Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises — meeting

Networking among small and medium-sized enterprises - meeting the challenge of promoting safety and health measures to SME’s. Hans Jørgen Limborg & Maya Flensborg Jensen, Team. Arbejdsliv - Denmark

Point of departure • Our hypothesis is that SME’s are influenced stronger by the networks they are part of than other external actors • But we need to identify the mechanisms the ‘drive’ the process

Background of the project • Current research on SME’s and OHS: – Reasonable knowledge about regulation – but difficulties to meet demands formalised OHS practise (Hasle et al 2004, Forteyn et al 97) – They have limited resources but responses to external pressure (Champoux & Brun 2003, Hasle & Limborg 2006) – Questions of OHS are approached with the same informal approach as the task of management (Walters 2001, Axelsson 2002) – Local and sectorial networks are important to them (Birgersdottir 2002, Johansson 98, Limborg & Mathiessen 2010)

The objectives Objectives of the project and the paper: • To provide knowledge on how ”networks among SME’s can be a catalyst for general policy instruments aiming to improve OHS • To assess if Pawsons generative model of causation and network theory enhances our understanding of the mechanisms that will motivate a network to develop higher standards of OHS.

The project - idea, data and methodology • Two existing networks among small dairies (21) and microbreweries (26) received funding from The Dansih National Prevention Fund for development projects • The projects aimed to reduce MSD – which is a problem in both sectors – by developing practical and low cost tools • The projects ran from 2010 to 2012 • Our Data: Qualitative interviews (17) with key persons, documents, company visits and project evaluations.

Programme theory* of both External mechanism prevention projects F (P und re in tio ven g Fu n nd ) Sk co illed n tan sults The network Project group Screening and priority of problems Nomination of frontrunner companies Development and implementa -tion of solutions The network as context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation, organised meeting opportunity , limited resources, a “we” in opposition to the large company, focus on quality *Pawson: Realistic evaluation Improved working conditions Distribution of ideas to the network

The implementation theory Policy instruments: Labour Ínspection Prevention fund Skilled advisors External mechanisms: Control and possible enforcement Funding Knowledge Proces Development Prevention project The network Project group Screening and priority The network context: Open culture and tradition for cooperation, organised meeting opportunity , limited resources, a “we” in opposition to the large company, focus on quality Nomination of frontrunner Development and implemen -tation Improved working conditions Distribution of ideas to the network

Secondary context: Labour inspection, unions and society Mechanisms in a network Primary context: The network Mechanism 4: • Curiosity from peers • Accessibility to experiences – “Pact on openness” • Willingness to share Mechanism 2: National regulation Labour inspection • “Handshake” - trust among network participants • Skillful Consultant – able to push 2020 - actionplan reduction of MSD Committee Safety commitee ”Front runners” • Development of Financial support from Prevention Fund • Projectorganisation • Mapping of exposure • Catalogue of good ideas prototypes • Real time testing Test companies Followers, • Implementation of aids • Utilisation • ”Open house” dissemination of experience Supplyer • Fewer notes from L. I. • Price for best project 2011 • New generally accepted standard • Reduced number of heavy lifts • Reduced sick leave Outcome Mechanism 1: External support to project & presure from L. I. Mechanism 3: Development and testning in real life Workers participation Good relation to supplyer Mechanism 5: Sustainability Internal context: History, knowledge and experience related to OHS

I spite of identical programme theories the projects developed very different. Mechanism External Dairies Breweries +++ ++ External funding +++ Professional support Internal External pressure +++ +(+) Trust within network ++ ++ Pact on openness in relation to the project +++ (+) + - Shared commitment to standards

Conclusion • SME’s/owner manager values are influenced by their peers in networks, also in relation to OHS • It is possible to push networks to take up OHS • But these ’mechanisms’ are essential: • External – They face inspection, receive funding and have access to relevant support (stick, carrot and sermon) • Internal – – The network give priority to OHS Frontrunners take the lead and inspire The network are build upon mutual trust The network make a pact on openness and share knowledge • Sustainability is dependant on continued focus on OHS

s rk o t in us w et n tr Thank you for listening hjl@teamarbejdsliv. dk