Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sicherheit

  • Chapter
Human Factors

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Amalberti, R. (2001). The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems. Safety Science, 37,109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice.Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baram, M. & Schöbel, M. (2007). Safety culture and behavioral change at the workplace (Editorial). Safety Science, 45 (6),631–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, J. & LaRhette, R. (1988). Managing human performance – INPO’s human performance evaluation. System. Human-Error-Avoidance-Techniques Conferences Proceedings.Warrendale, Pennsylvania: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE), Publications No. P-204, 79–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S., Rudolph, J. W. & Hatakenaka, S. (2002). Organizational learning from experience in high-hazard industries: Problem investigation as off-line reflective practice.MIT Sloan School of Management: Working Paper 4359–02.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review,21, 619–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • DIN 40041. (1990-12). Zuverlässigkeit; Begriffe. Berlin: Beuth-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • EFQM (2003). Die Grundkonzepte der Excellence. [Online] http://www.luzern.phz.ch/fileadmin/media/luzern.phz.ch/qualitaetsmanagement/plu_efqm_grundkonzepte_2003.pdf [23.06.2011].

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlbruch, B. & Schöbel, M. (2011). SOL – Safety through organizational learning: A method for event analysis, Safety Science, 49 (1), 27-31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlbruch, B. (2000). Vom Unfall zu den Ursachen–Empirische Bewertung von Analyseverfahren. Berlin: Mensch & Buch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlbruch, B. & Wilpert, B. (1997). Event analysis as problem solving process. In A. R. Hale, B. Wilpert & M. Freitag (Eds.), After the event: from accident to organisational learning(pp. 113–130). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlbruch, B. & Wilpert, B. (1999). System safety – an emerging field for I/O psychologie. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Hrsg.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology(Bd. 14, S. 55–93). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M. & Lardner, R. (1999). The development of a draft safety culture maturity model. Suffolk: HSE Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin, R. (2007). Measuring safety culture in healthcare. A case for accurate diagnosis. Safety Science, 45 (6),653–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin, R., Mearns, K., O’Connor, P. & Bryden, R. (2000). Measuring safety climate: Identifying the common features. Safety Science, 34 (1–3),177–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D. & Odella, F. (1998). What do you mean by safety? Conflicting perspectives on accident causation and safety management in a construction firm. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 6 (4),202–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guldenmund, F. W. (2000). The nature of safety culture: A review of theory and research. Safety Science, 34 (1–3),215–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guldenmund, F. (2007). The use of questionnaires in safety culture research: An evaluation. Safety Science, 45 (6),723–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, A. R. (2000). Editorial: Culture’s confusion. Safety Science, 34,1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, A. & Heijer, T. (2006). Defining resilience. In E. Hollnagel, D. D. Woods & N. Leveson (Eds.), Resilience engineering: concepts and precepts(pp. 35–41). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmreich, R. L. & Merritt A. C. (1998). Culture at work: National, organisational and professional influences. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel, E., Woods, D. D. & Leveson, N. (2006). Resilience engineering: concepts and precepts. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, A. (1999). The limits of normal accident theory. Safety Science, 32 (2–3),93–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, P. (2007). Implementing a safety culture in a major multi-national. Safety Science, 45 (6),697–722.

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEA (1991). ASSET Guidelines revised 1991 edition. Reference material prepared by the IAEA for assessment of safety significant event teams(IAEA-TECDOC-632). Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEA (1995). ASCOT-Guidelines. Guidelines for reviews by the assessment of safety culture in organizations teams. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEA (1998). Developing safety culture in nuclear activities: Practical suggestions to assist progress. IAEA Safety Report Series Nr. 11. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEA (2005). SCART Guidelines. Guidelines for safety culture assessment review teams. Unpublished report. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICAO (2004). ICAO-Annex 14, Volume I, »Aerodrome design and operations«. 4thEdition, July 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • INSAG-1 (1986). Summary Report on the Post-Accident Review Meeting on the Chernobyl accident. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • INSAG-4 (International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group) (1991). Safety Culture.Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • INSAG-15 (International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group) (2002). Key practical issues in strengthening safety culture. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC Guide 51 (1999). Leitfaden für die Aufnahme von Sicherheitsaspekten in Normen. Berlin: Beuth Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, A., Shorrock, S. T., Kennedy, R., Kirwan, B., Andersen, H. & Bove, T. (2003). The human error in ATM technique (HERA-JANUS)(HRS/HSP-002-REP-03). Brussels: Eurocontrol.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. (1980). MORT Safety Assurance Systems. New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1996). The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques – THERP, HEART and JHEDI: Part 1 – technique descriptions and validation issues. Applied Ergonomics, 27 (6),359–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1997a). The development of a nuclear chemical plant human reliability management approach: HRMS and JHEDI. Relibility Engineering and System Safety, 56,107–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1997b). The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques – THERP, HEART and JHEDI: Part III – Practical aspects of the usage of the techniques. Applied Ergonomics, 28 (1),27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1997c). Validation of human reliability assessment techniques: Part 1 – Validation issues. Safety Science, 27 (1),25–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1997d). Validation of human reliability assessment techniques: Part 2 – Validation results. Safety Science, 27 (1),43–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, B. (1998). Safety management assessment and task analysis – a missing link. In A. Hale & M. Baram (Eds.), Safety management: The challenge of change(pp. 67–92). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koornneef, F. (2000). Organised learning from small-scale incidents. Delft: Delft University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porte, T. R. (1996). High reliability organizations: Unlikely, demanding and at risk. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 4 (2),60–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porte, T. R. & Consolini, P. M. (1991). Working in practice but not in theory: theoretical challenges of high-reliability organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1,19–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lardner, R. (2004). Mismatches between safety culture Improvement and behaviour-based safety. Paper presented at the 23th NetWork-Meeting on Safety Culture and Behavioral Change, Blankensee, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leveson, N. (2011). Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events. Safety Science, 49 (1), 55-64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leveson, N., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Barrett, B., Brown, A., Carroll, J., Dulac, N., Fraile, L. & Marais, K. (2004). Effectively addressing NASA’s organizational and safety culture: Insights from system safety and engineering systems. Paper presented at MIT ESD Symposium, March 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • OSHA (2002). Arbeitsunfälle verhindern. Magazin der Europäischen Agentur für Sicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz am Arbeitsplatz, 4,1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D., Lawrie, M. & Hudson, P. (2006). A framework of understanding the development of organisational safety culture. Safety Science, 44 (6),551–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1986). Lernen wir etwas aus den jüngsten Katastrophen? Soziale Welt, 37, 390–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1987). Normale Katastrophen. Die unvermeidbaren Risiken der Großtechnik. Frankfurt u. a.: Campus-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N. F. (1991). Safety culture and risk management in organizations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,Vol. 22, pp. 129–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, J. (1991). Safety control: Some basic distinctions and research issues in high hazard low risk operation.Paper preseted at the NeTWork workshop on Risk Management, Bad Homburg, May 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, J. (1997). Risk management in a dynamic society: A modelling problem. Safety Science, 27 (2–3),183–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. (1990). Human error.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. (1997). Managing the risks of organizational accidents.Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. T. (1998). Achieving a safe culture: theory and practice. Work and Stress, 12 (3),293–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochlin, G. I. (1993). Defining »High reliability« organizations in practice: A taxonomic prologue. In K. H. Roberts (Ed.), New challenges to understanding organizations(pp. 11–32). New York, Toronto: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, S. D. (2004) Learning from normal accidents. Organization and Environment, 17 (1),15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaaf, T. W. van der & Kanse, L. (2004). Biases in incident reporting databases: An empirical study in the chemical process industry. Safety Science, 42 (1),57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45 (2),109–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schöbel, M. & Manzey, D. (2011). Subjective Theories of Organizing and Learning from Events, Safety Science, 49 (1), 47-54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schöbel, M. (2009). Trust in high reliability organizations. Social Science Information, 48(2), 315-333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seghezzi, H. D., Fahrni, F. & Herrmann, F. (2007). Integriertes Qualitätsmanagement. Der St. Galler Ansatz.(3., vollst. überarbeitete Aufl.). München: Carl Hanser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skiba, R. (1997). Taschenbuch Arbeitssicherheit(9., neubearb. Aufl.). Bielefeld: Schmidt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, B. A. (1978). Man-made disasters. London: Wykeham Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, B. A. & Pidgeon, N. F. (1997). Man-made disasters(2. ed.). Boston [u. a.]: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, B. A., Pidgeon, N., Blockley, D. & Toft, B. (1989) Safety culture: its importance in future risk management.Position paper for the Second World Bank Workshop on safety control and risk management, Karlstad, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • VGB-Powertec (2002).Sicherheitskultur in deutschen Kernkraftwerken – Konzept zur Bewertung und Trendverfolgung.[Unveröffentliches Manuskript].

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R., Schöbel, M., Klostermann, A. & Manzey, D. (2010). Sikumeth: Ein Multi-Methoden-Verfahren zur Erhebung von Sicherheitskultur in Kernkraftwerken. In R. Trimpop, G. Gericke & J. Lau (Hrsg.), Psychologie der Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheit: Sicher bei der Arbeit und unterwegs -wirksame Ansätze und neue Wege, 16. Workshop 2010 (pp. 375-378). Kröning: Asanger Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organisations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21,1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1987). Organizational culture as a source of high-reliability. California Management Review, 29 (2),112–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations – Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (3),357–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Das unerwartete Managen: Wie Unternehmen aus Extremsituationen lernen. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilpert, B., Becker, G., Maimer, H., Miller, R., Fahlbruch, B., Baggen, R., Gans, A., Leiber, I. & Szameitat, S. (1997). Umsetzung und Erprobung von Vorschlägen zur Einbeziehung von Human Factors (HF) bei der Meldung und Ursachenanalyse in Kernkraftwerken.[Endbericht SR 2039/8, Bericht der Technischen Universität Berlin und des TÜV Rheinland e. V. im Auftrag des Bundesministers für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit im Rahmen des Vorhabens SR 2039/8].

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65 (1),96–102.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TÜV NORD SysTec GmbH & Co.KG, Große Bahnstr. 31, 22525, Hamburg, Deutschland

    Babette Fahlbruch

  2. Fakultät für Psychologie, Abteilung Economic Psychology, Universität Basel, Missionsstrasse 62a, 4055, Basel, Schweiz

    Markus Schöbel

  3. Institut für Psychologie und Arbeitswissenschaft, Fachgebiet für Arbeits-, Ingenieur- und Organisationspsychologie, Technische Universität Berlin, Marchstr. 12, Sekr. F7, 10587, Berlin, Deutschland

    Juliane Marold

Authors
  1. Babette Fahlbruch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Markus Schöbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juliane Marold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Product Innovation Management, TU Delft Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Landbergstraat 15, 2628, CE Delft, Niederlande

    Petra Badke-Schaub

  2. Hofinger Forschung Beratung Training, Team HF, Hohenheimer Str. 104, 71686, Remseck

    Gesine Hofinger

  3. Nijmegen School of Management, Radboud University Nijmegen, 6500, Nijmegen, Niederlande

    Kristina Lauche

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fahlbruch, B., Schöbel, M., Marold, J. (2012). Sicherheit. In: Badke-Schaub, P., Hofinger, G., Lauche, K. (eds) Human Factors. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19886-1_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation