ARMY ACCIDENT REPORTING. RESULTS OF SOME EXPLORATORY INTERVIEWS.
Abstract
The interviews with safety directors revealed some of their attitudes and opinions about accident reporting. The main findings are: (1) Reporting completeness, quality and intensiveness depend on the seriousness of the accident and on the type of installation at which it is reported. In general, serious accidents are reported more completely than trivial accidents. The reporting systems of installations with a preponderance of civilian personnel produce more record-keeping and more intensive reporting than posts with a preponderance military. (2) The usefulness of reports is adversely affected by motivations of supervisors that are contrary to the interests of accurate reporting. These motivations include the supervisor's desire to protect his men from punishment and to protect his safety record from any blemish. (3) Safety directors are under indirect pressures from military commanders to under-enumerate accidents.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Sep 01, 1954
- Accession Number
- AD0488404
Entities
People
- Berton Winograd
Organizations
- George Washington University