Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining

Emmanuel Aboagye-Nimo, Ani Raiden

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

Abstract

The acknowledgment of the use of tacit knowledge as a safety praxis in the mining industry has been in existence for over half a century. This is referred to as pit sense. On the contrary, the use of tacit knowledge and common sense for site safety is only gathering steam in the construction industry. As a relatively new concept and one that conflicts with official practices and policies, this type of knowledge still receives resistance from individuals in managerial roles. Common sense in construction and pit sense in coalmining substantial similarities including their heavy dependence on self-preservation and the use of a bottom-up approach i.e. both focusing on the discretion of the workers. The aim of this paper is to shed light on common sense safety in the construction industry as an approach to safety while juxtaposing with coalminers’ pit sense approach. Non-participant observations and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data on the practices of workers of micro construction firms in relation to common sense safety. This data was analysed in comparison to secondary data on coalminers’ pit sense safety. Findings from this study indicate that unlike common sense, pit sense has evolved from being regarded as a mere informal practice to being acknowledged by managers as a way of workers taking responsibility and accountability for their own safety. Thus even turning a blind eye to practices that fall outside the scope of official practices. Common sense and pit sense are both recognised as safety practices that are not formally taught but acquired through continuous practice. They are both situational knowledge that are gained through informal techniques and close interactions amongst workers. Lastly, in both schools of thought, it is widely known that experienced workers are proud to possess and demonstrate pit sense and common sense respectively.
Original languageEnglish
Pages467-476
Number of pages10
Publication statusPublished - 5 Sep 2016
EventProceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016 - Manchester
Duration: 5 Sep 2016 → …

Conference

ConferenceProceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016
Period5/09/16 → …

Fingerprint

worker
construction industry
responsibility
participant observation
manager
firm
industry
interaction
interview
school

Keywords

  • coalmining
  • common sense
  • local knowledge
  • pit sense
  • site sense

Cite this

Aboagye-Nimo, E., & Raiden, A. (2016). Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining. 467-476. Abstract from Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016, .
Aboagye-Nimo, Emmanuel ; Raiden, Ani. / Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining. Abstract from Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016, .10 p.
@conference{d52f7b9dbeb1442f95a244022c56bfaa,
title = "Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining",
abstract = "The acknowledgment of the use of tacit knowledge as a safety praxis in the mining industry has been in existence for over half a century. This is referred to as pit sense. On the contrary, the use of tacit knowledge and common sense for site safety is only gathering steam in the construction industry. As a relatively new concept and one that conflicts with official practices and policies, this type of knowledge still receives resistance from individuals in managerial roles. Common sense in construction and pit sense in coalmining substantial similarities including their heavy dependence on self-preservation and the use of a bottom-up approach i.e. both focusing on the discretion of the workers. The aim of this paper is to shed light on common sense safety in the construction industry as an approach to safety while juxtaposing with coalminers’ pit sense approach. Non-participant observations and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data on the practices of workers of micro construction firms in relation to common sense safety. This data was analysed in comparison to secondary data on coalminers’ pit sense safety. Findings from this study indicate that unlike common sense, pit sense has evolved from being regarded as a mere informal practice to being acknowledged by managers as a way of workers taking responsibility and accountability for their own safety. Thus even turning a blind eye to practices that fall outside the scope of official practices. Common sense and pit sense are both recognised as safety practices that are not formally taught but acquired through continuous practice. They are both situational knowledge that are gained through informal techniques and close interactions amongst workers. Lastly, in both schools of thought, it is widely known that experienced workers are proud to possess and demonstrate pit sense and common sense respectively.",
keywords = "coalmining, common sense, local knowledge, pit sense, site sense",
author = "Emmanuel Aboagye-Nimo and Ani Raiden",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "5",
language = "English",
pages = "467--476",
note = "Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016 ; Conference date: 05-09-2016",

}

Aboagye-Nimo, E & Raiden, A 2016, 'Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining' Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016, 5/09/16, pp. 467-476.

Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining. / Aboagye-Nimo, Emmanuel; Raiden, Ani.

2016. 467-476 Abstract from Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016, .

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

TY - CONF

T1 - Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining

AU - Aboagye-Nimo, Emmanuel

AU - Raiden, Ani

PY - 2016/9/5

Y1 - 2016/9/5

N2 - The acknowledgment of the use of tacit knowledge as a safety praxis in the mining industry has been in existence for over half a century. This is referred to as pit sense. On the contrary, the use of tacit knowledge and common sense for site safety is only gathering steam in the construction industry. As a relatively new concept and one that conflicts with official practices and policies, this type of knowledge still receives resistance from individuals in managerial roles. Common sense in construction and pit sense in coalmining substantial similarities including their heavy dependence on self-preservation and the use of a bottom-up approach i.e. both focusing on the discretion of the workers. The aim of this paper is to shed light on common sense safety in the construction industry as an approach to safety while juxtaposing with coalminers’ pit sense approach. Non-participant observations and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data on the practices of workers of micro construction firms in relation to common sense safety. This data was analysed in comparison to secondary data on coalminers’ pit sense safety. Findings from this study indicate that unlike common sense, pit sense has evolved from being regarded as a mere informal practice to being acknowledged by managers as a way of workers taking responsibility and accountability for their own safety. Thus even turning a blind eye to practices that fall outside the scope of official practices. Common sense and pit sense are both recognised as safety practices that are not formally taught but acquired through continuous practice. They are both situational knowledge that are gained through informal techniques and close interactions amongst workers. Lastly, in both schools of thought, it is widely known that experienced workers are proud to possess and demonstrate pit sense and common sense respectively.

AB - The acknowledgment of the use of tacit knowledge as a safety praxis in the mining industry has been in existence for over half a century. This is referred to as pit sense. On the contrary, the use of tacit knowledge and common sense for site safety is only gathering steam in the construction industry. As a relatively new concept and one that conflicts with official practices and policies, this type of knowledge still receives resistance from individuals in managerial roles. Common sense in construction and pit sense in coalmining substantial similarities including their heavy dependence on self-preservation and the use of a bottom-up approach i.e. both focusing on the discretion of the workers. The aim of this paper is to shed light on common sense safety in the construction industry as an approach to safety while juxtaposing with coalminers’ pit sense approach. Non-participant observations and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data on the practices of workers of micro construction firms in relation to common sense safety. This data was analysed in comparison to secondary data on coalminers’ pit sense safety. Findings from this study indicate that unlike common sense, pit sense has evolved from being regarded as a mere informal practice to being acknowledged by managers as a way of workers taking responsibility and accountability for their own safety. Thus even turning a blind eye to practices that fall outside the scope of official practices. Common sense and pit sense are both recognised as safety practices that are not formally taught but acquired through continuous practice. They are both situational knowledge that are gained through informal techniques and close interactions amongst workers. Lastly, in both schools of thought, it is widely known that experienced workers are proud to possess and demonstrate pit sense and common sense respectively.

KW - coalmining

KW - common sense

KW - local knowledge

KW - pit sense

KW - site sense

M3 - Abstract

SP - 467

EP - 476

ER -

Aboagye-Nimo E, Raiden A. Introducing site sense: comparing situated knowledge in construction to coalmining. 2016. Abstract from Proceedings 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference 2016, .