Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A. and Lukic, D. (2018) The development and evaluation of a learning from incidents toolkit. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, 16(1), pp. 57-70. (doi: 10.1080/14773996.2018.1465263)
|
Text
185324.pdf - Accepted Version 557kB |
Abstract
This paper describes the development and evaluation of a toolkit to support organizations in improving their learning from incidents (LFI) activities. Grounded in adult learning theory, extensive literature review and empirical research within the energy sector, the LFI Toolkit has five key components: a Process Model; a Framework; a Questionnaire; a set of Guidelines and a series of Engagement Exercises. The LFI Toolkit fosters participatory learning enabling broader employee engagement, sensemaking and contextualization. The Toolkit was developed and evaluated through participatory co-design methodology including two large energy companies. The data were drawn from four participatory co-design workshops and a stakeholder engagement review meeting including practitioners from a variety of organizations and roles – shop floor workers, frontline and middle managers, senior leaders, health and safety specialists and representatives of professional bodies. The findings provide insight into the clarity, usability and relevance of the Toolkit and the feasibility of its application across other companies.
Item Type: | Articles |
---|---|
Keywords: | Professional learning, organisational learning, learning from incidents. |
Status: | Published |
Refereed: | Yes |
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID: | Littlejohn, Professor Allison |
Authors: | Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., and Lukic, D. |
College/School: | College of Social Sciences > School of Education |
Journal Name: | Policy and Practice in Health and Safety |
Publisher: | Taylor & Francis |
ISSN: | 1477-3996 |
ISSN (Online): | 1477-4003 |
Published Online: | 26 April 2018 |
Copyright Holders: | Copyright © 2018 Institution of Occupational Safety and Health |
First Published: | First published in Policy and Practice in Health and Safety 16(1): 57-70 |
Publisher Policy: | Reproduced in accordance with the publisher copyright policy |
University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record