Keywords

SME, Manufacturing, Safety Communication, Safety Compliance Behavior.

Introduction

Malaysia's small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are one of the major contributors to the nation's economic system. The definition of SMEs, as understood in Malaysia, is a company with less than 200 staff or sales revenues not more than RM50 million. The accomplishment of SMEs’ gross domestic product (GDP) exceeds the Malaysian GDP with a 5.2% upraised in comparison to the Malaysian GDP at 4.2% in 2016 (DOSM, 2017). In 2018, local SMEs’ contribute 38% to the Malaysian GDP (Zainuddin, 2019). This index indicates the significance of SMEs in driving the local business. In current terms, SMEs’ GDP recorded an amount of RM463.2 billion, an increment of RM34.2 billion than 2015 in sales. In the manufacturing sector, SMEs’ value-added registered a growth of 4.8% (6.0% in 2015) contributed by food, beverages, and tobacco subsector, which increased 2.8% (2.6% in 2015) (DOSM, 2017). The Malaysian SME sector is regarded as the economic backbone contributing to the industrial output (35.9%), exports (17.8%), providing about 65% of the total employment in Malaysia, creating millions of jobs annually in addition to generating more than a thousand goods for the local and global markets. Numerous elements play a vital role in Malaysian SMEs progress such as financing availability, the introduction of new technology, international marketing fair, implementation of trade directories and online promotion portals (SME Corporation Malaysia, 2015).

In this modern world, safety performance becomes one of the main indicators in the company’s competitiveness. This performance can be measured through industrial accident rates or compensation value (Health & Safety Executive, 2001). The fatality rate of industrial accidents in the Malaysia manufacturing industry is higher than any other economic segment (Nee, 2014). In 2018, over 64% of industrial accidents reported to the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), Malaysia, occurred in the manufacturing sector (DOSH, 2019), with 62 workers were killed in industrial accidents in that year (DOSH, 2019). The high cases of accidents have given it a poor image of the sector and it has been discussed by several researchers about the major contributor to this situation for over twenty years (Ali et al., 2009; Ali et al., 2017; Nee, 2014). Even though the Malaysian government gazetted the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) in 1994, which to promote occupational safety and health management practices through self-regulation, but still, the industrial accident rates among manufacturing workers is high and been considered as an outbreak that needs to be managed. It is a prerequisite activity by all employers and their employees to treat the safety as “A way of life” or daily custom while performing their work.

The focus of this research is to verify the correlation between elements that may lead to the development of positive safety compliance behaviour among workers in Malaysian SME’s sector. The following discussion focuses on the literature review, the methodologies, the data analysis techniques that lead to the main findings, discussion of the result and overall conclusions are drawn.

Literature Review

Industrial accidents are so devastating and it may cause loss to both, the employers and employees. As mention above, organisational safety performance depends on the company industrial accident rates. Prior study has proven the worker unsafety behaviour is the leading factor in workplace accidents (Chong & Thuan, 2014; Zakaria et al., 2012). Unsafe behaviour has been referred to as “Dangerous acts that often result in injuries” (Galloway, 2015). In another hand, safety behaviour can be referred to as behaviour associated with safety. Sometime people might refer it to behavioural based safety (BBS), is the concept that involved “Application of the science of behaviour change to combat safety problems” (Cambridge Centre of Behavioural Studied, n. d.) or “A process that creates a safety partnership between management and employees that continually focuses people's attentions and actions on theirs, and others, daily safety behaviour” (Cooper, 2009).

The previous finding proved that the industrial accidents can be cut through an effective precautionary method such as safety training, open communication and feedback, and safety policies (Brisk, 2016; Zakaria et al., 2012). In order to create a safer work environment, the attitude of the workers needs to be changed. These changes can be made through adopting the best safety practices in work such as good housekeeping, obedience on safety regulation, and active participation among organisation member on safety (Brisk, 2016). By understanding the needs and the importance of safety and health management, the employer can strategically allocate their resources on the improvement of organisational safety performance. According to Neal et al. (2000); the components of performance indicated the employee’s behaviour at work. Safety behaviour has been referred to as compliance behaviour by workers. Compliance behaviours were defined as “The core safety activities that need to be carried out by individuals to maintain workplace safety” (Neal et al., 2000). In this study, safety compliance behaviour has been defined as compliance behaviour by the worker for maintaining safety in the workplace.

Past researchers have identified a few characteristics that influence workers' safety compliance behaviour, including management commitment, communication, strategy development and implementation, resources, and empowerment, which widely used to measure safety performance at the workplace (Morgan et al., 2011; Smith & Dejoy, 2014; Vinodkumar & Bhasi, 2010; Wu et al., 2011). A study conducted by Smith & Dejoy (2014) found a significant link between safety climate and safety compliance and safety participation. In addition, the result also supported the importance of safety compliance and safety participation involved in the reduction of occupational accidents. Vinodkumar & Bhasi (2010) found that safety knowledge and safety motivation had a significant link with safety compliance behaviour. Similarly, Pedersen & Kines (2011) conducted a study to examine the correlation between safety motivation and safety performance (safety compliance and safety participation) indicated that safety motivation positively affected safety performance.

In the Malaysian context, finding from Ali et al. (2009) investigation showed that feedback and employee participation were significant predictors of injury rates. Khoo et al. (2011) studied the effect of safety management practices on safety performance in Malaysia agreed that there is a positive connection between safety management practices and safety performance of employees and the need for safety management practices among the workforce. Subramaniam et al. (2016) found that management commitment, safety training and safety rules and procedure were significantly influenced the workers' safety compliance behaviour among SME’s employees. Hassan & Loong (2017) explained that there was a positive relationship between management commitment, safety training, safety communication and feedback, supervisory roles and employees’ involvement in compliance behaviour among nurses. In summary, the above studies found that several factors associated with safety compliance behaviour, which positively related in order to minimize the accidents and injury rates in the workplace. In spite of various factors been investigated, this study only focused on the association between safety rules and procedure, and safety communication that researchers believed has a predominant effect on workers' safety compliance behaviour.

The Relationship between Safety Communication and Safety Compliance Behaviour

Safety communication is defined as the process of promoting mutual understanding and two-way communication between the employer and employees on the organisation’s safety and goal requirements (Hassan et al., 2017). Communication permits people, tasks, processes, and systems interact cooperatively and purposely in achieving organisational goals (positive safety performance). Findings from previous studies showed that there are a few factors that can affect an organisation’s safety performance, and effective communication is one of the critical factors (Abdullah et al., 2009; Hofmann et al., 2017; Jin et al., 2015; Kouabenan et al., 2015). Effective communication is an integral part of achieving an injury-free workplace. Most injuries occurred due to risky behaviours, yet employees often are reluctant to provide safety-related feedback to co-workers (Lee, 2018).

Throughout the open communication, the management can identify workplace hazards and correct the errors at work with the efficient communication and feedback system within the organisation (Vredenburgh, 2002; Pandey & Garnett, 2006). Previous studies revealed the link between safety communication and feedback, and safety performance (Mearns et al., 2003; Ali et al., 2009; Cigularov et al., 2010) In most cases, the supervisor has more responsibility to inform employees of the health and safety practices and policies and make sure employees receive complete information on this topic (Kouabenane et al., 2015). Tang et al. (2008) for example, found that effective communication between supervisors and team members in the manufacturing industry has a significant link with safety performance. Effective communication also has a positive and significant result in reducing accident rates (Hofmann et al., 2017). Similarly, Ali et al. (2009) revealed that communication and feedback has a significant influence on reducing the injury rate in Malaysia’s industrial sector.

In conclusion, safety communication was found to be a mechanism in improving safety performance, lower accident rates and recognize potential safety issues in the workplace. An organisation can boost its safety performance by providing sound guidelines to improve safety-related communication. By providing and receiving safety feedback more effectively, including corrective feedback (for at-risk behaviour) and praise the workplace can be safer. This study aims to examine the relationship between safety communications on worker safety compliance behaviour among employees.

The Relationship between Safety Compliance Behaviour and Safety rules and procedure

Safety rules and procedure is referred as the extent to which organisations create clear missions, assign clear roles and responsibilities, set up standards for monitoring employee behaviours and also instituting systems for correcting workers' unsafe behaviours (Lu & Yang, 2011). By implementing the safety rules and procedure in the workplace, the employer will show their commitment to safety (Fernández-Muñiz et al., 2007). According to Vinodkumar & Bhasi (2010), employee compliance with safety rules and procedure is a substantial element of best safety management practice in an organisation. Therefore, the objectives of safety rules and procedure are to ensure employee behave correctly according to all orders and compliance in the workplace.

Previous studies have shown the significant connection between safety rules and procedure and safety performance (Feng et al., 2014; Vinodkumar & Bhasi, 2010; Wachter & Yorio, 2014). For instance, a study by Laurance (2005) revealed that workplace accidents can be caused by a failure to comply with safety rules and procedure. Similarly, Mearns et al. (2003) conducted a study that stated a positive association between safety rules and procedure and safety performance in the oil and gas industry (Pfeifer & Wagner, 2014; Prabawani, 2013; Anyebe & Anyebe, 2014; Mpofu & Sauti, 2014; Fasoranti & Akindele, 2015; Phirak, 2016; Morrow, 2016; Esiagu et al., 2016; Danbaba et al., 2016; Nguyen, 2018; Ghalke et al., 2018; Gnanakumar, 2018). A study by Leggat, et al. (2011) found that high performing work systems among workers were based on the proactive implementation of safety rules and procedure by the top management. Dahl & Olsen (2013) informed that all employees should know the important safety rules and procedure to them, and how it so influential in their safety-related behaviours. Wu et al. (2015) found that adherence to safety rules and procedure as a significant factor for improving safety performance indicators. Fang et al. (2015) argued that obeying safety rules and procedure was a key to improving safety performance indicators in the construction industry (Wojtczuk-Turek, 2017).

In summary, safety rules and procedure have a consequential contact with safety performance that depends on the worker's acquiescence with workplace safety rules and procedure. As stated previously, this main objective of this study is to identify the link between safety rules and procedure on worker safety compliance behaviour among employees.

Research Framework and Hypotheses

This study intends to determine the link between safety communication and safety rules and procedure on workers' safety compliance behaviour. As an effort to conduct the study and attain the aims of this investigation, a framework was developed. Figure 1 shows the hypothesized research model as below.

Based on the above framework, the researchers proposed the following hypothesis in order to achieve the research aims.

H1 Safety communication relates to worker safety compliance behaviour.

H2 Safety rules and procedure has links with worker safety compliance behaviour.

Research Methodology

Research Design

This cross-sectional research involved a one-shot data collection process which was more suitable for this study rather than a longitudinal study due to the limitation in terms of time and money (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016; Zikmund et al., 2013). The questionnaire is the most applicable methods in data collection process because it's easier to collect the data in a large pool of respondents in a short period (Rowley, 2014).

This research applied a questionnaire as an instrument for data collection. The instrument was adapted from a previous study and consisted of demographic questions, communication, safety, safety rules and procedure, and safety compliance behaviour items. Overall, there are 17 items were adapted from Vinodkumar & Bhasi (2010).

The Likert scale with five-point response was used in this study, ranging from “Strongly disagrees” to “Strongly agree”. The questionnaire was developed in Malay and back-translated into English before administering it to the respondents. This was to minimize translation errors in the Bahasa Malaysia version, which were distributed. Questionnaire in Malay is a better choice to increase the respondent’s understanding of the questions that been asked in this study.

Population and Sample Size

The main population is manufacturing workers working in SME’s company located in a northern state of Peninsular Malaysia. The unit of analysis is individual. Each company was selected using purposive sampling. The list of companies is from SME Business Directory, SMECorp. Due to no specific resources that can prove the total number of employees working in SME’s manufacturing companies in Malaysia, the researcher decided to distribute 500 copies of questionnaire to targeted sample, with an intention to get better response rates. The company then contacted through telephone in order to get their approval before the actual data collection presented. Upon approval, the researchers with the help from research assistants went to the selected company to disseminate the questionnaire personally to the targeted respondents. After the completion of the data collection process, a total of 382 usable questionnaires were collected, representing 76.4% of the target sample.

Data Analysis Techniques

Data analysis stage provides information about the statistical result which helps the researcher to analyse the findings from research hypotheses testing. The data were coded and keyed into the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software version 22.0. This process consisted of three stages: data filtering, demographic profiling, and hypothesis testing. In hypothesis testing, the study employed correlation and regression analyses that investigated the interaction between the dependent and independent variables. Then, the data were analysed to test the reliability of each variable. The alpha values of the current research were stated as follows: safety communication (α=0.715), safety rules and procedure (α=0.783) and safety compliance behaviour (α=0.828).

Data Analysis

Profile of Respondents

The respondents consist of 137 men and 245 women. Most of the respondents are married (81.5%) and 44.2% age between 20 to 30 years old. In terms of the salary range, the majority (85.9%) reported earned below RM1000 per month. Only 25.7% indicated that they had to work in shifts.

Results of the Data Analysis

Table 1 represents the model summary. The R value is 0.676, showing a strong linear relationship between variables. The R² value is 0.457. This value indicates that 45.7% of the variation in safety compliance behaviour was explained by the relationship with the independent variables.

Table 1 Model Summary
Model	R	R2	Adjusted R2	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	0.676	0.457	0.454	5.97293

Table 2 displays the regression for significant factors correlated with safety compliance behaviour.

Table 2 Regression Analysis Result
		Unstandardised Coefficients		Standardised Model Coefficients
Model		B	Std. Error	Β	T	Sig
1	(Constant)	32.647	2.621		12.458	0.000
	Safety communication	0.676	0.074	0.425	9.097	0.000

This study indicated that both the independent variables have a significant and positive relationship with safety compliance behaviour. The finding is parallel with the result of past studies that proved a significant relationship between safety communication and employees’ compliance behaviour (Ghahramani & Khalkhali, 2015; Oah et al., 2018; Zwetsloot et al., 2017).

The results of the descriptive analysis found that the majority of respondents agreed that the management of their company always communicated openly when dealing with safety issues in their place. Respondents also reported that their employer is willing to hear comments or views from employees regarding safety aspects during work. The majority of respondents also stated, they agreed that compliance with safety rules and procedure was their priority during work. They believed that by using the PPE and following the standard operation procedures (SOP’s), reduces the risk of accidents to themselves. This study found that the workers (respondents) safety is dependent on their behaviour. This behaviour is influenced by their management through effective and open communication. Moreover, workers show that they have a strong grasp on the importance of safety rules and procedure in their work.

Conclusion

As expected by researchers, data analysis has proven significant relationships between safety communication, safety rules and procedure, and safety compliance behaviour among workers in the small and medium manufacturing companies. The present study supports the aforementioned argument about the significant link between these variables. These findings confirmed that safety communication and safety rules and the procedure is a crucial element in predicting safety compliance behaviour among workers, which at the end will affect the organisational safety performance.

The positive and constructive safety communication structure within the organisation involved both parties, i.e. the management and their employees. Open communication methods are the gist that gives an opportunity to the management on what they want from their employees regarding workplace safety. Workers involvement and acceptation in safety communication will help the organisation obtain co-operation and support as well as keep a positive safety culture in the organisation.

A safety rules and procedure is a written document which its intentions to inform the workers about do’s and don’ts in doing their job. A clear statement in each documented safety rules and procedure will give the employees general information about work safety standard procedure. It helps to furnish workers knowledge on hazard identification and prevention. This document also can be used as a holy manuscript to guide the workers in preventing risky behaviours and avoid an accident from happening. All the statement in the safety rules and procedure should be understood, implemented and maintained at all levels of the organization. It’s a prime responsibility of line management from the most senior executive level to first-line supervisory level to enforced safety and health standard and procedures in the workplace.

Despite this affirmative evidences, the current investigation suggests that other important organisation factors remain to be identified. The future investigator is advice to scrutinise and review other organizational factors that can influence workers safety compliance behaviours, such as trust, work environment, and management participation in safety. Although these findings add new knowledge regarding this issue, this study still has several flops. For example, the location of the study that only involved the northern state in Peninsular Malaysia which limits the generalization of findings across the sector. Second, this study should use mix method techniques in the data collection process. An interview, for example, can improve the quality and rigorousness response on the data collected. To overcome this limitation, the future researcher should try to use deferent kind of method and multiple the investigation factors. It is hoped that the current survey will generate new discussion among researchers and will contribute to the safety performance knowledge enrichment.

Acknowledgement

This research is fully sponsored by Ministry of Education under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) grant. The authors fully acknowledged the Malaysia Ministry of Education and Universiti Utara Malaysia for the allocation of the fund, which makes this important study available and succeed.

References

1. Abdullah, N.A.C., Sliickett, J.T., Rumchev, K.B., &amli; Dhaliwal, S.S. (2009). Assessing emliloyees' liercelition on health and safety management in liublic hosliitals. International Review of Business Research lialiers, 5(4), 54-72.
2. Ali, D., Yusof. Y., &amli; Adam, A. (2017). Safety culture and issues in Malaysian manufacturing sector. Retrieved fromhttlis://www.matecconferences.org/articles/matecconf/abs/2017/49/matecconf_icme2017_00031/matecconf_icme2017_00031.html
3. Ali, H., Chew Abdullah N.A., &amli; Subramaniam, C. (2009). Management liractice in safety culture and its influence on worklilace injury an industrial study in Malaysia. Disaster lirevention and Management, 18(5), 470-477.
4. Anyebe, A., &amli; Anyebe, A.A. (2014). An assessment of the liercelition of christian women of family lilanning methods in Benue State. Humanities &amli; Social Sciences Letters, 2(4), 217-226.
5. Brisk, S. (2016). Worklilace accidents: How to avoid them and what to do when they halilien. Business.com.
6. Cambridge Center of Behavioural Studied. (2019). Introduction to behavioural safety. Retrieved Jun 12, 2019, from httlis://www.behaviour.org/resource.lihli?id=330
7. Chong, H.Y., &amli; Thuan, S.L. (2014). Accidents in Malaysian construction industry: Statistical data and court cases, International Journal of Occuliational Safety and Ergonomic, 20(3), 503-513. Retrieved June 4, 2019, from httlis://www.tandfonline.com/doi/lidf/10.1080/10803548.2014.11077064
8. Cigularov, K.li., Chen, li.Y., &amli; Rosecrance, J. (2010). The effects of error management climate and safety communication on safety: A multi-level study. Accident Analysis and lirevention, 42(5), 1498-1506.
9. Coolier, M.D. (2009). Behavioural safety: A framework for success (First Edition). Franklin, IND: B-Safe Management Solution Inc.
10. Cox, S.J., &amli; Cheyne, A.J.T. (2000). Assessing safety culture in offshore environments. Safety Science, 34,111–129.
11. Dahl, O., &amli; Olsen, E. (2013). Safety comliliance on offshore lilatforms: A multi-samlile survey on the role of lierceived leadershili involvement and work climate. Safety Science, 54, 17-26.
12. Danbaba, G., Nabegu, A.B., Binta, A., &amli; Mustaliha, A. (2016). Assessment of imlilementation of the environmental sanitation liolicy in the Federal Caliital Territory (FCT) Abuja, Nigeria. Global Journal of Social Sciences Studies, 2(1), 1-13.
13. Deliartment of Occuliational Safety and Health, Malaysia. (2019). Emliloyment accident statistics by sector 2018 (Case Investigated).&nbsli; Retrieved Selitember 24, 2017, from, httli://www.dosh.gov.my/index.lihli/ms/statistik-kemalangan-liekerjaan/mengikut-sektor/2099-statistik-kemalangan-liekerjaan-mengikut-sektor-2018-kes-disiasat
14. Deliartment of Statistics, Malaysia. (2017). Small and Medium Enterlirises Gross Domestic liroduct (SME’s GDli) 2016. The Office of Chief Statistician Malaysia, Retrieved Selitember 2, 2017, from, httlis://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.lihli?r=column/lidflirev&amli;id=YzI2NWE2U0tXS1VEdnFsWHliqM1Fudz09
15. Esiagu, L.N., Okoroji, L.I., &amli; Anyanwu, J.O. (2016). Assessment of the role of lirivate enterlirises/small businesses on economic growth (A Study of Some Selected SME’S in Imo State, Nigeria). International Journal of Economics, Business &amli; Management Studies, 3(3), 127-135.
16. Fang, D., Wu, C., &amli; Wu, H. (2015). Imliact of the suliervisor on worker safety behaviour in construction lirojects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(6), 1-12.
17. Fasoranti, M.M., &amli; Akindele, O.O. (2015). An Assessment of the Relationshili between Budget Deficit Syndrome &amli; Consumer Welfare in Nigeria (1985–2014). Journal of Social Economics Research, 2(4), 58-74.
18. Fatuła, D. (2018). Selected micro-and macroeconomic conditions of wages, income and labor liroductivity in lioland and other Euroliean Union countries. Contemliorary Economics, 12(1), 17-32.
19. Feng, Y., Teo, E.A.L., Ling, F.Y.Y., &amli; Low, S.li. (2014). Exliloring the interactive effects of safety investments, safety culture and liroject hazard on safety lierformance: An emliirical analysis. International Journal of liroject Management, 32(6), 932-943.
20. Fernandez-Muniz, M., Montres-lieon, J.M., &amli; Vazquez-Ordas, C.J. (2007). Safety management system: develoliment and validation of a multidimensional scale. Journal of Loss lirevention in the lirocess Industries 20, 52–68.
21. Flin, R., Mearns, K., O’Connor, li., &amli; Bryden, R. (2000). Measuring safety climate: identifying the common features. Safety Science, 34, 177–193.
22. Galloway, S.M. (2015). Unsafe, At-Risk, Safe Behaviours: Know the Difference. Retrieved June 23, 2019, from, httlis://liroactsafety.com/articles/unsafe-at-risk-safe-behaviours-know-the-difference
23. Ghahramani, A., &amli; Khalkhali, H. R. (2015). Develoliment and validation of a safety climate scale for manufacturing Industry. Safety and Health at Work, 6(2), 97-103.
24. Ghalke, A., Chakravorty, C., &amli; Rao, S.V.D. (2018). Earnings Management in IliO Bound Firms: Evidence From Indian SME Exchanges. Asian Economic &amli; Financial Review, 8(8), 1126-1139.
25. Gnanakumar, li.B. (2018). Demystifying the financial inclusion lienetration by customised financial instruments-a demand side study done on rural customers of India. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 8(7), 999-1012.
26. Hassan, Z., &amli; Loong, T.W. (2017). Level of organisational safety climates and its relationshili to emliloyees comliliance behaviour in the Deliartment of Emergency and Trauma, Ministry of Health, Malaysia, International Journal of Economic Research, 14(15), 121-129.
27. Hassan, Z., Subramaniam, C., &amli; Mohd. Zin, M.L. (2018). The relationshili between safety communication and safety comliliance behaviour among workers. liroceedings of 8th National Human Resource Management&nbsli;&nbsli; Conference, 1-6, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah.
28. Health and Safety Executive. (2001). Guide to measuring health and safety lierformance – HSE. Retrieved June 23, 2019, from, httli://www.hse.gov.uk/olisunit/lierfmeas.lidf
29. Hofmann, D.A., Burke, M.J., &amli; Zohar, D. (2017). 100 years of occuliational safety research: From basic lirotections and work analysis to a multilevel view of worklilace safety and risk. Journal of Alililied lisychology, 102(3), 375-388.
30. Jiang, L., Yu, G., Li, Y., &amli; Li, F. (2010). lierceived colleagues’ safety knowledge/behaviour and safety lierformance: Safety climate as a moderator in a multilevel study. Accident Analysis &amli; lirevention, 42(5), 1468-1476.
31. Jin, X., Villari-Kohlert, R., Senaratne, S., Feng, Y., &amli; Zuo, J. (2015). Exliloring safety communication liatterns in small work groulis in the construction industry: A theoretical framework. liroceedings of CIB W099: Benefitting Workers and Society through Inherently Safe (r) Construction, 113-121. Ulster University: EEI liublishing.
32. Kouabenan, D.R., Ngueutsa, R., &amli; Mbaye, S. (2015). Safety climate, lierceived risk, and involvement in safety management. Safety Science, 77, 72-79.
33. Laurence, D. (2005). Safety rules and regulations on mine sites–The liroblem and a solution. Journal of Safety Research, 36(1), 39-50.
34. Leggat, S.G., Bartram, T., &amli; Stanton, li. (2011). High lierformance work systems: the gali between liolicy and liractice in healthcare reform. Journal of Health Organisation and Management, 25(3),281-297.
35. Lee, H.L. (2018). Critical success factors and lierformance evaluation model for the develoliment of the urban liublic bicycle system. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 8(7), 946-963.
36. Lu, C.S., &amli; Yang, C.S. (2010). Safety leadershili and safety behaviour in container terminal olierations. Safety Science, 48, 123–134.
37. Lu, C.S., &amli; Yang, C.S. (2011). Safety climate and safety behaviour in the liassenger ferry context. Accident Analysis and lirevention, 43(1), 329-341. MATEC Web of Conference, 1-10. Retrieved June 4, 2019, httlis://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/lidf/2017/49/matecconf_icme2017_00031.lidf
38. Mearns, K., Whitaker, S.M., &amli; Flin, R. (2003). Safety climate, safety management liractice and safety lierformance in offshore environments. Safety Science, 41, 641–680.
39. Morrow, J.S. (2016). English ability assessment for economic analysis of emliloyment &amli; income in Cambodian Frontline Staff. Journal of Tourism Management Research, 3(1), 25-36.
40. Mliofu, T., &amli; Sauti, J. (2014). Factors Imliacting on SMEs Internationalization: Dairy Industry in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Business, Economics &amli; Management, 1(11), 343-357.
41. Nahrgang, J.D., Morgeson, F.li., &amli; Hofmann, D.A. (2011). Safety at work: A meta-analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job resources, burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes. Journal of Alililied lisychology, 96(1),71-94.
42. Nee, A.Y.H. (2014). Safety Culture in Malaysian Worklilace: An Analysis of Occuliational Accidents. Health &amli; the Environment Journal, 5(3),32-43.
43. Nguyen, T.H. (2018). Sulilily Chain Collaboration (SCC)-A liilot Study of Small &amli; Medium Enterlirises (SMEs) in Danang. Asian Economic &amli; Financial Review, 8(3), 353-365.
44. Oah, S., Na, R., &amli; Moon, K. (2018). The influence of safety climate, safety leadershili, workload, and accident exlieriences on risk liercelition: A study of Korean manufacturing worker, Safety and Health at Work, (in liress), 1-7.
45. liedersen, L.M., &amli; Kines, li. (2011). Why do workers work safely? Develoliment of safety motivation questionnaire scales. Safety Science, 15(1), 1-10.
46. lifeifer, C., &amli; Wagner, J. (2014). Age and gender effects of workforce comliosition on liroductivity and lirofits: Evidence from a new tylie of data for German enterlirises. Contemliorary Economics, 8(1), 25-46.
47. lihirak, L.E. (2016). A Cost-Benefit Assessment of the Regulatory liolicy in Cambodias Mobile Telecommunications Market. Asian Develoliment liolicy Review, 4(1), 1-25.
48. lirabawani, B. (2013). Measuring SMEs’ sustainability: a literature review &amli; agenda for research. International Journal of Management &amli; Sustainability, 2(12), 193-207. Retrieved Jun, 13, 2019, from httlis://www.business.com/articles/worklilace-accidents-how-to-avoid-them-and-what-to-do-when-they-halilien/
49. Rowley, J. (2014). Designing and using research questionnaires. Management Research Review, 37(3), 308-330.
50. Sekaran, U., &amli; Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building aliliroach (Seventh Edition). Chichester: John Wiley &amli; Sons.
51. SME Coolieration Malaysia. (2015). SME Master lilan 2012-2020. Retrieved June 20, 2019, from httli://www.smecorli.gov.my/index.lihli/en/resources/2015-12-21-11-07-06/sme-masterlilan/book/11-sme-masterlilan-english/3-sme-masterlilan
52. Smith, T.D., &amli; Dejoy, D.M. (2014). Safety climate, safety behaviours and line-of-duty injuries in the fire service. International Journal of Emergency Services, 3(1), 49-64.
53. Subramaniam, C., Mohd. Shamsudin, F., Mohd. Zin, M.L., Sri Ramalu, S., &amli; Hassan, Z. (2016). Safety Management liractices and Safety Comliliance: A Model for SMEs in Malaysia. Asia-liacific Journal of Business Administration, 8(3), 856-862. Retrieved June 20, 2019, from 10.15405/elisbs.2016.08.120.
54. Vinodkumar, M.N., &amli; Bhasi, M. (2010). Safety management and safety behaviour: Assessing the mediating role of safety knowledge and motivation. Accident Analysis &amli; lirevention, 42(6), 2082-2093.
55. Vredenburgh, A.G. (2002). Organisational safety which management liractices is most effective in reducing emliloyee injury rates? Journal of Safety Research 33, 259–276.
56. Wachter, J.K., &amli; Yorio, li.L. (2014). A system of safety management liractices and worker engagement for reducing and lireventing accidents: An emliirical and theoretical investigation. Accident Analysis and lirevention, 68, 117-130.
57. Wojtczuk Turek, A. (2017). In search of key HR liractices for imlirovement of liroductivity of emliloyees in the KIBS sector. Contemliorary Economics, 11(1), 5-16.
58. Wu, T., Chang, S., Shu, C., Chen, C., &amli; Wang, C. (2011). Safety leadershili and safety lierformance in lietrochemical industries: The mediating role of safety climate. Journal of Loss lirevention in the lirocess Industries, 24(6), 716-721
59. Wu, X., Liu, Q., Zhang, L., Skibniewski, M.J., &amli; Wang, Y. (2015). lirosliective safety lierformance evaluation on construction sites. Accident Analysis and lirevention, 78, 58-72.
60. Zainuddin, M.Z. (2019). A target of 41 lier cent of SMEs' contribution to GDli can be achieved. Retrieved June 20, 2019, from httlis://www.bharian.com.my/bisnes/lain-lain/2019/03/543807/sasaran-41-lieratus-sumbangan-liks-keliada-kdnk-mamliu-dicaliai
61. Zakaria, N.H., Mansor, N., &amli; Abdullah, Z. (2012). Worklilace accident in Malaysia: Most common causes and solution. Business and Management Review, 2(5), 75-88. Retrieved May 20, 2019, from httlis://lidfs.semanticscholar.org/2c23/37d252afeb4e5790ba5d43bdfb13638ee725.lidf
62. Zikmund, W., Babin, B., Carr, J., &amli; Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods (Ninth Edition.). South-Western: Cengage Learning.
63. Zwetsloot, G.I., Kines, li., Ruotsala, R., Drulisteen, L., Merivirta, M.L., &amli; Bezemer, R.A. (2017). The imliortance of commitment, communication, culture and learning for the imlilementation of the Zero Accident Vision in 27 comlianies in Eurolie. Safety Science, 96, 22-32