Construction Safety Personnel at a Crossroads: Challenges and Organisational Interventions in Malaysia

Construction safety personnel are responsible for translating statutory requirements and organisational policies into daily site practices, yet their effectiveness depends on the resources, authority and cooperation available to them. This study examined the challenges encountered by construction safety personnel and identified organisational interventions that could strengthen their performance in the Malaysian construction industry. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted among 54 construction practitioners with safety-related knowledge, experience or responsibilities in Penang, Malaysia. The questionnaire measured four domains using a seven-point Likert scale: current safety-compliance conditions, challenges affecting safety personnel, organisational interventions and expected safety outcomes. Data were analysed using frequencies, mean scores, standard deviations and Cronbach’s alpha. Limited resources ranked first among the assessed challenges (mean = 5.20), followed by communication and language barriers (mean = 5.17). Adapting to technological advancements and balancing safety with productivity were jointly ranked third, with both recording a mean of 5.15. Clear roles and responsibilities and training and education were jointly ranked as the most strongly supported interventions, with both recording a mean of 5.56, followed by technology adoption (mean = 5.43) and leadership support (mean = 5.39). Prevention of accidents, proactive hazard mitigation and control, and timely hazard identification and risk assessment were jointly ranked as the leading expected outcomes, with each recording a mean of 5.70. Internal-consistency coefficients ranged from 0.981 to 0.992, indicating highly consistent responses, although these values may also reflect similarity among some questionnaire items. Drawing on these results, the study proposes an exploratory conceptual framework for role realisation that organises the identified factors into role inhibitors, role stimulators, and pessimistic and optimistic organisational conditions. The framework provides a structured interpretation of the descriptive findings rather than a statistically tested causal model. The findings indicate that the organisational contribution of safety personnel may be strengthened through clear authority, adequate resources, continuing competency development and management support. The study provides context-specific evidence from construction practitioners in Penang and establishes a basis for wider investigation across the Malaysian construction industry.

construction safety personnel, occupational safety and health, safety management, organisational interventions, Malaysian construction industry

1. Choi, D., Seo, S., Park, H., Hong, T., & Koo, C. (2023). Forecasting personal learning performance in virtual reality-based construction safety training using biometric responses. Automation in Construction, 156, 105115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2023.105115 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2026). Construction statistics, fourth quarter 2025. https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal-main/release-content/construction-statistics-fourth-quarter-2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Elosta, M., & Alzubi, A. (2024). The interplay between safety leadership and construction workers’ safety behavior: Do perceived employer safety obligations matter? Buildings, 14(11), 3650. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113650 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Han, Y., Yang, J., Diao, Y., Jin, R., Guo, B., & Adamu, Z. (2022). Process and outcome-based evaluation between virtual reality-driven and traditional construction safety training. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 52, 101634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101634 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Kima, O., Urlainis, A., Wang, K.-C., & Shohet, I. M. (2026). Safety climate in small and medium construction enterprises. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 15(2), 508–532. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-01-2024-0038 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Liao, L., Gan, C., Yang, J., & Liang, Y. (2025). Impacts of safety capacity and personalized safety training on construction workers’ hazard recognition using eye-tracking technology. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(6), 04025050. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-15765 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Masrom, M. A. N., Chan, M., Ohueri, C. C., Mohd Ramlee, N. H., & Omar, R. (2025). Construction safety improvement framework for mass rapid transit projects. Construction Innovation, 25(7), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-06-2024-0175 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Oni, O. Z., Olanrewaju, A., & Khor, S. C. (2024). Fuzzy synthetic evaluation of the factors affecting health and safety practices in Malaysia construction industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 22(6), 1773–1796. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-08-2022-0432 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ozel, B. E., & Pekericli, M. K. (2025). Construction site hazard recognition via mobile immersive virtual reality and eye tracking. Automation in Construction, 173, 106080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2025.106080 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Rokooei, S., Shojaei, A., Alvanchi, A., Azad, R., & Didehvar, N. (2023). Virtual reality application for construction safety training. Safety Science, 157, 105925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105925 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Saedi, A. M., Isa, Z., & Salleh, S. S. (2023). An empirical study of workers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding safety risk across demographic factors and active BBS organizations: A factorial MANOVA approach. Sains Malaysiana, 52(8), 2453–2469. https://doi.org/10.17576/jsm-2023-5208-20 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Sankar, S. S., Anandh, K. S., & Prasanna, K. (2024). Safety leadership: A catalyst for positive safety climate on construction sites. Buildings, 14(6), 1806. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14061806 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Shohet, I. M., Naveh, R., & Shahin, F. (2025). Safety climate in high-rise construction. Buildings, 15(9), 1398. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15091398 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Uddin, S. M. J., Albert, A., Ovid, A., & Alsharef, A. (2023). Leveraging ChatGPT to aid construction hazard recognition and support safety education and training. Sustainability, 15(9), 7121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097121 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Xia, N., Ding, S., Ling, T., & Tang, Y. (2023). Safety climate in construction: A systematic literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(10), 3973–4000. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-11-2022-1074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Zhang, M., Shu, L., Luo, X., Yuan, M., & Zheng, X. (2022). Virtual reality technology in construction safety training: Extended technology acceptance model. Automation in Construction, 135, 104113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.104113 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Tribal Child Nutrition and Health in District of Sundargarh: A Public Health Review of ICDS Intervention
• Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Towards Prostate Cancer Screening Amongst Men Aged 40-60 Years in The Buea Health District: A Cross-Sectional Study
• Compliance with JCI Protocols: A Focus on Employee Safety
• Influence and Involvement of Teachers in Menstrual Hygiene Management of Female Secondary School Students in Kogi State, Nigeria
• A Critical Evaluation of Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana in Bihar