We were recently asked if we could post this research survey, I hope you can all Take 5 to help them out
Request:
I have been following your website for a number of years. I am seasoned safety professional currently on my last stage of a masters degree. As part of my degree I am undertaking a research project on personal risk assessment tools/last minute risk assessments commonly known as SLAM or Take 5. I am wondering if I can post my questionnaire /Survey Monkey on your website in order to hear different viewpoints on these tools. At the end I will be publishing a paper which you can publish on your website.
Dear Potential Participant,
We are conducting research survey that seeks to look at effectiveness of Last-Minute Risk Assessments (LMRA) based on perception of users. LMRA are usually pocket-size booklets. You may know them as Take 5, Personal Mental Risk Assessments, Personal Informal Risk Assessments, Step Back Take 5, Stop Look Assess and Manage (SLAM) or Stop Cards.
This survey will assist in studying and understanding the viewpoint of users on these tools and it will be a fundamental step to contribute to the body of knowledge and ultimately this will improve safety outcomes and benefit society as a whole.
The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your responses are completely anonymous.
If you have any questions about this project, please contact the Project Supervisor A/Prof Geoffrey Dell via g.dell@cqu.edu.au or the student researcher Innocent Matiyenga via innocent.matiyenga@cqumail.com
Please contact Central Queensland University’s Research Division (Tel: 07 4923 2603; E-mail: ethics@cqu.edu.au; Mailing address: Building 32, CQUniversity, 554-700 Yaamba Road, Norman Gardens QLD 4701) should there be any concerns about the nature and/or conduct of this research project.
This project has been approved by the CQUniversity Human Research Ethics Committee, approval number 2019-003.
Survey link https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LMRA
Thank you
Please share our posts
Dyno says
May 10, 2019 at 11:26 PMI took the survey and I had several issues with the framing of the questions, the choices made available and just several grammar errors or incomplete questions (I think #21 was an example of that). The only meaningful answer I could give with any depth was at the end when I could type in my thoughts on the Taylorism/BBS/cult of zero world view where this comes from.
Innocent Matiyenga says
May 11, 2019 at 6:11 AMErrors on questions #21 have been corrected .
Rob Long says
May 11, 2019 at 6:29 AMI had to stop at question 4 because of poor survey design.
Peter says
May 11, 2019 at 5:26 PMThe survey comes from the assumption that the person completing the Take 5 type device, having seen the way that they are used in the mining industry I have no confidence in the use of them. Perhaps a second survey asking about the effectiveness of this risk assessment tool and whether they should be used and if so how do you make them work?
Christine says
May 13, 2019 at 10:51 AMstill some errors / typos in the survey. Also where it states to select multiple you can only select 1.
Rob Long says
May 13, 2019 at 11:09 AMChristine, the survey bias is that it is only designed for agreement with the hidden thesis of the project. This is much more important than spellos and grammar.
Adam says
May 13, 2019 at 1:36 PMGood luck with the research Innocent, I just had to do a thesis for my Masters in OHS last year. You’re going to have a stack of data to analyse! I don’t think anyone really values them except managers for a number of reasons. The only portion that really seems to get used are sections for outstanding hazard reports – they at least get added to a hazard register so they can get fixed, but even then most are just ‘jobs to do’ and not real hazards.
Rob long says
May 13, 2019 at 6:33 PMAdam, hazard registers are a total waste of time and energy. They have no meaning and make no contribution to safety. A list of objects is a list of objects.
Wynand says
May 13, 2019 at 5:22 PMDear Rob, A few years ago you sent me some material about drawing up survey questions (The MiProfile Survey and Interactive Rapid Implicit Methodology – iRI) and this was a real eye-opener to me. I have a daughter study psychology, and the issue of designing psychometric tools was discussed recently. The amount of work needed to update one of the existing tools and gain the required acceptance is obviously large. I frequently see surveys with very good intentions, but either the biases are visible, or the questions are worded in such a way that more than one interpretation is valid. I think part of the problem is that too many studies rely on surveys without in in-depth understanding of how to compile the questions. One that is used currently in numerous surveys is: “Will you recommend company X based on your latest interaction?” While I may be completely satisfied with the interaction, it may be that company X does not offer what I want, so answering the question is completely irrelevant. A “no” would not imply a bad interaction, and there is no follow-up to ask “why not?” if I answered “no”.
Rob long says
May 13, 2019 at 6:29 PMHi Wynand, many people think surveys are neutral and have no idea of survey design. The key to effective surveying requires a thorough knowledge of one’s own philosophy, ontology, ethic and purpose. Things that Safety knows precious little about. What results is surveying that hides assumptions and attributes findings which are not there.
The design of this survey hides many things.