Bridging the Gap Between Work as Imagined and Work as Done:
- Michael Matthew
- 52 minutes ago
- 11 min read
Data-Driven Insights into Organizational Safety Management System Misjudgments and Effective Interventions in Construction, Manufacturing, and Logistics
I. INTRODUCTION
Overview
Organizational Safety Management Systems (SMS) are foundational to risk mitigation in high-risk sectors such as construction, manufacturing, and logistics. However, persistent gaps exist between "work as imagined" (formal procedures and risk assessments) and "work as done" (actual operational practices), leading to misjudgments of real operational risk. This report synthesizes data from recent research to examine how and why these misjudgments occur and identifies the most effective system and leadership interventions to reduce the gap and improve safety outcomes.
Context
Despite the proliferation of SMS frameworks and safety protocols, accident rates and near-misses remain high in sectors like construction and logistics, suggesting that formal systems often fail to capture the complexities of real-world operations (Haslama et al., 2005)(Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Nævestad et al., 2022). The literature highlights the influence of organizational culture, leadership, training, and human factors in shaping the effectiveness of SMS and their alignment with frontline realities (Newaz et al., 2022)(Ta et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Nasim et al., 2022)(Schachtner et al., 2025)(Hale, 2006). Understanding the root causes of SMS misjudgment and identifying interventions that bridge the gap between theory and practice are critical for advancing safety performance.
II. DATA SYNTHESIS
Data Trends and Key Findings
1. Prevalence and Nature of the Gap
High Incidence of Risk Misjudgment: Studies in construction reveal that 84% of accidents involve deficiencies in risk management, with 70% linked to worker/team issues and 49% to workplace factors, indicating that SMS often fail to account for actual operational complexities (Haslama et al., 2005).
Systemic and Human Factors: Both process-driven (accident causation) and people-driven (worker involvement) perspectives are dominant in safety research, but a disconnect remains between formal systems and the lived experience of workers (Newaz et al., 2022)(Lin & Zhong, 2023).
Sector-Specific Evidence: In logistics, the implementation of organizational safety management (OSM) measures could reduce killed and seriously injured (KSI) incidents by up to 51%, yet low adoption rates persist, reflecting a gap between system design and operational uptake (Nævestad et al., 2022).
2. Causes of SMS Misjudgment
Overreliance on Formal Procedures: SMS often emphasize compliance and documentation over adaptive, context-sensitive risk management, leading to blind spots regarding real operational risks (Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022).
Leadership and Culture: Lack of top management commitment and weak safety culture are repeatedly identified as root causes of SMS ineffectiveness (GRIFFITHS, 1985)(Schachtner et al., 2025)(Hale, 2006)(Gil, 2019).
Inadequate Worker Involvement: Insufficient participation of frontline workers in risk identification and system design leads to underreporting of hazards and non-compliance with procedures (Haslama et al., 2005)(Haas et al., 2017)(Anderson et al., 2013)(Pfeiffer et al., 2010).
3. Effective Interventions
Leadership Commitment: Strong, empowering, and transformational leadership styles are associated with significant improvements in safety culture and performance (effect size r = 0.50–0.60) (Nasim et al., 2022)(Ta et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Arifin et al., 2025).
Participatory and Adaptive Systems: Systems thinking, participatory risk assessment, and continuous learning (e.g., learning from incidents, field-level risk assessments) are effective in closing the gap between work as imagined and work as done (Newaz et al., 2022)(Haas et al., 2017)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Integrated Training and Communication: Combining active, context-rich training methods (e.g., simulations, gamification) with ongoing feedback and communication enhances risk awareness and compliance (Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Read & Kleiner, 1996)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Accountability and Safety Responsibility: Embedding safety responsibility at all organizational levels mediates the relationship between SMS and safety performance, leading to measurable improvements (Tong et al., 2020).
4. Quantitative Evidence
Table 1: Key Data Points on SMS Misjudgment and Interventions
Sector | SMS Misjudgment Rate / Evidence of Gap | Key Causes Identified | Effective Interventions (with Data) | Quantitative Impact | |
Construction | 84% of accidents involve SMS deficiencies (Haslama et al., 2005) | Overreliance on procedures; weak leadership; poor worker involvement (Haslama et al., 2005)(Okonkwo & Wium, 2022) | Empowering leadership (r=0.60); participatory risk assessment; integrated training (Nasim et al., 2022)(Haas et al., 2017)(Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024) | Leadership reduced lost time accident rate from 34.7 to 0.5 per 10^6 man-hours (GRIFFITHS, 1985) | |
Manufacturing | Nuanced relationship: JIT harms safety unless mitigated by team-based work (Pagell et al., 2014) | Focus on productivity over safety; lack of adaptive systems (Pagell et al., 2014) | Team-based work; leadership commitment; continuous learning (Pagell et al., 2014)(Arifin et al., 2025) | Team-based work mitigates negative impact of JIT on safety (Pagell et al., 2014) | |
Logistics | OSM measures could reduce KSIs by up to 51% (Nævestad et al., 2022) | Low adoption of OSM; insufficient integration of risk management (Nævestad et al., 2022) | Stepwise OSM implementation; leadership-driven culture (Nævestad et al., 2022)(Arifin et al., 2025) | Estimated 7–52 KSIs avoided per year with OSM (Nævestad et al., 2022) |
III. ANALYSIS
Detailed Analysis of Data Points
A. How and Why SMS Misjudge Real Operational Risk
Disconnection Between Formal Systems and Reality
SMS are frequently designed around "work as imagined"—idealized workflows and risk scenarios—rather than the messy, adaptive nature of "work as done" (Newaz et al., 2022)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022).
In construction, 84% of accidents were linked to risk management deficiencies, often because SMS failed to capture the actual conditions and behaviors on site (Haslama et al., 2005).
In manufacturing, operational practices like just-in-time (JIT) can inadvertently increase risk unless counterbalanced by team-based, adaptive work structures (Pagell et al., 2014).
Organizational and Human Factors
Leadership that prioritizes production or cost over safety leads to underreporting, non-compliance, and a culture of risk normalization (GRIFFITHS, 1985)(Hale, 2006)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022).
Lack of worker involvement in SMS design and risk assessment results in procedures that are impractical or ignored in real operations (Haslama et al., 2005)(Haas et al., 2017).
Psychological barriers (fear of blame, lack of trust) further inhibit accurate risk reporting and learning from incidents (Gampetro et al., 2024)(Pfeiffer et al., 2010)(Anderson et al., 2013).
Systemic Shortcomings
SMS often lack mechanisms for continuous feedback, adaptation, and learning from incidents, leading to repeated misjudgments of risk (Lin & Zhong, 2023)(Haas et al., 2017)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
In logistics, low prevalence of OSM measures reflects organizational inertia and insufficient leadership drive for system-wide adoption (Nævestad et al., 2022).
B. System and Leadership Interventions: Effectiveness and Data
Table 2: Comparative Effectiveness of Interventions
Intervention Type | Description / Mechanism | Evidence of Effectiveness (with Data) | |
Empowering Leadership | Leaders encourage participation, feedback, and shared responsibility | Most influential style (r=0.60); strong effect on safety culture (Nasim et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Arifin et al., 2025) | |
Participatory Risk Assessment | Field-level, worker-involved risk identification and mitigation | Increased hazard identification, reduced incidents (Haas et al., 2017)(Haslama et al., 2005) | |
Integrated Training | Active, scenario-based, and blended training approaches | Higher efficiency, improved compliance and awareness (Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Read & Kleiner, 1996)(Ford & Fisher, 1994) | |
Continuous Learning (LFI) | Systematic learning from incidents, feedback loops | Multi-system, multi-dimensional improvement in safety (Lin & Zhong, 2023) | |
Accountability & Safety Responsibility | Embedding responsibility at all levels, not just compliance | Mediates SMS impact on performance; reduces risk level (Tong et al., 2020) | |
Safety Culture Development | Building shared values, trust, and psychological safety | Strong correlation with safety outcomes (Schachtner et al., 2025)(Hale, 2006)(Nik Him et al., 2023) |
C. Patterns, Variations, and Discrepancies
Sectoral Differences: Construction and logistics show higher rates of SMS misjudgment due to complex, dynamic work environments and lower formalization compared to manufacturing (Haslama et al., 2005)(Nævestad et al., 2022).
Leadership Impact: Empowering and transformational leadership consistently outperform transactional or passive styles in fostering safety culture and reducing the gap (Nasim et al., 2022)(Ta et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023).
Training and Worker Involvement: Training effectiveness is maximized when it is participatory and context-specific, and when workers are involved in both design and delivery (Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Barriers to Reporting and Learning: Psychological safety, trust, and non-punitive environments are essential for accurate risk reporting and effective learning from incidents (Gampetro et al., 2024)(Pfeiffer et al., 2010)(Anderson et al., 2013).
IV. DISCUSSION
Contextualizing Data
The data demonstrate that the gap between work as imagined and work as done is a systemic issue rooted in organizational culture, leadership practices, and the design of SMS themselves (Newaz et al., 2022)(Haslama et al., 2005)(Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022). Effective interventions are those that:
Empower Workers: Involving frontline employees in risk assessment and system design ensures that SMS reflect operational realities (Haas et al., 2017)(Haslama et al., 2005).
Foster Adaptive Leadership: Leadership that is visible, committed, and empowering drives cultural change and bridges the gap between formal systems and practice (GRIFFITHS, 1985)(Ta et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Nasim et al., 2022)(Arifin et al., 2025).
Promote Continuous Learning: Systems that institutionalize learning from incidents and adapt based on feedback are more resilient and effective (Lin & Zhong, 2023)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Integrate Training and Communication: Blended and context-rich training, coupled with open communication, enhances risk awareness and compliance (Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Read & Kleiner, 1996)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Gaps and Areas for Further Research
Measurement of Work as Done: There is a need for more robust methodologies to capture and analyze actual work practices versus formal procedures (Newaz et al., 2022)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022).
Sector-Specific Interventions: While many principles are universal, tailored interventions for sector-specific challenges in manufacturing and logistics require further empirical study (Pagell et al., 2014)(Nævestad et al., 2022).
Longitudinal Impact: More longitudinal studies are needed to assess the sustained impact of interventions on bridging the gap and improving safety outcomes (Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Nævestad et al., 2022).
V. CONCLUSION
Summary of Key Findings
SMS Misjudgment of Risk: Organizational SMS in construction, manufacturing, and logistics often misjudge real operational risk due to a persistent gap between work as imagined and work as done, driven by overreliance on formal procedures, lack of worker involvement, and weak leadership commitment (Haslama et al., 2005)(Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Pagell et al., 2014)(Nævestad et al., 2022).
Root Causes: The main causes include insufficient integration of frontline knowledge, inadequate leadership, and lack of adaptive, learning-oriented systems (Newaz et al., 2022)(GRIFFITHS, 1985)(Lin & Zhong, 2023)(T.-O. Nævestad et al., 2022).
Effective Interventions: The most effective interventions are empowering and transformational leadership, participatory risk assessment, integrated and context-rich training, continuous learning from incidents, and embedding safety responsibility throughout the organization (Nasim et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Haas et al., 2017)(Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Tong et al., 2020)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Direct Answer to the Research Question
Organizational safety management systems in construction, manufacturing, and logistics misjudge real operational risk primarily because they are designed around idealized procedures and fail to incorporate the realities of frontline work. This misalignment is perpetuated by weak leadership, lack of worker involvement, and insufficient feedback mechanisms. The most effective interventions to reduce this gap are those that foster empowering leadership, participatory risk assessment, integrated training, continuous learning, and a culture of shared safety responsibility (Haslama et al., 2005)(Okonkwo & Wium, 2022)(Pagell et al., 2014)(Haas et al., 2017)(Nasim et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Tong et al., 2020)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Recommendations
Adopt Empowering Leadership Styles: Organizations should prioritize leadership development programs that foster empowerment, participation, and shared responsibility for safety (Nasim et al., 2022)(Sankar et al., 2023)(Arifin et al., 2025).
Implement Participatory Risk Assessment: Regularly involve frontline workers in identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks to ensure SMS reflect operational realities (Haas et al., 2017)(Haslama et al., 2005).
Integrate Adaptive Training: Use blended, scenario-based training methods that are continuously updated based on feedback from actual work practices (Bęś & Strzałkowski, 2024)(Ford & Fisher, 1994).
Institutionalize Learning from Incidents: Develop robust systems for learning from incidents that include feedback loops and adaptive changes to SMS (Lin & Zhong, 2023)(Anderson et al., 2013).
Embed Safety Responsibility at All Levels: Make safety responsibility a core value and performance metric for all employees, not just compliance officers (Tong et al., 2020)(Schachtner et al., 2025)(Hale, 2006).
By implementing these interventions, organizations can significantly reduce the gap between work as imagined and work as done, leading to more accurate risk assessments and improved safety outcomes across high-risk sectors.
References
Haslama, R. A., Hidea, S. A., Gibbb, A. G., Gyia, D. E., Pavittb, T., Atkinsona, S., & Duffc, A. R. (2005). Contributing Factors in Construction Accidents.
Okonkwo, P. N., & Wium, J. A. (2022). Investigating the effectiveness of health and safety management systems within construction organizations. In International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (Vol. 29, Issue 2, pp. 785–795). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2022.2082137
Nævestad, T.-O., Phillips, R., Hovi, I. B., Jordbakke, G. N., & Elvik, R. (2022). Estimating Safety Outcomes of Increased Organisational Safety Management in Trucking Companies. In Safety (Vol. 8, Issue 2, p. 36). MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety8020036
Newaz, M. T., Ershadi, M., Jefferies, M., Pillay, M., & Davis, P. (2022). A systematic review of contemporary safety management research: a multi-level approach to identifying trending domains in the construction industry. In Construction Management and Economics (Vol. 41, Issue 2, pp. 97–115). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2022.2124527
Ta, M. T. D., Kim, T., & Gausdal, A. H. (2022). Leadership styles and safety performance in high-risk industries: a systematic review. In Safety and Reliability (Vol. 41, Issue 1, pp. 10–44). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/09617353.2022.2035627
Sankar, S. S., Anandh, K. S., Rajendran, S., Ibrahim, C. K. I. C., & Szóstak, M. (2023). Examining the Relative Importance and Association between Safety Leadership Styles and Factors Affecting Organizational Safety Climate. In Buildings (Vol. 13, Issue 8, p. 2062). MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13082062
Nasim, M. A., Yadav, R. S., Dash, S. S., & Bamel, U. (2022). Leadership styles and safety culture – a meta-analytic study. In International Journal of Organizational Analysis (Vol. 31, Issue 7, pp. 3233–3250). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-02-2022-3166
Schachtner, C., Jabłoński, A., & Jabłoński, M. (2025). Determinants of Social Impact Through Safety Culture in Technical Organizations. In Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management (Vol. 32, Issue 6, pp. 8598–8624). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.70151
Hale, A. (2006). Organizational Culture and Safety. In International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors, Second Edition - 3 Volume Set. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780849375477.ch568
Lin, L., & Zhong, J. (2023). Analysis of the systems nature of safety incidents in the construction industry from a post-2010 literature review. In Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems (Vol. 40, Issue 4, pp. 267–296). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2023.2283708
Nævestad, T. (2009). Mapping Research on Culture and Safety in High‐Risk Organizations: Arguments for a Sociotechnical Understanding of Safety Culture. In Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management (Vol. 17, Issue 2, pp. 126–136). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2009.00573.x
GRIFFITHS, D. K. (1985). Safety attitudes of management. In Ergonomics (Vol. 28, Issue 1, pp. 61–67). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140138508963112
Gil, L. (2019). Leadership and management for safety. 60, 10–11.
Haas, E. J., Connor, B. P., Vendetti, J., & Heiser, R. (2017). A case study exploring field-level risk assessments as a leading safety indicator. In Transactions (Vol. 342, Issue 1, pp. 22–28). Springer Science and Business Media LLC. https://doi.org/10.19150/trans.8104
Anderson, J. E., Kodate, N., Walters, R., & Dodds, A. (2013). Can incident reporting improve safety? Healthcare practitioners’ views of the effectiveness of incident reporting. In International Journal for Quality in Health Care (Vol. 25, Issue 2, pp. 141–150). Oxford University Press (OUP). https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzs081
Pfeiffer, Y., Manser, T., & Wehner, T. (2010). Conceptualising barriers to incident reporting: a psychological framework. In BMJ Quality & Safety (Vol. 19, Issue 6, pp. e60–e60). BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2008.030445
Arifin, K., Mansor Ali, M. X., Abas, A., Juhari, M. L., Khalid, M. S., & Zulkifly, S. S. (2025). Linking management leadership and safety outcomes: a multidimensional view of safety performance constructs. In International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (pp. 1–13). Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2025.2543659
Ford, J., & Fisher, S. (1994). The transfer of safety training in work organizations: a systems perspective to continuous learning. Occupational Medicine, 9 2, 241–59.
Bęś, P., & Strzałkowski, P. (2024). Analysis of the Effectiveness of Safety Training Methods. In Sustainability (Vol. 16, Issue 7, p. 2732). MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072732
Read, C. W., & Kleiner, B. H. (1996). Which training methods are effective? In Management Development Review (Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 24–29). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/09622519610111781
Tong, R., Zhang, N., Wang, X., & Zhao, H. (2020). Impact of safety management system on safety performance: the mediating role of safety responsibility. In Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (Vol. 27, Issue 10, pp. 3155–3170). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-03-2020-0197
Pagell, M., Dibrell, C., Veltri, A., & Maxwell, E. (2014). Is an Efficacious Operation a Safe Operation: The Role of Operational Practices in Worker Safety Outcomes. In IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management (Vol. 61, Issue 3, pp. 511–521). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2014.2316249
Gampetro, P. J., Nickum, A., & Schultz, C. M. (2024). Perceptions of U.S. and U.K. Incident Reporting Systems: A Scoping Review. In Journal of Patient Safety (Vol. 20, Issue 5, pp. 360–369). Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). https://doi.org/10.1097/pts.0000000000001231
Nik Him, N. F., -, N. A. A., Tun Ismail, W. N. A., & Tuan Abdullah, T. N. Z. (2023). ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY MANAGEMENT ATTITUDE PRACTICES TOWARD THE SAFETY CULTURE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR. In PLANNING MALAYSIA (Vol. 21). Malaysian Institute of Planners. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v21i25.1220
Michael Matthew Mike@SAFETY.INC SAFETY.INC Jan 2026
Comments