An intervention study was conducted at a large Finnish shipyard to investigate the usefulness of small-group activities in improving environmental safety in shipbuilding industry.

The pilot intervention was started at the end of the year 2000, and lasted till 2003. The main goal of the intervention was to improve both safe and healthy working methods, focusing on hazardous or risk taking behaviour. The focus group was particularly metal workers, but other professions (such as installers and warehouse workers) participated as well. The intervention was conducted in co-operation with shipyard safety personnel, vocational adult educators, and the university of Turku. The university didn't participate on the actual implementation of the intervention, but was committed in a follow-up research. Research methods (relevant to this paper) were mainly questionnaires (totaling 233 respondents) and theme-interviews (N=29). Jens Rasmussen's risk management model gave broad theoretical framework into research. The model focuses in deterioration of Defence-in-Depth -safety systems via social and technical factors. As an important part of the intervention, the adult educators trained blue-collar workers from each production department of the shipyard. Participation for the training program was voluntary, mostly because of motivational reasons. Each trained workers were supposed to act in the role of so-called workplace-tutors, i.e. trusted persons of the working team, guides for novice workers, developer of new working skills and environmental safety, and - more generally - improvers of safety culture within the team. However, there were no financial incentives and the tutors were supposed to carry out their roles as members of the team, not as higher hierarchy level actors. The training period was conducted in co-operation with safety personnel of the shipyard and adult educators.

The essential learning material consisted mainly of social and historical aspects in environmental safety, statistical reviews of workplace accidents on metal industry and theoretical views of prevention of accidents and industrial diseases. Furthermore, there was some pedagogical training associating with tutors' role as guides for novice workers. In practise, the tutors participated into several specific projects in the context of safety intervention. These projects included technical improvements of working posts, evaluating and correcting the lack of important tools. They also took active role in safety meetings, thus generating discussion at all hierarchy levels of the team about safety hazards and accident prevention strategies. Due to uniqueness and novelty of the tutor's role, many problems are still unsolved at the end of pilot period of the intervention. From the tutors' perspective, crucial questions are associated with both authority and methods of change: For example, do they have authority and motivation to intervene their workmates' working habits, hazardous or not? Traditionally this kind of authority has been unique to foremen and upper management. Furthermore: What kinds of methods, within the complex socio-technical environment of the shipyard, do they actually have to improve safety at work? The latter question refers to general theme of blue-collar workers' degrees of freedom at their work.