REVISTA INGENIO
Improving Workplace Safety: A Delphi Study On OSH Monitoring And Management
Mejorar la Seguridad en el Trabajo: un Estudio Delphi Sobre la Supervisión y la Gestión de la SST
Ferenc Faragó | Óbuda University -Hungría
Fernando Rene Flores Benítez | Instituto Superior Universitario 17 de Julio -Ecuador
Gyula Szabó | Óbuda University -Hungría
https://doi.org/10.29166/ ingenio.v8i2.8253 pISSN 2588-0829
2025 Universidad Central del Ecuador eISSN 2697-3243
CC BY-NC 4.0 —Licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional ng.revista.ingenio@uce.edu.ec
, (), - , . -
Mejorar el desempeño en Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional (SSO) en el entorno actual, caracterizado por
rápidos cambios tecnológicos y económicos, representa un gran desafío para las organizaciones. Aunque
existen numerosos estudios sobre prácticas e intervenciones en SSO, hay poca investigación sobre la
información que utilizan los directivos para tomar decisiones ecaces en este ámbito. Este estudio busca
abordar esa brecha identicando las principales fuentes de información utilizadas para tomar decisiones
en SSO y los factores clave que las inuyen. Un panel de 16 personas, compuesto por profesionales y
directivos en SSO, fue consultado en tres rondas mediante el método Delphi para conocer sus opiniones.
En la primera ronda, proporcionaron comentarios cualitativos sobre las fuentes de información y los
factores que inuyen en la toma de decisiones. Estos comentarios fueron analizados y utilizados para
elaborar preguntas para las siguientes rondas. Se utilizó un umbral de consenso del 70 % para determinar
acuerdos. El panel coincidió en cuatro fuentes clave de información para la toma de decisiones en SSO:
cumplimiento normativo, retroalimentación de los empleados, evaluaciones de riesgos y resultados del
análisis de accidentes. El estudio también identicó factores que inuyen en cómo se interpreta esta in-
formación, como la cultura organizacional, el compromiso del liderazgo y la disponibilidad de recursos.
La toma de decisiones ecaz en SSO también depende de factores contextuales y organizacionales más
amplios, y no solo de la disponibilidad de información.
Improving OSH performance in today’s rapidly changing technological and economic environment is
a major challenge for organizations. While there are many studies on OSH practices and interventions,
there is little research on the information used by managers to make eective decisions in this area. is
study aims to address this by identifying the main sources of information used to make such decisions
and the key factors inuencing them. A 16-person panel of OSH professionals and managers were as-
ked in three rounds of the Delphi method for their views. In the rst round, they provided qualitative
feedback on information sources and factors that inuence decisions. ese were analysed and used to
create questions for the next rounds. A 70% agreement threshold was used to determine consensus. e
panel agreed on four key sources of information for OSH decisions: compliance, employee feedback,
risk assessments, and accident analysis results. e study identied inuential factors aecting how this
information is interpreted, including organisational culture, leadership commitment and resource avai-
lability. Eective OSH decision-making also depends on broader contextual and organisational factors,
not just information availability.
Recibido: 1/4/2025
Recibido tras revisión: 24/5/2025
Aceptado: 11/6/2025
Publicado: 10/7/2025
Safety, Management, OSH manage-
ment, Safety performance manage-
ment, OSH performance monitoring,
Decision-making
Seguridad, gestión, salud ocupacional
SSO, gestión en desempeño en seguri-
dad, monitoreo, toma de decisiones
1. Introduction
Evaluation of risks is a fundamental component of gua-
ranteeing safe and healthy working conditions in addi-
tion to being required by law [1]–[3]. For OSH mana-
gers and professionals, enhancing occupational safety
and health (OSH) in a quickly changing scientic and
nancial context continues to be a constant struggle.
e number of work-related accidents in the European
Union (EU) has decreased somewhat over the last ten
years, but it is still alarmingly high. e substantial im-
pact on workers, businesses, and society at large is hi-
ghlighted by the over three million non-fatal and 3347
108
Improving Workplace Safety: A Delphi Study On OSH Monitoring And Management
fatal work accidents that happened in EU nations in 2021
alone, according to Eurostat [4], [5].
Employers, particularly those in big companies, have
a complicated and essential obligation to prevent wor-
kplace accidents and job-related disorders [6], [7]. Com-
panies need to satisfy consumer demands with their goals
to conduct sustainable operations, with these goals ser-
ving as a guide for operational decisions [8]–[10].
Employees, who want safe working conditions, are
among the important consumers. ese expectations are
met, and operational performance is improved by exce-
llent OSH management. In addition to improving produc-
tivity and lowering accident-related expenses, it also raises
employee engagement. OSH is positioned as a competi-
tive advantage and a crucial success factor due to its high
safety culture and positive work environment, which also
help to attract and retain talent [11]–[16].
It is imperative to regularly evaluate safety-related ope-
rations in a changing organizational structure. To evaluate
hazards and comprehend the safety posture of the com-
pany, professionals need to handle complex data. Rapid,
well-informed decision-making is necessary at all organi-
zational levels due to the growing complexity of technology
settings and changing production needs [17]–[19].
An essential ability for management is problem-sol-
ving, which starts with recognizing an undesirable cir-
cumstance and concludes with coming up with an
innovative solution. Enough high-quality information is
necessary to make eective decisions. Choosing the best
course of action comes aer recognizing and compre-
hending the situation, according to psychological theory.
erefore, decisions are the result of transforming infor-
mation into actions or even more information [20]–[27].
e type and quality of information used depend hea-
vily on the nature of the problem and the decision-maker’s
experience. Chikan describes two stages in corporate de-
cision-making: preparing and making decisions [21].
ese are oen separated across organizational levels,
resulting in interpretational dierences and information
gaps. e function and managerial level aect how infor-
mation is perceived and utilized, especially in OSH, whe-
re risk minimization is paramount.
Continuous access to pertinent information is crucial
for assessing risks and recognizing hazards in rapid pro-
duction situations. Proactive and based on data corporate
safety management is essential. Organizational decisions
pertaining to safety are greatly impacted by the availa-
bility of timely, pertinent, and well-structured informa-
tion. e organizational level at which the information
is obtained and internal business elements like culture,
structure, and communication ow that inuence how in-
formation is interpreted and used both aect how eecti-
ve these choices are.
Managing occupational safety and health (OSH) re-
mains a constant challenge for companies operating in
increasingly technologically advanced and economically
unstable situations. However, while there are several fra-
meworks and regulatory procedures in place to support
OSH compliance, the quality and accessibility of relevant
organisational data play a signicant role in the eec-
tiveness of managerial decision-making in this area. In
contrast, little is known about the specic types of infor-
mation that managers use, how this information is proces-
sed at dierent organisational levels, and which internal
factors facilitate or hinder managers from making sound
OSH decisions. is gap poses a signicant diculty in
advancing proactive and evidence-based safety practi-
ces. e present study seeks to identify and analyse the
key information sources and organisational factors that
inuence OSH decision-making. e aim is to support
more eective and informed management strategies that
will improve safety performance [17], [19].
2. Methodology
Expert opinions on monitoring and handling occupa-
tional safety and health (OSH) performance were ga-
thered for this study using a modied electronic Delphi
approach that was administered during three survey
rounds (see Figure 1).
rough anonymous and iterative communication, the
Delphi technique is a systematic expert consultation pro-
cedure intended to promote consensus on complicated
subjects [28], [29]. In contrast to conventional group
discussions, the Delphi method guarantees anonymity,
reducing the impact of dominating personalities and
enabling participants to formulate their answers on their
own. It usually consists of several rounds, in which par-
Figure 1.
Research methodology
109
Faragó F. et al.
ticipants answer questions and get controlled feedback
along with a rundown of the outcomes from the previous
round before moving on to the next. Because experts can
revise their answers considering group comments while
retaining their unique viewpoints, this format promotes
reective thinking [30]–[33].
Expert opinions on the data and corporate variables
that inuence occupational safety and health (OSH) de-
cisions are systematically gathered and rened using the
three-round Delphi technique. is format was chosen
in accordance with generally recognised scientic guide-
lines, which suggest that three rounds are typically su-
cient to minimise participant fatigue and attrition, while
also achieving a rm consensus among experts. In the
rst round, open-ended questions were used to gather
qualitative data and pinpoint important ideas and varia-
bles. In the second round, these preliminary results were
organised into more specic topics, enabling specialists
to assess group input more eectively. e third round
was then used to reach a consensus, clarify any remaining
dierences and conrm areas of agreement. A predeter-
mined consensus threshold of 70% agreement among par-
ticipants was set [34].
e initial phase of the Delphi study, which is shown
in Figure 2, was to investigate the fundamental factors that
aect occupational safety and health (OSH) management
decision-making. In addition to evaluating organizational
and individual factors that could have a positive or nega-
tive impact on these decisions, participants were asked to
identify the kinds of information commonly used in cor
-
porate OSH decisions.
is round also aimed to gather actual instances of
successful OSH practices and comprehend the perceived
diculty of OSH-related procedures within businesses. e
notion of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) was also in
-
troduced, and expert opinions regarding their inuence on
managerial choices were gathered. e study focused its at-
tention to the methods and procedures for tracking OSH
performance and sharing ndings in the second round.
To get their opinions on the kind of information middle
and senior managers require to properly assess OSH, ex-
perts were asked to participate. e round looked at how
best to share updates with leadership, how oen to do so,
and whether contemporary technology like articial inte-
lligence could improve present procedures. With special
focus on the ow and display of information to assist stra-
tegic decision-making, this phase expanded the investiga-
tion into the operational aspects of OSH management. e
nal round focused on choosing and assessing Key Perfor-
mance Indicators to improve knowledge of OSH perfor-
mance measurement. In addition to determining if these
indicators are in line with the organization’s more general
Figure 2.
Research questions
110
Improving Workplace Safety: A Delphi Study On OSH Monitoring And Management
strategic objectives, experts were asked to provide crite-
ria for selecting suitable KPIs. e availability of pertinent
data needed for KPI use and the internal procedures used
by businesses to evaluate these indicators were also exami-
ned in this round.
Between March and November 2023, two expert
teams conducted the study. e four members of the pre-
paratory team were an experienced audit specialist, two
doctoral research students from the Doctoral School of
Security Sciences at the University of Óbuda, and a se-
nior associate professor. e design and coordination of
the study fell within the purview of this group. e spe-
cialists on the second team were chosen based on their
responses to the study questions. ese specialists were
either seasoned researchers, senior managers in big bu-
sinesses, or those with signicant OSH competencies.
Participants had to have proven prociency in OSH ma-
nagement, senior-level experience in major organizations,
or noteworthy academic research credentials in the eld
in order to meet the inclusion criteria. A sample size of at
least 15 was required to guarantee trustworthy consensus.
e Delphi survey was accepted by 32 experts out of the
124 who were rst invited in March 2023, and 16 com-
pleted all three rounds.
Questionnaires were developed based on a prelimi-
nary review of literature concerning occupational safety
and health (OSH) and how company decisions are made.
In the rst round, open-ended questions were used to eli-
cit qualitative insights and identify key categories of in-
formation and inuencing factors. ese responses were
analysed using inductive content analysis and thematic
coding. is process was supported using word cloud vi-
sualization to validate the prominence of recurring terms
and themes. ese initial ndings informed the design of
the second and third rounds, which employed structured
questions and scale evaluations to assess levels of agree-
ment. To ensure content validity, each version of the ques-
tionnaire was reviewed and rened by the research team,
who were professionals with extensive experience in OSH
and Delphi methodology.
Strict protocols were put in place to ensure that the
study’s participants remained anonymous. During the
analysis and feedback phases, all replies were anonymi-
sed, and each expert was assigned a unique identica-
tion number. e identities of other participants weren’t
shown to the experts. To minimise the possibility of do-
minance bias or a hierarchical eect, communication took
place online using Excel spreadsheets for the second and
third rounds, and Survio for the rst.
3. Results
e research identies key types of information that in-
uence managerial decisions in OSH. Experts reached
consensus on four main sources: legal and standard com-
pliance, employee feedback, risk assessment results, and
accident data. Additional factors considered included
cost-eectiveness, technical feasibility, audit ndings,
and employee satisfaction. Other responses touched on
benchmarking, business impact, risk timelines, process
integration, and sustainability.
In the rst round, qualitative responses were catego-
rized into 16 distinct informational themes. Quantitative
aggregation of expert responses revealed consensus—de-
ned as agreement by at least 70% of participants—for four
key items: (1) compliance with legal and standard require-
ments (100% agreement), (2) employee feedback and su-
ggestions (81%), (3) results from risk assessments (78%),
and (4) accident statistics and analysis (70%). Additional
factors such as cost-eectiveness (58%) and technical feasi-
bility (52%) did not meet the consensus threshold but were
retained for further evaluation in subsequent rounds. A to-
tal of 16 distinct statements summarising these observa-
tions were compiled and presented in Table 1.
Information to inform decisions on OHS Agreement
(%)
compliance with legislation, standards 100
employee ideas, opinions, feedback, lobbies 81
risk assessments 78
accident statistics (events, near-misses) and
analysis, root cause analysis 70
cost, cost-eectiveness and available resour-
ces 58
technical feasibility 52
results of management reviews, internal au-
dits 39
employee skills, satisfaction 39
safety rst philosophy, parent company expe-
ctations 19,5
reduce risks, new risks emerge 19,5
priority order of occupational safety and
health 13
benchmark results 6,5
the achievement of occupational safety and
health objectives and programmes 6,5
order, working environment 6,5
own professional judgement 6,5
training, education 6,5
A total of 36 elements were found aer the positive and
negative aspects were ltered out (e.g., lack of commit-
ment, lack of good communication). A ve-point Likert
scale was used to gauge the experts’ responses to ques-
tions about how complex business procedures impact
OSH (Table 2). All the experts agreed that business pro-
Table 1.
Information underpinning OSH decisions, own-editing.
111
Faragó F. et al.
cedures that impact OSH are intricate and dicult to
understand.
Complexity of business procedure that impant
OHS
No of
repson-
ses
ey are simple, easy to understand and easy to
track 2
ey are not very simple, but easy to understand
and track 1
ey are not simple; they are not easy to unders-
tand 1
Complex processes that are not easy to unders-
tand 11
Highly complex processes, not easy to understand
and monitor 1
e signicance of tracking and assessing OSH-related
procedures was acknowledged by experts, who pointed
out that it facilitates managerial decision-making, en-
hances information ow within the company, allows for
comparisons, and aids in identifying key areas of atten-
tion. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were thought
to be very useful for OSH management. Although one
expert believed KPIs had little bearing on decision-ma-
king, two others thought they were crucial.
KPIs were found to serve ve main purposes: (a)
identifying problems and priority areas; (b) supporting
decision-making; (c) managing processes and giving fee-
dback; (d) improving communication; and (e) enabling
comparison and long-term tracking. Regarding the uti-
lization of KPIs, a total of 28 criteria were identied. Ex-
perts also underlined that for KPIs to be useful; they must
be employed in certain circumstances. Among the wo-
rries were that KPIs might not provide enough context on
their own and that their appropriate application necessi-
tates professional knowledge, training, interpretation, and
open, two-way communication across the organization.
In the second round, structured statements based on
round one ndings were presented to experts using clo-
sed-ended formats. e expert panel agreed on 20 of the
118 specic statements, with a consensus of more than
70%. Panellists were asked to reevaluate their answers for
things that did not receive consensus in the rst round,
with the goal of promoting a range of opinions rather than
coercing them into agreement. Requests for clarication
followed diering viewpoints. Despite having been ca-
rried out, rounds two and three’s specic results are not
presented in this page. Lastly, for conrmation, the ex-
perts were given access to the combined results from all
three rounds. Two of the sixteen participants did not re-
ply, but fourteen of them acknowledged agreement with
the results.
e third round further rened items that lacked clear
consensus. Of the 92 items presented, 14 achieved the
70% consensus level. Notably, strong agreement was rea-
ched regarding the sources for dening OSH key perfor-
mance indicators (e.g., OHSAS management systems and
corporate expectations), and on the necessity of linking
KPIs to organizational goals. However, participants ex-
pressed limited condence in their own readiness to apply
these indicators eectively, with only 37.5% arming ade-
quate knowledge. e main KPIs are presented in Table 3.
KPI Source or
Criterion
Description Consensus Le-
vel
OHSAS Mana-
gement Systems
KPIs should be ba-
sed on standards
from Occupational
Health and Safety As-
sessment Series (OH-
SAS).
Achieved
(>70%)
Parent Company
Expectations
KPIs should reect
the expectations and
strategic directions of
the parent company.
Achieved
(>70%)
Linkage to Or-
ganizational Ob-
jectives
KPIs should be alig-
ned with com-
pany-level strategic
goals.
Achieved
(>70%)
Expert Know-
ledge and Expe-
rience
KPIs should be se-
lected by professio-
nals with expertise
in OSH and process
control.
Not Consensual
Usability Across
Organizational
Levels
KPIs must be un-
derstandable and
applicable at all ma-
nagement levels.
Partial Support
Information
Flow and Com-
munication
KPIs should facilita-
te two-way commu-
nication and support
decision-making
transparency.
Partial Support
Complementa-
rity with Other
Business KPIs
OSH KPIs are not ty-
pically integrated
with nancial or pro-
duction indicators.
Achieved
(100%)
Supportive Tools
and Training
Required for In-
terpretation
Proper interpretation
of KPIs requires tra-
ining and documen-
tation.
Partial Support
Table 2.
Table 3.
Assessment of the complexity of company processes aecting OSH
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for OSH Identied rough
Expert Consensus.
112
Improving Workplace Safety: A Delphi Study On OSH Monitoring And Management
OSH management decisions are inuenced by a num-
ber of rm aspects. A supportive business culture, ma-
nagers’ communication abilities, and eective two-way
communication within the organization are the primary
elements that favourably inuence managers’ dedication
to OSH. e primary impediments include lack of re-
sources, lack of expertise and knowledge management,
lack of enthusiasm, and unprofessional decision-ma-
king. Both the company’s and employees’ personal opi-
nions are impacted by wise OSH actions (Figure 3).
Figure 3.
3.1. Discussion
e study highlights the multifaceted and complex na-
ture of information sources that underpin OSH deci-
sion-making processes. One of the main results is that
OSH managers base their judgments mostly on adhe-
rence to national and EU legislative frameworks. Despite
providing a strong foundation for safety requirements,
many companies nd the legislation to be too compli-
cated, indicating the need for improved support systems
and more precise interpretation guidelines. Although it
also highlights disparities in understanding and imple-
mentation across dierent rms, this is consistent with
other research showing that legal compliance successfu-
lly enhances workplace safety [11], [19], [35], [36].
e signicance of involving stakeholders in OSH de-
cisions is another important subject. It is seen to be es-
sential to get input from employees, occupational health
specialists, and management, particularly in sophisticated
technological workplaces where frontline sta frequent-
ly have the most practical experience. Frequent feedback
systems allow for the early detection of risks and promote
a preventive culture. However, OSH professionals may be-
come overwhelmed and lose concentration if they receive
too much unltered feedback, so this process needs to be
handled carefully. e creation of organized and eecti-
ve feedback mechanisms is therefore necessary to guaran-
tee that pertinent information inuences choices without
becoming irrelevant.
All members of the expert panel agreed that risk as-
sessments are the cornerstone of OSH strategy. e insti-
tutional signicance of both qualitative and quantitative
risk assessments is further supported by legislative re-
quirements. A number of obstacles were identied, too,
such as the inability to eectively handle intricate eva-
luations and convert results into administrative decisions
that could be put into practice. Particularly in situations
involving new or developing technology, experts under-
lined the necessity of trustworthy, transparent, and con-
trollable risk assessment procedures.
e results of the research emphasize the importance
of diversied, organized, and context-aware information
ows in making OSH judgments of the highest caliber.
Stakeholder participation, empirical accident data, legis-
lative requirements, and thorough risk assessments in-
teract to form the basis of good safety governance. e
availability of resources, organizational communica-
tion, and managerial commitment are necessary to su-
pport these, nevertheless [2], [12], [37]–[39]. According
to the research, the eciency and sustainability of OSH
procedures can be greatly increased by combining these
components in a comprehensive way while taking con-
founding variables into account.
e ndings of the Delphi study indicate the need
to support a change in OSH management, shiing the
focus from reactivity to proactivity and embracing da-
ta-driven decision-making, strategy alignment and cul-
tural commitment. Implementing these insights could
enhance employee satisfaction, operational eectiveness
and safety performance, ultimately leading to long-term
commercial success. e study shows that, in practical
terms, good OSH governance necessitates an organiza-
tional culture that encourages candid communication,
prompt feedback, and proactive risk management in ad-
dition to regulatory compliance. e general agreement
that managerial commitment and eective internal com-
munication are essential for facilitating safety decisions
highlights the need of leadership development and inter-
nal communication procedures that are adapted to the in-
formation ows associated with safety [40].
Information and company factors inuencing OSH decisions
113
Faragó F. et al.
4. Conclusions
Expanding the body of knowledge on the data suppor-
ting OSH choices and the business variables inuencing
them was the aim of this study. In order to make ma-
nagement decisions that result in better workplace heal-
th and safety, the experts agreed that information from
many sources and at various organizational levels is re-
quired. Decision-making about OSH is also inuenced
by a few additional factors. Confounding variables that
complicate the interpretation of data from many sources
and the corporate elements that have the biggest impact
on management choices have been brought to light by
the study. e expert view that emerged from the pro-
cess made clear that corporate eorts to enhance OSH
performance enhance employee engagement and the
company’s reputation, both of which support long-term
corporate success.
To make informed decisions, OSH practitioners will
benet from the study’s ndings. Guidelines for OSH
practitioners, managers, and business decision-makers
can be developed using them to enhance their OSH ma-
nagement decision-making procedures.
One of the study’s main limitations is the expert pa-
nel’s diversity and representativeness. Despite the partici-
pants’ extensive backgrounds in occupational safety and
health (OSH), the nal group only included 16 experts,
most of whom were connected to major Hungarian ins-
titutions and companies. e ndings’ applicability to di-
erent organizational sizes, cultural contexts, or industrial
sectors is limited by the sample’s modest size and geo-
graphic concentration. More varied viewpoints should be
incorporated into future studies to improve the results’ ex-
ternal validity and wider applicability.
References
[1] M. Peron, S. Arena, N. Paltrinieri, F. Sgarbossa, y G.
Boustras, “Risk assessment for handling hazardous subs-
tances within the European industry: Available metho-
dologies and research streams,” Risk Anal., vol. 43, no.
7, pp. 1434–1462, 2023, doi: 10.1111/risa.14010.
[2] G. Szabó, “e Characteristics of Industrial Safety Risk
Management,” Advances in Intelligent Systems and Com-
puting, vol. 1204, pp. 47–52, 2020, doi: 10.1007/978-3-
030-50946-0_7.
[3] B. Jahanvand, S. Bagher Mortazavi, H. Asilian Mahaba
-
di, y O. Ahmadi, “Determining essential criteria for se-
lection of risk assessment techniques in occupational
health and safety: A hybrid framework of fuzzy Delphi
method,” Saf. Sci., vol. 167, no. April, p. 106253, 2023,
doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106253.
[4] Eurostat, “Accidents at work by sex and age, excluding
road trac accidents and accidents on board of any
mean of transport in the course of work (NACE Rev.
2 activity A, C-N excluding H)” 2023. https://ec.euro-
pa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/hsw_mi03/default/ta-
ble?lang=en.
[5] Eurostat, “Number of non-fatal and fatal accidents
at work, 2021” 2024. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/
statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:Number_
of_non-fatal_and_fatal_accidents_at_work,_2021_(per-
sons)_AAW2023.png.
[6] S. van den Heuvel et al., Estimating the costs of work-re
-
lated accidents and ill-health: An analysis of European
data sources - European Risk Observatory. 2017.
[7] European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, “e
value of occupational safety and health and the socie-
tal costs of work-related injuries and diseases,” pp. 1–10,
2017, doi: 10.2802/986314.
[8] D. Dumitriu, G. Militaru, D. C. Deselnicu, A. Nicules-
cu, y M. A. M. Popescu, “A perspective over modern
SMEs: Managing brand equity, growth and sustainabili-
ty through digital marketing tools and techniques,” Sus-
tain., vol. 11, no. 7, 2019, doi: 10.3390/su10022111.
[9] A. D. Neely, C. Adams, y M. Kennerley, e Performan-
ce Prism e Scorecard for Measuring and Managing Bu-
siness Success, 1era ed. Financial Times Management,
2002.
[10] T. Imre, Stratégiai menedzsment a gyakorlatban, 1era ed.
Budapest: SpringMed Kiadó K., 2020.
[11] V. C. Erazo-chamorro, R. P. Arciniega-rocha, y G. Szabo,
“Safety workplace: From of point of view of ergonomics
and occupational biomechanics” vol. 65, pp. 669–676,
2022.
[12] V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, N. Ru-
dolf, B. Tibor, and S. Gyula, “Safety Workplace: e Pre-
vention of Industrial Security Risk Factors,” Appl. Sci.,
vol. 12, no. 21, 2022, doi: 10.3390/app122110726.
[14] M. O’Toole, “e relationship between employees’ per-
ceptions of safety and organizational culture.,” J. Safe-
ty Res., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 231–243, 2002, doi: 10.1016/
S0022-4375(02)00014-2.
[15] C. Haslam, J. O’Hara, A. Kazi, R. Twumasi, and R. Has-
lam, “Proactive occupational safety and health mana-
gement: Promoting good health and good business,”
Saf. Sci., vol. 81, pp. 99–108, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.
ssci.2015.06.010.
[16] Z. C. Tan, C. E. Tan, y Y. O. Choong, “Occupational
Safety & Health Management and Corporate Sustaina-
bility: e Mediating Role of Aective Commitment,”
Saf. Health Work, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 415–424, 2023, doi:
10.1016/j.shaw.2023.10.006.
[17] R. K. Mitchell, B. R. Agle, y D. J. Wood, “Toward a
Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience:
[13] T. Dyllick y K. Hockerts, “Beyond the business case for
corporate sustainability,” Bus. Strateg. Environ., vol. 11,
no. 2, pp. 130–141, 2002, [Online]. Available: https://on-
linelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bse.323.
114
Improving Workplace Safety: A Delphi Study On OSH Monitoring And Management
Dening the Principle of Who and What Really Counts,”
Acad. Manag. Rev., vol. 22, no. 4, p. 853, 1997, doi:
10.2307/259247.
[18] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, P. D. Ro-
sero-Montalvo, y G. Szabó, “Smart Wearable to Prevent
Injuries in Amateur Athletes in Squats Exercise by Using
Lightweight Machine Learning Model,” Inf., vol. 14, no.
7, pp. 1–12, 2023, doi: 10.3390/info14070402.
[19] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, y G. Sza-
bo, “e Prevention of Industrial Manual Tool Accidents
Considering Occupational Health and Safety,” Safety,
vol. 9, no. 3, 2023, doi: 10.3390/safety9030051.
[20] F. Dr. Lénárd, A problémamegoldó gondolkodás, 6ta ed.
Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1987.
[21] A. Chikán, Vállalatgazdaságtan, II ed. Budapest: AULA
Kiadó, 1999.
[22] D. K. Chikán, Az értékteremtő folyamatok menedzsmen-
tje. AULA Kiadó, 1999.
[23] F. Faragó, “Teljesítménymutatók, mint menedzsment
döntéselőkészítő eszközök alkalmazása a nagyvállala-
ti munkavédelemben,” Mérnöki Szimpózium a Bánkin
Előadásai, pp. 124–134, 2022.
[24] T. H. Davenport y L. Prusak, Tudásmenedzsment. Buda-
pest: Bőgel György, 2001.
[25] S. Hans, From Dream to Discovery: On Being a Scientist.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.
[26] F. Jay W., Industrial Dynamics, 1era ed. Massachusetts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1961.
[27] V. Dr. Nemény, A döntéshozatal alapelemei. Budapest:
Tankönyvkiadó, 1985.
[28] K. Korzon, “A Delphi módszer felhasználása a tájékoz-
tatási tevékenység fejlesztésének prognosztizálásában,”
1976.
[29] S. Keeney, F. Hasson, y H. McKenna, “Consulting the
oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in
nursing research” J. Adv. Nurs., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 205–
212, Jan. 2006, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03716.x.
[30] N. D. Uhl, “Delphi Technique,” in e International ency-
clopedia of curriculum, A. Lewy, Ed. Oxford-New York:
Pergamon Press, 1991, p. 453.
[31] H. A. Linstone y M. Turo, Delphi Method: Techniques
and Applications, 2da ed. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Advanced Book Program, 1975.
[32] M. Häder y S. Häder, “Delphi und
Kognitionspsychologie: Ein Zugang zur theoretischer
Fundierung der Delphi-Methode,” ZUMA Nachrich-
ten, vol. 37, no. 19, pp. 8–34, 1995, [Online]. Available:
http://www.gesis.org/leadmin/upload/forschung/pu-
blikationen/zeitschrien/zuma_nachrichten/zn_37.pdf.
[33] R. Boulkedid, H. Abdoul, M. Loustau, O. Sibony, y C. Al-
berti, “Using and reporting the Delphi method for selec-
ting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review.,”
PLoS One, vol. 6, no. 6, p. e20476, 2011, doi: 10.1371/
journal.pone.0020476.
[34] H. A. von der Gracht, “Consensus measurement in Del-
phi studies: Review and implications for future quality
assurance,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
vol. 79, no. 8, pp. 1525–1536, Oct. 2012, doi: 10.1016/J.
TECHFORE.2012.04.013.
[35] “Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs) -
Risk Factors : OSH Answers.” https://www.ccohs.ca/os-
hanswers/ergonomics/risk.html.
[36] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, P. D. Ro-
sero-Montalvo, y G. Szabó, “Healthy and safe workplace
denition: A friendly boundary for a complex issue.,” in
Mérnöki Szimpózium a Bánkin Előadásai: Proceedings of
the Engineering Symposium at Bánki (ESB2021). Vol. 1.,
pp. 51-56, 2021.
[37] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, A. Tick, V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, y
G. Szabó, “Risk Perception and Mitigation in Hand Tool
Use: A Comparative Study of Industrial Safety Perspec-
tives from Ecuador and Hungary,” Safety, vol. 11, no. 1,
2025, doi: 10.3390/safety11010014.
[38] S. M. Kyaw-Myint, L. Strazdins, M. Clements, P. But-
terworth, y L. Gallagher, “A method of identifying heal-
th-based benchmarks for psychosocial risks at work: A
tool for risk assessment,” Saf. Sci., vol. 93, pp. 143–151,
2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.11.016.
[39] F. Faragó y G. Szabó, “Qualitative Assessment of the Oc-
cupational Health and Safety Knowledge Management
Practices of Hungarian Companies,” in Proceedings of
the 9th International Ergonomics Conference. ERGO-
NOMICS 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems,
vol 701., I. Salopek Čubrić, G. Čubrić, K. Jambrošić, T.
Jurčević Lulić, and D. Sumpor, Eds. Springer, 2023, pp.
105–112.
[40] C. Markmann, A. Spickermann, H. A. von der Gra-
cht, y A. Brem, “Improving the question formulation in
Delphi-like surveys: Analysis of the eects of abstract
language and amount of information on response beha-
vior,” Futures and Foresight Science, vol. 3, no. 1, p. e56,
Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1002/FFO2.56;PAGE:STRING:AR-
TICLE/CHAPTER.
