This study examined the architecture of the relationships between components of organizational safety climate, including employee attitudes to safety issues and perceptions of the work environment, and related this to self-reported levels of safety activity. Data were collected from a large multinational manufacturing organization by questionnaire. A total of 915 valid questionnaires were returned and formed the basis for structural equation modelling and subsequent analyses. These data showed that a common structure, or architecture, of attitudes to safety issues and perceptions of the work environment could be constructed that explained levels of safety activity. The strength of employees' attitudes with regard to safety management played a pivotal role in this model through both direct and indirect paths. This is consistent with earlier findings on the importance of management commitment in organizations with well developed safety cultures. An examination of the differences between plants/sites showed that employees differed in their attitudes to safety issues, such as the management of safety and communication, and in their perceptions of workplace hazards. It is intended that this model be further utilized within the organization under study as a basis for monitoring safety performance and planned improvements in safety.

This study examines the relationships between components of organisational safety climate, including: employee attitudes to organisational and individual safety issues; perceptions of the physical work environment and perceptions of workplace hazards; and relates these to self‐reported levels of safety activity. It also attempts to replicate the explicative model derived by Cheyne et al. in a similar study within the manufacturing sector. Data were collected from a large manufacturing organisation using a questionnaire. A total of 708 valid questionnaires were returned and formed the basis for the subsequent analyses. These data showed that a common structure of attitudes to safety issues and perceptions of the work environment can be constructed in line with the previous model, with a few differences, providing some evidence of a sector‐wide safety culture. The strength of employees’ attitudes with regard to safety management and individual responsibility once again played central roles in the model and are consistent with earlier findings. Comparisons are made between the two organisations and mean scores on each of the model components show that there are differences between the two organisations in terms of individual responsibility and personal involvement, as well as levels of safety activity and perceived levels of workplace hazards. The results are discussed in terms of generating general models of attitudes to safety, which in turn may facilitate climate change.

As a model of job design, the demands-control-support model (DCSM) indicates that dynamic processes involving individual agency underpin the effects of job characteristics. Specifically, the DCSM indicates that control and social support facilitate effective coping with work demands. To examine such processes in detail, 32 nuclear design engineers participated in an experience sampling study (number of observations = 456). Findings indicate that enacting problem-focused coping by control and support across situations may be beneficial for affect. Problem-focused coping enacted by control was also related to fewer decisions that bear risks to design safety. Although higher levels of risky decisions were related to consistent use of emotional-approach enacted by control coping across situations, this form of coping used in specific demanding episodes was related to less cognitive error and fewer risky decisions two hours later. Emotional-approach enacted through support in specific episodes had a mixed pattern of relationships with outcomes. Theoretically, the findings indicate the importance of understanding the purpose for which job characteristics are enacted. Practically, the findings indicate the importance of shaping both problem-solving and emotional processes alongside job redesign.