Institutions:
Study Overview
Dissertation title: Managing Safety from the Top: The Influence of Senior Managers’ Characteristics
Purpose: Thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Aberdeen
The description of senior managers by literature manager is that they are crucially influencing the safety of organization. Yet it has not been completely understood, their influence is contributed by. Thus, the thought was to investigating characteristics of senior managers with respect to their impact toward safety in management organizations in the air traffic. A safety literature review indicated that research in the area would gain from introduction of model of research as basis of theoretical. The leadership model that is skilled based by Mumford together with his colleagues was proposed to be a suitable influence model for the senior managers on safety of organization. Safety- specific model version was devised, which consisted of skills (social competence, problem solving), traits (regulatory focus, Big Fives) as well as safety knowledge like organizational safety and safety commitment outcomes antecedents. Study One explored these characteristics relevance for work on the safety by senior managers’ using interviews that are semi-structure with the senior managers (N=9). The responses were put in form of codes into characteristics with reliability that was sufficient using analysis of qualitative content. Characteristics were established as being relevance for safety influence on senior managers and based on finding their content were refined. Social competence and social knowledge were indicated frequently. Interpersonal leadership was discovered as an additionally significant. Study Two investigated relevance of characteristics for CEOs’ and safety managers’ influence on the safety with open questions being a part of it (N=49) Coding of responses were done using analysis of qualitative content with reliability that was acceptable. The characteristics relevance was reconfirmed by the results. As in previous study, there was emergence of interpersonal leadership. Furthermore, leadership, safety and problem-solving knowledge were established more regularly for the CEOs than safety managers, while personality was highly regularly indicated for the safety managers than CEOs. Lastly, Study Three tested influence of characteristics on commitment of safety, which was conceptualized as it’s indicated through the behaviors reflecting attitude that are positive towards safety. The questionnaires, scenarios and interview questions were used for safety and characteristics commitment measuring in a senior managers sample (N=60). Scenario and interview responses were quantified with reliability that is acceptable. Indication by results was that not all the characteristics which were previously found as being relevant for influence by senior managers on safety of organizational were also connected to the safety commitment. Generally, solving of problem was shown as having influence on safety commitment, having problem understanding ability, to identify information-sources that are useful as well as to generate change related ideas in the culture of organization as the most influential.
Methodology Evaluation
The dissertation applied a qualitative methodology involving a combination of interview and questionnaire. In that respect, the following is the summary analysis of the two methodology approaches identifying the purpose statement of the dissertation, the individual approaches research questions, strengths an weaknesses, limitations, validity and reliability, sampling , site selection and the type of the data used.
Interview study
Purpose statement
The earlier papers’s chapter has established that description of the senior managers as a major influence on safety of organizational. Yet it’s not clear how they exact the influence, For the purpose of addressing the gap in literature, a leadership model that is skill based version was adopted by Mumford et al. (2000), which included regulatory focus, social competence, personality, problem-solving as well as safety knowledge was developed,
Research questions
Determine the characteristics relevance for influence of senior managers on safety of organizational. Refine the model of research based on subcomponents of characteristics’ presence in work on the safety by senior managerial descriptions.
Strengths and limitations
The applied interviews’ strengths:
Good for attitudes measuring as well as many other content of importance. • Allows interviewer in posing and probing of the follow-up questions. • Can offer information that is in-depth. • Can give information about thinking way and internal meaning of participants. • Interviews that are closed-ended provide the researcher with exact information they need. • E-mail and telephone interview offer turnaround that is quick. • Moderately high validity of measurements such as high validity and reliability for well tested and constructed protocols of interview. • Can be used with probability sample. •Comparatively high rates of response are often achievable. • Useful for confirmation as well as exploration.
The Interviews weaknesses of he applied interviews include
Usually interviews that are in-person are time consuming and expensive. • Has reactive effects such as the interviewees trying to give what is desirable socially only. • Effects of investigator may occur such as interviewers who are untrained may distort the data as result of poor skills of interviewing and/or personal biases. • Interviewees may lack self-awareness as well as not recall information that is important. • Respondents’ perceived anonymity may be little. • Analysis of the data for items that are open-ended may consume a lot of time. • There may be need for validation in measures.
Sampling/participants selection
Sample consisted senior managers (N=9, rate of response = 81%) from the three Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) from European. The criteria of recruitment were for individuals to be in positions of senior managerial in the European organization of air traffic management. This group was the subject matter which was experts and thus suitable in evaluating the construct or domain content (Sireci & Geisinger, 1995). At first, twelve interviewees were recruited, this was upper end size range of the sample that Guest, Bunce and Johnson (2006) described as required in order for saturation to be achieved (they propose range of sample that is between 7 and 12 as being sufficient). AS one of interviewee was unavailable and other two were in the positions of middle management, they subsequently were excluded from sample. Description by Guest et al. (2006) of sample which is selective (i.e. senior managers who are subject matter experts) to be the one that reduces the size of sample requirements for saturation, thus suggesting nine samples will be enough for occurring of saturation for this study.
Site selection
Procedure: Aberdeen University committee of ethics approved this study’s procedure. Participants’ initial contact was done through the Development Department and Safety Research Head at the Air Traffic Management Safety at European Agency. Each of the three organisations which were approached accepted to participate. From the earlier approach, contacts in organisations were sent information through phone, in-person or e-mail from the Aberdeen University inviting them to volunteer. The interviews were conducted by two interviewers who were trained and the interview venue was either in the office if the participant or in another room. Author carried out the interviews by using questions schedule and both of interviewers followed the issues that were mentioned by the participants that felt relevant for more investigation. It was proposed by Arksey and Knight (1999) having 49 interviewers two Chapter 4 Study 1 as of help in clarifying main themes as well as analysis and equity areas (p.74). 74.9 minutes was the duration of an average (SD = 15.7, range 60-113 minutes). Each participants at the start of every interview received brief introduction from both interviewers as well as brief research project description. With participants’ permission, interviews were taped using digital recorder. The participants were explained about their responses confidentiality as well as their right of refusing to respond to any questions as well as dropping out from interview at whichever point. There was none who refused to answer the questions as well nobody dropped from the interview.
Types of data
Measures: All the interviews covered same theme as well as focusing generally on the managers’ work aspect regarding safety, allowing investigation of role of researcher components model for participants’ safety work. It’s noted that the participants weren’t plainly asked of the characteristics in relation to their work, to avoid priming them towards these characteristics in their responses.
Questionnaire
Purpose statement
Second study investigated specifically characteristics that were included in research model intended for CEOs and safety managers. The study was designed in a way it would build on insights that were gained from the Study One. For this investigation, additional exploration toward component stability of the research model for investigation of influence by senior manager on the safety of organizational performed by use of questionnaire method. As a result, the following aim of the research was addressed.
Research questions
Solving of the problems is more significant for CEO’s safety influence than for safety managers’ safety influence
The social competences are highly relevant for CEO’s safety influence, than for influence of safety manager
There is more safety knowledge for safety influence by safety manager than for safety influence by CEO
Strengths and limitations
Questions strength: They are good for attitudes measuring as well as other content eliciting from participants of the research. • Inexpensive especially the mail questionnaires as well as group administered questionnaires. • they can give information about way of participant thinking and internal meaning. • are admissible to the probability samples. • Turnaround is quick. • Are admissible to groups. • Respondent perceived anonymity may be more. • Validity of measurement are moderately high (i.e., high validity and reliability) for well validated and constructed questionnaires. • Items that are closed-ended may provide researcher with exact information they needed. • Items that are open-ended can provide information that are detailed in own words of respondents. • Analysis of data is easy for the items that are closed-ended. • Useful for confirmation as well as exploration.
Questionnaires weaknesses: Usually have to be kept as short as possible. • There may occur reactive effects such as trying to give only what is desirable socially by the interviewees. • No response to some selective items. • Not recalling of information that is important as well as lack of self-awareness by interviewees. • There may be low response rate for email and mail questionnaires. • Items that are open-ended may seem to mean differences in the verbal ability, thus obscuring the interest issues. • Analysis of data for items that are open-ended may be time consuming. • There is need for validation of measures.
Sampling/participants selection
This study’s sample consisted of managers who are senior (N=49) who were working in the management of air traffic and incorporated CEOs (n=11) as well as managers who are senior and holding a role in safety (n=38). Initially invited for participation were 72 of safety managers (rate of response = 53%) as well as 23 of the CEOs were invited (rate of response = 47%). The average time of overall sample selected in their positions in years was 5.4. The CEOs average time at that position in years was 2.3 (range from 3 weeks to 6 years) and the average safety managers in those position in years was 6.3 (range from 6 months to 20 years). Nearly all samples (97.4) stated that they had received special training on safety. Majority of the CEOs had experience in either management of air traffic (36%; n=4), engineering (36%; n=4) and military (27%; n=3). Majority of the safety managers were having experience in either management of air traffic (37%; n=14) engineering (40%; n=15). Overall, the experience, background and positions of the participants show that they are organizational safety and managerial roles of senior are expert subject matter. Consequently, they possibly are likely to appropriate to evaluate construct or domain content
Procedure: Aberdeen University committee of ethics approved this study’s procedure. Recruiting of participants was in two meetings that were organized by Air Safety Traffic Management European Agency, with it being this research funding body. After a short introduction about topic of research, participants were requested to complete questionnaires during their free time or coffee break. There was assurance to participants of confidentiality in the data with emphasis that partaking of the questionnaires was voluntarily. Results feedback report of high level was received by participants in form of presentation which focused on descriptive and characteristic results of the sample.
Types of data
In coding of responses into research model’s included characteristics was done by two raters who were independent using similar methods of analysis as in the Study One (Mayring, 2000).
Measures: Consisted in the questionnaire were four questions that were open which were devised with the help of a subject matter expert in ATM. By traditional, questionnaires on job-analysis provides attributes list that are in scale rating regarding their position frequency and complexity. Therefore, two reasons lead to choosing of open questions. First, the format of the question was thought to be reflecting research’s exploratory stage. As there is no much known of CEOs and safety managers’ characteristics as well as their influence toward safety, this method was determined at delivering results that were qualitative that may inform about characteristics, almost to their significance. Secondly, the open questions got evaluated for them not to encourage self-presentation by use in so far as scale of rating. It was argued by Travaglia et al. (2009) that open questions’ free response allows raising of issues spontaneously by participants, which may point out their relevance. Questions that are of open format are less obvious as well as not easy for them to have fake manipulation.
Validity and reliability
The use of the two approaches enhanced the research validity and reliability given that the analysis as well as results from the two could be compared.
Alternative methods
Selected method
As an alternative approach the focus groups could have been applied. The research through focus group involves organizing of discussions with group of selected individuals to get information on their experiences and views of the selected topic. The major purpose of this type of research is getting respondents’ feelings, attitudes, reactions, experiences, and beliefs in a manner which could not be practical using other research methods, such as, observation, questionnaire surveys, or interviewing through one-to-one methods. These beliefs, feelings and attitudes may be partly independent of the group or the social setting, however, they may be highly likely of being revealed through social gathering as well as through interaction which entails being in the focus group. Compared to the individual interviews, as they aim at getting individual feelings, attitudes and beliefs, the focus group draw out a multiplicity of emotional and views processes within group context. Individual interviews are easier to be controlled by researcher than focus group where the participants may assume the initiative. As compared to the observation, researcher is enabled by focus group to get large information amount within shorter time. The observation method id dependent on waiting for happening of things, while in focus group researcher follows the interview guide. In this case focus groups are organized events and not natural events. The focus group is mostly useful when power difference exist between participants and professionals or decision-makers, when there is interest in everyday language as well as culture use of a particular group, and when a specific topic consensus’ degree wants to be explored.
Interviewing of focus group is particularly suitable for getting several perspectives on same topic.
Focus group research benefits include insight gaining into understanding that is shared by the people on everyday life as well as ways through which in group situation individuals can influence others.
Problem begins when trying to identify view of individuals from view of the group, and also in convenient arrangement for focus group conducting.
The moderator’s role is very important. Good interpersonal skills as well as group leadership levels are required for moderating the group successfully.
Rationale
Focus groups’ Strengths
• Useful for concepts and ideas exploring. • Window providing into internal thinking of participants. •Information that is in-depth can be obtained. • How the participants react to one another can be examined. • Probing is allowed. • Most content may be tapped. • Quick turnaround is allowed.
Focus groups’ weaknesses
• Expensive sometimes. • Finding moderator of focus group who has good skills in report building as well as with facilitative that are good may be hard to find. • Investigator as well as reactive effects can occur if there if feeling by the participants of being studied or watched. • One participant or two may dominate it. • Generalizing the results is difficult if a small and/or unrepresentative participant’s samples are used. • Large unnecessary amount of information may be included. • Validity of measurements may be minimal. • Usually should not be the only data collection methods used in a study. • Analysis of data may consume a lot of time due to data’s open-ended nature.
References
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18, 59-82.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1, 20. Retrieved from, http://nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002204
Sireci, S.G., & Geisinger, K.F. (1995). Using subject matter experts to assess content representation: An MDS analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 241-255.
Travaglia, J.F., Westbrook, M.T., & Braithwaite, J. (2009). Implementation of a patient safety incident management system as viewed by doctors, nurses and allied health professionals. Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine, 13, 277-296.
