Regulatory Fit Demonstrates That Prohibitive Voice Does Not Lead to Low Performance Evaluation

Voice behavior, the extra-role behavior of employees based on their sense of responsibility, plays an important role in organizational development. Research shows that an employee’s voice can have a positive impact on both the quality of decision-making and organizational performance. This study explores the relationship between the prohibitive voice and employees’ safety performance based on the theory of regulatory fit. The study examined 372 employees and their leaders in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region of China through a questionnaire survey. A moderated model was constructed, and the SPSS-PROCESS was applied to analyze the data. The study results show that prevention regulatory focus fit strengthened the positive association between the prohibitive voice and safety performance evaluation. This study provides a new perspective in understanding leaders’ evaluation of the prohibitive voice and concludes that the prohibitive voice should be encouraged in organizations as it promotes greater adherence to safety measures and helps reduce organizational development risks.

Safety performance evaluation of cable median barriers on freeways in Florida

OBJECTIVE

This article aims to evaluate the safety performance of cable median barriers on freeways in Florida.

METHOD

The safety performance evaluation was based on the percentages of barrier and median crossovers by vehicle type, crash severity, and cable median barrier type (Trinity Cable Safety System [CASS] and Gibraltar system). Twenty-three locations with cable median barriers totaling about 101 miles were identified. Police reports of 6,524 crashes from years 2005-2010 at these locations were reviewed to verify and obtain detailed crash information. A total of 549 crashes were determined to be barrier related (i.e., crashes involving vehicles hitting the cable median barrier) and were reviewed in further detail to identify crossover crashes and the manner in which the vehicles crossed the barriers; that is, by either overriding, underriding, or penetrating the barriers.

RESULTS

Overall, 2.6% of vehicles that hit the cable median barrier crossed the median and traversed into the opposite travel lane. Overall, 98.1% of cars and 95.5% of light trucks that hit the barrier were prevented from crossing the median. In other words, 1.9% of cars and 4.5% of light trucks that hit the barrier had crossed the median and encroached on the opposite travel lanes. There is no significant difference in the performance of cable median barrier for cars versus light trucks in terms of crossover crashes. In terms of severity, overrides were more severe compared to underrides and penetrations. The statistics showed that the CASS and Gibraltar systems performed similarly in terms of crossover crashes. However, the Gibraltar system experienced a higher proportion of penetrations compared to the CASS system. The CASS system resulted in a slightly higher percentage of moderate and minor injury crashes compared to the Gibraltar system.

CONCLUSIONS

Cable median barriers are successful in preventing median crossover crashes; 97.4% of the cable median barrier crashes were prevented from crossing over the median. Of all of the vehicles that hit the barrier, 83.6% were either redirected or contained by the cable barrier system. Barrier crossover crashes were found to be more severe compared to barrier noncrossover crashes. In addition, overrides were found to be more severe compared to underrides and penetrations.

Note on evaluating safety performance of road infrastructure to motivate safety competition

Road infrastructures are usually developed and maintained by governments or public sectors. There is no competitor in the market of their jurisdiction. This monopolic feature discourages road authorities from improving the level of safety with proactive motivation. This study suggests how to apply a principle of competition for roads, in particular by means of performance evaluation. It first discusses why road infrastructure has been slow in safety oriented development and management in respect of its business model. Then it suggests some practical ways of how to promote road safety between road authorities, particularly by evaluating safety performance of road infrastructure. These are summarized as decision of safety performance indicators, classification of spatial boundaries, data collection, evaluation, and reporting. Some consideration points are also discussed to make safety performance evaluation on road infrastructure lead to better road safety management.