Organizational Practices Questionnaire

Abstract

The Organizational Practices Questionnaire (OPQ) is a specialized psychometric instrument developed to assess organizational practices and cultural values, particularly those influencing safety within high-risk work environments. The scale items are structured around two primary conceptual frameworks: the critical dimensions of safety management systems and the established organizational culture models detailed within the Competing Values Framework. The OPQ comprises four distinct sections, systematically gathering respondent background information, company details, and comprehensive data on organizational values, leadership, communication systems, motivational patterns, and employee job satisfaction, all measured using a 7-point Likert scale.

The questionnaire was developed in the context of the Human Centered System for Aircraft Maintenance Safety (ADAMS 2) project, a European initiative focused on enhancing reliability and mitigating risks associated with human factors in the maintenance industry. Preliminary psychometric evaluations confirm that the OPQ exhibits adequate levels of reliability for its intended application.

Keywords

Organizational culture, Safety management systems, Safety culture, Aircraft Maintenance Safety, Organizational practices, Job satisfaction, Leadership style, Competing Values Framework, Likert scale

Authors

Díaz Cabrera, D., Hernandez-Fernaud, E., & Diaz, R. I.

Purpose

The primary objective of the Organizational Practices Questionnaire is to rigorously assess the cultural values, beliefs, and practices held by maintenance personnel within an organization. This assessment focuses specifically on how these deeply embedded cultural characteristics and organizational structures influence and predict safety outcomes in daily work processes.

The instrument is designed to provide actionable insights into areas such as incident reporting, adherence to safety procedures, and the effectiveness of internal communication, enabling organizations to identify critical areas for safety improvement and cultural change.

Construct

The OPQ measures a multifaceted construct of organizational safety culture and practice, drawing upon two key theoretical classifications. Firstly, it evaluates specific dimensions crucial to effective safety management systems, including incident investigation, training efficacy, and safety promotion. Secondly, it integrates models of organizational culture, particularly those derived from the Competing Values Framework, which allows for the categorization of organizational values (e.g., flexibility versus control, internal focus versus external focus).

The scale is segmented to cover specific organizational factors such as leadership style, motivational patterns, communication quality, handling of incident and accident data, and overall employee job satisfaction, providing a holistic view of the safety climate experienced by workers.

Validity

The source material does not provide specific details regarding the construct, criterion, or content validity of the Organizational Practices Questionnaire. However, its foundation in two established theoretical models—dimensions of safety management and the Competing Values Framework—suggests a strong theoretical basis for its content validity regarding the measurement of organizational safety culture and values. Further research is required to detail the empirical validation processes undertaken for this instrument.

Reliability

The psychometric evaluation of the scale indicates adequate levels of reliability. This finding was reported in the seminal paper by Díaz Cabrera, Hernandez-Fernaud, & Diaz (2007), suggesting that the instrument demonstrates acceptable internal consistency across its measured dimensions, ensuring stable and consistent measurement of organizational practices related to safety.

Factor Analysis

While the specific results of any factor analysis (e.g., Exploratory Factor Analysis or Confirmatory Factor Analysis) are not detailed in the provided source content, the scale structure implies underlying factors corresponding to its major sections. These dimensions include the Incident and Accident Reporting System, Safety Standard Procedures and Rules, Safe Behaviour Promotion, Communication Systems, Working Style of the Immediate Superior, and Job Satisfaction. These thematic groupings likely represent the key factors identified during the scale development process.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychometric questionnaire

Format: 48 core items plus demographic and company background questions, utilizing a 7-point Likert response scale.

Language Available: English (Original items provided in English)

Population Group: Employees and maintenance personnel working in operational and high-risk industrial environments.

Age Group: Adult working population.

Population Details: Specifically developed for maintenance personnel, particularly those involved in aircraft maintenance safety, as part of the ADAMS 2 European research project.

Test Methodology: Quantitative survey methodology assessing the degree of agreement, satisfaction, or frequency concerning organizational practices and values.

Keywords

Organizational behavior, Safety performance, Work climate, Accident prevention, Human factors, Leadership, Training programs, Communication systems, Organizational values

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Not provided in source)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Not provided in source)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Not provided in source)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Information regarding specific testing fees and formal permissions for commercial use is not detailed in the source. The foundational research and development of the instrument were published in 2007, marking the test year for its initial validation.

The original guide for the questionnaire, which may contain usage details, can be downloaded here: guide_of_organisational_practices_questionnaire (PDF).

Reference’s

Díaz Cabrera, D., Hernandez-Fernaud, E., & Diaz, R. I. (2007). An evaluation of a new instrument to measure organisational safety culture values and practices. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39, 1202-1211.

Items of the Organizational Practices Questionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The Human Centered System for Aircraft Maintenance Safety (ADAMS 2) project is a European research initiative concerning the role of Human Factors in safety and reliability in aircraft maintenance, with the aim of developing improved systems and tools in the European maintenance industry. This survey is aimed at assessing your views about safety and risk prevention in your organization. We would like to thank you for answering every question with attention and sincerity. There are no right or wrong answers, any response is good, as long as you answer each question according to what you really think. In the following pages there are some questions about different aspects of organizations, grouped into topics. Please mark with an “X” in the scale of 1 to 7 whether you are agree or disagree with each question. PLEASE REMEMBER TO ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS

COMPANY/JOB INFORMATION

1. Name of the company:

2. Name of the job:

3. Area / Division in the Maintenance or Human Resources Department:

4. Activity to be performed:

5. Level of responsibility (Mark with an X):

• (1) Unit Manager
• (2) Shift Manager
• (3) Team Manager
• (4) Brigadier /Crew Manager
• (5) Technician
• (6) Other (please specify)

6. Present job situation (Mark with an X):

• (1) Full-time Permanent
• (2) Part-time Permanent
• (3) Temporary contract
• (4) Other (please specify)

7. Have you had any work accidents in the last twelve months? (Mark with an X):

(1) No

(2) Yes, with absence of leave

(3) Yes, without absence of leave

PERSONAL INFORMATION

8. Sex (Mark with an X):

• (1) Male
• (2) Female

9. Age:

10. Time in the company: years months

11. Time in the job: years months

12. Level of Education (Mark with an X):

• (1) Primary education
• (2) Lower secondary education
• (3) Upper secondary education
• (4) Non-university higher education
• (5) University diploma
• (6) University degree

13. Training (Mark with an X):

(1) Apprenticeship

(2) Limited Authorization

(3) Full Authorization

(4) Other (please specify):

INCIDENT AND ACCIDENT REPORTING SYSTEM

1. In my company, workers only contribute with information about incidents and accidents that are clearly observable and/or serious.

2. In my company, workers contribute with information about incidents and accidents from their experience in the work context.

3. In my company, workers participate with information about those incidents and accidents that interfere with achieving the work goals set.

4. In my company, workers participate in the development of new incident and accident reporting systems and new working procedures.

5. My company values in the workers the correct observation of safety rules and procedures.

6. My company values the sincerity and participation of all workers in information collection about incidents and accidents.

7. My company values the collaboration of all workers in the solution of problems related to work goal achievement.

8. My company values workers’ initiative and implication in finding new solutions to improve safety.

9. In my company, the results of incident and accident investigation are used to develop changes in work procedures according to solutions given by workers with the aim of improving safety.

10. In my company, the results of incident and accident investigation are used for the revision of previously set work goals to adapt these to specific situations.

11. In my company, the results of incident and accident investigation are used for providing information to workers about non-observation of safety rules and procedures and for developing disciplinary procedures.

12. In my company, the results of incident and accident investigation are used for the detection of training needs and training program development.

SAFETY STANDAR PROCEDURES AND SAFETY RULES

13. In my company, standard operation procedures and safety rules are flexible with the aim of adapting them to workers and work team.

14. In my company, it is possible to make suggestions and modifications in order to adapt the safety rules and procedures to changes in the work context.

15. In my company, standard operation procedures and safety rules are obligatory criteria of how to perform the work.

16. In my company, standard operation procedures and safety rules are general guidelines, because productivity goals set by internal and external demands have priority.

SAFE BEHAVIOUR PROMOTION

17. My company values the collaboration and participation of team workers in order to promote safety.

18. My company values the observation of safety rules and procedures in order to promote safety.

19. My company values the contribution of new and creative ideas from workers with the aim of improving safety.

20. My company values the achievement of the goals set, both in productivity and safety.

21. In my company, if a worker’s performance is safe, he/she avoids being sanctioned.

22. In my company, if a worker’s performance is safe, he/she obtains greater work autonomy and responsibility.

23. In my company, if economic incentives. a worker’s performance is safe, he/she obtains promotion and salary and workmates.

24. In my company, if a worker’s performance is safe, he/she obtains recognition from managers and workmates.

COMMUNICATION SYTEMS

25. In my company, the communication among workers and superiors about issues related to safety in the work context is common.

26. In my company, it is usual to communicate to workers the safety aims to be achieved.

27. In my company, the formal communication of safety rules and procedures to be observed by workers is usual.

28. In my company, the direct communication among workmates to suggest and find improved safety solutions is common.

WORKING STYLE OF THE INMEDIATE SUPERIOR

29. My immediate superior encourages creativity and the contributions of suggestions; tries out new ideas and concepts; faces up to challenges; anticipates and facilitates change and transmits a global vision of our organization.

30. My immediate superior defines, plans and co-ordinates aims; motivates subordinates to achieve these aims; acknowledges achievement, gives instructions; emphasizes effort and evaluates performance.

31. My immediate superior organizes and co-ordinates work planning; organizes and gives instructions about how to perform the work and shows how to do it; controls performance and emphasizes discipline.

32. My immediate superior stimulates the team and facilitates cohesion; listens and communicates actively with the members of the team; promotes personal development; seeks consensus and takes into consideration the needs of subordinates.

33. My immediate superior shows me the safe way to do the task when I carry out an unsafe behaviour.

34. When I carry out an unsafe behaviour my immediate superior analyses the unsafe behaviour in the specific context where it occurred, taking into account the work goal to be achieved.

35. When I carry out an unsafe behaviour my immediate superior tells me off and warns about a possible sanction

36. When I carry out an unsafe behaviour my immediate superior discusses with me about what is the most adequate solution to avoid the situation happening again

JOB SATISFACTION

37. My department cares about their workers’ satisfaction with working in teams, for example: interpersonal relationships, co-operation and participation between workmates and managers.

38. My department cares about their workers’ satisfaction with job characteristics, for example: level of autonomy, task variety and creativity.

39. My department cares about their workers’ satisfaction with performance criteria, for example: clarity of job tasks, work rules and procedures.

40. My department cares about their workers’ satisfaction with work goals, for example: the goals are well-defined, they are specific, achievable and realistic.

41. To what extent are you satisfied with the work goals, for example: the goals are well-defined, they are specific, achievable and realistic?

42. To what extent are you satisfied with the job characteristics, for example: with the level of autonomy, the task variety and the creativity?

43. To what extent are you satisfied with your work team, for example: with the interpersonal relationships, the co-operation and the participation between workmates and managers?

44. To what extent are you satisfied with the performance criteria, for example: with the clarity of the job tasks, work rules and procedures?

TRAINING COURSES

45. In your company, to what extent have you received human resources development courses such as: leadership and working in groups; quality of working life; interpersonal communication, etc.?

46. In your company, to what extent have you received courses on innovation and change such as: creativity,; group problem-solving; development and management; information-finding strategies, etc.?

47. In your company, to what extent have you received technical and professional training courses such as: use of tools and equipment; safety rules, norms and procedures; work legislation, etc.?

48. In your company, to what extent have you received goal setting and goal-achievement training such as: cost-risk optimization; task and procedure planning; time management; etc.?

If you would like to give us your comments and opinion about this questionnaire, we appreciate your contributions.

Thank you.