| dc.description.abstract | The construction industry has persistently high accident rates, underscoring the urgent need for effective risk mitigation during the design phase. Design for safety (DfS) regulations are intended to eliminate or reduce hazards at the source, but their implementation often focuses on documentation rather than meaningful risk reduction, limiting their impact on safety outcomes. This study aims to classify organizational DfS compliance behaviors in Singapore’s construction industry under mandatory regulation and to develop a two-axis model that explains these variations. Based on qualitative analysis of 59 semistructured interviews with industry professionals, the study categorizes compliance behaviors along two axes: the primary focus of the project team (fulfilling regulatory intent versus avoiding penalties) and the level of effort deployed to support this focus. Five types of compliance behaviors were identified: deep compliance, alternative deep compliance, enlightened surface compliance, extravagant surface compliance, and surface compliance. These findings reveal diverse organizational interpretations of DfS, from proactive risk elimination to minimal regulatory adherence. By extending the concept of surface and deep compliance from individuals to organizations, this study provides a nuanced framework for assessing and improving DfS implementation. The findings highlight the importance of aligning regulatory strategies with organizational behaviors to drive meaningful risk reduction. The proposed two-axis model categorizes DfS compliance behaviors in construction industry, identifies how situational and organizational factors shape these behaviors, and provides practical tools for regulators, trainers, consultants, and safety professionals to design targeted interventions and enhance alignment between regulatory intent and organizational safety practices. | |
