector,
occupational diseases reporting and safety, health and child labor. Thus, a good safety management system with
the implementation of safety and health legislation will help the employers in promoting safety and health at
workplace. Therefore, most Asian countries awareness on the importance of having comprehensive safety and
health laws in all types of jobs has started to gain momentum. According to Soehod & Laxman (2007), Malaysia
is the first Asian country to have enacted safety and health legislation covering all occupations. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (OSHA) covers occupational safety and health in both private and
public sectors. The main goal of this Act is to ensure that the employers provide safe working condition to the
employees. It promotes for workplace free from any hazards such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive
182

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress or unsanitary conditions.

Apart from OSH, the terms safety culture is also an important aspect in reducing risks and accidents at
workplace. The term safety culture arose due to the Chernobyl major accidents in 1986 (Ostrom, Wilhemsen &
Kaplan, 1993). This term was introduced by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), (Gad & Collins,
2002). According to Guldenmund (2000), safety culture is defined as those aspects of the organizational culture
which will impact on attitudes and behaviour related to increasing or decreasing risk.
1.1 Occupational Safety and Health Law in the Malaysian Manufacturing Sectors
In Malaysia, the role of occupational safety and health has existed since 130 years ago. According to the
Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH, 2010), the development of safety and health at
workplace can be categorized into five eras. It started with the first era, named Steam Boiler Safety Era, which
took place prior to 1914. Subsequently, the Machinery Safety Era took place from 1914 until 1952. During this
era, the Machinery Enactment 1913 replaced the various steam boiler enactments of Allied Malay States on 1st
January 1914. The development of safety and health at workplace expanded in the following era of the Industrial
Safety Era that took place from 1953 until 1969. In 1953, the Machinery Ordinance 1953 was enacted to replace
all previous legislations. Subsequently, in 1967, the Parliament had approved the Factory and Machineries Act
(FMA 1967). Between the years 1970 until 1994, the era was called the Industrial Safety and Hygiene Era. In
this era, few modifications were made. Starting in 1970, the Factory and Machineries Act 1967 and eight of its
regulations were enforced replacing the Machinery Ordinance 1953. In 1980, the application of the Factory and
Machineries Act 1967 was extended to Sabah and Sarawak. Since the year 1994, it is the Occupational Safety
and Health Era where the Parliament passed a new legislation known as the Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA) 1994 which was gazetted on February 1994.
It is important to note that since manufacturing is one of the major contributors to the Malaysian economy, the
development of manufacturing sector must also be in line with the awareness and compliance of the industry
towards safety and health. The policy for manufacturing in Malaysia does not only cover technology, market
access, productivity and financial component but must also consider numerous hazards in the work environment.
Various occupational and health issues such as exposure to chemical, lack of trained workers and deficiency in
enforcement must be appropriately managed.
1.2 Manufacturing Industries
To understand safety culture in the manufacturing sectors in Malaysia, it is important to understand what
constitutes manufacturing sector. According to the Industrial Co-ordination Act 1975 (ICA), manufacturing
activity is defined as the making, altering, blending, ornamenting, finishing or otherwise treating or adapting
any article or substances with a view to its use, sale, transport, delivery or disposal; and includes the assembly of
parts and hip repairing but shall not include any activity normally associated with retail or wholesale trade. The
ICA requires manufacturing companies with shareholders funds of RM2.5 million and above or engaging 75 or
more full-time paid employees to apply for a manufacturing license for approval by the Ministry of International
Trade and Industry (MITI). Applications for manufacturing licenses are to be submitted to the Malaysian
Industrial Development Authority (MIDA), an agency under MITI.
MIDA is the governments principal agency for the promotion of the manufacturing and services sectors in
Malaysia. MIDA assists companies which intend to invest in the manufacturing and services sectors, as well as
facilitates the implementation of their projects. The wide range of services provided by MIDA includes
providing information on the opportunities for investments, as well as facilitating companies which are looking
for joint venture partners. MIDA classified manufacturing sector in Malaysia into twelve industries, which are
basic metal products, electrical and electronic, electronics manufacturing services, engineering supporting, food
processing, machinery and equipment, medical devices, petrochemical and polymer, pharmaceuticals, rubber
products, textiles and apparel and wood-based industries.
Another body which is closely related with manufacturing sectors in Malaysia is Federation of Malaysia
Manufacturers (FMM). FMM has been established since 1968 and acts as representative for the manufacturing
industries. FMM operates as a business organization which promotes and support manufacturing sectors
interests. FMM classifies the organization registered with its body according to International Standard Industrial
Classification (ISIC) Codes. Based on this ISIC Codes, products manufactured in manufacturing industries
classified into 23 categories. They are food products and beverages, tobacco products, textiles, wearing apparel,
tanning and dressing of leather, wood and products of wood and cork, except furniture, paper and paper products,
publishing, printing and reproduction of recorded media, coke, refined petroleum products and nuclear fuel,
chemicals and chemical products, rubber and plastics products, other non-metallic mineral products, basic metal,
183

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

fabricated metal products except machinery and equipment, machinery and equipment N.E.C., office, accounting
and computing machinery, electrical machinery and apparatus N.E.C., radio, television and communication
equipment and apparatus, medical, precision and optical instruments, watches and clocks, motor vehicles, trailers
and semi-trailers, other transport equipment, manufacture of furniture and recycling.
2. Occupational Safety and Health Problems in the Malaysian Manufacturing Sector
There are two main problems relating to occupational safety and health in the Malaysian manufacturing sector
discussed below:2.1 High Accident in Manufacturing Industries Which Could Be Due to Lack of Safety Culture
In the industrialized nations of the world, workplace accident has become a major problem, which is supported
by Biggs, Sheahan & Dingsdag (2005), who concurs that accidents now cause more deaths than all infectious
diseases and more than any single illness except those related to heart disease and cancer. An analysis from the
Chernobyl 1986 nuclear power plant accident has also suggested that inadequate organizational safety culture
was a possible major contributor to the accident. It was not necessarily due to less than optimum engineering
design or equipment failure, but peoples poor human factor (Taylor, 2010). This suggestion was indeed put up
more than 70 years ago by Heinrich (1941), who advocated that 88% of all accidents were caused by unsafe acts
of people, 20% were by unsafe machines or conditions while another 2% were by acts of God (force majeure). In
Malaysia, although manufacturing sector contributes significantly to the national income, the existence of safety
culture in this sector is still questionable.
Table 1. Accidents reported to SOCSO by sectors
Industries/Year

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Manufacturing

35,642

33,523

29,780

26,690

23,350

21,609

19,607

19,041

17,206

Trade/wholesale
and retail

13,774

13,685

13,395

12,948

11,930

11,430

11,658

9,741

9,197

Public Service (non

government)

7,487

8,140

7,743

8,325

8,502

8,502

8,309

3,912

4,128

Other Service

5,950

5,924

5,617

5,295

4,570

4,832

4,718

11,078

12,467

Construction

4,593

5,015

4,654

4,445

3,948

3,686

3,703

3,814

4,108

Transportation

4,382

4,439

4,104

4,151

3,643

3,610

3,639

3,305

3,690

Agriculture,
forestry and fishing

12,424

9,456

6,947

5,644

3,734

3,567

3,255

3,594

2,696

Finance and
insurance

602

567

572

605

581

538

612

718

780

Electricity, gas and

water

442

516

510

496

465

509

476

524

544

Mining and
quarrying

573

545

536

533

459

394

362

368

370

TOTAL

85,869

81,810

73,858

69,132

61,182

58,321

56,339

56,095

55,186

Source: SOCSO
As shown in Table 1, statistics from the Social Security Organization (SOCSO) show that from the year 2001
2009, the manufacturing sector recorded the highest number of reported accidents fatalities as compared to other
industries in Malaysia. This leads to the question of whether, in the quest of optimizing productivity, employers
do pay enough concern on the safety and health of the employees? Since manufacturing is one of the major
contributors to the Malaysian economy, the development of the manufacturing sector must also be in line with
the awareness and compliance of the industry towards safety and health.
From the statistics by DOSH (2010) on fatal occupational accidents classified according to sectors for the year
2007 2010 in Malaysia as shown in Figure 1, 2, 3 and 4, the manufacturing sector stands as the second highest

184

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

sector for the year 2007, 2009 and 2010 respectively. The statistics indeed took a deeper plunge in 2008 when
occupational accidents in the manufacturing sector scored the highest rate of fatality.

Figure 1. Occupational accidents by sector for the category of death until 2010

Figure 2. Occupational accidents by sector for the category of death until 2009

185

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Figure 3. Occupational accidents by sector for the category of death in 2008

Figure 4. Occupational accidents by sector for the category of death in 2007

186

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

Figure 5. Statistics of occupational accidents by sector in 2011 (investigated)

From the above statistics, it may be deduced that occupational safety is yet to be incorporated as a culture
amongst the Malaysian manufacturers. This deduction may be supported with the admission by DOSH itself that
occupational safety and health in Malaysia is still at compliance level and has yet to become a culture (DOSH,
2010). The statistic of occupational accidents by sector in 2011 as endorsed by DOSH (Figure 5) also shows that
manufacturing sector recorded the highest rate of non-permanent disabilities (NPD) and permanent disabilities
(PD) due to occupational accidents with the total of 1471 workers having NPD and 133 workers having PD
compared to other sectors (DOSH, 2012).
2.2 Non-compliance of OSHAs Requirement Have Respectively Led to Lack of Safety Culture in Manufacturing
Industries
2.2.1 Section 16 Safety Policy
Section 16 compels all employers (or self-employed persons) with more than five employees to develop written
safety and health policy. It is important to note that non-compliance of this provision may inadvertently
contribute to lack of safety culture since according to Health and Safety Executive (1997), safety policy captures
the existence of a written declaration reflecting the organizations commitment to safety. This statement is
supported by Fernandez-Muniz, Montes-Peon & Vazquez-Ordas (2007) indicating that safety policy reflects the
organizations principles and values towards safety culture.
Mohd Hanip (2007) further strengthens this outlook by stating that the employers failure to comply with Section
16 of OSHA in the Johors manufacturing industries has shown significant weaknesses of the employers, who
view occupational safety and health as not important. Thus, non-compliance towards Section 16 could be
considered a major provenance to lack of safety culture in the manufacturing industries.
The above arguments are further strengthened by Mohd Saidin et. al. (2006), who views that one of the elements
in developing safety culture is safety policy. It is believed that combination of rules, believes, attitudes and good
practices will create positive safety culture at workplace.
2.2.2 Section 30 Safety and Health Committee
Section 30 of OSHA compels employers of 40 or more employees (or if directed by General Director) to
establish safety committee at workplace. For companies with 40 or more employees, the safety committee shall
comprise of two representatives each from the employers and employees while companies of 100 employees and
more, there should be four representatives each from the employers and employees.
187

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

The functions of the safety committee are mainly to make recommendations to promote and develop measures to
ensure the safety and health at the workplace and to monitor the effectiveness of such measures (Xavier, 1996).
He further adds that the establishment of such a committee should not be restricted according to the number of
workers or to be left to the discretion of the General Director because hazards depend more on the nature of
work carried out at the workplace rather than the number of employees. However, Pollock (1995) skeptically
views that despite the importance of the employees involvement in safety programs, many of the safety and
health committees were formed with no goals. Finally, they will be split into an empty talk or discussion sessions
with no results.
2.2.3 Section 29 Safety and Health Officer
Section 29 compels companies exceeding 100 or 500 employees (depending on the nature of business) to appoint
a Safety and Health Officer where non-compliance of this provision may also be relevant to this problem. As
suggested previously by Xavier (1996), appointment of a safety and health officer should not be severely
restricted according to the number of workers. He further reiterates that the question of danger does not lie in
numbers but in the nature of the work carried out at the workplace. Since this is a provision which ensures that
compliance with the safety and health provisions of the Act is monitored, he suggests that this compulsion
should not be restricted to certain categories of occupation only.
3. Developing Safety Culture in the Malaysian Manufacturing Sector
Safety culture can be viewed as a component of the organizational culture that refers to the individuals, jobs, and
organizational characteristics that affect employees health and safety (Fernandez-Muniz et.al., 2007). There has
been increasing interest among researchers and practitioners since the past two decades towards the concept of
safety culture because of its impact on safety outcomes such as injuries, fatalities, and other incidents (Choudhry,
Fang & Mohamed, 2007) where the aim of safety culture is to avoid taking any unsafe actions (Fernandez-Muniz
et.al., 2007).
Heinrichs Domino Theory is the pioneer theory of accident causation in the field of industrial accident safety.
According to Heinrich (1941), accidents result from a chain of sequential events, like a line of dominoes falling
over. In explaining his theory, Heinrich posited five dominoes in a sequence namely:
1) Social Environment and Ancestry (e.g.: stubbornness, alcoholism, etc.)
2) Fault of the Person (e.g.: carelessness, recklessness, etc.)
3) Unsafe act or unsafe condition
4) Accident
5) Injury
Heinrich also emphasized that the first three (i, ii and iii) combining factors cause accidents and consequently
injuries. Apart from the suggestion by Taylor (2010) that the outcome of the investigation of Chernobyl incident
which bring into focus the performance of the person managing, designing, constructing or operating hazardous
facilities, Heinrich had already suggested that 88% of all accidents were indeed caused by unsafe acts of people
with the rest 20% were caused by unsafe machines or conditions and another 2% were caused by acts of God.
According to the Malaysian Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH, 2010), ILO Safety Culture
Model has identified different levels of safety culture. These levels of safety culture are influenced by three main
independent variables namely:
1) Individuals commitment
2) Managers commitment
3) Policy commitment
Cooper (2000) identifies the characteristics of safety culture model which are; psychological, behavioural and
situational factors. Self-regulatory processes have been promoted as a part of this model in reducing risks in
organization. This is in fact consistent with Malaysia, where the introduction of self-regulation, through the
enactment of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1994 was to promote safety culture (Faridah,
Hasmawati, Razidah & Muhd. Zaimi, 2010).
In promoting safety culture, DOSH, in its strategies, also looks forward for the outcome of self-regulation for the
year 2011-2015. This time frame becomes the indicator for DOSH to meet their target of having OSH culture at
workplace in Malaysia for the year 2016-2020 and having preventive culture beyond 2020 (DOSH, 2010).
188

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

It is important to note that, to develop safety culture at workplace, the behavioural aspects of employees should
also be measured. Such measure can be done by peer observations to check the readiness of employees,
workplace conditions as well as to identify weaknesses at the workplace. One of the appropriate programs to
measure employees behaviour is called Behaviour-based safety (BBS). BBS is characterized as an analytic,
objective and data-driven approach focusing on safety-related behaviours performed by first-line personnel
(Tharaldsen & Haukelid, 2009). This program can also be developed for different levels of management
(Choudhry et. al., 2007). HSE (2002) supports such program by saying that the output of BBS program will
ultimately lead to improving safety culture. Thus, identifying behavioural aspects of employees is a key in
developing safety culture in the organizations.
There have been many studies conducted to examine safety-related behaviours as key aspects in promoting
safety culture. Zohar (2002), for instance, has emphasized the role of leadership to improve safety while Barling,
Loughlin & Kelloway (2002) examined the role of transformational leadership in promoting safety. Parboteeah
& Kapp (2008) examined positive relationship between safety motivation and safety enhancing behaviors in
their study. It is also noteworthy that safety motivation is considered as one of the indicators since the study by
Ajzen & Fishbein (2005) has identified that motivation as an important precursor to actual behaviour. Safety
motivations, safety compliance and safety participation were also considered by Parboteeah & Kapp (2008)
simply because employees who are motivated will actively follow safety compliance and participate in safety
participation activities.
Apart from that, management commitment is also important in developing positive safety behavioural aspects
amongst employees. Employees will be less safety conscious and willing to take more risks to get the work
completed if the management does not support the safety process (Borstorff & Lowe, 2010). Another
behavioural aspect that should not be neglected is educational and training programs. According to Root (2005),
the organizations must provide training programs in order to increase awareness and provide safe working
environment. The extent of employee safety and health training is dependent upon employee occupational
factors, company resources available to finance training, importance placed on safety and other organizational
factors (Borstorff & Lowe, 2010).
Therefore, understanding the behavioural aspects amongst employees is important in this study. This is because,
positive safety behaviour aspects amongst employees will lead to positive safety culture in the organization.
Management who are willing to observe employees behaviour aspects will promote positive safety behaviour
amongst employees which in turn can lead to positive safety culture in organizations.
4. Conclusion
Despite more than 18 years have passed since OSHA was first implemented in Malaysia, there has been no
revision done on OSHA. Since Malaysia is a fast growing country since the last three decades, there are certain
provisions that may no longer be compatible with current situation. For example, in the manufacturing industries,
new machineries with new technologies have been introduced which consequentially requires some of OSHAs
provision to be revised. As mentioned by Xavier (1996), danger is not based on the number of employees but the
nature of the work. The changing work environment most certainly requires change of law.
It is irrefutable that a right combination of rules, believes, attitudes and good practices will create positive safety
culture at workplace. This combination seems to be a big challenge to the government and policy makers in
order to reduce accident rate in manufacturing industries. Even if the laws are well developed, the question
remains whether these laws are properly enforced and complied by the industries? If managers only focus on
how to get more profit rather than how to reduce accident rate at the workplace and supervisors mindset is more
on productivity rather than safety, this leads to another question on how positive attitude and perception can be
developed among production employees?
As a conclusion, the DOSH who is responsible in the enforcement of OSHA must relook in the relevance of
OSHA in this new era of industrialization. Revisions and amendments to the law must be carried out to make it
more compatible to all the industries particularly those high levels of accident rates like the manufacturing
industries. Commitment from government agencies, employers and employees are also needed to ensure safety
issues become a culture in the industries because reducing accident rates, in the long run, would prove to be
more cost effective to the employers.
References
Abdul Rahman, B. (2006). Keynote address Driving Improvements in Occupational Safety and Health. In K.
Soehod, & L. Laxman (Eds.), Law on Safety and Health in Malaysia. Fakulti Pengurusan dan Pembangunan
189

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

Sumber Manusia, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The Influence of Attitudes on Behavior. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M.
P. Zanna (Eds.), The Handbook of Attitudes (pp. 173-221). Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Barling, J., Loughlin, C., & Kelloway, E. K. (2002). Development and Test of a Model Linking Safety-Specific
Transformational Leadership and Occupational Safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 488-496.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.488
Biggs, H. C., Sheahan, V. L., & Dingsdag, D. P. (2005). A Study of Construction Site Safety Culture and
Implications for Safe and Responsive Workplaces. The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling,
11(1), 1-8.
Borstorff, P. C., & Lowe, S. K. (2010). The Culture of Safety: How Important To Employee Health?
International Journal of Business Research, 10(5), 147-156.
Choudhry, R. M., Fang, D., & Mohamed, S. (2007). Developing a Model of Construction Safety Culture.
Journal
of
Management
in
Engineering,
23(4),
207-212.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2007)23:4(207)
Cooper, M. D. (2000). Towards a Model of
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00035-7

Safety

Culture.

Safety

Science,

36,

111-136.

DOSH. (2010, April 16). Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (Act 514). Retrieved from
http://www.dosh.gov.my
DOSH. (2010, April 16). The Role and Development. Retrieved from http://www.dosh.gov.my
DOSH. (2012, August 15). Statistics of Department. Retrieved from http://www/dosh.gov.my
Faridah, I., Hasmawati, H., Razidah, I., & Muhd Zaimi, A. M. (2010). A Framework of Safety Culture for the
Malaysian Construction Companies: A Methodological Development. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum, 18(1),
45-54.
Fernandez-Muniz, B., Montes-Peon, J. M., & Vazquez-Ordas, C. J. (2007). Safety culture: Analysis of the Causal
Relationships between Its Key Dimensions. Journal of Safety Research, 38, 627-641.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2007.09.001
Gadd, S., & Collins, A. M. (2002). Safety Culture: A Review of the Literature. Report No. HSL/2002/25,
Sheffield: Health and Safety Laboratory, Human Factors Group, pp. 8-30.
Guldenmnund, F. W. (2000). The Nature of Safety Culture: A Review of Theory and Research. Safety Science,
34(1-3), 215-257.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00014-X
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (1997). Successful Health and Safety Management, HSG65. London: HSE
Books.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (2002). Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Health and Safety Executives
Health and Safety Climate Survey Tool. Prepared by the Keil Centre. Research Report 042.
Heinrich, H. W. (1941). Industrial Accident Prevention: A Scientific Approach (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Book
Company Inc.
Industrial Co-ordination Act 1975 (ICA). (2006). Percetakan Nasional Malaysia Bhd.
Mohd Hanip, A. (2007). Tahap Pengamalan Pengurusan Keselamatan Dalam Industri kecil dan Sederhana.
Fakulti Kejuruteraan Mekanikal, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Mohd Saidin, M., Abdul Hakim, M., Sulaiman, K., Zakaria, M.Y., Wan Yusoff, W. M., & Ahmadon, B. (2006).
Pembangunan Budaya Keselamatan dalam Industri Pembinaan, proceedings of the International Conference
on Construction Industry 2006 (ICCI 2006). June 21-25. Padang, Sumatera Barat.
Ostrom, L., Wilhelmsen, C., & Kaplan, B. (1993). Assessing Safety Culture. Nuclear Safety, 34(2).
Parboteeah, K. K., & Kapp, E. (2008). Ethical Climates and Workplace Safety Behaviours: An Empirical
Investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 515-529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9452-y
Pollock, J. L. (1995). Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rantanen, J., Lehtinen, S., & Savolainen, K. (2004). The Opportunities and Obstacles to Collaboration between
the Developing and Developed Countries in the Field of Occupational Health. Toxicology, 198, 63-74.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2004.01.038
190

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 9, No. 3; 2013

Root, D. (2005). Creating a Culture of Safety on Construction Sites. Risk Management, 52(11), 56-62.
Soehod, K., & Laxman, L. (2007). Law on Safety and Health in Malaysia. Fakulti Pengurusan dan Pembangunan
Sumber Manusia, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Taylor, J. B. (2010). Safety Culture: Assessing and Changing the Behaviour of Organisations. Gower Publishing.
Tharaldsen, J., & Haukelid, K. (2009). Culture and Behavioural Perspectives on Safety - towards a Balanced
Approach. Journal of Risk Research, 12(3/4), 375-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13669870902757252
Xavier, G. (1996). Health and Safety at Work. Current Law Journal, 2.
Zohar, D. (2002). The Effects of Leadership Dimensions, Safety Climate, and Assigned Priorities on Minor
Injuries in Work Groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 7592. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.130

191

Copyright of Asian Social Science is the property of Canadian Center of Science & Education and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.