Hazard function deployment: a QFD-based tool for the assessment of working tasks – a practical study in the construction industry

References

• Cheng C-W, Leu S-S, Lin C-C, et al. Characteristic analysis of occupational accidents at small construction enterprises. Saf Sci. 2010;48(6):698–707. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• López Arquillos A, Rubio Romero JC, Gibb A. Analysis of construction accidents in Spain, 2003–2008. J Safety Res. 2012;43(5):381–388. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2012.07.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa V, Almeida NM, Dias LA. Risk-based management of occupational safety and health in the construction industry – part 1: background knowledge. Saf Sci. 2014;66:75–86. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health and Safety Executive (HSE). European comparisons [Internet]; 2016 [cited 2017 Nov 30]. Available from: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/european/european-comparisons.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cornelissen PA, Van Hoof JJ, De Jong MDT. Determinants of safety outcomes and performance: a systematic literature review of research in four high-risk industries. J Safety Res. 2017;62:127–141. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.06.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jo BW, Lee YS, Kim JH, et al. Trend analysis of construction industrial accidents in Korea from 2011 to 2015. Sustainability. 2017;9(8):1297. doi: 10.3390/su9081297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA). Estimating the cost of work-related accidents and ill-health: an analysis of European data sources Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2017. Available from: https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-and-publica-tions/publications/estimating-cost-work-related-accidents-and-ill-health-analysis/view
   Google Scholar
• Lombardi M, Rossi G. Cluster analysis of fatal accidents series in the Infor.mo database: analysis, evidence and research perspectives. Int J Saf Secur Eng. 2013;3(4):317–331. doi: 10.2495/SAFE-V3-N4-317-331
   Google Scholar
• Dumrak J, Mostafa S, Kamardeen I, et al. Factors associated with the severity of construction accidents: the case of South Australia. Constr Econ Build. 2013;13(4):32–49.
   Google Scholar
• Forteza FJ, Carretero-Gómez JM, Sesé A. Occupational risks, accidents on sites and economic performance of construction firms. Saf Sci. 2017;94:61–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2017.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli M, De Minicis M, Di Gravio G. Knowledge management integration in occupational health and safety systems in the construction industry. Int J Prod Dev. 2011;14(1–4):165–185. doi: 10.1504/IJPD.2011.042298
   Google Scholar
• Guarascio M, Lombardi M, Rossi G, et al. Risk analysis and acceptability criteria. WIT Trans Built Environ. 2007;94:131–138.
   Google Scholar
• Suárez-Cebador M, Rubio-Romero JC, López-Arquillos A. Severity of electrical accidents in the construction industry in Spain. J Safety Res. 2014;48:63–70. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2013.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ersoy M. A proposal on occupational accident risk analysis: a case study of a marble factory. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 2015;21(8):2099–2125. doi: 10.1080/10807039.2015.1017878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forteza FJ, Sesé A, Carretero-Gómez JM. CONSRAT. Construction sites risk assessment tool. Saf Sci. 2016;89:338–354. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gangolells M, Casals M, Forcada N, et al. Mitigating construction safety risks using prevention through design. J Safety Res. 2010;41(2):107–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2009.10.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Underwood P, Waterson P. Systemic accident analysis: examining the gap between research and practice. Accid Anal Prev. 2013;55:154–164. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitropoulos P, Cupido G, Namboodiri M. Cognitive approach to construction safety: task demand-capability model. J Constr Eng Manag. 2009;135(9):881–889. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa V, Almeida NM, Dias LA. Risk-based management of occupational safety and health in the construction industry – part 2: quantitative model. Saf Sci. 2015;74:184–194. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parise G, Parise L, Lombardi M. Collision theory in electric shock risk assessment. In: AEIT Annual Conference – From Research to Industry: The Need for a More Effective Technology Transfer; 2014 Sept 18–19; Trieste. Milan: IEEE; 2014. p. 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou Z, Goh YM, Li Q. Overview and analysis of safety management studies in the construction industry. Saf Sci. 2015;72:337–350. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinze JW, Teizer J. Visibility-related fatalities related to construction equipment. Saf Sci. 2011;49(5):709–718. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosravi Y, Asilian-Mahabadi H, Hajizadeh E, et al. Factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents on construction sites: a review. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(1):111–125. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2014.11077023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong HY, Low TS. Accidents in Malaysian construction industry: statistical data and court cases. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(3):503–513. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2014.11077064
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jafari MJ, Gharari M, Ghafari M, et al. An epidemiological study of work-related accidents in a construction firm. Saf Promot Inj Prev. 2015;2(3):196–203.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh SM, Fosbroke DE. Trends of occupational fatalities involving machines, United States, 1992–2010. Am J Ind Med. 2015;58(11):1160–1173. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22532
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seifi Azad Mard HR, Estiri A, Hadadi P, et al. Occupational risk assessment in the construction industry in Iran. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2017;23(4):570–577. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2016.1264715
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaafar MH, Arifin K, Aiyub K, et al. Occupational safety and health management in the construction industry: a review. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2017;1–14. doi:doi: 10.1080/10803548.2017.1366129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aneziris ON, Papazoglou IA, Konstandinidou M, et al. Quantification of occupational risk owing to contact with moving parts of machines. Saf Sci. 2013;51(1):382–396. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2012.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadeghi L, Dantan J-Y, Mathieu L, et al. A design approach for safety based on product-service systems and function–behavior–structure. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol. 2017;19:44–56. doi: 10.1016/j.cirpj.2017.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akao Y. Quality function deployment: integrating customer requirements into product design. Cambridge (MA): Productivity Press; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Sadeghi L, Dantan J-Y, Siadat A, et al. Design for human safety in manufacturing systems: applications of design theories, methodologies, tools and techniques. J Eng Des. 2016;27(12):844–877. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2016.1235262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli M, Sakao T. Uncovering differences and similarities among quality function deployment-based methods in Design for X: benchmarking in different domains. Qual Eng. 2017;29(4):690–712. doi: 10.1080/08982112.2016.1253849
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu H-T, Tsai Y-L. A fuzzy risk assessment approach for occupational hazards in the construction industry. Saf Sci. 2012;50(4):1067–1078. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bas E. An integrated quality function deployment and capital budgeting methodology for occupational safety and health as a systems thinking approach: the case of the construction industry. Accid Anal Prev. 2014;68:42–56. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fabiano B, Currò F, Pastorino R. A study of the relationship between occupational injuries and firm size and type in the Italian industry. Saf Sci. 2004;2(7):587–600. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2003.09.003
   Google Scholar
• Kines P, Andersen D, Andersen LP, et al. Improving safety in small enterprises through an integrated safety management intervention. J Safety Res. 2013;44:87–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2012.08.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holte KA, Kjestveit K, Lipscomb HJ. Company size and differences in injury prevalence among apprentices in building and construction in Norway. Saf Sci. 2015;71:205–212. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunduz M, Laitinen H. A 10-step safety management framework for construction small and medium-sized enterprises. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2017;23(3):353–359. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2016.1200258
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. Fundamentals of the analytic network process – dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network. J Sys Sci Sys Eng. 2004;13(2):129–157. doi: 10.1007/s11518-006-0158-y
   Google Scholar
• Karwowski W. Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics. 2005;48(5):436–463. doi: 10.1080/00140130400029167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli M, Laurendi V, Tronci M. Design for safety in agricultural machinery. In: Marjanovic D, Storga M, Pavkovic N, editors. Proceedings of the 11th International Design Conference; 2010 May 17–20; Dubrovnik. Zagreb: Fakultet strojarstva i brodogradnje, The Design Society; 2010; p. 701–710.
   Google Scholar
• Grote G. Safety management in different high-risk domains – all the same? Saf Sci. 2012;50(10):1983–1992. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.07.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombardi M, Guarascio M, Rossi G. The management of uncertainty: model for evaluation of human error probability in railway system. Am J Appl Sci. 2014;11(3):381–390. doi: 10.3844/ajassp.2014.381.390
   Google Scholar
• Seker S, Recal F, Basligil H. A combined DEMATEL and grey system theory approach for analyzing occupational risks: a case study in Turkish shipbuilding industry. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 2017;23(6):1340–1372. doi: 10.1080/10807039.2017.1308815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hale A, Kirwan B, Kjellén U. Safe by design: where are we now? Saf Sci. 2007;45(1):305–327. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2006.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rausand M, Utne IB. Product safety – principles and practices in a life cycle perspective. Saf Sci. 2009;47(7):939–947. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2008.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombardi M, Fargnoli M. Prioritization of hazards by means of a QFD-based procedure. Int J Saf Secur Eng. 2018;8(2):342–353. doi: 10.2495/SAFE-V8-N2-342-353
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Safety of machinery – risk assessment – part 2: practical guidance and examples of methods. Geneva: ISO; 2012. Technical Report No. ISO/TR 14121-2:2012.
   Google Scholar
• Horberry T, Burgess-Limerick R. Applying a human-centred process to re-design equipment and work environments. Safety. 2015;1(1):7–15. doi: 10.3390/safety1010007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horberry T, Burgess-Limerick R, Cooke T, et al. Improving mining equipment safety through human-centered design. Ergon Des. 2016;24(3):29–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto A, Nunes IL, Ribeiro RA. Occupational risk assessment in construction industry – overview and reflection. Saf Sci. 2011;49(5):616–624. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang H-H, Boukamp F. Ontology-based representation and reasoning framework for supporting job hazard analysis. J Comput Civil Eng. 2011;25(6):442–456. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rausand M. Job safety analysis. In: Rausand M, editor. Risk assessment: theory, methods, and applications. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; 2011. p. 457–468.
   Google Scholar
• Rozenfeld O, Sacks R, Rosenfeld Y, et al. Construction job safety analysis. Saf Sci. 2010;48(4):491–498. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.12.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Boukamp F, Teizer J. Ontology-based semantic modeling of construction safety knowledge: towards automated safety planning for job hazard analysis (JHA). Autom Constr. 2015;52:29–41. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2015.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan G, Ertay T, Kahraman C, et al. Determining the importance weights for the design requirements in the house of quality using the fuzzy analytic network approach. Int J Intell Syst. 2004;19(5):443–461. doi: 10.1002/int.20006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahraman C, Ertay T, Büyüközkan G. A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach. Eur J Op Res. 2006;171(2):390–411. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.09.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patriarca R, Di Gravio G, Mancini M, et al. Change management in the ATM system: integrating information in the preliminary system safety assessment. Int J Appl Decis Sci. 2016;9(2):121–138.
   Google Scholar
• Lam JSL. Designing a sustainable maritime supply chain: a hybrid QFD–ANP approach. Transp Res Part E Logist Transp Rev. 2015;78:70–81. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2014.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaim S, Sevkli M, Camgöz-Akdağ H, et al. Use of ANP weighted crisp and fuzzy QFD for product development. Expert Syst Appl. 2014;41(9):4464–4474. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.01.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckley CC. Delphi technique supplies the classic result? Austral Library J. 1994;43(3):158–164. doi: 10.1080/00049670.1994.10755684
   Google Scholar
• Grisham T. The Delphi technique: a method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. Int J Manag Proj Bus. 2009;2(1):112–130. doi: 10.1108/17538370910930545
   Google Scholar
• Italian Workers’ Compensation Authority (INAIL). Database concerning occupational accidents and injuries [Internet]; 2017 [cited 2017 Nov 13]. Available from: http://bancadaticsa.inail.it/bancadaticsa/bancastatistica.asp?cod=2. Italian.
   Google Scholar
• Lipscomb HJ, Schoenfisch AL, Shishlov KS. Non-fatal contact injuries among workers in the construction industry treated in US emergency departments, 1998–2005. J Safety Res. 2010;41(3):191–195. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2010.03.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shibuya H, Cleal B, Kines P. Hazard scenarios of truck drivers’ occupational accidents on and around trucks during loading and unloading. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42(1):19–29. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.06.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aminbakhsh S, Gunduz M, Sonmez R. Safety risk assessment using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects. J Safety Res. 2013;46:99–105. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2013.05.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ericson CA. Hazard analysis techniques for system safety. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; 2015. p. 124–144.
   Google Scholar
• Foussard C, Remis CD. Risk assessment: methods on purpose? Int J Process Sys Eng. 2014;2(4):337–352. doi: 10.1504/IJPSE.2014.070090
   Google Scholar
• Ayağ Z, Özdemir RG. An analytic network process-based approach to concept evaluation in a new product development environment. J Eng Des. 2007;18(3):209–226. doi: 10.1080/09544820600752740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raharjo H, Brombacher AC, Xie M. Dealing with subjectivity in early product design phase: a systematic approach to exploit quality function deployment potentials. Comput Ind Eng. 2008;55(1):253–278. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2007.12.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan G, Berkol Ç. Designing a sustainable supply chain using an integrated analytic network process and goal programming approach in quality function deployment. Expert Sys Appl. 2011;38(11):13731–13748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samantra C, Datta S, Mahapatra SS. Analysis of occupational health hazards and associated risks in fuzzy environment: a case research in an Indian underground coal mine. Int J Inj Control Saf Promot. 2017;24(3):311–327. doi: 10.1080/17457300.2016.1178298
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohm J, Harris D. Risk perception and risk-taking behavior of construction site dumper drivers. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2010;16(1):55–67. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2010.11076829
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kines P, Spangenberg S, Dyreborg J. Prioritizing occupational injury prevention in the construction industry: injury severity or absence? J Safety Res. 2007;38(1):53–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2006.09.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narasimhan G, Crowe TG, Peng Y, et al. A task-based analysis of machinery entanglement injuries among Western Canadian farmers. J Agromedicine. 2011;16(4):261–270. doi: 10.1080/1059924X.2011.584043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadhana C, Shanmugapriya S. Assessment of risk in construction projects by modified fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2017;4(3):1695–1700.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson KM, Graham JD. Going beyond the single number: using probabilistic risk assessment to improve risk management. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 1996;2(4):1008–1034. doi: 10.1080/10807039609383660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Etherton J, Taubitz M, Raafat H, et al. Machinery risk assessment for risk reduction. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 2001;7(7):1787–1799. doi: 10.1080/20018091095393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli M, De Minicis M, Di Gravio G. Occupational health and safety improvement throughout knowledge management. In: Horváth I, Mandorli F, Rusák Z, editors. Proceedings of the TMCE; 2010 Apr 12–16; Ancona. Delft: Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, 2010. p. 1085–1096.
   Google Scholar
• Guneri AF, Gul M, Ozgurler S. A fuzzy AHP methodology for selection of risk assessment methods in occupational safety. Int J Risk Assess Manag. 2015;18(3–4):319–335. doi: 10.1504/IJRAM.2015.071222
   Google Scholar
• Voss C, Tsikriktsis N, Frohlich M. Case research in operations management. Int J Oper Prod Manag. 2002;22(2):195–219. doi: 10.1108/01443570210414329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Reddy KS. The state of case study approach in mergers and acquisitions literature: a bibliometric analysis. Future Bus J. 2015;1(1):13–34. doi: 10.1016/j.fbj.2015.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fargnoli M, Vita L, Gattamelata D, et al. A reverse engineering approach to enhance machinery design for safety. In: Marjanovic D, Storga M, Pavkovic N, et al., editors. Proceedings of the 12th International Design Conference; 2012 May 21–24; Dubrovnik. 2012 Zagreb: Fakultet strojarstva i brodogradnje, The Design Society; p. 627–636.
   Google Scholar
• Caffaro F, Roccato M, Micheletti Cremasco M, et al. Part-time farmers and accidents with agricultural machinery: a moderated mediated model on the role played by frequency of use and unsafe beliefs. J. Occup Health. 2018;60(1):80–84. doi: 10.1539/joh.17-0061-BR
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pillay, M. Accident causation, prevention and safety management: a review of the state-of-the-art. Procedia Manuf. 2015;3:1838–1845. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.224
   Google Scholar