Live or Let Die: Managing Safety Management System Strategies and Stakeholders by Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis
Essay Preview: Live or Let Die: Managing Safety Management System Strategies and Stakeholders by Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis
Report this essay
SUMMARY OF THE ARTICLEĀ Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā The article “Live or let die: managing safety management system strategies and stakeholders ” by Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis, appears ina book in theĀ Business Strategy Series.Ā The article states that the ļ¬nancial and social cost of an organizationās safety performance has reported a greater signiļ¬cance to the integration of its safety management system (SMS) into the ļ¬rmās overall strategic drive.Although the arrangement and change of SMS strategies from the executive group to the work has become a serious factor of a ļ¬rmās strategic pursuits. Ā The authors believe that the possibility of this safety problem is embodied in managementās proper identiļ¬cation of successful SMS strategies. Ā According to the authors, there are three stages of SMS strategy processes that can create, change, and form upon the organizationās workplace safety performance. Ā The SMS processes are making sense of the ļ¬rmās safety environment, the identiļ¬cation of safety issues and the decision making resulting in actions.The authors cite examples in order to prove the stages of SMS strategy processes.The authors then offerrecommendations for managers and safety professionals that offers a new perspective from which to recognize, understand and accomplish organizational safety performances. Ā This includes several management characteristics that assumes to be critical in creating a high performance Safety Management Systems (SMSs).CRITIQUE OF THE ARTICLE Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā The article “Live or let die: managing safety management system strategies and stakeholders ” by Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis, appears in a book in the Business Strategy SeriesseeksĀ to address how the three stages of SMS strategy processes have the ability to create, change, and form upon the organizationās workplace safety performance.Ā TheĀ research problem being addressed is whether the authors can prove that the possibility of safety problems in an organization is embodied in managementās proper identiļ¬cation of successful SMS strategies.
ItĀ isĀ clearĀ from the abstract of the article that this is no simpleĀ issue. Ā In fact,Ā the article is fairlyĀ confusingĀ forĀ theĀ firstĀ coupleĀ paragraphs. Ā The author starts byĀ saying that SMSs have been shaped by three major stakeholders in the USA. Ā In my opinion, it is not necessary for the author to give detailed explanation about any other additional information that is not relevant towards the topic that needs to be discussed.Another influence is that the authors keep on repeating phrases in a certain paragraph. Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis writes āThe scope of this safety problem is embodied in managementās proper identiļ¬cation of successful SMS strategies, integration of those strategies within the ļ¬rmās overall strategic thrust, and allocation of the ļ¬rmās limited resources.ā Ā The exact phrase has been repeated on the second line of the third paragraph. Ā They did not paraphrase the points that have been stated in the first paragraph of the introduction of the article, at which the mistake they did is unprofessional. Ā On the other hand, to such a complicated issue, the author sums the research upĀ wellĀ by addressing three stages of SMS strategy processesĀ Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā . The authors cite examples in order to prove the stages of SMS strategy processes can create, change, and form upon the workplace safety performance of an organization. Ā At the ļ¬rst SMS strategy step, the safety environment sense making process builds a set of shared senses or meanings and purposes in understanding the organizationās safety environment (Choo, 2002; Loebbaka, 2008). This is result from current and future regulations, industry standards, workplace injuries, fatalities, and changes in workersā compensation costs. The second SMS strategy step involves the identiļ¬cation of safety issues. Ā Grant (2002) indicates that this stage influences the ļ¬rmās safety knowledge to produce new capabilities. Ā The point stated by Jon Kevin Loebbaka and Alfred Lewis is proven to be true because other author also supports it. Ā As for the final SMS strategy which is the decision making resulting in actions. Ā The authors stresses that this step affects the ļ¬rmās ļ¬nances, inļ¬uences stakeholdersā views of the ļ¬rm, and boosts competitive advantage. Ā ThisĀ isĀ excellentlyĀ laid out asĀ aĀ theory, theĀ authors eventually declareĀ thatĀ thereĀ are no other successful SMS strategies.