Safety-specific passive-avoidant leadership and safety compliance among chinese steel workers: The moderating role of safety moral belief and organizational size

6Citations
Citations of this article
51Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Despite the documented relationship between active-approaching leadership behaviors and workplace safety, few studies have addressed whether and when passive-avoidant leadership affects safety behavior. This study examined the relationship between two types of safety-specific passive-avoidant leadership, i.e., safety-specific leader reward omission (SLRO) and safety-specific leader punishment omission (SLPO), and safety compliance, as well as the moderating effects of an individual difference (safety moral belief) and an organizational difference (organizational size) in these relationships. These predictions were tested on a sample of 704 steel workers in China. The results showed that, although both SLRO and SLPO are negatively related to safety compliance, SLPO demonstrated a greater effect than SLRO. Moreover, we found that steel workers with high levels of safety moral belief were more resistant to the negative effects of SLRO and SLPO on safety compliance. Although steel workers in large enterprises were more resistant to the negative effects of SLPO than those in small enterprises, the SLRO-compliance relationship is not contingent upon organizational size. The current study enriched the safety leadership literature by demonstrating the detrimental and relative effects of two types of safety-specific passive-avoidant leadership on safety compliance and by identifying two boundary conditions that can buffer these relationships among steel workers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Liu, L., Mei, Q., Jiang, L., Wu, J., Liu, S., & Wang, M. (2021). Safety-specific passive-avoidant leadership and safety compliance among chinese steel workers: The moderating role of safety moral belief and organizational size. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052700

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free