A Strategic Approach to Transforming Traffic Safety Culture to Reduce Deaths and Injuries (2018)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

91 Chapter 3: Integrating the Strategic Approach into Agency Planning Processes The proposed strategic approach to transforming public traffic safety culture prioritizes traffic safety as a societal value and emphasizes the transformation of local culture as a means to support traffic safety goals that align with that value (Figure 2). The adoption of this approach requires the culture of the implementing organization to also prioritize safety and adopts a culture-based paradigm to achieve safety goals. As a result, it may be necessary for state traffic safety agencies (and other traffic safety stakeholder organizations) to transform their own culture in order to integrate and implement this strategic approach into their existing safety planning processes. This chapter discusses the nature of organizational culture as well as the conditions and actions that can support a culture of safety that integrates the proposed strategic approach into existing traffic safety planning processes. 3.1 Organization Safety Culture The study of organizational safety culture has a long history within safety-critical industries (e.g., nuclear power industry, commercial aviation, public health sector) for which safe operations are critical to the health and safety of both employees and consumers (Choudhry et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2002). Various models have been proposed to specify the structure and influence of organizational safety culture. The general model shown in Figure 25 is based on an integration of Guldenmund’s (2000) model of safety culture (based on Schein’s (1992) concept of organizational culture and organization leadership as well as Johnson’s (1992) model of managing strategic change in organizations).

Figure 2 Johnson In thi paradigm process. is “impro also inclu threaten represent  S th  B tr The response safety ag and eme assessme organizat favored b 5 General m , 1992, Sche s model, the is defined b For example ving the saf des the pre the declare s a belief sy ystem Hazar e road syste ehavioral H ansport syst accepted be to perceive ency will de rgency resp nt of the r ion to resp y an organiz odel of org in, 1992). culture of y the priorit , the highes ety of the N vailing beli d values. F stem focuse ds: “The bl m.” (Whitel azards: “Ro em set by th lief system d hazards (C pend on its onse servic isk imposed ond (Coope ation with a anization s an organiza ized values t stated valu ation’s tran efs about wh or example d on two cat ame for fata egg & Haq, ad users are e system de then determ ooper, 200 capabilities es (USDOT by the pr r, 2000; Jo culture that 92 afety cultur tion is deter of the organ e of the U.S. sportation s ich hazards , the safe egories of h lities in the 2006; Wadh responsible signers.” (W ines the st 0). Traditio with respect , 2008). T ioritization hnson, 199 (1) believes e (based on mined by it ization that Departmen ystem” (US in the phy systems app azard that im road system wa, 2001). for followin hitelegg & rategies fav nally, the st to engineer he choice of hazards 2). For exa behavioral Guldenmu s operating governs the t of Transpo DOT, 2013 sical and so roach show pact traffic is assigned g the rules f Haq, 2006). ored by the rategic resp ing, enforce of strategy and the ca mple, enfo hazards suc nd, 2000; “paradigm.” decision-ma rtation (USD a). The para cial environ n in Figur safety: to the failur or using the organizatio onse of a t ment, educa is based o pabilities o rcement ma h as speedin The king OT) digm ment e 21 e of road n in raffic tion, n an f the y be g are

93 the primary threat to traffic safety (paradigm), and (2) believes enforcement is a feasible and effective method to reduce speeding behaviors (strategy). Eventually, the paradigm and its favored strategies may become institutionalized by codifying within the artifacts of the organization (Sun, 2008). Artifacts are the structures, processes, and documentation created by members of the organization to document the paradigm and direct supporting strategies. Specifically, these artifacts serve to “bind” strategies to the organization values (paradigm) they are intended to satisfy. For example, each state transportation department is required to produce a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) that specifies the traffic safety strategies to address the identified hazards that threaten the department goal (value) for safety (FHWA, 2012). 3.2 Transformation of Organization Safety Culture For those organizations with a safety culture that is not ready to integrate the proposed strategic approach, it may be necessary to change their operating paradigm by increasing the valuation of safety and instilling the belief that TSCB strategies can effectively address behavioral hazards. In this regard, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) recently conducted a domestic scan to examine the stages that successful organizations have taken to strengthen their own safety culture (NCHRP 14-03, 2014). Members of the scan panel collected data from leaders of a selection of organizations (inside and outside the transportation sector) reputed to have strong safety cultures. The data collection focused on aspects of the organization environment and culture that supported improving safety in the workplace. The results of the scan also identified a number of conditions within the organization that can enable and support the development and implementation of successful safety strategies (see also Austin, 2010; Sorensen, 2002):  Employees shared a common “bond” with organization values and mission.  Management and leadership within the organization are publically committed to safety.  Safety goals are formalized in organization planning and strategic documents.  There is open communication within the organization about safety programs and goals.  The organization provides safety training for all employees.

94  The organization has policies and equipment that promote and support safety in workplace.  There is low turnover in the organization’s workforce (including leadership).  The organization has a “democratic” style of management and leadership (based on worker input).  The organization emphasizes safety as part of its internal and public image.  The organization has a vision for the goal (success) of the safety culture program.  Many organizational levels are involved in the design and implementation of the program.  Failure of safety goals would be catastrophic and impact the public reputation of the organization. Whereas the purpose of this scan was to determine factors that support the implementation of strategies that impact safety within the organization workplace, it is reasonable to expect that this same process could enable traffic safety organizations to implement strategies to impact their public constituents. It is therefore possible that this same process and organization factors also need to be present for a traffic safety organization to adopt the proposed strategic approach to transform the public traffic safety culture. Indeed, these factors may be used as a simple self-audit tool for such organizations for their readiness to integrate the traffic safety culture paradigm. 3.3 Safety Planning Process A key strategy to institutionalize changes in an organization is to manifest that change in the artifacts governing the organization: “To be successful, strategists must create new cultural artifacts or modify existing ones so that they support the new strategy” (Higgins & Mcallaster, 2004, p. 63). Importantly, these artifacts can justify the relationship of the change to the organization values and document information that can support leadership succession to maintain these changes (NCHRP 14-03, 2014). In the case of traffic safety organizations, a key artifact is their safety planning process. This process represents the organization valuation of safety and beliefs about effective strategies for specified safety goals. The application of this process determines prioritization of resources for the development and implementation of strategies. Thus, this safety planning process represents a

critical o traffic sa For e Strategic monitor a (3) identi to satisfy strategies of the pu As an traffic sa Figure 2 Highway 2014). rganization fety culture. xample, in t Highway Sa nd set traff fy and resou these objec of the agen blishing age example, fety culture 6. Illustrati Safety Pla artifact into he US, each fety Plan (S ic safety per rce relevan tives will b cy. Accordi ncy. Minnesota as the unifyi on of traffic n (SHSP) fo which to int state transp HSP) as a fo formance ta t safety strat e based on ngly, the SH Department ng theme fo safety cult r the Minn 95 egrate the st ortation ag rm of artifa rgets, (2) pr egies (FHW the primary SP represen of Transpo r their SHSP ure as a cen esota Depa rategic appr ency is requ ct. The obje ioritize risk A, 2012). T values, sys ts a relevan rtation has as shown tral theme rtment of T oach to tran ired to prep ctives of th factors and he content o tem beliefs t artifact of already exp in (MnDOT within the ransportat sform the pu are and sub e SHSP are t crash types f SHSP inte (paradigm) the safety cu licitly iden , 2014). Strategic ion (MnDO blic mit a o (1) , and nded , and lture tified T,

96 It is anticipated that this section will provide guidance on principles and strategies for integrating into current planning processes a strategic approach to transform public traffic safety culture strategies. This section will focus on the following existing safety planning processes: Strategic Highway Safety Plans, the Highway Safety Improvement Program, Highway Safety Plans, Pedestrian/Bicycle Plans, and Vision Zero Plans.