International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06 29

Network Analysis on Safety Culture and Workers

Behaviour : A Forest of All Minimum Spanning
Trees
Maman Abdurachman Djauhari1 , Shamshuritawati Sharif1,2 , Hariza Djauhari3
1
Faculty of Science, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
2
College Arts and Sciences, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia
3
Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs, Indonesia

Abstract In this paper safety culture and workers
are considered, all together, as a complex system and
statistically represented in the form of correlation network
among their characteristics. We show that the current practice,
based on a minimal spanning tree (MS T), to filter the
information contained in the network is not robust. A robust
filter based on the forest of all possible MS Ts is then proposed
and used to analyze the network. For practical purpose, an
algorithm will be provided to find the forest. The advantages of
the proposed filter compared to the MS T-based filter will be
illustrated first before we use it in the case of Malaysia
manufacturing industry. S ome important results that will be
useful for the management will be highlighted.
Index Term adjacency matrix, centrality measures,
correlation matrix, distance matrix, network topology.
I. INT RODUCT ION
Depart ment of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH),
Govern ment of Malaysia, is responsible in p roviding safety
and healthy work environ ment for all emp loyees and protect
those who may be affected by its activities. A safety and
health officer is appointed in every state office fo r
coordinating and discharging the planned activities related
to safety and health. This task is to ensure that the objectives
of DOSH policy are fu lly met. Besides that, DOSH
conducted three major responsibilities, namely, standard
setting, enforcement, and promotion. A ll activit ies are
periodically monitored fro m time to time in order to
guarantee employers and employees in the country pay more
attention to safety and health at work [1].
The DOSH policy comprises:
(i) To prepare and preserve a workplace with a safe and
healthy working system;
(ii) To ensure that all staff are p rovided with the relevant
informat ion, instruction, training and supervision
regarding methods to carry out their duties in a safe
manner and without causing any risk to health;
(iii) To investigate all accidents, diseases, poisonous and/or
dangerous occurrences, and to take action to ensure
that these occurrences will not be repeated;
(iv) To provide basic welfare facilities to all workers; to
revise and improve on this policy whenever necessary;
and
These are an enforcement form of all the requirements of the
legislations related to safety and health as stated in the
Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (Act 514), as well
as regulations and codes of practice wh ich have been
approved. The purpose of this act is to promote and
encourage occupational safety and health awareness among
workers and to create safety and health organization in all
industrial sectors. In manufacturing industry, besides Act
514, DOSH also needs to enforce another important act,
namely, Factories and Machinery Act 1967 (Act 139) which
covers manufacturing, min ing, quarrying and construction
industries.
The aim of this paper is to have a better understanding
to what extent the current pract ice of safety culture and
workers behaviour differs fro m DOSH policy. More
specifically, to identify the most important factors that must
be paid more attention by DOSH in order to reduce the
number o f fatal accidents in manufacturing sector. For that
purpose, safety culture and workers behaviour will be
considered as a complex system and numerically
represented in the form of a correlation network among
characteristics involved in this study. The current practice to
analyze such network is generally consists of (i) info rmation
filtering by using a min imal spanning tree (MST), and (ii)
interpretating the filtered information by using, for example,
centrality measures.
In this paper we show that the MST-based filter is not
robust except when the network contains only one unique
MST. However, this case is very rare in pract ice. Therefore,
instead of using a MST, here we propose to use the forest of
all possible MSTs (or simp ly the forest) as a robust filter.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In the next
section, we highlight the current situation on occupational
accident occurrence in Malaysia manufacturing industry as
reported in DOSH. Sect ion III will be devoted to research
methodology including data collection and analysis, the
proposed information filtering, the proposed algorith m to
find the forest, and some advantages of the proposed filter.
The results and discussion in Section IV will be focused on

1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS I JE NS

 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06
the dot plot matrix, network topology, and centrality
measures. Concluding remarks will close the presentation of
this paper.
II. CURRENT SIT UAT ION
Manufacturing sector is one of the sexiest industrial sectors
in Malaysia economic gro wth. It contributes around 10%
[2]. Therefore, it provides economic opportunities for
related industries and businesses. On the other hand,
however, the number of accidents in manufacturing sector,
including fatal accidents, has been increased from time to
time.
In 2008 2010, Malaysias manufacturing sector has been
contributing the highest number of accidents which result in
non-permanent disabilit ies (NPD), permanent disabilities
(PD) and death (D). Th is sector becomes the second sector
where accident occurrences causing death is placed on the
top behind the construction sector, in 2009 and 2010, as can
be seen in Table I.
T ABLE I
T he occupational accident by sector in 2008 2010
Source: DOSH (2011).
The occurrences of occupational accidents are believed due
to direct, indirect and basic causes. Human factors are
believed as the most important contributors to the accident
occurrences. In this regards, Short [3] has mentioned that
unsafe behaviour of the workers is the direct source of
accident along with unsafe condition.
Safety culture and workers behaviour, as observable
human factors, are a manifestation of the organization
reflected by its organizational culture. However, if safety
culture is presumed as the underlying basic factor that
permits direct cause of accidents to take place, workers
behaviour is the predominant factor in reducing the number
and fatality of accidents.
Fro m Table I we learn that the current practice of safety
culture and workers behaviour differs considerably fro m
DOSH expectation. More specifically, that table shows that
the workp lace is neither safety nor healthy as required in
DOSH po licy. It is to understand the deviation from DOSH
expectation, and to find out the way to reduce accident
occurrences, this research has been conducted.
III. M ET HODOLOGY
In this research, front line workers are the target group.
They are requested to fill-in the questionnaire related to
1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS
30
safety culture and workers behaviour. The questionnaire
consists of nine factors of safety culture, namely,
(i) Management Commitment
(ii) Communication
(iii) Priority of Safety
(iv) Safety Procedure and Policy
(v) Supportive Environment
(vi) Involvement
(vii) Personal priority and need of safety
(viii) Personal Appreciation towards Risk
(ix) Work Environment
and seven of workers behaviour, i.e.,
(i) Reacting behaviour
(ii) Personal Protective Equipment
(iii) Specific Job Risk
(iv) Tools and equipments
(v) Safe Work Practice
(vi) Ergonomics
(vii) Communication
In total, there are 43 characteristics (questions) in this study;
18 characteristics are related to safety culture and 25 to
workers behaviour. See Appendix for the list and Djauhari
[4] for the details of questionnaire construction.
Correlation network approach is used to represent
numerically the interrelationships among all characteristics.
Once the data are collected fro m respondents, the network is
then simp lified in the form of correlation matrix. This
matrix is the only source of information in any correlation
network analysis. The current pract ice in this analysis is to
filter the informat ion contained in the network by using a
minimal spanning tree (MST). See Mantegna[5] who
originally introduces MST-based filter in that analysis,
Mantegna and Stanley [6] who popularize this filter,
Miccich et al. [7] for its application in price return and
volatility, Sieczka and Holyst [8] in co mmodity market, Park
and Yilmaz [9] for road network analysis, and Tabak et al.
[10] for stock market analysis. MST does not only serve as
an information filter but also as a tool to simplify and
visualize the co mplex netwo rk in the form of filtered
network topology among all characteristics [11][12]. These
show the important role of M ST as an informat ion filter in
network analysis. Ho wever, as we will show in the next
section, the use of MST-based filter might g ive misleading
informat ion if there is more than one MST in the network;
two different MSTs will differently filter the information in
the network. To handle this drawback, instead of using a
MST, we propose to use the forest of all M STs (o r, briefly,
the forest). Th is will ensure the robustness of the filtered
information [13].
There are many papers on MST availab le in the
literature. But, to our knowledge, none talks about the use
and construction of the forest of M STs. For this reason, an
algorith m to construct the forest will be provided. Once the
filtered network topology related to the forest is obtained,
we use network centrality measures as the aids of
interpretation. See, for examp le, M iccich et al.[7] and
I JE N S
 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06
Monrrez-Espino and Caballero-Hoyos [14] for practical
examples.
A. Data collection and analysis
In our survey, the focus is on the front line workers, i.e.,
operators and technicians because they are the main target
of DOSH policy. A nu mber of 136 workers were
participated in filling-in the questionnaire described
previously. Data collected fro m those workers were used to
construct the correlation matrix.
Let X i and X i denote the i-th characteristic and
the average of X i , respectively; i = 1, 2, , n = 43. The
correlation networks among those characteristics are
numerically summarized in the form o f correlation mat rix C.
It is a symmet ric matrix of size 43 43 where the
element in i-th row and j-th column is,
Xi X j Xi Xj
ij
X i
2
Xi
2
X j
2
Xj
2
the correlation coefficient of X i and X j that serves to
quantify the degree of their linear relationship. By
definit ion, ii 1 for all i and ij is between 1 to 1 for
all i j . Thus, C is a nu merical summary representing
the complex system of characteristics interrelationships.
The network C consists of 43 characteristics together
with the (43-1)* 43/ 2 = 903 co rrelation coefficients. In
general, see Mantegna [5], the standard practice to analy ze
this network is
(i) transforming C into a d istance matrix D where its i-th
row and j-th column is
d(i, j ) = 2(1 ij ) for all i, j = 1, 2, , n, (1)
(ii) find a MST in D, which represents the filtered
important information contained in D,
(iii) analyze the topological property of all characteristics
based on MST. For this purpose, in this paper we use
the centrality measures.
The centrality measures such as degree, betweenness,
closeness, and eigenvector centralities[15 will be used to
identify the most important factors followed by a Pareto
analysis to identify the vital few in safety culture as well as
workers behaviour.
B. Robust information filtering
Minimal spanning tree (MST) related to the correlat ion
network beco mes an indispensible tool in network analysis
to filter the most important informat ion. See, for example,
Mantegna [5] for the original work, Tu mminello et al.[16]
for its application in general co mp lex systems, Eo m et al.
[17] in Shanghai and Shenzhen market index, and , Eo m et
al. [18] in a correlation network.
The role of MST in network analysis is as a tool to
explain the physical correlation between the topological
structure and classification of the nodes [19]. If the
1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS
31
topological structure of the nodes could be directly obtained
fro m MST, the classification in the form o f an indexed
hierarchical t ree is constructed based on its corresponding
subdominant ultrametric (SDU). However, we will show
below that the use of MST as an information filter might
produce misleading informat ion if there is more than one
MST in the network.
Consider the co mplex system in Fig. 1 consisting of
five nodes P, Q, R, S, and T where the d istance between two
different stocks is given in Table II.
T ABLE II
T he Distance between stocks
P Q R S
Q 0.1
R 0.6 0.6
S 0.5 0.7 1.0
T 0.1 1.5 0.8 0.5
Fig. 1. Complex system of five stocks
To find a MST of that network, the two most suggested
algorith ms in the literature are Kruskals algorith m an d
Prims. If the data structure in Table II is stored in Matlab
version 7.8.0 (2009a), those algorith ms will g ive the MST in
Fig. 2(a). If we store another data structure form, those
algorith ms will g ive another MST. Actually, that co mplex
system contains four MSTs as can be seen in Fig. 2(a)
2(d).
Each M ST in Fig. 2 filters differently the information
in the network co mpared to others. Two d ifferent MSTs
represent different filtered information. Thus, they define
different topological property co mpared to each others. This
shows that the use of a MST might provide misleading
informat ion. In other words, the in formation filtered by
using MST is not robust.
The above observation motivates us to filter the
informat ion based on the forest of all MSTs instead of a
MST. If M ST might be not unique, the forest is unique.
Since the forest provides unique source of filtered
informat ion, it ensures the robustness of filtered info rmation.
In what fo llo ws we present an algorith m to determine the
forest of all possible MSTs constructed based on fuzzy
I JE N S
 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06 32
relation approach.

C. Algorithm to find the forest

We consider D fro m fu zzy relation viewpoint. This will
enable us to see more in-depth the properties of the distance
d in (1). Let E the set of n characteristics. As a real
non-negative function defined on E E, for all i, j and k in
E, d satisfies
0 d(i, j) < and
d(i, j ) = 0 if and only if i = j,
d(i, j ) = d(i, j) , and
d(i, j ) d(i, k ) + d( k, j)
(d)
Fig. 2. All possible minimal spanning trees
Fro m fu zzy relation viewpo int, these properties show that D
is a symmetric and anti-reflexive fuzzy relat ion with d as the
membership function. Consequently, the SDU of D is the
min-max t ransitive closure of D, [13] denoted by D*K for
an integer K ; 2 K n, where

(i) D*k = D * D*(k -1) is k times min-max transitive

operation * of D; for k = 2, 3, , K with D*1 =
D
(ii) D*K = D*( K + m) for all positive integers m.
(a) (iii) The membership function of D*k fo r all positive
integers k is d*k i, j given by

n
d*k i, j = d(i, m) d*(k -1) (m, j )
m 1
(iv) a b = min{a, b} and a b = max{a, b} for all
real numbers a and b
By using D*K we construct the forest of all MSTs in D.
Let M be a MST of D and (i = i1 ,i 2 ,.....,i p j ) be the
chain fro m i to j in M . If we define the distance d between
i and j in M by
d(i, j ) = p -1 ,
d( ik , ik+1)
(b) k =1

then, d is the SDU of d. See Djauhari [13] for the details.

Therefore, there exists an integer m; 1 m < p, such that

d*K i, j =
d(i, j) = d(im, im+1) .
Let be a fuzzy relation where its membership function
is given by
1; d( i, j) d *K i, j = 0 and i j

(i, j ) = (2)
0; d( i, j) d *K i, j 0 or i = j
Then, is the adjacency matrix that corresponds to the
forest of all MSTs in D. In other words, that forest is defined
by all pairs (i, j) where i > j and (i, j ) = 1. Consequently,
(c) MST in D is unique if and only if the number of pairs (i, j),
where i > j and (i, j ) = 1, is (n 1). Th is is an important
property that can be used to check whether o r not a network
contains unique MST.

1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS I JE N S

 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06
Based on the above results we propose the follo wing
algorith m to find the forest. In this algorith m, D and are
considered as matrices of size (n n) .
Step 1: Let k = 2,
Step 2: Co mpute D*k where D* D*( k -1) is matrix
mu ltip licat ion of D and D*( k -1) in the usual
sense but mult iplication and su mmation o f t wo real
numbers a and b are defined as max{a, b} and
min{a, b}, respectively,
*k
Step 3 : If D*k = D*( k -1) , then the SDU of D is D
and go to Step 4. Otherwise, let k := k+1 and then
go back to Step 2,
Step 4. Co mpute as defined in (2). Then is the
adjacency matrix representing the forest of all
MSTs in D.
To speed up the convergence of this algorithm we
compute D*2 , D*4 , D*8 , , instead of D*2 , D*3 ,
K centrality measure.
D*4 , . We stop at the K-th iteration if D*2 =
( K -1) K Fro m 136 surveyed workers, we obtain the correlation
D*2 . Then, D*2 is the SDU of D and the nu mber of
ln( n)
iterations K satisfies 2 K n or K . the above algorithm g ives us the adjacency matrix
ln(2)
D. Some advantages of the proposed filter
Topological properties of correlation network derived fro m
a MST as presented, for examp le, in [10] are different fro m
those issued fro m the forest except if D contains one unique
MST. Consequently, filtered informat ion issued from the
forest and that from a MST are different. If MST is not
unique, then its use will be misleading. This situation will
not be encountered if we use the forest of all MSTs.
As an example, let us consider the topological properties in
terms of degree centrality of each node. See Micciche et
al.[7], and Borgatti [5] fo r the details about this measure. In
correlation network analysis, degree centrality plays an
important role. For example, in stock networks analysis, it is
closely related to market index[18]. Stocks with high degree
are more strongly correlated with market index than those
with low degree [17]. Suppose D contains more than one
MST. Let M be a MST with adjacent matrix M and F be
the forest of all MSTs. The degree of stock k with respect to
M is the number of links adjacent to that stock or,
equivalently, the sum of all elements in the k-th row o f
M , i.e.,
n that represent Supportive Environ ment, Personal
M (k ) = M (k, j) . (3)
j =1
Here M (k , j ) is the element in the k-th row and j-th
column of M . Based on the forest F, the degree of stock
k is defined by
F ( k ) = max M (k ) . (4)
MF
1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS
33
Therefore, in general, F (k ) M (k ) for all k = 1,
2, , n.
As an illustration, suppose Kruskals algorith m o r
Prims accidentally gives the MST in Fig. 2(d). Then,
according to (3), the degree of P, Q, R, S, and T with respect
to that MST are M (P) = 2, M (Q) = 2, M (R) = 1,
M (S) = 1, and M (T) = 2, respectively. These differ
considerably fro m the degrees defined by the forest.
According to (4); F (P) = 4, F (Q) = 2, F (R) = 1,
F (S) = 1, and F (T) = 2.
Similar phenomenon will also be encountered when we
use the other centrality measures. This shows the advantages
of the forest in terms of centrality measures.
IV. RESULT S AND DISCUSSION
In this section, the dot plot matrix issued from forest of all
MST is performed to illustrate the benefit of this study.
Later we show our result based on network topology and
A. Dot pot matrix
matrix C among 43 characteristics. After having
transformed C into distance matrix D by using equation (1),
associated to the forest of all MSTs. This matrix is presented
in Fig. 3 in the fo rm of dot plot matrix. The b lank cell
represents = 0 and black cell = 1.
That figure shows that the highest correlations among
safety culture characteristics (region A) are concentrated
along diagonal wh ile workers behaviour characteristics
(region C) are mo re dispersed. Moreover, some of workers
behaviour characteristics are also highly correlated with
some safety culture characteristics (reg ion B). This indicates
that managing workers behaviour is more co mplex
compared to safety culture. More specifically,
(i) In safety culture (region A), the high correlat ions are
generally among characteristics within factors. The
correlations between factors are low.
(ii) In workers behaviour (region C), the high correlations
are not only among characteristics within factors but
can also be found between factors.
(iii) The following workers behaviour characteristics CD1,
CC2, and CA 3 representing Reacting Behaviour,
Specific Job Risk, and Tools and Equip ments
factors , respectively, are also highly correlated with
these safety culture characteristics ; BE2, BH1 and BI1
Appreciation Towards Risk, and Work Env iron ment
factors. See region B of Fig. 3.
(iv) In general, the two groups are clearly separated.
However, there are t wo factors of safety culture which
are more similar, in terms of correlation, to factors of
workers behaviour than to factors within their own
group. They are, Personal Appreciation Towards
Risk (BI1 and BI2), and Work Env iron ment (BH1
and BH2).
I JE N S
 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06 34
clearly separated as mentioned earlier except the fo llo wing
A B two factors of safety culture,
1 (i) Personal appreciation towards risk (BH1 and BH2), and
2 (ii) Work environment (BI1 and BI2).
These factors are more similar to Reacting Behaviour
3 factor of wo rkers behaviour than to other factors within
their own group. Furthermore, Supportive Environ ment
C in safety culture group (empty circles group) is
factor (BE2)
more similar to Tools and Equip ments factor in workers
behaviour group (black circles group) than to factors of its
C
3 own group.

Fig. 3. Dot plot matrix issued from the forest of all MST s.
The first advantage of the use of the forest of all MSTs
compared to the use of a MST to filter the info rmation can
be seen when we co mpare dot plot matrix in Fig. 3 with that
issued from a MST in Fig. 4. In Fig.3 there are four
additional black cells that cannot be found in Fig. 4. They
are numbered 1 and 2 in region B (between safety culture
and workers behaviour characteristics), and 3 and 4 in
region C (within wo rkers behaviour characteristics). This
will be clarified in the next sections.
The second advantage is that the nu mber o f b lack cells
in Fig. 3 is 46 which greater than that in Fig. 4 which is 42 Fig. 5. Network topology based on the forest of MST s.
(total number of characteristics minus 1). This means that
the number of M STs in D is mo re than one. More precisely, C. Centrality measures
there are 16 M STs in D. Whichever MST is used, the The importance of each particular node can be nu merically
informat ion is misleading. Therefore, the use of the forest of analyzed by using the centrality measures such as degree,
MSTs as a robust filter is mo re appropriate than a MST to betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector centralities. See [8]
filter the informat ion in D. Fo r this reason, in the rest of the for their applicat ion in co mmodity market and [9] in road
paper, only the forest will be considered. network. According to the forest, the score of each node for
those centrality measures is given in Table III.
A B
T ABLE III
Centrality measure
No. i di bi ci evi
1 BA1 0.024 0 0.142 0.019
2 BA2 0.071 0.138 0.165 0.053
3 BB1 0.048 0.048 0.143 0.022
4 BB2 0.024 0 0.142 0.019
C
5 BC1 0.024 0 0.125 0.008
6 BC2 0.071 0.138 0.165 0.053
7 BD1 0.095 0.373 0.191 0.108
8 BD2 0.024 0 0.161 0.039
Fig. 4. Dot plot matrix based on a MST .
9 BE1 0.024 0 0.186 0.159
10 BE2 0.095 0.411 0.227 0.443
B. Network Topology 11 BF1 0.071 0.463 0.213 0.155
To elaborate the above results more clearly, in Fig. 5 we 12 BF2 0.048 0.377 0.220 0.215
present the network topology that corresponds to the fo rest. 13 BG1 0.048 0.048 0.143 0.022
In that figure we see the interconnectivity among all 14 BG2 0.024 0 0.125 0.008
characteristics of both groups. Empty circles represent 15 BH1 0.048 0.048 0.122 0.017
safety culture characteristics group and black circles are fo r 16 BH2 0.024 0 0.109 0.006
workers behaviour group. In general, the two groups are 17 BI1 0.048 0.048 0.127 0.010
18 BI2 0.024 0 0.113 0.003

1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS I JE N S

 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06 35
19 CA1 0.048 0.037 0.174 0.141 (iv) The last measure is the eigenvector centrality.
20 CA2 0.024 0 0.186 0.169 According to this measure, CD3 receives the highest
21 CA3 0.048 0.177 0.164 0.048 score followed by BE2 and CD2 at the second and
22 CA4 0.071 0.242 0.188 0.109 third, respectively. Hence, CD3 is the node that
23 CA5 0.071 0.138 0.144 0.024 influences the other high scored nodes. It is the most
24 CA6 0.095 0.160 0.138 0.042 influential characteristic to the second BE2 and the
25 CB1 0.024 0 0.128 0.018 third CD2.
26 CB2 0.024 0 0.128 0.018 It is important to note that these results are different fro m
27 CB3 0.071 0.094 0.146 0.051 those given by MST-based filter. Since each measure plays
28 CB4 0.071 0.222 0.168 0.106 different role, the factors that should be of high priority in
29 CB5 0.048 0.048 0.145 0.043 reducing the number of fatality and paid more attention by
30 CB6 0.024 0 0.127 0.016 DOSH depend on what measure is used. Due to this
31 CC1 0.024 0 0.127 0.008 restriction, we p ropose to use also a Pareto analysis on the
32 CC2 0.024 0 0.122 0.015 top scored characteristics in each measure to find the vital
33 CD1 0.048 0.103 0.198 0.177 few. Based on Pareto analysis, there are three among nine
34 CD2 0.071 0.122 0.214 0.392 factors of safety culture and three among seven factors of
35 CD3 0.095 0.528 0.227 0.471 workers behaviour which are the v ital few. For safety
36 CD4 0.071 0.530 0.219 0.311 culture, in order of importance, they are (a) Supportive
37 CE1 0.071 0.266 0.192 0.200 Environment, (b) Safety Procedure and Policy, and (c)
38 CE2 0.048 0.096 0.193 0.103 Involvement. On the other hand, the vital few in workers
39 CF1 0.048 0.002 0.122 0.026 behaviour are, (a) Tools and Equip ment, (b) Safe Work
40 CF2 0.048 0.021 0.135 0.030 Practice, and (c) Communication.
41 CF3 0.071 0.253 0.155 0.058
42 CG1 0.048 0.285 0.174 0.091 V. CONCLUDING REMARKS
43 CG2 0.071 0.331 0.195 0.195 The forest of all MSTs is proposed to filter the impo rtant
informat ion contained in correlation network o f safety
From those scores we summarize culture and workers behaviour in Malaysia manufacturing
(i) Based on degree centrality, BD1 and BE2 (black industry. We found that the network contains more than one
points), CA6, and CD3 (blank po ints) have the highest MST. Therefore, whichever MST we use, the informat ion is
number of links (4 links). Each of the followings has 3 misleading. This justifies the appropriateness of the use of
lin ks: BA 2, BC2, and BF1 (b lack points), CA4, CA5, the forest as a robust filter of information. A visual
CB3, CB4, CD2, CD4, CE1, CF3, CG2 (blank points). representation of the adjacent matrix related to the forest is
The rests are of 1 and 2 links only. The mo re the given in the form o f dot plot matrix and the topological
number of lin ks of a particular characteristic, the more properties of the forest are analy zed numerically by using
the number of other characteristics influenced by that centrality measures such as degree, closeness, betweeness,
characteristic. For examp le, according to this measure, and eigenvector centrality. We also conduct a Pareto
BD1, BE2, CA6 and CD3 are the most influential analysis on the top ten scored characteristics in each
characteristics to the large nu mber o f other measure to find the vital v iew that could be paid attention by
characteristics. DOSH.
(ii) In terms of betweenness, CD3 and CD4 play the most First, dot plot matrix indicates that managing workers
important role in the network followed by, in order o f behaviour is more co mplex co mpared to safety culture.
importance: (i) BE2 and BF1 as the second most More specifically, in safety culture, high correlation is
important, (ii) BD1 and BF2 as the third most generally among characteristics within and not between
important, and (iii) CA4, CB4, CE1, CF3, and CG1 as factors. On the other hand, in workers behaviour, hig h
the fourth most important. Thus, these characteristics correlation is not only among characteristics within factors
should be well managed since the influence of the but can also be found between factors. The two group of
characteristics to each other will be passing through factors are clearly separated except Personal Appreciation
them more effectively than others. Towards Risk and Work Environ ment factors in safety
(iii) According to closeness centrality measure, BE2 and culture are of h igher correlat ion with React ing Behaviour
CD3 have an excellent position co mpared to the others factor of workers behaviour than with other factors within
where the information flow in the network can faster their own group. Furthermore, Supportive Environ ment
reach the others. The second and third closest node to factor in the first group is of higher co rrelation with Tools
the others are (i) BF1, BF2, CD2, and CD4, and (ii) and Equip ments factor in the second group than with other
BA2, BC2, BD1, BD2, BE1, CA1, CA 2, CA3, CA4, factors in the same group.
CB4, CD1, CE1, CE2, CF3, CG1. Second, the scores of each centrality measure lead to
the follo wing conclusion. According to degree centrality,
Safety Procedure and Policy and Supportive

1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS I JE N S

 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06
Environment factors of safety culture, and Reactin g [7]
Behaviour and Tools and Equ ip ment factors of workers stability of a minimum spanning tree of price return and volatility,
behaviour are the most influential factors to other factors. In
terms of betweenness, Tools and Equip ment factor o f
workers behaviour p lays the most important role followed
by, in order of importance (a) Supportive Environ ment and [8]
Involvement, (b) Safety Procedure and Policy. The
closeness centrality measure put Supportive Environ ment
and Tools and Equipment as the closest factors to the
others. Thus, the information flow in the network can faster [9]
reach other factors fro m them. Based on eigenvector
centrality, Tools and Equip ment is the only factor that
lin ks to the other high scored factors. It is the most
influential factor to the second most influential factor [10]
Supportive Environment.
Third, according to a Pareto analysis the following
vital few factors are to be paid more attention by DOSH. Fo r [11]
safety culture, in order o f importance, they are (a)
Supportive Env iron ment, (b) Safety Procedure and ACM SIGKDD, Washington, D.C. 2003.
Policy, and (c) Involvement. On the other hand, the vital [12] V. Batagelj, and A. Mrvar, (2011) PAJEK: Program for Analysis and
few in workers behaviour are, (a) Tools and Equip ment, Visualization of Large Networks, version 2.02. [online]. Available:
(b) Safe Work Practice, and (c) Communication.
A CKNOWLEDGMENT [13]
We are very grateful to the Ministry of Higher Education,
Govern ment of Malaysia, fo r financial support to conduct
this research under RUG vote nu mber [14]
Q.J130000.7126.02H18. The authors would like to thank the
Ministry of Higher Education, Universit i Tekno logi
Malaysia and Universiti Utara Malaysia for the sponsorship
and the opportunity to do this research. Special thanks go to
the Editor and anonymous referees for their helpfu l
comments and suggestions.
[15]
REFERENCES
[1] (2011) Department of Occupational Safety and Health Malaysia.
[16]
[Online]. Available: http://www.dosh.gov.my
[2] (2011) Malaysia Economic Report, Available:
http://www.treasury.gov.my.
[3] J. Short, The role of safety culture in preventing commercial motor [17]
vehicle crashes. Volume 14 of Synthesis (Commercial Truck and Bus
Safety Synthesis Program (U.S.)). Washington D. C. Transportation [18]
Research Board, 2007.
[4] H. Djauhari, Safety Culture at a manufacturing Industry in Johor
[19]
Malaysia, Master Dissertation. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
Johor, Malaysia, 2010.
[5] R. N. Mantegna, Hierarchical Structure in Financial Markets,
European Physical Journal B, vol. 11, pp. 193-197, 1999.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s100510050929
[6] R. N. Mantegna, and H.E. Stanley, An Introduction to Econophysics:
Correlations and Complexity in Finance. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge UK, 2000.
1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS
36
S. Miccich, G. Bonanno, F. Lillo, and R.N. Mantegna, Degree
Physica A, vol. 324, pp.6673, 2003.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(03)00002-5
P. Sieczka, and J. A. Holyst, Correlations in commodity markets,
Physica A, vol. 388, pp.1621-1630, 2009.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2009.01.004.
K. Park, and A. Yilmaz, A Social Network Analysis Approach to
Analyze Road Networks, ASPRS Annual Conference. San Diego,
CA, 2010.
B.M. Tabak, T .R. Serra, and D.O. Cajueiro, Topological
properties of stock market networks: The case of Brazil, Physica A,
vol. 389, pp. 3240-3249, 2010.
V. Batagelj, and A. Mrvar, Density based approaches to network
analysis: Analysis of Reuters terror news network, Ninth Annual
http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php?id=download.
M.A. Djauhari, A robust filter in stock networks analysis. Physica
A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 391, no. 20, pp.
5049-5057, 2012.
J. Monrrez-Espino, and J. R. Caballero-Hoyos. Stability of
Centrality Measures in Social Network Analyses to Identify
Long-Lasting Leaders from an Indigenous Boarding School of
Northern Mexico, Estudios sobre las Culturas Contemporaneas,
vol. 16, no. 32, pp.155-171, 2010.
S. P. Borgatti, Centrality and AIDS, Connections, vol. 18, no. 1,
pp.112-114, 1995.
M.T umminello, T . Aste, T. D. Matteo, and R. N. Mantegna, A tool
for filtering information in complex systems. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science USA, vol. 102, pp.10421-10426,
2005.
C. Eom, G. Oh, and S. Kim, 2006. Topological properties of the
minimal spanning tree in Korean and American stock markets,
Available: http://arXiv:physics/0612069v1
C. Eom, G. Oh, and S. Kim, Statistical investigation on connected
structures of stock networks in a financial time series. Journal of the
Korean Physical Society, vol. 53, no.6, pp. 3837-3841.2008.
R. Zhuang, B. Hu, and Z. Ye, Minimal spanning tree for
Shanghai-Shenzhen 300 stock index. IEEE World Congress on
Computational Intelligence, Hong Kong, pp. 1417-1424. 2008
I JE N S
 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No:06 37
Appendix
Safety Culture and Workers Behaviour Components and their
WO RKERS BEHAVIO UR
Corresponding Variables
Reacting behaviour
SAFETY CULTURE
19 CA1 I always adjust my personal protective equipment before
Management Commitment doing my job so that I can work safely
1 BA1 Management acts decisively whenever 20 CA2 I never do shortcut in my job
safety matters occur 21 CA3 I always change my position carefully
2 BA2 Management acts quickly to solve safety matters when doing my job
Communication 22 CA4 I always stop my work first before
3 BB1 My line superior always gives me information on safety attaching safety guards
4 BB2 T here is good communication regarding 23 CA5 I always do my job in order so that I can work safely
safety issues which influences my work 24 CA6 I never do horseplay during my job
Priority of Safety Personal Protective Equipment

5 BC1 Management considers safety as important asproduction 25 CB1 I always use head gear
6 BC2 I believe safety issues are put in high priority 26 CB2 I always use eye protection and face shielding
Safe ty Procedure and Policy 27 CB3 I always use hearing protection
28 CB4 I always use respiratory protection
7 BD1 All health and safety rules and procedures need to be
29 CB5 I always use arm and hand covering
followed to get the job done safely
30 CB6 I always use foot and leg protection
8 BD2 All health and safety rules are practical
Specific Job Risk
Supportive Environment
31 CC1 I always follow safety policy and procedure
9 BE1 I am encouraged to report unsafe condition
32 CC2 I never experience accidents due to my job
10 BE2 I can influence health and safety performance
Tools and equipments
Involvement
33 CD1 I always use right tools and equipments for my job
11 BF1 I am involved in informing management to important
34 CD2 I always use tools and equipments for my job correctly
safety issues
35 CD3 Tools and equipment I use for my job are always be
12 BF2 I am involved with safety issues at work
maintained well
Pe rsonal priority and need of safety
36 CD4 I always participate to keep my workplace
13 BG1 Safety is my top priority when doing my work
in a good housekeeping
14 BG2 It is important to do continuous emphasis on safety
Safe Work Practice
Pe rsonal Appreciation towards Risk
37 CE1 I understand how work safely in my job
15 BH1 I believe I will not experience occupational accident here 38 CE2 I always work safely
16 BH2 T he chance of being involved in an accident here is low
Ergonomics
Work Environment
39 CF1 I never do many repetition in my job
17 BI1 Operational targets are always in accordance with 40 CF2 I never do my work in long duration without rest
safety measures 41 CF3 I never have awkward posture in my work
18 BI2 I am always given enough time to get my job done safely Communication
42 CG1 I always inform my friend if they act unsafely
43 CG2 I always remind my friend to work safely

Appendi x: S

afety Culture and Workers Behaviour Components and

their Corresponding Variables

1216905-06-8484- IJBAS-IJENS @ December 2012 IJENS I JE NS