Health and safety induction training in the construction industry: a review

Abstract

Purpose

Absence of Health and Safety (H&S) induction training can expose workers to construction hazards and risks. To protect workers, construction organisations provide site H&S induction training. This training is used in the construction industry to train workers on organisation, project and client H&S practices and rules. While researchers have recognised its role in creating worker awareness, developing H&S culture and influencing accident rate, but there has been little research. Furthermore, there lacks a review that identifies the research trends, research focus and future research directions on H&S induction training in the construction industry. This study aims to review literature on H&S induction training in the construction industry.

Design/methodology/approach

Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct and Google Scholar databases were used to identify articles. Initial search produced a total of 278 papers and final analysis resulted in ten articles. Content analysis was applied.

Findings

The identified three contributions to knowledge: (a) identifies specific trajectory or development trends of H&S induction training in the construction industry (three research areas were identified, namely, impact of H&S induction training on H&S culture, impact of H&S induction training on accident rate and barriers affecting supervisor’s skills and ability to conducting H&S induction training), (b) suggestions have been given on the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture and (c) future research directions have been proposed. The review provides knowledge that the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture is influenced by skills, knowledge and experience of presenter, language used, content covered, mode of delivery, technological tools used, type of assessment and duration.

Research limitations/implications

The review is limited to studies related to H&S induction training in the construction industry. Other safety training studies and industries could have provided different findings. The review is limited to 2012 and 2022 and to ten articles.

Practical implications

Understanding the role of H&S induction training to worker behaviour, H&S culture and outcomes will improve H&S practices and standards within the construction industry. Construction organisations can consider the factors identified in this study to improve the effectiveness of H&S induction training.

Social implications

Understanding the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture may help to improve H&S culture.

Originality/value

The study has identified three main research areas and future research directions. It further revealed the factors that researchers, practitioners and policy makers can consider to improve the effectiveness of H&S induction training in the construction industry.

Citation

Rantsatsi, N.P. (2024), "Health and safety induction training in the construction industry: a review", Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-10-2023-0109

1. Introduction

H&S induction training is a legal requirement in several countries. South African Construction Regulations 2014 require employer to provide H&S induction training to each worker on construction project. Similar requirement exists in other countries such as the UK, Australia (Bahn and Barratt-Pugh, 2012a, 2012b), Malaysia (Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al., 2004) and Hong Kong (Li et al., 2012). Mandatory induction training and learning program are used to improve safety culture, reduce incidents (Bahn and Barratt-Pugh, 2012a, 2012b) and raise safety awareness. Loosemore and Malouf (2019) Identify four forms of induction training: general induction; company induction; site/project induction and task specific inductions. Similarly, Mutwale-Ziko et al. (2017) identify general induction, site induction and task specific induction as the three types of induction practices. General H&S inductions provide basic information on H&S, while site inductions provide H&S information and rules that are specific to construction site and task specific inductions provide H&S information and rules relating to a specific task on site (Loosemore and Malouf, 2019; Mutwale-Ziko et al., 2017).

This type of training can be done within a day or less (Sacks et al., 2013; Li et al., 2012; Wilkins, 2011). However, according to Loosemore and Malouf (2019) the risk level determines the length and depth of induction training. Hence, inductions can be done for couple of hours, a day or couple of days. For example, in other countries such as Malaysia, workers are required to attend one day H&S induction training (Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al., 2004) and the same happens in the UK, Australia and Hong Kong (Sacks et al., 2013; Choudhry et al., 2008). On the other hand, different administrative and technological resources are used to deliver H&S induction training. This includes the use of videos, demonstrations and lectures (Loosemore and Malouf, 2019; Sacks et al., 2013) and hard copy presentations. Mode of delivery can be contact (face to face), online and simulations. According to Gao et al. (2019) virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality and serious game can be used as examples of computer aided training tools. Furthermore, H&S induction training can be classified into formal, informal or both. Formal induction may be facilitated by H&S practitioner or site supervisor (Khalid et al., 2021; Okorie and Musonda, 2020), while informal induction may be conducted by workers. Regardless of the type of training or presenter, H&S induction helps to raise awareness on H&S issues and promote safe behaviours.

Broad and specific H&S issues are discussed during H&S induction training. This is used to help workers understand H&S rules and regulations (Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al., 2004). Similarly, According to Khalid et al. (2021) H&S induction training is usually used to teach workers about site hazards and organisation H&S rules which are designed to influence worker behaviour, attitude and decisions. Thus, it can lead to a change in worker knowledge and attitude towards H&S issues. On the other hand, investment in H&S training is instrumental in changing construction site workers’ attitudes or behaviours as noted by Lingard and Rowlinson (2005). This is because training provides workers with the skills to identify and assess risks (Sacks et al., 2013). Hughes and Ferrett (2010) assert that site H&S induction provides workers with skills to do their work safely. Besides, provision of skills, H&S induction facilitates H&S culture (Fewings, 2010) and practices (Mutwale-Ziko et al., 2017). Therefore, part of the functions of H&S induction training is to introduce new employees to site H&S hazards, practices and regulations. Noting that some workers suffer injuries within the first 30 days on the job (Simpson and Sam, 2019). Hence H&S induction remains one of the measures used to prevent such as incidents. Accordingly, H&S induction training is a requirement for achieving ideal H&S culture (Khalid et al., 2021). It is argued that developing better H&S culture may fail if H&S induction training is not prioritised.

For many years, H&S induction training has been used to facilitate H&S practices and rules on construction projects. While some scholars have recognised its role in developing H&S culture (Khalid et al., 2021; Okorie and Musonda, 2020; Bahn and Barratt-Pugh, 2012a) and influencing accident rate (Bahn and Barratt-Pugh, 2012a), but there has been little research directed to H&S induction training. Furthermore, there lacks a review that identifies the research trends, research focus and future research directions on H&S induction training in the construction industry. Unlike previous studies which focused on one research area, this study aims to review literature on H&S induction training in the construction industry. This study is one of the first efforts to provide a review of H&S induction training in the construction industry. No review has been undertaken and this study provides platform for future studies on H&S induction training. This is critical in understanding the developments, diversity, depth and breadth of studies focusing on H&S induction training. The objectives of the study are to identify H&S induction training main research areas, to establish how H&S induction training can be used to contribute to H&S culture and finally to propose future research directions. The study looks at the following questions: what are the main H&S induction training research areas, what is the role of H&S induction training to H&S culture and what are the emerging knowledge areas? Together with the inclusion and exclusion requirements in section 2, the five questions were used to guide the review. Similarly, Toyoda et al. (2022) used questions as a guide for the review.

2. Methodology

Literature review can be used to better understand a specific research area; that is H&S induction training. An extensive review was conducted to review literature on H&S induction training within the construction industry. This approached was also used recently by Toyoda et al. (2022) on current studies in virtual reality-based H&S training. A systematic literature review using meta-analysis or bibliometric was not used to analyse the review results. In the review, eligible articles were not suitable for such methods. Hence, a review method based on qualitative analysis was preferred. A research process involving five steps as adapted from Khallaf and Khallaf (2021) is used; identify research questions, identify search process and inclusion and exclusion criteria, conduct data collection, quality assessment and conduct analysis. This process is depicted in Figure 1. Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct and Google Scholar databases were used to identify articles. These databases were chosen for their quality and extensiveness. A similar approach was adopted by Muzafar (2021). Previous studies recommended the combination of different databases to improve the quality and comprehensiveness (Bar-Ilan, 2008). The search was done between 01 October 2022 and 31 May 2023. The initial searches resulted in 278 papers. Search strings used ‘’health and safety induction’’ AND ‘’ safety induction’’ AND ‘’ health and safety training’’ OR ‘’ construction industry’’. Reference lists of the reviewed articles were used to identify further studies. Hence, snowball sampling was adopted in that case. Regarding inclusion and exclusion requirements, papers were included if:

• were published in peer reviewed journals,

• health and safety induction training was the focus or both H&S induction training and H&S culture or accident rate were examined,

• safety induction training,

• articles published between 2012 and 2022,

• were written in English, and

• had author names and year of publication.

Papers were excluded if:

• were university dissertations, theses or conference papers,

• examined H&S culture for improving H&S performance,

• examined H&S induction training outside construction industry, and

• had only abstracts.

The consideration of only peer reviewed articles was made to improve the quality, reliability and validity of the findings. The same approach was proposed by previous studies (Ibrahim and Belayutham, 2019 and Rantsatsi, 2023). Based on the inclusion and exclusion requirements, only 96 papers were retained. Abstract analysis produced 24 papers. Abstract analysis looked on the objectives, methods, results and contributions made by the article. Final analysis was based on the full text screening of the actual content of article and any article whose full text could not be obtained was excluded from final analysis. Hence, ten articles were retained for final analysis. To improve the quality assessment, the current study adapted the five questions to rate the articles as proposed by Khallaf and Khallaf (2021) and later used by Toyoda et al. (2022). Five questions: Do the authors state the research aims clearly? Do the authors describe the methodology? Do the authors define the data collection method? Do the authors discuss their findings clearly and Do the authors discuss the limitations in their study. These questions were also considered to remove any perceived biases since the review was conducted by one researcher.

3. Findings and discussion

This section presents six main findings of the study:

1. the year and journal name;

2. country of origin;

3. research methodology;

4. H&S induction training main research areas;

5. role of H&S induction training and

6. future research directions.

The findings are presented and discussed at the same time. Content analysis method was used to synthesise the literature. Similar reviews studies used the method for data analysis (Mok et al., 2015; Rantsatsi et al., 2020; Rantsatsi, 2023). Information such as author name, country, methodology and research focus were extracted. For this study, inductive content analysis method was adopted. This type of analysis allows the researcher to extract the information directly from the data without the need of prior relevant theories or when the knowledge is fragmented (Horani, 2023). In this study, inductive content analysis was used with the prompts introduced by the research question (Toyoda et al., 2022) since the study purpose was not to test previous theories.

Furthermore, the identified articles were used to achieve the study objectives: To identify H&S induction training main research areas, to establish how H&S induction training can be used to contribute to H&S culture and to propose future research directions. These articles are presented, analysed and discussed. Microsoft Excel was used to tabulate the content of the articles which includes the following: author name and year; country; journal name, methodology and study focus as shown in Table 1.

3.1 Year of publication and journal name

The final analysis produced only ten relevant articles. This is surprising given the role that H&S induction training play in the construction industry. The review was between 2012 and 2022. Table 1 above shows that H&S induction training have been investigated from 2012 to 2021. In 2012 and 2020 three and two articles were published respectively. Notably, no studies were found in 2013, 2016, 2018 and 2022. The lack of studies during this period could be due to lack of interest or perhaps some authors might have published in other publications rather than in journals. The publication of papers in conference proceedings was also noted by previous study (Rantsatsi, 2023). No journal had significant contribution, as all journals contributed one article.

3.2 Country of origin

The review is represented by four continents. Surprisingly, North America made no contribution while Europe only provided one article. This was not the case in other research topics where North America contributed more articles than any other continents (Rantsatsi, 2023) and Europe is usually the second contributor behind North America. Australia provided four articles and the rest of the countries in Table 1 contributed one article each. These findings may show that research focus areas differ based on the continent or country. It can also suggest that different continents pursue different research interests and goals or face different H&S challenges. The results also show that the gap in terms of article contributions between developed and developing countries still exists. This supports the findings by Shaikh et al. (2020) and Rantsatsi (2023).

3.3 Study methodology

Table 1 presented the research methods used by scholars investigating H&S induction training in construction industry. Findings indicate that research in H&S induction training is dominated by mixed method approaches. Eight articles used mixed method approaches, translating into 80% of all contributions. The use of mixed method approaches indicates the desire to gain deeper understanding of phenomena under investigation. Only two studies used longitude approach and the rest adopted cross sectional approach. The use of longitude approach is significant since the phenomenon can be studied for longer period and initial findings can be improved. 90% of the studies used questionnaires and interviews to collect primary data, while none used literature review. Notably, one study used only quantitative method and the other used qualitative method. Finally, none of the reviewed articles used literature review to investigate H&S induction training in the construction industry. It is interesting that for the past ten years, no study has sought to provide a summarised information on health and safety induction training within the construction industry.

3.4 Main research areas

The review identified three main research areas. The first research area focused on the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture. Only four studies have investigated the relationship between H&S induction training and H&S culture. Tam and Fung (2012) evaluated the effectiveness of a mandatory safety training course. The study found that paying more attention towards safety training resulted in a positive personal safety attitude. In Austrialia, Loosemore and Malouf (2019) investigated the impact of safety training on worker attitude towards safety and it was found that construction workers had slightly better knowledge of safety risks after receiving induction training. Furthermore, it was revealed that induction training was not effective in modifying worker attitude towards safety. This contradicts the findings by Tam and Fung (2012) which indicated that safety training contributed to positive worker safety attitude and argument that H&S inductions instil safe working behaviours (Hashim et al., 2018; Spillane and Oyedele, 2013). The use of H&S induction for improving safety culture is widely recommended. According to Smallwood (2015) H&S induction training is one of the predictors of the organisational H&S performance. Studies by Okorie and Musonda (2020) and Khalid et al. (2021) contend that for achieving optimum H&S culture, H&S induction training becomes critical. According to Zulu and Haupt (2016), not only is H&S induction critical for H&S culture, but is also key for the effective H&S management system. Similarly, Makin and Winder (2008) note that the implementation of H&S management systems can be improved by H&S induction training.

In Malaysian, Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al. (2004) evaluated the effectiveness of H&S induction training in terms of safety knowledge and awareness gained. The study found that no evaluation has been done within Malaysian construction industry on the effectiveness of H&S induction training. It is suggested that pre- and post-training evaluations should be conducted to measure safety knowledge and awareness gained. In UK, Harveya et al. (2020) evaluated the impact of actor-based H&S induction on participants and other stakeholders on megaprojects. Study found that despite the use of longitudinal study, it was difficult to determine whether actor-based H&S inductions influenced workers’ behaviour. Further, no clear evidence existed to determine whether actor-based H&S inductions improved H&S outcomes. Finally, safety training can increase worker hazard awareness and knowledge of safe work procedures (Cohen et al., 1998).

The second review focused on supervisor’ H&S skills and ability to conduct H&S inductions. Only two studies have investigated the skills and ability required for conducting inductions. Okorie and Musonda (2020) explored supervisor’s H&S competency and ability to effectively conduct site H&S induction training to workers. Similarly, Khalid et al. (2021) assessed supervisors H&S capabilities and skills to oversee site H&S induction training. Both studies identified barriers affecting supervisor’s ability to conduct induction training effectively. The common barriers identified by two studies were lack of management commitment, inadequate H&S training and limited awareness or knowledge of visual and audio communication aids. Other barriers included inadequate communication skills, lack of budget to H&S training and unavailability of modern training equipment. In other study, Okorie and Smallwood (2011) identified lack of communication skills as one of the obstacles to effective site induction training. The studies recommended H&S training, use of modern technologies and multilingual skills among supervisors. Both studies focused on capabilities and skills required by supervisors. While supervisors conduct H&S inductions, but previous studies indicate that part of H&S professionals duties is to conduct H&S training and inductions (Freitas et al., 2017). Hence, studies focusing on skills and ability of H&S practitioners to conduct induction training should be encouraged. Okorie and Musonda (2020) notes that unless attention is given to the skills and competencies of those conducting H&S induction training, success remains unlikely. These authors recognising that effective H&S induction training would lead to a positive H&S culture.

The third review focused on the contribution of H&S induction training to diseases, injury or accidents reduction. Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2012a) evaluated the effectiveness of safety induction training within housing and civil construction sectors. Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2012b) evaluated the mandatory construction induction training program in Australia. Similarly, Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2014) evaluated the impact of construction induction training on work related injuries in Western Australian construction sector. The studies found that mandatory construction induction provided many benefits to the employers such as reduction of accidents on worksites, increase in worker safety awareness and positive change in safety culture. H&S induction training is done to reduce accident (Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al., 2004). A study by Aksorn and Hadikusumo (2008) in Thailand found that safety inductions were effective in reducing unsafe conditions. Similarly, unsafe H&S work behaviours can be deterred through H&S induction training (Zulu and Haupt, 2016).

On the hand other, Mutwale-Ziko et al. (2017) evaluated the effectiveness of H&S induction practices in Zambian construction sites. Study findings revealed that implementation of H&S induction practices is inadequate and ineffective as preventative measures for reducing accidents on construction sites. These findings are important since training interventions contribute to safety culture and decrease in injuries (Varonen and Mattila, 2000). Despite, the benefits outlined, the reviewed studies could not provide clear evidence on the relationship of H&S induction training and the number of lost time injuries or diseases. A study by Robson et al. (2012) found that H&S training influences workplace practices and that there was uncertainty as whether it prevented illnesses and injuries. On the contrary, over two decades ago, Kinn et al. (2000) found plumbing and fitting industry workers who received site specific safety induction had fewer injuries.

Based on the three research areas presented above, H&S induction training has been used to communicate H&S practices, however, this review revealed that the relationship between H&S training induction and improved H&S culture and low accident rate remains unclear. Over three decades ago, Cohen et al. (1998) pointed out the contribution of training to injury rate reduction remain uncertain. However, Kinn et al. (2000) note that safety orientation and training contribute to reduction of work-related injuries and safety culture improvement. The value of H&S induction training emanates from its ability to change workers behaviour, improve worker knowledge acquisition, H&S culture and accident rate. While, the review confirms the role of H&S induction training to H&S culture and accident rate, but its effectiveness or contribution remains unclear. Furthermore, it is increasingly challenging to determine its long-term impact on worker behaviour, H&S culture and outcomes. It can be hard to determine the effectiveness of H&S induction training because of the inherent characteristics of construction industry such as its short-term employment and constant staff turnover. The assumption is that receiving H&S induction training will lead to better understanding and implementation of H&S practices and rules. Similarly, absence of H&S induction training will to lead poor H&S culture or performance.

3.5 The role of health and safety induction training

The role of H&S induction training is to introduce both the workers and visitors to site H&S issues and measures. The review revealed that H&S induction training is used to communicate both H&S hazards and controls. Workers can use the information given to identify hazards and assess the level of risk. This is critical since construction industry makes use of hazardous tools and equipment. Traditionally, induction training communicates the organization’s expectations on H&S and serves a precondition for accessing worksite (Bahn and Barratt-Pugh, 2012b). H&S induction training is one of the H&S measures implemented to raise awareness and reduce hazards. Duffy (2003) notes that training can improve workers ability identify potential hazards and risks correctly. Similarly, workers awareness and skill of specific risks and controls can be increased by training (Bena et al., 2009). Besides, identification of hazards and assessment of risks, it can be used to define H&S responsibilities for any person working or visiting the site. Bust et al. (2008) remark that H&S induction training is used to help workers understand their H&S roles and responsibilities. Without communicating H&S practices and rules, implementation becomes a pipe dream.

Gao et al. (2019) identify knowledge acquisition, unsafe behaviour alteration and injury rate reduction as the three measures of effectiveness of training. Similarly, Safety training is often used to prevent work related injuries (Schoenfisch et al., 2017) and reduce accidents (Hashim et al., 2018). Thus, the aim of H&S induction training is to change or modify safety related behaviour, attitude, knowledge and outcomes. H&S inductions are used to decrease the number of fatalities and to maintain good H&S record (Gilmour et al., 2017). This can occur only if workers transfer the learned H&S knowledge and skills to workplace (Freitas et al., 2017). The knowledge and skills gained can be demonstrated in how workers conduct themselves towards H&S. For instance, a worker knows, understands and complies with H&S rules, recognises and controls the site hazards based on the knowledge given during H&S induction. Hence, training should change unsafe behaviours and promote safe ones (Bena et al., 2009).

The review has shown the role played by H&S induction training in the construction. It is concluded that H&S induction training is important for hazard identification, documentation, communication and control. This review also shows the progress which has been made in this research field. It is clear that the progress is still minimal and much must be done to maximise the potential of H&S induction training for improving H&S culture, worker behaviour and accident rate. Finally, contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture is dependent on myriad of factors. Firstly, medium of instruction; If workers know and understand the language used during induction training. Secondly, mode of delivery is also important, for example whether training is face to face, online or simulations. Thirdly, the content of induction training if it includes general and specific information relevant to the site. Finally, the construction site, H&S knowledge and experience of person offering the training. Similarly, Wilkins (2011) note that experience, culture, educational attainment, levels of literacy, language, learning disabilities, age and race should be considered when developing safety training methods. The above should be developed to enhance the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture in the construction industry.

3.6 Future research directions

Five future research directions are proposed based on this review. The aims of future research could focus on traditional and computer aided training tools, consideration of specific hazards over generic, the role of language, use of written assessment and the relationship between duration, validity and H&S induction training.

This review indicates that there is paucity of studies focusing on the effectiveness of H&S induction training delivery tools such as lecture, handout, video demonstration, role play and computer aided technologies such as virtual reality, serious games, building information model (BIM) and augmented reality. Insights into these tools may help the construction industry to improve the delivery of induction training. Gao et al. (2019) note that both traditional and computer aided training tools can be used to promote worker knowledge acquisition, behaviour modification and accident rate reduction. According to Godfaurd and Abdulkadir (2011) and Muzafar (2021) BIM can be used to improve worker perception, visualisation and understanding of site hazards. It can also be used as a part of H&S induction training (Gilmour et al., 2017). More studies should investigate the role or impact of traditional and computer aided training tools on H&S induction training.

The review shows that different inductions are given to workers; general, organisation, project and task. These are provided to achieve specific goals. This review argues that general and specific information should be provided by H&S induction training. On the contrary, Zulu and Haupt (2016) contend that inductions should not include generic hazards because workers might be familiar with generic hazards from past projects or experiences. In that case, H&S induction training can serve to remind workers about site hazards (Godfaurd and Abdulkadir, 2011). According to Gilmour et al. (2017) H&S induction training is divided into two sections: general and site specific H&S information. Hence, general, prevalent, and specific hazards should be communicated by induction training. More importantly, the types of construction activities, work environment, legislations, client, organisation requirements, workers profile and risks should determine the content of H&S induction training. The above aspects are likely to influence the duration and delivery of H&S induction training. There is a need to determine whether H&S induction training should consider only specific hazards and controls.

Another finding was the use of language. Ideally, workers should be given inductions in their own languages. Study by Hashim et al. (2018) revealed that different languages were used for communicating H&S information. However, due to diversity of languages and resources, inductions are often delivered in English in some countries. Others have suggested translating (Zulu and Haupt, 2016) or making use of interpreters during induction training. This is important because the success of H&S induction training is probably dependent on medium of instruction. According to findings by Hashim et al. (2018) respondents prefer induction training to be done in their own language. This is because its effectiveness can be affected by language. It could be beneficial to explore the role of language on H&S induction training.

The review further reveal that H&S induction trainings are either mandatory or non-mandatory. The former comes from government H&S legislations and the latter comes from organisation, professional and certification bodies. In Hong Kong, workers are required to attend H&S induction training approved by Department of Labour (Choudhry et al., 2008). Despite their distinct requirements, both are enforced and monitored during audits and inspections. Obtaining permission to work on site, one should have passed the induction training test and in some instances, only proof of attendance is acceptable. A similar requirement exists where a worker is required to pass a basic safety training before advancing to next training (Bena et al., 2009). It is worthwhile investigating whether mandatory H&S induction training should include the writing and passing of written assessment before site authorisation or approval is given to workers.

Finally, attendance register or card is issued as a proof that a worker has undergone H&S induction training. Induction card usually includes a period of issue or validity attached to. Analysis shows that the duration and validity of H&S induction training differ. Some are valid for year or three years (Tam and Fung (2012) and Hashim et al. (2018) and duration ranges from couple of hours to three days. The relationships between H&S induction training, duration and validity should be investigated.

Inclusion of non-peer reviewed publications could have increased the number of papers reviewed. All studies that investigated the impact of H&S induction training on accident rate were conducted in Australia, hence the results could not be generalised to other locations. Similar studies should be conducted in other countries. Although, review may lack some of the characteristics demonstrated by meta-review, systematic or bibliometric methods, it remains an essential component of any scientific review. More advanced reviews may benefit from this study. Meta review, systematic and bibliometric methods may be more appropriate where the research area has been overly studied. No review has been undertaken and this study provides platform for future studies on H&S induction training.

4. Conclusion

Managing H&S requires a constant commitment from every organisation. Organisations must always inform and train workers on good H&S practices and rules. The value of H&S induction training emanates from its ability to change workers behaviour, improve worker knowledge acquisition, H&S culture and accident rate. The review provides summarised information on the status of H&S induction training in the construction. The study makes three contributions to knowledge:

1. identifies specific trajectory or development trends of H&S induction training in the construction industry (three research areas were identified, namely, impact of H&S induction training on H&S culture, impact of H&S induction training on accident rate, and barriers affecting supervisor’s skills and ability to conducting H&S induction training),

2. suggestions have been given on the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture, and

3. future research directions have been proposed based on review.

While, the review showed the role of H&S induction training to H&S culture and accident rate, but its contribution or effectiveness is unclear. Furthermore, it is increasingly challenging to determine its long-term impact on worker awareness, behaviour and outcomes. The review provides knowledge that the contribution of H&S induction training to H&S culture is influenced by skills, knowledge and experience of presenter, language used, content covered, mode of delivery, technological tools used, type of assessment and duration. The results presented by this review reveal the factors that researchers, practitioners and policy makers can consider to improve the effectiveness of H&S induction training in the construction industry. On the other hand, the review revealed that researchers have predominately relied on empirical studies to explore H&S induction training in the construction. While empirical studies can help to establish the relationship between H&S induction training and accident rate, but review studies are helpful in establishing the trends, knowledge gaps and suggesting future research directions. The review further revealed that no study has been done about H&S professionals roles to H&S induction training, Although studies show the importance of H&S professionals to H&S induction training. Further studies are encouraged to investigate the relationship between H&S professionals and induction training. Review provided no evidence regarding the effectiveness of training tools used for delivering H&S induction training. It may be useful to investigate the effectiveness of traditional and computer aided tools used in H&S induction training. These studies will help in improving the theory and practice of H&S induction training. Understanding the role of H&S induction training to worker behaviour, H&S culture and outcomes will improve H&S practices and standards within the construction industry.

Figures

Figure 1.

A process for review of health and safety induction training in the construction industry

Table 1.

Reviewed articles on health and safety induction training in the construction industry

No	Authors/year	Country	Journal name	Methodology	Study focus
1	Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2012a)	Australia	Journal of Health, Safety and Environment	Mixed method	Evaluate the effectiveness of the construction induction training
2	Tam and Fung (2012)	Hong Kong	Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice	Mixed method	Investigate the relationship among people’s behavior, attitude and perception toward the safety culture and evaluate the effectiveness of a mandatory safety training course
3	Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2012b)	Australia	Journal of Evaluation and Program Planning	Mixed method	Evaluate the mandatory construction induction training program
4	Bahn and Barratt-Pugh (2014)	Australia	International journal of Training Research	Mixed method	Evaluate the impact of construction induction training on work related injuries
5	Alfred Goh Pui Tecka et al. (2004).	Malaysia	Jurnal teknologi	Qualitative	Evaluate criteria of safety and health induction for construction worker
6	Mutwale-Ziko et al. (2017)	Zambia	International journal of Health and Medical Engineering	Mixed method	Explore the effectiveness of H&S induction practices on Zambian construction sites
7	Loosemore and Malouf (2019)	Australia	Safety science	Quantitative	Explore the impact that induction training has on worker attitude towards safety
8	Harveya et al. (2020)	UK	Journal of Applied Ergonomics	Mixed method	Evaluate the impact of actor-based H&S induction on participants and other stakeholders
9	Okorie and Musonda (2020)	Nigeria	International journal of Construction Management	Mixed method	Investigate supervisor’s ability and competency to conduct construction site H&S induction training
10	Khalid et al. (2021)	Pakistan	Journal of Applied Engineering Science	Mixed method	Assess supervisor’s capability and attitude to supervise H&S induction training

Source: Author’s own work