Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore a drilling crew’s acceptance of and safety concerns about implementation of a new automated drilling technology at a Norwegian offshore oil- and gas-producing installation. In this study, 23 interviews were conducted with personnel on a single offshore oil and gas installation who were all involved with the implementation process or the application of the technology itself. Observations of the drilling crew’s operation on the installation were also made. For data analyses, grounded theory was used. The conclusions were that the change process was successful in the sense that the operators accepted the new technology. However, it could be questioned whether the operators had too much trust in the safety aspects of the change process. High trust was found to cause a low-risk perception and a non-questioning attitude, which is not in accordance with the theory of a high reliability organization which the petroleum industry is expected to practice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Armenakis A, Harris SG (2009) Reflections: our journey in organizational change research and practice. J Change Manag 9(2):127–142
Brannan MJ, Oultram T (2012) Participant observation. In: Symon G, Cassell C (eds) Qualitative organizational research. Core methods and current challenges. Sage, Los Angeles, pp 296–313
Conchie SM, Burns C (2008) Trust and risk communication in high risk organizations: a test of principles from social risk research. Risk Anal 28(1):141–149
Conchie SM, Taylor PJ, Charlton A (2011) Trust and distrust in safety leadership: mirror reflections? Saf Sci 49:1208–1214
Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Los Angeles
Cox S, Jones B, Collinson D (2006) Trust in high-reliability organizations. Risk Anal 26(5):1123–1138
Darley JM, Fazio RH (1980) Expectancy confirmation processes arising in the social interaction sequence. Am Psychol 35(10):867–881
Davis JH, Schoorman FD, Mayer RC, Tan HH (2000) The trusted general manager and business unit performance: empirical evidence of a competitive advantage. Strateg Manag J 21(5):563–576
Deci EL (1972) The effects of contingent and noncontingent rewards and controls on intrinsic motivation. Organ Behav Hum Perform 8:217–229
Dirks KT, Karlicki DP (2004) Trust in leaders: existing research and emerging issues. In: Kramer RM, Cook KS (eds) Trust and distrust in organizations. Dilemmas and approaches. Russel Sage Foundation, New York, pp 21–40
Fishbein M, Aizen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Furst SA, Cable DM (2008) Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader–member exchange. J Appl Psychol 93(2):453–462
Gilbert JA, Tang TL-P (1998) And examination of organisational trust antecedents. Public Pers Manag 27(3):321–338
Graham B et al (2011) Deep water. The gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore drilling report to the president. National Commission on the BP deepwater horizon oil spill and offshore drilling
Hardin R (2002) Trust and trustworthiness. Russel Sage, New York
Harvard Business School (2005) Managing change to reduce resistance. Harvard Business School Press, Harvard
Heider F (1946) Attitudes and cognitive organization. J Psychol 21:107–112
Hellesøy O (1985) Work environment Statfjord field. Universitetsforlaget AS, Bergen
Herscovitch L, Meyer J (2002) Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. J Appl Psychol 87(3):474–487
Janis IL (1982) Groupthink, 2nd edn. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston
Kotter JP (1996) Leading change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Kramer RM (1999) Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annu Rev Psychol 50:569–598
Kramer RM, Cook KS (2004) Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches. In: Kramer RM, Cook KS (eds) Trust and distrust in organizations. Dilemmas and approaches. Russel Sage Foundation, New York, pp 1–19
Kvale S (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Lewicki RJ, Bunker BB (1995) Trust in relationships: a model of development and decline. In: Bunker BB, Rubin JZ (eds) Conflict, cooperation and justice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 133–175
Lewis JD, Weigert A (1985) Trust as a social reality. Soc Forces 63(4):967–985
Lines R, Selart M, Espedal B, Johansen ST (2005) The production of trust during organizational change. J Change Manag 5(2):221–245
Mishra AK (1996) Organizational responses to crisis: the centrality of trust. In: Kramer RM, Tyler TR (eds) Trust in organizations. Frontiers of theory and research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 261–288
Perrow C (1984) Normal accidents living with high risk technologies. Basic Books, New York
Pidgeon N, O’Leary M (2000) Man-made disasters: why technology and organizations (sometimes) fail. Saf Sci 34:15–30
Proctor RW, Proctor JD (2006) Sensation and perception. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, New Jersey, pp 53–89
Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Reason J (1997) Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot
Rousseau DM, Sitkin SB, Burt RS, Camerer C (1998) Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):393–404
Scott CL (1980) Interpersonal trust: a comparison of attitudinal and situational factors. Hum Organ Stud 8:319–336
Searle R, Den Hartog DN, Weibel A, Gillespie N, Six F, Hatzakis T, Skinner D (2011) Trust in the employer: the role of high-involvement work practices and procedural justice in European organizations. Int J Hum Resour Manag 22(5):1069–1092
Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20(5):713–720
Siegrist M, Gutscher H, Earle T (2005) Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence. J Risk Res 8(2):145–156
Simons T (2002) Behavioral integrity: the perceived alignment between manager’s words and deeds as a research focus. Organ Sci 13(1):18–35
Simons DJ, Chabris CF (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28(9):1059–1074
Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, Newbury Park
Sutcliffe K (2011) High reliability organizations (HROs). Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 25(2):133–144
Tharaldsen JE, Mearns KJ, Knudsen K (2010) Perspectives on safety. The impact of group membership, work factors and trust on safety performance in UK and Norwegian drilling company employees. Saf Sci 48:1062–1072
Torbiörn I (2006) Elements of uncertainty and risk in intercultural contact. In: Svenson O, Salo I, Oedewald P, Reiman T, Skjerve AB (eds) Nordic perspectives on safety management in high reliability organizations. Stockholm University, Department of psychology, Stockholm, pp 183–193
Wanberg CR, Banas JT (2000) Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. J Appl Psychol 85(1):132–142
Weick K, Sutcliffe K (2007) Managing the unexpected. Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty, 2nd edn. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco
Yardley L (2000) Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychol Health 15:215–228
Acknowledgments
We are very grateful to the Norwegian Research Council’s Petromaks program (eLAD Grant Number 176018), Statoil ASA, and ConocoPhillips who funded this research. We would also like to thank our scientific collaborating partners Institute for Research in Stavanger (IRIS), Christian Michelsen Research (CMR), and Institute of Energy Technology (IFE). Additionally, we would like to thank those who participated in this case study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sætren, G.B., Laumann, K. Effects of trust in high-risk organizations during technological changes. Cogn Tech Work 17, 131–144 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-014-0313-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-014-0313-z