Sunday S. AKPAN Isaac A. AYANDELE

Remodeling Strategic Staff Safety and Security Risks Management in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions

This paper examined safety and security risk management in tertiary institutions in Nigeria. The frequent attacks at workplace, especially schools, have placed safety and security in the front burner of discussion in both business and political circles. This therefore, forms the imperative for the conduct of this study. The work adopted a cross sectional survey research design and collected data from respondents who are security personnel of the University of Uyo. Analysis of data was done with simple percentage statistics while the research hypotheses were tested with mean and simple regression and correlation statistics. The findings of the study revealed that assassination, kidnappings and bombings were principal risk incidents threatening the safety and security of staff in University of Uyo. A significant positive relationship was found between the funding of security management and workers’ performance. It was discovered specifically that employment screening, regular training of security personnel, regular safety and security meetings and strategic security policy formation were the main strategies for managing safety and security in University of Uyo. The paper concluded that safety and security management and control involves every worker (management and staff) of University of Uyo. It was recommended, among others, that management should be more committed to safety and security management in the University by means of making safety and security issues an integral part of University’s strategic plan and also by adopting the management line model – one form of management structure-where safety and security are located, with other general management responsibilities. This way, the resurgent cases of kidnapping, hired assassination, etc. would be reduced if not completely eradicated in the University.
JEL ClassificationM10, M14

Full Article

1.Introduction

1.1.General Outlook

Cases of workplace safety and insecurity have assumed a global status and have posed great challenge to management of organisations. These developments are considered a rising omen in the workplace and are deemed to have defiled all conventional management strategies. Consequently there is a renewed awareness regarding safety and security which according to Belilos (2001) have taken precedence over all other subjects since the terrible tragedies of September 11, 2001, in New York, Washington D. C.; and Pennsylvania, which cost thousands of lives. While it is not realistic to believe that employees can be insulated from all potential threats to their safety or security, effective Human Resource Managers should take steps to help minimize these threats. From moral perspective, employers certainly have a responsibility to provide workers with a worksite that is as free from threatening conditions as it can reasonably be. From a legal perspective, the Occupational Safety and Health Acts of 1970 require that employers address safe and healthful working conditions. Specifically, the law requires employers to provide their employees with a place of employment that is free from recognizable hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees, as well as the exposure at which no worker will suffer diminished health, functional capacity, or life expectancy as a result of his or her work experience. The moral and legal taking on safety and security are pointers to how important a safe and secured work environment is to organizational growth and development.

According to Bertini (2000), good, safe and secured workplace bring a lot of improvements to organization in term of healthy and sustained operations that result in improved profit, organisational and operational efficiency, employee satisfaction with appertained effect of improved customer satisfaction all of which ultimately lead to organizational growth and development. In support of this opinion, Kiruja, Eirik and Sicko (2011) said good security management is about good program management: Proactively managing risks and being better positioned to deal with crises enables us to work safety and securely. This benefits our staff, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders. The inference here is that safety and security of personnel in an organisation are factor that can engender organizational growth. It follows that any organization that graves for growth and development should, in addition to managing other resources of the organization, also strive to ensure that employees work in a safe and secured environment. In recognition of the importance of safety and security Barabant (2001) has this to say:

“The security and safety of…..staff is of growing concern to managers of… organisations and their ‘stakeholders’. The fact that organisations increasingly find themselves working in violent environments, and particularly the perception that they are being targeted, has given rise to a range of internal measures, as well as inter-organisational initiatives; After an initial emphasis on security (acts of violence), staff safety (accidents and health) is attracting renewed attention.”

In view of the above, an employer therefore has more responsibility than hiring people to do their job. They must ensure that those hired, work in safe and secured environment otherwise the organization will not perform effectively. This is true because in Sheik’s (2000) opinion, as soon as employees feel that their superiors are disinterested in their work environment, they also lose passion for their work; when this happens, the entire workforce of a business collapse”. Therefore, Safety and security in every business should be taken seriously. It is not a gainsaying that unless management shows interest in the safety and security of employees, the latter group also ceases to pay attention to important details that may become crucial to the success of the organization.

There is great benefit for organizations to provide a safe and secured workplace for its workforce. According to Barabant (2001), there is indeed an incompressible element of risk in organisation’s work, but good security management is also a tool to help organization enter and remain in business irrespective of the risk involved, after all business is not devoid of risk. The loss of staff and assets, either through accident or incident, actually makes it more difficult for an organization to carry out its fundamental task. Organisations which are generally committed to safety and security management tend to have a culture of care for its staff, a commitment to competence and professionalism and a commitment to being a learning organization. The importance of the attitude of the director of the organization cannot be underestimated: “safety and security does not start with the type of staff member you recruit, it starts with the type of Chief Executive Officer you recruit’, (Barabant, 2001).

In view of the importance of having good safe and secured workplace there is need to find out how management of the university of Uyo has been handling the threat to workers safety and security on all the campuses of the university. In this study therefore, the researchers envisages a thorough discussion of measures that management can adopt to ensure that safety and security of their staff at workplace are given paramount attention.

1.2.Statement of the Problem

Safety and security of personnel are today serious management challenges. Part of these challenges is due to apparent lack of definitive clarity between the concept of safety and security which has, often times, led to conceptual misunderstanding, misapplications and mismanagement. Acknowledging this conceptual confusion and its appertained devastative effect on organizations, Baratant (2001) explained thus:

“…yet there is confusion between security management, and safety management. Organisations are responsible for the safety and security of their staff. Both can be subsumed under the concept of ‘risk management’. But while there is significant overlap between measures to improve safety and measures to improve security, the two are not identical, and focusing on one at the expense of the other leaves dangerous omissions.”

As an allusion to the above excerpt, many organisations in their bit to tackling source of threats to safety and security at workplace and to the overall organizational performance, do often give much attention to one risk management dimension, for instance security alone, with less emphasis on safety or otherwise. The most common argument has been that safety and security risks are an integral part of organisation’s work; and that, organisations have been managing them for decades with existing tools and competences, so there is no need for additional or new measures (Baratant, 2001).

The above argument reveals dangerous and problematic assumptions that risk is static and cannot be reduced through any new measure. These assumptions go against the available evidence and realities, which is the fact that risk incidents are becoming more frequent (Barabant, 2001). Also, organisations are currently working in dangerous, volatile, risk-prone environments and the supposed ‘immunity’ of the organizational staff seem to decline.

Another problem is the often misused concept of safety to sometimes mean security in our daily activities such that these twin concepts are either not given proper attention or they are simply overlooked on account of the fact that their mentioning poses no serious threat or make no significant grievous sound in the organization. Whether management has taken bold steps to address these issues or not is a contentious issue. This contention is due to the fact that current hazards in Nigerian Universities are on the increase (Williams, 2012). It is becoming worrisome and most unfortunately so because staff safety and security appear to be left on the back burner until crisis occurs, at which time, people had fallen victim to crimes, get robbed, assaulted, and become sick or die (Barabant, 2001). This study therefore investigates how staff safety and security are managed in the University of Uyo with a view to suggest appropriate strategies to achieve a safe and secured workplace.

1.3.Objective of the Study

The main objectives of this research is to examine safety and security of personnel at workplace and how management or employers of labour have handled these issues strategically in the face of limited organizational resources. Specific objectives are to:

i. find out if bombing, assault, corruption, kidnapping, organized crime, appliances/gadgets, machineries/equipment and, building are sources of safety and security threats to University of Uyo.

ii. find out the opinion of security personnel concerning managements’ commitment to safety and security management in University of Uyo.

iii. find out the relationship between safety, security management and staff performance in University of Uyo

iv. find out if good management structure, command principle, meetings, funding, threat assessment, physical survey, employment screening, and operations planning are not effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management in the University of Uyo.

1.4.Hypotheses

To guide the conduct of this study, four research hypotheses were developed. The null form these hypotheses are as stated below:

i. Bombing, assault, corruption, kidnapping, organized crime, appliances/ gadgets, machineries/ equipment and, building are not sources of safety and security threats to University of Uyo.

ii. Management’s committed to safety and security management in University of Uyo is insignificant.

iii. There is no significant relationship between safety and security management and staff performance in University of Uyo.

iv. Good management structure, command principles, meetings, funding, threat assessment, physical survey, employment, screening, and operations planning not effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management in the University of Uyo

2. Literature Review

The concepts of safety and security at workplace have received several attentions from both the academics and the industrialists. This is to say that these concepts are not only limited to organisations but also extends to the field of study and perhaps in a more debatable academic and industrial investigation. But it is regrettable that the concepts of safety and security have been misconstrued to be synonymous rather than inextricably related concepts that must be clearly distinguished and compared for proper understanding.

2.1.Safety and Security: Conceptual Distinctions and Issues

There are two slightly different meanings of safety and security. For example, home safety may indicate building’s ability to protect against external harm events (such as weather, home invasion, etc.), or may indicate that its internal installations (such as appliance, stair, etc) are safe (not dangerous or harmful) for its inhabitants. Discussion of safety often includes mention of related terms. Security is such a term. With time, the distinction between these two have often become interchanged, equated, and frequently appear juxtaposed in the same sentence. Readers unfortunately are left to decide whether they comprise a redundancy. This confuses the uniqueness that should be reserved for each by itself. When seen as unique, as we intend here, each term will assume its rightful place in influencing and being influenced by the other.

According to Milan-Perez (2003):

“Safety is the condition of a “steady state” of an organization or place doing what is supposed to do. “What it is supposed to do” is defined in terms of public codes and standards, associated architectural and engineering designs, corporate vision and mission statements, and operational plans and personnel policies. For any organization, place, or function, large or small, safety is a normative concept. It complies with situation-specific definitions of what is expected and acceptable.”

Using this definition, protection from a home’s external threats and protection from its internal structural and equipment failures are not two types of safety but rather two aspects of a home’s steady state. In the world of everyday affairs, not all goes as planned. Some entity’s steady state is challenged. This is where security science, which is of more recent date, enters. Drawing from the definition of safety, then: “security is the process or means, physical or human, of delaying, preventing, or protecting against external or internal defects, dangers, loss, criminals, and other individuals or actions that threaten, hinder or destroy an organisation’s “steady state”, and deprive it of its intended purpose for being” (Milam-Perez, 2003). Using this generic definition of safety it is possible to specify the elements of a security program by looking at safety and security issues in organizations.

In human resource literatures, experts such as Van Brabant (2000, 1998), Davidson and Neal (1998), Jensen (1999) and Macnair (1995) among others, have highlighted security issues in organisations as encompassing areas such as security of the property itself, company assets, employees’ and customers’ personal belongings and valuables, life security, personal security, and job security (not covered here because this latter relates to income security), among others. Similarly, safety issues in organization relate to the structure itself, installations and fixtures (electrical, plumbing, air-conditioning and other installations), public and work areas (e.g. slippery floors, hazardous obstacles in traffic areas), safety of furniture, equipment, appliances, and utensils as well as health safety (nontoxic cleaning material and detergents used) and good quality air (what we breathe, dependent upon the type of equipment, installations and fixtures used, and regular repairs and maintenance).

Inferentially, the centre piece of safety issues in an organization is workplace accident and diseases which is more of internal and external risk exposures while that of security is workplace violence which is more of external than internal risk exposures. Implicitly therefore, there would not be a case of security without the mentioning of safety in an organizational setting. This is because these two concepts are so interwoven such that distinguishing and treating them separately become difficult and inappropriate within an organization’s risk management framework. The most important point to note in the discussion of security and safety issues in an organization is that, both concept fall within the framework of risk apprehension and management.

The external risk exposures asserted to be appertained to security issues in organizations is linked to Brabant’s (2001) corporate security. This security concept has connotations of site protection, protection of confidential corporate information, VIP protection of executives (for example against kidnapping or blackmail), and protecting the organization from liability through insurance and legal clauses. It would be wrong to believe that no senior executive or board member of an organization, even some members of the public could possibly understand security in this way. The internal risk exposure asserted to be linked to safety issues in an organization is also supported by Brabant’s (2001) purely defensive security concept: Security here has connotations of protective procedures (no-go area, curfew times, convoy driving, checking-in of visitors to the premises…) and protective devices (helmets, flak jackets, barbed wire, radios). According to Van Brabant (2000), this is a fairly widespread concept.

However, in this study, discussions on each of safety and security are without recourse to their etymological enquiry although this may be considered artificial and conjectural. It is no doubt that a conceptual distinction can be made between ‘safety’ and ’security’, whereby the former refers to accidents and diseases, while the latter refers to acts of violence. There are two schools of thought: those agencies that quite explicitly make the conceptual distinction, and those that equally explicitly do not want to do so.

In the over-arching concept of risk management, safety and security cannot be used synonymously otherwise it becomes a way of signalling that safety cannot be overlooked and exclusive attention paid to security. Thus, in this study, both safety and security are considered together as inextricable concepts that must be addressed together in order to tackle and manage risk exposures at workplace.

Figure 1. Safety and Security issues in organization

Source: Researchers’ inference from the above discussions

2.1.1. Sources of safety and security threats in organizations: Global Review

An analysis of incidents worldwide suggests that the primary safety and security threats arise from a number of sources. To ensure that staff safety and security is ensued in an organization, the various causes or sources of these threats must be identified and appraised. Safety and security of personnel at workplace is caused by a number of factors. Accordingly, Anderson (2010) has developed an extensive database to help identify risks, assess probability of threats and assist in mitigating the potential for disasters. The database-which now encompasses 80 countries, identified the various sources of safety and security threats discussed below:

i. Bombings: The incidents of bombings are most prevalent in all regions. Anderson (2010) reported that in Africa, for example, there were 182 bombings or attempted bombings between 1990 and 1998, while Asia reporting showed a count of 358; Latin America at 344 and the Middle East at 119. Bombings typically result in extensive property damage, high incident of injury and lengthy disruption of operations, not only to the target company, but to adjoining businesses extended blocks or miles from the bombing target. According to Anderson (2010), Colombia, Panama and Peru, Uganda, Greece, Sri Lanka all experienced one form of bombing or the other while In Nigeria, the incident of bombing has been on the increase with the persistent activities of Boko Haran sects in the Northern parts of the country.

ii. Assaults: Assault is the second most frequent offenses reported after bombings. Assaults take the form of shootings, murder and physical assaults on a person. Various police jurisdictions report high numbers. According to Sao Paulo, Brazil police records, for example 4,778 people were murdered in Sao Paulo in 1997, averaging 13 homicides per day. The Brazilian Ministry of Justice reported that 31 of every 100,000 Brazilians are murdered compared to 20 per 100,000 in Mexico and 10 per 100,000 in the United States. The records of the Colombian National Police reflected 31,808 murders or 87 per day in 1997, as well as 204 muggings or assaults committed in Colombia every 24 hours. Mexico City reports more than 250,000 crimes annually or approximately 700 per day. In Nigeria, incident of assaults are also increasing especially on females at workplace. Most common among all assaults is sexually harassment.

iii. Kidnapping: This threat has emerged as a problem worldwide, reaching critical level in Colombia and Mexico. Kidnappings are conducted by terrorists, criminals and others acting for political reasons. Most of the kidnappings are motivated by economic reasons, but in some cases are undertaken to effect political change in a country. Most are resolved peacefully, but some have tragic results. These threats are become almost a legalized business in Nigeria and especially in Akwa Ibom State. Most of these threats in Nigeria and Akwa Ibom State are political reasons. These have however, cause serious safety and security issues in many organizations in Nigeria and Akwa Ibom State.

iv. Organized Crime: The threat from organized crime elements has reached global proportions. The threat ranges from the well-developed economies of the United States to such places as Hungary, Russia, India, South Africa and other emerging markets. Organized crime groups, sometimes working in concert with distant organization, are generally engaged in transporting stolen goods internationally, extortion, murder, bombings, drug trafficking, arson and bribery of government officials. In Hungary, organized crime has been responsible for killing a diplomat, newspaper publisher, the bombing of several political candidates’ houses and offices, as well as more than 100 other bombings since 1991.

v. Corruption: The International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank are all addressing the issue as it relates to projects with which they are involved. The U.S. Commerce Department estimates that companies worldwide operating outside their own national borders paid approximately $80 billion in illegal payments or bribes to officials in other countries since 1995.

2.1.2 Safety and Security Management Framework and Strategies

The management of safety and security of personnel at workplace revolve around many factors as encapsulated in figure 2, adapted from Brabant (2001).

The framework presented below (figure 2) contains several complex activities that are involve in effective safety and security risk management, the cardinal activities are captured in what Brabant (1998) refers some years ago as the ‘safety-security triangle’, which represent three ideal types of safety and security risk management strategies namely: acceptance, protection and deterrent. In a nutshell, an acceptance strategy tries to reduce or remove the threats by increasing the acceptance for an organization’s presence and work in a particular environment. Another way of putting this is ‘winning the hearts and minds’ of people. A protection strategy does not affect the threats but tries to reduce organization’s vulnerability, through protective devices (high walls, barbed wire, flak jackets, blast-walls or – where there is respect, – a prominent logo). A deterrence strategy essentially tries to contain a threat by posing a counter-threat (arrest and fines, international sanctions, trial by an international tribunal and, ultimately, armed protected with the possibility of return fire).

As explained further by Brabant (2001), different safety and security risk management strategies require different staff skills and time allocation. For instance, a protection strategy requires mostly technical knowledge and is least context specific and requires political, social and anthropological understanding, and diplomatic and negotiation skills, as well as significant more time spent monitoring contextual developments.

This ‘security triangle’ (Figure 2) has been very successful, not so much because what it said as totally new, but because it gave simple concept and simple words to things that organizations has been implicitly practicing all over the world. It would be a mistake, however not to read the commentary with the triangle, and therefore to misuse it. Some organizations seem to have grasped on to ‘acceptance’ and declare it their strategy. This could be a dangerous mistake.

The commentary says that many individuals, organizations and even countries seem to have a preferred style, but that the art of safety and security management is choosing the right mix of strategies, in accordance with your threat and vulnerability analyses in a given context. Thus, an acceptance strategy is not going to prove very effective against brutal organized crime. The security triangle cannot be taken in isolation, its place and use needs to be seen in the context of a comprehensive safety and security management framework as presented in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Safety and Security Risk Management Framework

Source: Adapted from Brabant (2001). Mainstreaming the Organizational Management of Safety and Security: A review of aid agency practices and a guide for management. HPG Report 9 March, 2001.

From the above framework (figure 2), it is evidenced that management of organizations can manage safety and security of personnel in a number of ways such as having good management structure, regular meetings, safety and security review, safety and security policy, proper funding, intra-firm threat assessment, physical security survey, pre-employment screening/training, special event planning, market insurance, self-insurance and self-protection (UNHCR, 1997; Davidson and Neal, 1998).

(i) Good management structures: Three types of managerial set-up for strengthening safety and security are in vogue. These include the management line model, where safety and security is located, with other general management responsibilities within the operational line management between headquarters and the field; but the problem for line managers here is lack of time and, sometimes, of sufficient competence; the specialist security officer model, where one or more such post are created at headquarters and in the field, often outside of, and subordinate to, the line management; However, a frequent problem here is the lack of interest and/or competence among line managers, who can ignore or override the ‘advice’ of a security officer; and, the security advisor model, where the responsibility for security management lies within the management line, but there one or more security advisors at headquarters, who support the organization as a whole, and specific field offices.

(ii) Creation of security focal point: Several agencies have designated staff as their ‘security focal point’. In practice, this can cover different roles: the specialist security officer or the security advisor can be fulltime, but also can be a senior line manager, who ensures that security remains on the agenda of top-level managers, and who, as time allows, direct organizational efforts to improve, safety and security management.

(iii) Good chain-of-command principle: Good safety and security management requires clarity about authority and responsibility, lines of communication and decision-making. Good practice holds that authority and responsibility are vested in line managers, and that safety and security are managed ‘close to the ground’. However, decentralized organization risk losing overall consistency, and the checks and balances that headquarters provide.

(iv) Holding regular meetings: Making significant improvements in organizational safety and security management requires one or more for a at head-quarters where discussions can take place. Macnair (1995:21) once said “organizations that have achieved a strong safety and security culture can rely on regular meetings of their operations and senior management teams, creating ad hoc working groups as the need arises”.

(v) Safety and security review: This can be conducted by staff, or by outsiders. It will, however, be effective only if top management follows up on its recommendations. An important precondition for improved security management is clarifying what security concept is appropriate. Not recommended are concepts of ‘corporate security’ with ‘VIP protection’, nor a narrow ‘procedural-technical’ concept that emphasizes protective procedures and devices. What is recommended is a multi-dimensional security concept, that brings into play the values and principles of the organization, its mandate and mission, contextual analysis and scenario monitoring, the organization’s position in relation to the multitude of actors in a particular context, the nature and design of field-level programmes and the way the organization manages its staff, (Salama, 1999).

(vi) Formation of safety and security policy: Few agencies currently have a safety and security policy. It is possible to develop a policy relating specifically to security and another one to safety, or to integrate both. The value of such policy is that it makes safety and security management a corporate responsibility, rather than an operational issue. It then obliges management to act, and legitimizes the allocation of staff, time and other resources.

(vii) Proper funding: A key management question will always be that safety and security cost money. For many organisations, new expenditure requirements are now emerging. One is for increased site protection, due to a rise in crime. If safety and security is fully written into operational budgets, it will help a great deal in solving threats from these vices. Even then, some reserve funds probably have to be kept available centrally, to cover unexpected and non-budgeted requirements.

(viii) Intra-Firm threat assessment: Prior to physically launching operations, an analysis should be conducted of the organization and of the market within which the organization is located. In this process, current threats may be addressed in the immediate market era, as well as in the natal context. The risk assessment should encompass the identification of particular criminal problems and crime statistics, as well as the evaluation of local and regional law enforcement agencies. The agency review should in particular focus on an assessment of proficiency, training, degree of professionalism, and level of response to incidents.

(ix) Physical security survey: Once the intra-firm and market area assessments are complete, the next step is a physical security survey. If done thoroughly at the outset, it may reduce the frequency of need for future assessments. The common link here, however, is perimeter security and access control. Both of these issues should be addressed in the physical security survey. The survey should include the identification of vulnerabilities and critical operational components, such as communications, power supply and valuable storage and data processing areas.

(x) Building design and security: New construction should include a crime-prevention design audit. Design for crime prevention in organisations can be highly beneficial. TO be considered are such factors as the relationship of buildings to parking areas and structures, lighting, perimeter views and protection, and security system.

(xi) Pre-employment screening/training: All employees in an organization should have a thorough background check conducted. There have been a number of instances in which firms have hired individuals with criminal records in illegal drugs sales or theft. Incidents of drugs dealing, time-clock tampering and theft are relatively common problems that can be greatly mitigated with thorough employment and criminal checks. This process is especially important when selecting security personnel.

(xii) Training: these programs should be developed to enhance safety and security among all staff in addition to the security force. Employee training should not only include a focus on organizational functions (client relations check-in procedures, daily operations, and administrative responsibilities), but security awareness as well. As is the case at most companies, safety and security staff is limited and is sometimes strained due to commitments and shrinking staff. By providing the entire employees with training in the identification of safety and security issues, a description of operational methods, where to report information and periodic updates on security advisories, management can in effect add additional “eyes” and to the organization.

(xiii) Safety and security planning and operations: It is important to broaden the focus of risk and systematize processes. Each firm, for example, should have a detailed bomb threat plan that covers procedures to include the reporting person, execution of the search plan, what to do if a suspect package is found and evacuation plans. The process is critical because time is always of the essence. Many bomb threats are made for the purpose of disrupting a company’s operations. Again, information must be properly handled due to the scope of potential damage.

(xiv) Special events planning: These events often involve government dignitaries, official and organizations senior management, associations that may be embroiled in controversial policies or business transactions that can elevate threat. In some cases, police or other government agencies provide security but this does not obviate organizational responsibility. The example of the bomb threat at the banking conference in Colombia, for example was augmented by exposure of detailed conference plans on the Internet. Organisations needs to track where information has been distributed, including the internet, to determine the level of risk that may result.

2.2.Relevant Theory and Empirical Review

This work is supported by Maslow’s Needs Theory. Maslow was a humanistic psychologist who proposed that within every person is a hierarchy of five needs, namely physical, safety, love, esteem and actualization. His theory is found within the domain of motivation which he said is a function of need not met. Thus if motivation is driven by the existence of unsatisfied needs, then it is worthwhile for a manager to understand which needs are the more important for individual employees. In this regard, Abraham Maslow developed a model in which basic, low-level needs such as physiological requirements and safety must be satisfied before higher-level needs such as self –fulfilment is pursued. In this hierarchical model, when a need is mostly satisfied it no longer motivates and the next higher need takes its place. The section of this theory that is relevant to this study is the second section which is need for safety and security. The bottom-line in this need theory and relevant section of it is that human beings must feel safe in their environments and free from any threat of attack by aggressors, they also need to live in a secure and certain environment in which they can act as social beings.

The first study to specifically examine the relationship between insecurity and safety was conducted by Probst and Brubaker (2001). In this study, the researchers found that when insecurity increased, employee safety knowledge and motivation to comply with safety policies and procedures decreased and organizational performance reduced proportionately. As a result, reported safety compliance as well as organizational performance was adversely affected. Not surprisingly, employees with insecure and unsafe work place suffered more accidents and injuries compared with employees with relatively more secured and safe workplace.

Although Probst and Brubaker’s (2001) findings were replicated in two cross-sectional analyses and one longitudinal analysis, questions remained regarding the direction of causality. Did insecurity cause poor safety outcomes, or did a poor safety record cause an employee to have less security? To address this issue, Probst (2002) conducted a laboratory experiment to manipulate organizational layoffs and observed their effects on employee security and safety behaviours. The results indicated that individuals threatened with layoffs violated more safety policies and produced lower quality output than their secure counterparts. This means that some sources of safety and security threats are also internal or within an organization. Although these results in conjunction with the earlier field study research clearly suggest that insecurity and unsafe workplace causes more negative outcomes, other empirical research suggests just the opposite – that insecurity and unsafe workplace is related to more positive outcomes at work.

More recently, however, research is beginning to suggest that poor safety and insecurity may also have a detrimental effect on employee work attitudes, behaviour and outcome, (Grumberg, Moore, and Greenberg, 1996, Probst, 2002; Probst and Brubaker, 2001). In the United States alone, over 5,000 employees lost their lives in 2001 due to work related injuries, and an additional 5.7 million employees suffered nonfatal work-related injuries and illness (Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2001). Although there is research to suggest that employee job insecurity may be contributing to this workplace accident and injury numbers, other research suggests instead that job insecurity is related to more positive safety outcomes (Parker, Axtell, and Turner, 2001).

3.Methodology and Data Set

This research was an applied study aimed at solving the safety and security management problem in an organization. The study design adopted was a cross sectional survey design. By this design, the researchers was able to administer copies of questionnaire to a sample of 144 respondents drawn scientifically from a total population of 224 who were security personnel in the University of Uyo through the use of Taro Yamen’s formula as presented below: n =N/1 +N(e)2; with e = 5%; n= 224/1+224 (0.0025) = 144. Out of the 144 copies of questionnaire administered, a total of 135 questionnaires representing 93.75% response rates were returned to the researchers in useable form. And this became the sample used for this study.

Statistically, mean and standard deviation was used in analysing responses from respondents and the mean (average) obtained is interpreted based on the interpretation scale (see Table 1). By the Likert Scale Rating, responses obtained from the respondents on questionnaire items were weighted in order to get their mean. Weighted scores refer to the respondent’s scores against each questionnaire item multiplied by the scores under each Likert Scale Point (LSP). The products were added together on each column in order to find out the average (mean) using the number of respondents involved. The Hypotheses were tested using Pearson Correlation Coefficient (R) Statistics with the use of SPSS. The Null hypotheses was accepted where R at P > 0.05 and rejected where R at p < 0.05. However, the decision rule for the mean statistics was that where the arithmetic mean (ma) value is the same with the Harmonic mean (mh) and Geometric mean (mg) value, the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted, otherwise the reverse. Thus: Reject Ho and accept Hi if ma = mh = mg; Accept Ho and reject Hi if ma ¹ mh ¹ mg.

Table 1. Likert Point Rating and Interpretation Scale

Options Symbol Likert 5-point Rating Scale Likert 5-point Interpretation Scale
Strongly Agree or Very committed SA or VC 4 3.50-4.00
Agree or Committed A or C 3 2.50-3.49
Disagree or Fairly committed D or FC 2 1.50-2.49
Strongly Disagree or Not committed SD or NC 1 1.00-1.44
Undecided U 0 0.00-0.99

Source: Inference from Hassan and Olaniran, (2011).

4.Data Presentation, Analysis and Results

The analysis done here are to help proffer objective answers to the questions. It is thus, an objective analysis of the subjective responses obtained from the respondents in relation to the questions asked. The result on the various sources of safety and security threats to University of Uyo are presented in table 2. From the responses on table 2, it is evident that all, except two sources were not agreed by the respondents as constituting sources of safety and security threats. These sources were assaults and corruptions with the mean (m) values of 2.30 and 2.23 respectively. All other sources were agreed with different degrees of agreements.

Table 2. Sources of Safety and Security Threats to University of Uyo

Sources of safety security threats
SA
4
A
3
D
2
SD
1
U
0
N Total Mean Interpretation
Bombings 83
328
47
141
4
8
2
2
0
0
135
-
-
479
3.55 SA
Assaults
31
124
34
102
25
50
35
35
10
0
135
-
-
311
2.30 D
Corruption
29
116
32
96
28
56
33
33
13
0
135
-
-
301
2.23 D
Kidnappings 92
368
37
111
3
6
1
1
2
0
135
486 3.60 SA
Organized Crime 62
248
57
171
6
12
3
3
7
0
135
-
434 3.22 A
Appliances gadgets 65
260
54 16 5
10
4
4
7
0
135 436 3.23 A
Machineries/ Equipment 60
240
60
180
2
4
3
3
10
0
135 427 3.16 A
Building 42
168
51
153
12
24
10
10
20
0
135 355 2.63 A

Source: Field survey data, 2013

These sources and their various means values are presented in figure 3 for a clearer assessment.

Figure 3. Pictorial presented of mean value on sources of safety and security risks in organization

Source: Constructed from Mean values on Table 2

The corresponding hypothesis that bombing, assault, corruption, kidnapping, organized crime, appliances/ gadget, machineries/equipment and, building are not sources of safety and security threats to University of Uyo was tested and the result is presented in Table 3 that follows.

Table 3. Mean Result for Sources of Safety and Security Threats

Likert point (2) Bombing Assault Corruption Kidnapping Organized Crime Appliances /Gadgets Machineries /Equipment Building
Mean 3.5500 2.3000 2.2300 3.6000 3.2100 3.2300 3.1600 2.6300
Harmonic Mean 3.5500 2.3000 2.2300 3.6000 3.2100 3.2300 3.1600 2.6300
Geometric Mean 3.5500 2.3000 2.2300 3.6000 3.2100 3.2300 3.1600 2.6300

Source: Generated from SPSS

The result on Table 3 shows that both Harmonic and Geometric mean which were used as an extended statistic to validate the mean value of 3.55, yielded same value with no variance and no error. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected while the alternative hypothesis was accepted. Thus, bombing, assault, corruption, kidnapping, organized crime, etc all constitute sources of safety and security threats to University of Uyo. On the extent of management’s commitment to safety and security management, responses are presented in Table 4 below.

Table 4. Extent of management’s commitment to safety and security Risk management

Level of Mgt. Commitment VC
4
C
3
FC
2
ND
1
UD
0
N Total m Interpretation
Response 22
[16.30%]
88
41
[30.37%]
123
49
[36.30%]
118
11
[8.15%]
11
12
[8.89%]
0
135
[100%]
340 2.52 A

Source: Field survey data, 2013

From Table 4, the various levels of management commitment to safety and security management in the University of Uyo are identified. With the mean value of 2.52, and the highest response rate being 49 representing about 36.30%, it can be stated that management is fairly committed to safety and security management at the University. The pictorial representation of this finding is in figure 4.

Figure 4. Pictorial Presentation means value on the level of managements’ commitment to safety and security management in organization.

Source: Constructed from Mean values on Table 4

The corresponding hypothesis that the level of management’s commitment to safety and security management in the University of Uyo is not significant was tested and the result presented on Table 5 shows that both Harmonic and Geometric mean values are the same. There was no variance and no error.

Table 5. Mean Result for Management Commitment to safety and Security

Likert point (2) Mean Harmonic Mean Geometric Mean
Total 2.5200 2.5200 2.5200

Source: Generated from SPSS

By this result, the null hypothesis was rejected in favour of the alternative hypothesis. This means that the level of management’s commitment to safety and security management in the University of Uyo is significant. Responses to the relationship between safety and security management and staff performance in University of Uyo are presented on Table 6.

Table 6. Relationship between safety and security management and staff performance in University of Uyo

Level of Mgt. Commitment VS
4
S
3
INS
2
NS
1
UD
0
N Total m Interpretation
Response 25 [18.52%] 100 51
[37.78%]
153
39
[28.89%]
78
13
[9.63%]
13
7
[5.19%]
0
135
[100%]
344 2.55 A

Source: Field survey data, 2013

With the mean value of 2.55, the respondents, on aggregate agreed that there is a relationship between management commitment to safety and security and staff performance in University of Uyo. Going by the principle of majority rule, the relationship is significant given the highest response rate of 37.78%. The result of the corresponding hypothesis which state that there is no significant relationship between safety and security management and staff performance in University of Uyo is presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Correlation Result for the relationship between management commitment to safety and security and Staff Performance in University of Uyo.

Mgt commitment Staff Performance
Mgt. commitment Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
1
0
5
.644
.241
5
Staff Performance Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.644
.241
5
1 5

Source: Generated from SPSS

The above result shows that the calculated r-value of .644 was greater than the critical r – value of .196 at 0.05 alpha level and n = 134. This implies that management commitment to safety and security contributes about 64.4% to staff performance in University of Uyo. Since this percentage contribution was in excess of 50.00% on average of 100%, the researchers therefore rejected the null hypothesis and accepted the alternative hypothesis. In other words, there is a significant relationship between management commitment to safety and security and staff performance in University of Uyo. Response to the most effective strategies for effective staff and security management are presented in Table 8.

Table 8. Most effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management

Safety & security management strategies SA
4
A
3
D
2
SD
1
U
0
N Total m Interpretation
Good Mgt. Structure 37
148
52
156
24
48
14
14
8
0
135
-
-
366
2.71 A
Good chain of command principle 30
120
30
90
25
50
20
20
35
0
135
-
-
280
2.07 D
Regular safety & security meeting, policy information & review 79
316
45
135
6
12
3
3
2
0
135
-
-
466
3.45 SA
Proper funding 84
336
47
141
2
4
1
1
1
0
135
-
482 3.57 SA
Intra-firm threat assessment 56
224
63
189
7
14
5
5
4
0
135
-
432 3.20 A
Physical safety & security survey 50
200
63
189
9
18
6
6
7
0
135
-
413 3.06 A
Pre- & post-employment screening/training 78
312
47
141
5
10
4
4
1
0
135
-
467 3.46 A
Safety & Security Planning & Operation 56
224
62
186
10
20
5
5
2
0
135
-
435 3.22 A
Source: Field survey data, 2013 From the responses in the table, it is shown that all, except good chain of command principle strategy which had the least means (µ) value of 2.07 was not agreed by respondents as constituting an effective strategy for managing safety and security risk effectively. Figure 5 presents the findings on the most effective strategies in order of priority. Figure 5. Pictorial presentation of the means of sources of safety and security risks in organization Source: Constructed from Mean values on Table 8 The result of the corresponding hypothesis that good management structure, command principles, meetings, funding, threat assessment, physical survey, employment screening, and operations planning are not effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management in the University of Uyo is presented in Table 9. Table 9. Mean Result for Strategies for Effective staff Safety and Security Management in the University of Uyo
Likert point (2) Good mgt. structure Good chain of command principle Regular safety & security meeting, policy formation & review Proper funding Intra-firm threat assessment Physical safety & security survey Pre- & post-employment screening/ training Safety & security planning operation
Mean 2.7100 2.0700 3.4500 3.57000 3.2000 3.0600 3.4600 3.2200
Harmonic Mean 2.7100 2.0700 3.4500 3.57000 3.2000 3.0600 3.4600 3.2200
Geometric Mean 2.7100 2.0700 3.4500 3.57000 3.2000 3.0600 3.4600 3.2200

Table 9 indicates that there are strategies that are effective for managing staff safety and security risks in the University of Uyo. This is because all the results had no variance and no error in their Arithmetic mean. Consequently, the null hypothesis which states that good management structure, command principle, meetings, funding, threat assessment, physical survey, employment screening, and operations planning are not effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management in the University of Uyo was rejected while the alternative hypothesis was accepted. This means that good management structure, meetings, funding, threat assessment, physical survey, employment screening, and operations planning are effective strategies for effective staff safety and security management in the University of Uyo except for good chain of command principle.

5.Conclusions and Recommendations

Safety and security are very important issue in organizational management. Today, the growth in population without corresponding growth in job opportunities create several and eminent juvenile tendencies among youths. The explosion in technology and emergent of sophisticated equipment for industrial use, among others have all rekindled academic and industrial interests in safety and security risks at workplace. From the findings made, it is concluded that the main sources of safety and security risks in the University of Uyo are more of external than internal. The principal sources are kidnapping and bombing. However, principal internal sources are Appliances/gadgets and machineries/equipment. It is concluded that the level of Management commitment to safety and security management is far less than needed to ensure effective safety and security operation.

Consequently, safety and security affect lives and properties in University of Uyo bi-directionally. That is, if managed well it will strongly protect lives and properties in University of Uyo; and if managed with levity, it will make lives and properties in University of Uyo vulnerable to the risk of unsafe and insecure workplace. Funding is the most contentious issue in safety and security management. Thus adequate funding is the most effective strategy for managing safety and security effectively in the University of Uyo. Another most important strategy is pre- and post-employment screening/training amongst others. Based on the above findings and conclusion, the following recommendations suffice:

i. Since one of the greatest sources of safety and security threats is external to the University, it is recommended that management of the University of Uyo should seek alliance and network with law enforcement agencies within Uyo metropolis to constantly keep the University environment under surveillance, and possibly apply for armed security men who are experts in bomb detonation and anti-kidnapping operation to be placed on strategic location along the University access roads.

ii. Management of the University of Uyo should be more committed to safety and security management. One of the way this can be achieved is to make safety and security issues integral part of University’s strategic pact with workforce and also by adopting the management line model – one form of management structure – where safety and security is located with other general management responsibilities.

iii. Everybody in an organization dreads risks and desire protection, especially as they may find insurance an expensive risk management strategy. The University of Uyo Management should look at safety and security management as complementary risk management strategy. When workplace is safe and secured, they will work with vigour and an intimidation-free mindset and this will lead to more employee commitment which is a recipe for organizational growth and development.

iv. Adequate budget should be allocated to safety and security department/operations. When this is done, other effective strategies such as pre- and post- employment screening/training would be possible. This is hereby recommended very strongly for security personnel in the University of Uyo.

References

  1. Andersen, A., 2010.  Emergency Management, Safety and Security. [online] Available at: http://suite101.com/article/employee-safety-and-security-a183454 [Accessed on May 20, 2015]
  2. Barabant, K.V., 2001.  Mainstreaming the Organizational Management of Safety and Security. A review of aid agency practices and a guide for management. Overseas Development Institute.  Europe.
  3. Belilos, C., 2001. Emergency Management, Safety and Security. [online] Available at: http://www.easytraining.com/safety.htm [Accessed on May 20, 2015]
  4. Bertini, C., 2000.  Statement by the Executive Director of WEP at the UN Security Council Open Debate on Security of UN Humanitarian and Associated Personnel [online] Available at: www.wfp.org
  5. Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2001. Injuries, illnesses, and fatalities: Latest members. [online] Available at: http://www.bls.gov/lif/home.htm [Accessed on October 22, 2013]
  6. Davidson, S., and Neal, J., 1998. Under Cover? Insurance for aid workers.  London, People-in-Aid [online] Available at: www.peopleinaid.co.uk/ [Accessed on May 20, 2015]
  7. Jensen, S.B., 1999. Taking Care of the Care-takers under War-Conditions. Who cares?. Copenhagen: European University Centre for Mental Health and Human rights.
  8. Kiruja, M., Erik, K., and Sicko, P., 2011. ACT Staff Safety and Security Guidelines. A handbook for ACT Staff Switzerland.
  9.  Macnair, R., 1995. Room for Improvement: The Management and support of relief and development workers.  London, Relief and Rehabilitation Network, Network Paper No. 10 [online] Available at: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?id=97933&lng=en [Accessed on May 20, 2015]
  10. Milan-Perez, L.A., 2003.  HR How-To:  Workplace Safety, Everything you need to know to ensure a Safety and Healthy Workplace. CCH Incorporated.
  11. Parker, S.K., Axtell, C. M., and Turner, N., 2001.  Designing a safer workplace:  Importance of job autonomy, communication quality, and supportive supervisors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, pp.211-228.
  12. Probst, T. M. 2002. Layoffs and tradeoffs: Production, quality, and safety demands under the threat of job loss. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, pp.211-220
  13. Probst, T.M. and Brubaker, T.L., 2001.  The effects of job insecurity on employee safety outcomes:  Cross-sectional and longitudinal explorations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, pp.139-159.
  14. Salama, P., 1999.  The Psychological Health of Relief workers.  Some practical suggestions.  London, Relief and Rehabilitation Network, Newsletter 15 [online] Available at: www.odihpn.org.uk http://www.odihpn.org/humanitarian-exchange-magazine/issue-15/the-psychological-health-of-relief-workers-some-practical-suggestions [Accessed on May 20, 2015]
  15. Sheilk, M., 2000.  Deaths among Humanitarian Workers 1985-1998. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health.
  16. United Nations, 2000.  Safety and Security of United Nations Personnel. Report of the Secretary-General.  New York. UN. General Assembly (18 October 2000)
  17. Van Brabant, K., 2000.  Operational Security Management in Violent Environments. A Development Institute.  Relief and Rehabilitation Network. Discussion paper [online] Available at: http://www.patronusanalytical.com/page11/assets/GPR8.pdf [Accessed on May 20, 2015]

Author(s)

Sunday S. AKPAN
University of Uyo, Nigeria

Isaac A. AYANDELE
University of Uyo, Nigeria

Correspondence

Sunday Akpan, Department of Insurance, University of Uyo, Nigeria, T/P: +2348032196839

Article History

Received: August 15, 2015
Accepted: September 29, 2015
Available Online: October 18, 2015

Cite Reference

Akpan, S.S., Ayandele, I.A., 2015. Remodeling Strategic Staff Safety and Security Risks Management in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions. Expert Journal of Business and Management, 3(2), pp.150-165

Save to Mendeley

Article Rights and License

© 2015 The Authors. Published by Sprint Investify. ISSN 2344-6781

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons License