Driving organizational performance through OHS culture and management in manufacturing SMEs within construction supply chains

This study examines the relationships among Organizational Culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Management, and Organizational Performance in manufacturing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating within construction supply chains in Norte de Santander, Colombia. We collected survey data from 204 employees across 16 manufacturing SMEs and analyzed them using structural equation modeling (SEM). The model evaluated the direct relationships among the three constructs and the indirect effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance through OHS Management. The results indicate that Organizational Culture is positively associated with OHS Management and Organizational Performance, while OHS Management is positively associated with Organizational Performance. The bootstrapped indirect effect supports OHS Management's partial mediating role. These findings suggest that Organizational Culture is associated with performance through two complementary pathways: a direct pathway involving shared values, managerial commitment, communication, and organizational practices, and an indirect pathway involving the institutionalization of OHS management practices. The study contributes to the literature by positioning OHS Management as an organizational mechanism that helps explain how cultural conditions relate to performance outcomes. For manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains, the findings highlight the importance of integrating cultural development with risk prevention, safety training, regulatory compliance, and employee participation. The results should be interpreted considering the cross-sectional design, the use of self-reported data, and the nesting of employees within a limited number of firms.

Organizational culture plays a fundamental role in organizational success and sustainability by shaping employee behavior and internal dynamics and guiding decision-making and operational execution (Suárez, 2020). In small- and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises (SMEs), this construct is particularly relevant because it relates to productivity, efficiency, and employee wellbeing. This relationship is especially important in complex operational environments, such as construction supply chains, where coordination, process standardization, and human risk management are key factors in organizational performance (Mandal et al., 2024).

In this context, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management systems are a strategic component of organizational performance (Liu et al., 2023). In construction production environments, where occupational risks are high and operational demands are intensive, effective safety management not only enhances employee wellbeing but also helps reduce costs associated with accidents and operational failures. However, the effectiveness of OHS management depends not only on formal policies and procedures but also on the underlying organizational culture, which can either facilitate or hinder its successful implementation (Cardenas Bohorquez et al., 2019).

Recent literature reinforces the relevance of studying SMEs operating within construction-related supply chains. Chen et al. (2025) show that SMEs in construction projects face significant supply chain risks related to management, coordination, and sustainability, while Argaw and Liu (2025) demonstrate that SME performance in the construction industry depends on tailored success factors shaped by firm-specific conditions. In addition, Alqahtani et al. (2026) emphasize that multiple risk factors affect construction supply chain management and require systematic managerial responses. These findings are relevant to manufacturing SMEs supplying construction activities, as they operate under resource constraints, interorganizational dependence, delivery pressure, and operational uncertainty. Therefore, organizational culture and OHS management can be understood as strategic internal capabilities that may help reduce risks, strengthen coordination, and contribute to organizational performance.

Organizational culture shapes how employees perceive, adopt, and internalize safety policies (Asgedom, 2025). With a strong safety culture, workers are more likely to engage in preventive behaviors and comply with established safety standards. Conversely, a weak or misaligned culture may undermine OHS implementation, with potential consequences for workplace safety and organizational performance. This dynamic is particularly critical in construction supply chains, where interactions among multiple actors and processes require high levels of coordination and regulatory compliance (Abubakar et al., 2019; Hussain and Papastathopoulos, 2022; Mandal et al., 2024).

OHS management, understood as a structured system for managing workplace risks, seeks to ensure safe working conditions through risk identification, preventive measures, and continuous training. However, its effectiveness largely depends on employees’ attitudes and organizational commitment to safety, both of which are shaped by the underlying culture (Liu et al., 2023). In this regard, a strong organizational culture oriented toward safety and wellbeing is expected to facilitate the implementation and institutionalization of OHS management practices, which may subsequently contribute to organizational performance, particularly in environments characterized by high operational pressure and interdependent processes (Kliestik et al., 2020).

Despite increased attention to workplace safety and organizational culture, a gap persists in the literature regarding their integration, especially in manufacturing SMEs operating within the built environment. Most prior studies have examined these factors in isolation, overlooking the mediating role of OHS management in explaining how organizational culture relates to performance outcomes. This limitation restricts a comprehensive understanding of the organizational mechanisms through which cultural conditions and formal safety practices may contribute to competitiveness in complex production systems.

This study advances existing knowledge by proposing and empirically testing an integrated culture–OHS–performance model in manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains. While prior research has commonly examined organizational culture, occupational health and safety management, and organizational performance as separate or directly related constructs, this study conceptualizes OHS management as a mediating mechanism that helps explain how organizational culture is associated with performance outcomes. In this sense, the model extends traditional approaches to culture and performance by examining whether shared values, leadership commitment, communication, and change management are associated with organizational performance not only through informal behavioral alignment but also indirectly through the formal institutionalization of safety-oriented management practices. Therefore, the study contributes to the literature by integrating cultural theory, safety management theory, and organizational performance theory within a single explanatory framework. Accordingly, OHS management is examined as a mediating mechanism rather than as a moderator that changes the strength of the relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance.

In this context, the present study aims to analyze the relationships among organizational culture, OHS management, and organizational performance in manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains in Norte de Santander, Colombia. Specifically, the study examines organizational culture as an antecedent of OHS management and evaluates OHS management’s mediating role in the relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance. The study uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to estimate direct relationships among constructs and the indirect effect of organizational culture on performance through OHS management.

This analysis is especially relevant to manufacturing SMEs in Norte de Santander, many of which supply goods and services to the construction sector. In these contexts, often constrained by limited resources and high exposure to operational risk, understanding the relationships among organizational culture, safety management, and organizational performance can provide strategic insights to improve working conditions and strengthen competitiveness within construction supply chains.

Theoretical framework and background

This theoretical framework integrates the conceptual foundations and empirical evidence concerning organizational culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management systems, and organizational performance in manufacturing SMEs. Unlike prior studies that examined these elements separately, either focusing on OHS management as an isolated compliance mechanism or treating organizational culture as an independent variable without considering the mechanisms linking it to organizational outcomes, this study adopts an integrative perspective. Specifically, it examines the direct relationships among the three constructs and the indirect relationship between organizational culture and performance through OHS management.

Organizational culture is understood as the set of shared values, beliefs, norms, and behaviors that influence how members of an organization interact, perform their work, and pursue organizational objectives (Schein, 1990). Organizational leaders shape this culture and transmit it through rituals, norms, and practices (Blouin et al., 2019). In manufacturing SMEs, organizational culture plays a crucial role in shaping employee behavior, their willingness to comply with occupational safety policies, and the organizational conditions associated with performance.

In this context, safety culture is a key dimension of organizational culture, particularly in high-risk sectors such as manufacturing (Zohar, 2000). A strong safety culture promotes safe behaviors, supports continuous training, and helps ensure that employees understand and adhere to safety regulations (Moran-Fuentes et al., 2022). Such a culture is also associated with lower workplace accident rates, which may subsequently contribute to productivity and operational efficiency.

Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management systems serve as both regulatory and strategic frameworks for managing workplace risks and promoting employee wellbeing (Cardenas Bohorquez et al., 2019; Feuerhahn et al., 2013; Kliestik et al., 2020). These systems typically include risk identification, preventive measures, safety training, and continuous monitoring of working conditions (Céspedes Tamayo, 2020; Céspedes Socarrás and Martínez Cumbrera, 2016). The objective of OHS management extends beyond legal compliance to fostering a safe and healthy work environment, thereby contributing to the organizational conditions associated with improved performance.

Several studies have demonstrated that well-implemented OHS systems can reduce operational costs associated with occupational accidents and diseases, thereby contributing to organizational profitability and sustainability (Barradas Martínez et al., 2021). Furthermore, safe and healthy work environments can enhance employee motivation and commitment, support performance, and foster a sense of organizational belonging.

Organizational culture and OHS management should not be understood as disconnected organizational elements. In the proposed theoretical model, organizational culture is treated as an antecedent that can facilitate or hinder the implementation of OHS management practices (Moran-Fuentes et al., 2022; Obando-Montenegro et al., 2019). A safety-oriented culture supports the adoption and institutionalization of OHS practices, whereas a weak or misaligned culture may hinder employee acceptance of and adherence to safety policies. Therefore, the theoretical direction proposed in this study runs from organizational culture to OHS management.

From another perspective, organizational performance refers to an organization’s ability to achieve its strategic goals and objectives and is a key indicator of its success and sustainability (Blouin et al., 2019; Kaluarachchi, 2010). In manufacturing SMEs, performance is commonly measured through productivity, efficiency, product quality, and employee satisfaction (Lee et al., 2022; Muhammed and Zaim, 2020). Organizational culture and OHS management may be associated with these outcomes through related but conceptually distinct pathways. Organizational culture can contribute to performance through shared values, behavioral alignment, communication, and managerial commitment, whereas OHS management can contribute through risk prevention, employee protection, regulatory compliance, and operational continuity.

According to Gracia et al. (2022) and Suárez (2020), a strong organizational culture characterized by cohesion, commitment, and adaptability is associated with higher operational efficiency and superior organizational performance (Hussain and Papastathopoulos, 2022; Mandal et al., 2024). In this regard, workplace safety not only supports employee wellbeing but may also contribute to productivity and profitability by reducing accident-related costs. Employees working in safe environments are more likely to be motivated and engaged, which may positively contribute to overall organizational performance.

Several studies have shown that implementing safety management systems is positively associated with organizational performance. An organizational culture that supports safety, employee wellbeing, and preventive behavior can facilitate effective implementation of these systems. Research by López et al., 2017 indicates that firms with strong safety-oriented cultures achieve better financial performance and operational efficiency. This finding highlights the importance of integrating organizational culture with safety strategies to support sustainable organizational outcomes.

Similarly, Barradas Martínez et al., 2021 in the Colombian manufacturing sector reinforce this perspective by identifying organizational culture and OHS management as relevant factors associated with SME competitiveness and growth. In this context, manufacturing SMEs that effectively integrate cultural development and safety management practices may improve their market positioning and profitability, thereby supporting long-term sustainability (Vranjes et al., 2020).

Despite these contributions, research examining the relationships among organizational culture, OHS management, and organizational performance remains limited in the context of manufacturing SMEs in Colombia, leaving a significant gap in the literature (López et al., 2017). This study addresses this gap by examining the direct relationships among these constructs and the indirect relationship between organizational culture and performance through OHS management in manufacturing SMEs in Norte de Santander. In doing so, it contributes to a deeper understanding of how cultural conditions may be translated into performance outcomes through formal safety management practices.

In this study, mediation and moderation are treated as conceptually and statistically distinct mechanisms. Mediation explains how or through which organizational mechanism one construct is associated with another. Accordingly, OHS management is conceptualized as a mediating mechanism through which organizational culture is indirectly associated with organizational performance. Moderation, by contrast, would imply that the strength or direction of the relationship between organizational culture and performance changes according to the level of OHS management. Because the proposed model does not include or estimate an interaction term between organizational culture and OHS management, it does not theorize or test a moderating effect.

The proposed model extends existing theoretical approaches in three ways. First, it expands organizational culture theory by specifying OHS management as a concrete organizational mechanism through which cultural values and managerial commitment translate into operational and performance outcomes. Second, it contributes to safety management theory by arguing that OHS systems should not be understood solely as compliance-oriented structures, but also as strategic organizational capabilities whose implementation is facilitated or constrained by the cultural context. Third, it extends organizational performance theory by proposing that performance in manufacturing SMEs is associated with both informal cultural patterns and formal safety management practices. Specifically, the model proposes a direct pathway between organizational culture and performance and an indirect pathway mediated by OHS management. This integrated perspective is particularly relevant to SMEs operating in construction supply chains, where operational risk, resource constraints, and interorganizational dependence require both strong cultural alignment and structured safety management.

General hypotheses

Based on the theoretical framework and the relationships established in the conceptual model, this study proposes the following hypotheses. The model conceptualizes OHS management as a mediating mechanism linking organizational culture to organizational performance. It does not propose or test OHS management as a moderator.

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Organizational culture is positively associated with OHS management in manufacturing SMEs. This hypothesis is grounded in the premise that organizations with a strong organizational culture, particularly one oriented toward employee safety and wellbeing, are more likely to implement OHS management systems effectively (Zohar, 2000).

Hypothesis 2 (H2): OHS management is positively associated with organizational performance in manufacturing SMEs. Prior research suggests that effective implementation of OHS management systems is associated with improvements in productivity and operational efficiency, particularly through reduced workplace accidents and occupational illnesses and improved working conditions (Barradas Martínez et al., 2021).

Hypothesis 3 (H3): OHS management mediates the relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance in manufacturing SMEs. This hypothesis proposes that organizational culture is indirectly associated with organizational performance through OHS management. A strong organizational culture facilitates the implementation and institutionalization of OHS management systems, which, in turn, contribute to organizational performance. Accordingly, OHS management serves as an explanatory mechanism through which cultural conditions translate into organizational outcomes (Cooper and Phillips, 2004; Viljoen and van Waveren, 2008).

Figure 1 Summarizes the theoretical structure of the proposed model. The model assumes that Organizational Culture provides the cultural conditions that support the implementation of OHS Management practices (H1), while OHS Management contributes to Organizational Performance (H2). It further proposes that OHS Management mediates the relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance (H3). The direct path from Organizational Culture to Organizational Performance is retained to determine whether the mediation is partial or complete. The figure conceptually represents the expected direct and indirect relationships among the constructs. No moderating effect is proposed or tested. The following sections present the operational definitions of the dimensions and the estimated coefficients.

Research design

This study adopted a quantitative, nonexperimental, cross-sectional, descriptive, and explanatory research design to characterize organizational culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management, and organizational performance and to examine the theoretically proposed relationships among these constructs. The descriptive component characterized the study variables and participants, while the explanatory component evaluated the direct relationships among the constructs and the indirect relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance through OHS management (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018).

Primary data were collected through a structured survey administered to managers, supervisors, and frontline employees. The study consulted institutional reports and corporate websites exclusively to identify eligible companies and describe the organizational context. This secondary information was not incorporated as observed variables or indicators in the structural equation model, nor was it used independently to test the hypotheses. Accordingly, the study is not classified as a mixed-sources or mixed-methods design.

Data were collected at a single point in time and within the participants’ natural organizational setting, consistent with the cross-sectional and nonexperimental design (Hernández and Pascual, 2018). Consequently, the estimated relationships are interpreted as theoretically specified associations and indirect effects rather than as definitive evidence of temporal causality.

Population and sample

The organizational population comprised 16 formally registered and operational manufacturing companies located in Norte de Santander, Colombia. All 16 eligible firms were included in the study; therefore, the research covered the identified organizational population rather than selecting a probabilistic sample of companies. The participating firms varied in workforce size, ranging from microenterprises with fewer than 10 employees to medium-sized companies with up to 200 employees, thereby reflecting the structural diversity of the manufacturing SMEs included in the study.

Within the participating companies, 204 employees were selected using proportional stratified random sampling. The strata were defined according to hierarchical level and functional area to incorporate the perspectives of managers, supervisors, and frontline employees. Proportional allocation was used to preserve the relative representation of these groups within the participating firms. The employee was treated as the unit of analysis because organizational culture, OHS management, and organizational performance were measured through individual perceptions obtained from the survey responses.

Sample-size adequacy was evaluated in relation to the characteristics of the proposed structural equation model rather than solely against a general threshold of 200 observations. The assessment considered the three principal latent constructs—Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance—their 12 underlying dimensions, the number of theoretically specified structural paths, the expected magnitude of the factor loadings and structural effects, the maximum-likelihood estimator, and the estimation of the indirect effect. Although the final sample of 204 respondents is consistent with commonly reported recommendations for comparatively parsimonious SEM models, sample-size requirements depend on model complexity, factor loadings, effect sizes, estimator, data distribution, and the number of parameters estimated (Hair et al., 2019; Kline, 2023; Wolf et al., 2013). Given the number of respondents, latent constructs, hierarchical measurement structure, and specified structural paths, the sample was operationally feasible for estimating the proposed individual-level model. Nevertheless, we did not conduct a simulation-based or Monte Carlo power analysis. Moreover, because respondents were nested within 16 companies, the effective amount of independent information may be lower than the nominal sample size of 204. Therefore, interpret sample-size adequacy cautiously.

We evaluated the indirect effect of organizational culture on organizational performance through OHS management using 5,000 bootstrap resamples and a 95% confidence interval. This procedure provided a more robust estimate of the sampling distribution of the indirect effect (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). Bootstrapping was not treated as a substitute for adequate sample size or as a correction for the data’s nested structure.

Because the 204 employees were nested within 16 companies, we considered potential within-company dependence when defining the study’s analytical scope. The constructs were analyzed at the individual level and were not aggregated to the organizational level; consequently, within-group agreement statistics such as \(r_{wg}\) were not used to justify aggregation. The limited number of participating companies did not support the reliable estimation of a multilevel SEM. Therefore, the structural model was estimated at the individual level.

Survey instrument

The survey instrument was developed based on prior theoretical and empirical literature on organizational culture, OHS management, and organizational performance. The questionnaire comprised three principal constructs, 12 dimensions, and 36 items, with three items assigned to each dimension.

Organizational Culture was measured using 12 items distributed across four dimensions: Top Management Commitment (CD1–CD3), Organizational Communication (CO1–CO3), Organizational Values (VO1–VO3), and Change Management (GC1–GC3). OHS Management was measured using 12 items distributed across Risk Integration (IR1–IR3), Safety Training (CA1–CA3), Regulatory Compliance (CN1–CN3), and Employee Participation (PT1–PT3). Organizational Performance was measured using 12 items distributed across Productivity (PR1–PR3), Efficiency (EF1–EF3), Quality (CLD1–CLD3), and Sustainability (SO1–SO3).

The measurement model was specified hierarchically. At the first-order level, the three observed items assigned to each dimension were specified as indicators of their corresponding latent dimension. At the second-order level, the four dimensions associated with each principal construct were specified as indicators of Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance, respectively. The study then estimated the structural relationships among these three higher-order constructs.

The items were adapted from previous studies addressing organizational culture, safety management systems, and performance measurement in SMEs and manufacturing contexts. The adaptation process involved reviewing each item’s conceptual consistency, adjusting the wording to the context of manufacturing SMEs operating within construction supply chains, and ensuring the items reflected the operational realities of managers, supervisors, and frontline employees. All 36 items were measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Before data collection, five international experts reviewed the initial version of the instrument. The experts evaluated the clarity, coherence, and relevance of the items, resulting in an overall agreement index of 0.96. Based on their evaluations, the wording of the items was reviewed to ensure conceptual consistency, contextual relevance, and clarity before administering the questionnaire.

We initially assessed the internal consistency of the complete instrument using Cronbach’s alpha, which yielded an overall value of α = 0.94. Because the questionnaire included three constructs and 12 dimensions, reliability was also evaluated separately for each dimension using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability, as reported in the Results section. We examined the suitability of the correlation matrix for factor analysis using the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. The overall KMO value was 0.81, and Bartlett’s test was statistically significant (p < 0.05 p < 0.05), supporting the application of factor analysis.

Data collection procedures

Data were collected through a structured 36-item questionnaire administered to managers, supervisors, and frontline employees of the 16 participating manufacturing SMEs. The questionnaire was administered at a single point in time, consistent with the study’s cross-sectional design.

Before completing the questionnaire, respondents were informed of the study’s objectives, the voluntary nature of their participation, the intended use of the information, and the measures adopted to protect their confidentiality. We obtained informed consent from all participants before data collection.

Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and respondents could decline or discontinue their participation without any consequences. We did not include any personally identifiable information in the analytical dataset. Throughout the study, we collected, stored, processed, and analyzed the primary data under procedures intended to preserve participant confidentiality, anonymity, and information security.

Common method bias assessment

Because the three principal constructs were measured using self-reported responses collected through the same questionnaire, we used procedural and statistical measures to assess potential common method bias. Procedurally, respondents were assured of anonymity and confidentiality; the questionnaire used neutral wording, and the items corresponding to the different constructs were organized into separate sections.

Statistically, we conducted Harman’s single-factor test. The first unrotated factor explained less than 50% of the total variance, suggesting that a single general factor did not account for most of the observed variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Fuller et al., 2016). However, because Harman’s test does not definitively exclude the presence of common method bias, this result was interpreted as preliminary diagnostic evidence rather than conclusive proof of its absence.

Data analysis procedures

In the first stage, exploratory data analysis procedures were applied, including descriptive statistics, graphical visualization, and exploratory factor analysis, to examine the distribution and preliminary dimensional structure of the 36 observed items (Hair et al., 2019). Spearman’s correlation coefficients were subsequently calculated as a preliminary relational analysis because the questionnaire responses were measured using a five-point ordinal Likert scale. These coefficients were used to examine the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the associations among the study variables. Spearman’s correlations were not used as evidence of convergent validity.

We implemented structural equation modeling following the two-stage procedure proposed by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). In the first stage, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis to assess the hierarchical measurement model. At the first-order level, the three observed items assigned to each dimension were specified as indicators of their corresponding latent dimension. At the second-order level, the four dimensions associated with each principal construct were specified as indicators of Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance. Convergent validity was assessed using standardized factor loadings, composite reliability, and average variance extracted, while discriminant validity was evaluated using the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio. The available measurement-model assessment therefore focused on standardized loadings, dimension-level reliability and convergent validity, discriminant validity, and the global fit indices of the complete hierarchical measurement model.

In the second stage, the structural model was estimated to assess the direct relationships among Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance, as well as the indirect effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance through OHS Management. The indirect effect was evaluated using 5,000 bootstrap resamples and a 95% confidence interval and was considered statistically significant when the interval did not include zero (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). The simultaneous significance of the direct and indirect effects was interpreted as partial mediation. No interaction term was included; therefore, no moderating effect was estimated. Model fit was assessed using the relative chi-square (χ2/df < 3.0\chi^2/df < 3.0), Comparative Fit Index (CFI >0.90 > 0.90), Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI >0.90 > 0.90), Normed Fit Index (NFI >0.90 > 0.90), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA <0.08 < 0.08), and Root Mean Square Residual (RMR <0.05 < 0.05), following Hair et al. (2019).

Software and reproducibility

We conducted all analyses using Python 3.11. We used the semopy 2.3.10 library to specify and estimate the confirmatory factor and structural equation models using a maximum-likelihood-based estimation procedure. The pandas 2.1 and numpy 1.26 libraries were used for data management, cleaning, and transformation, while matplotlib 3.8 and seaborn 0.13 were used for graphical visualization. We used the same analytical environment to estimate direct and indirect effects and conduct bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples.

Python was selected because its open-source environment supports documentation and traceability of the analytical workflow and enables integration of data processing, statistical estimation, and visualization in a unified environment. We documented software versions, model specifications, variable transformations, and analytical procedures to support the study’s replicability. Because the dataset contains confidential organizational information, reproducibility is subject to the data-access conditions described in the Data Availability Statement.

This section presents the results of the analysis of responses collected from 204 employees across 16 manufacturing SMEs located in Norte de Santander, Colombia, that operate within or are linked to construction supply chains. The results are organized into sample characteristics, descriptive findings, assessment of the hierarchical measurement model, evaluation of the structural relationships, and mediation analysis. Consistent with the proposed model, the analysis examines the direct relationships among Organizational Culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Management, and Organizational Performance, as well as the indirect relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance through OHS Management.

Sample characteristics

The sample comprised 204 employees from 16 manufacturing SMEs located in Norte de Santander, Colombia, that operate within or are linked to construction supply chains. Participants differed in gender, age, educational level, and job tenure, as summarized in Table 1. Most participants were male (60.3%), had completed high school (53.4%), and reported 1–5 years of job tenure (59.3%). The mean participant age was 35 years, with an observed range of 18–58 years.

Figure 2 presents the mean scores for the 12 items measuring Organizational Culture. Overall, employees reported comparatively positive perceptions of organizational communication and change management, with CO1 and GC1 showing the highest mean scores. Items related to Organizational Values and Top Management Commitment obtained comparatively lower scores. These results do not necessarily indicate a disconnect between employees and organizational values; rather, they highlight areas where employee perceptions were less favorable than in the other dimensions. The descriptive findings therefore suggest opportunities to strengthen the communication and integration of organizational values and reinforce visible management commitment.

Figure 3 presents the mean scores for Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) management, revealing that employees’ perceptions of safety and health policies are generally positive. High mean values in items IR1 and CA3 indicate that workers value risk management practices and the preventive measures implemented within the organization. However, some items related to safety training and participation in safety programs show slightly lower mean scores, suggesting opportunities to strengthen ongoing training and increase employees’ active involvement in workplace safety initiatives.

Figure 4 presents the average scores associated with the organizational performance indicators. Overall, the results suggest a positive perception of performance-related aspects. However, some items show slightly lower averages, indicating opportunities to improve efficiency, resource optimization, and the agility of organizational processes.

Reliability and validity results by dimension

To assess the psychometric properties of the first-order measurement model, we evaluated reliability and convergent validity indicators for each of the 12 dimensions, with each dimension measured using three items. Cronbach’s alpha (\(\alpha\)) was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the items, Composite Reliability (CR) was used as a model-based indicator of construct reliability, and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was used to assess the proportion of indicator variance explained by the corresponding latent dimension relative to measurement error.

The results for Top Management Commitment (CD), Organizational Communication (CO), Organizational Values (VO), Change Management (GC), Risk Integration (IR), Safety Training (CA), Regulatory Compliance (CN), Employee Participation (PT), Productivity (PR), Efficiency (EF), Quality (CLD), and Sustainability (SO) exceeded the recommended thresholds of 0.70 for Cronbach’s alpha and CR and 0.50 for AVE (Hair et al., 2019), as shown in Table 2. These findings support the internal consistency and convergent validity of the 12 first-order dimensions.

However, these dimension-level indicators do not, by themselves, establish the reliability or validity of the three higher-order constructs. The second-order relationships between the dimensions and Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance were therefore evaluated using standardized second-order loadings and the fit indices of the complete hierarchical measurement model, as reported in the following subsection.

Hierarchical measurement model assessment

The measurement model was specified as a hierarchical structure comprising 36 observed indicators, 12 first-order dimensions, and three second-order constructs: Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance. Each first-order dimension was measured using three observed items, while each second-order construct was represented by four theoretically corresponding dimensions. We evaluated the complete hierarchical measurement model before estimating the structural relationships among the three principal constructs.

Table 3 presents the global fit indices for the complete hierarchical measurement model. The relative chi-square indicated an acceptable model fit (\(\chi^2 = 4646.00\), \(df = 1933\), \(\chi^2/df = 2.405\)). The comparative and incremental fit indices exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.90, with CFI, TLI, and NFI reaching 0.999. Similarly, GFI and AGFI were 0.999, while SRMR was 0.048, indicating acceptable standardized residuals.

RMSEA was 0.083, slightly above the conventional threshold of 0.08. Therefore, the hierarchical measurement model fit was acceptable but not uniformly optimal. The satisfactory relative chi-square, comparative fit indices, and SRMR supported retaining the theoretically specified measurement structure, while the marginal RMSEA value was considered when interpreting the structural results. The decision to retain the model was also supported by its theoretical specification, in which Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance were represented as multidimensional higher-order constructs.

Discriminant validity

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT), following Henseler et al. (2015). The HTMT value between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance was 0.843, below the conservative threshold of 0.85. The value between Organizational Culture and OHS Management was 0.890, which was below the more permissive threshold of 0.90 but above 0.85. However, the HTMT value between OHS Management and Organizational Performance was 0.947, exceeding both thresholds. Bootstrap confidence intervals based on 5,000 resamples produced values of (0.835, 0.937) (0.778, 0.902), and (0.918, 0.973), respectively.

These findings provide support for the empirical distinction between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance but indicate limited discriminant validity between OHS Management and Organizational Performance. The two constructs were retained as theoretically distinct because OHS Management represents formal risk-prevention and safety practices, whereas Organizational Performance represents productivity, efficiency, quality, and sustainability outcomes. Nevertheless, the high HTMT value was considered when interpreting the structural relationships and is acknowledged as a measurement limitation.

Structural model

The structural model estimates the relationships among Organizational Culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Management, and Organizational Performance. As shown in Figure 5, the model includes the path from Organizational Culture to OHS Management (H1), the path from OHS Management to Organizational Performance (H2), and the direct path from Organizational Culture to Organizational Performance. We retained the direct path to determine whether the mediating effect proposed in H3 was partial or complete. H3 corresponds to the indirect pathway from Organizational Culture to Organizational Performance through OHS Management. No interaction term or moderating effect was specified or estimated. The corresponding tables present the magnitude and statistical significance of the direct and indirect effects.

Table 4 presents the standardized coefficients, standard errors, test statistics, and significance levels of the direct relationships estimated in the structural model. All three direct paths were positive and statistically significant. The results support H1 and H2, while the direct relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance was retained to determine whether the mediation proposed in H3 was partial or complete.

Organizational Culture showed a positive and statistically significant relationship with OHS Management (\(\beta = 0.84\), \(SE = 0.06\), \(t = 14.00\), \(p < 0.001\)), supporting H1. This result indicates that stronger perceptions of organizational culture were associated with more favorable perceptions of OHS management practices in the participating manufacturing SMEs.

OHS Management showed a positive and statistically significant relationship with Organizational Performance (\(\beta = 0.74\), \(SE = 0.08\), \(t = 9.25\), \(p < 0.001\)), supporting H2. This finding indicates that more favorable perceptions of OHS management were associated with higher perceived organizational performance.

The direct relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance was also positive and statistically significant (\(\beta = 0.54\), \(SE = 0.09\), \(t = 6.00\), \(p < 0.001\)). This direct path was not formulated as a separate hypothesis but was included to evaluate the nature of the mediating effect proposed in H3. Significant direct and indirect effects would indicate partial mediation, as examined in the following section.

Mediation effects

The direct, indirect, and total effects of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance were estimated using a bootstrapping procedure with 5,000 resamples and a 95% confidence interval (Table 5). The indirect effect through OHS Management was positive and statistically significant (effect estimate = 0.21, 95% CI [0.10, 0.33], \(p = 0.002 \)). Because the confidence interval did not include zero, the result supports H3 and provides evidence that OHS Management mediates the relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance.

The direct effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance also remained statistically significant after including OHS Management in the model (effect estimate = 0.54, 95% CI [0.36, 0.72], \(p < 0.001\)). Therefore, OHS Management was interpreted as a partial rather than complete mediator. This result suggests that Organizational Culture is associated with Organizational Performance through two complementary pathways: a direct pathway related to shared values and organizational behaviors and an indirect pathway involving the institutionalization of occupational health and safety management practices.

The findings provide empirical evidence on the relationships among Organizational Culture, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Management, and Organizational Performance in manufacturing SMEs in Norte de Santander, Colombia. The structural results support the proposed mediation model and help address the gap identified in the literature regarding the joint examination of these constructs in Latin American manufacturing contexts (Barradas Martínez et al., 2021). Specifically, the results indicate that Organizational Culture is positively associated with OHS Management, that OHS Management is positively associated with Organizational Performance, and that Organizational Culture has a statistically significant indirect association with performance through OHS Management.

The main theoretical contribution of this study lies in identifying OHS Management as a partial mediating mechanism between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance. Rather than a moderating condition that changes the strength of the relationship between culture and performance, OHS Management operates as an organizational mechanism through which cultural conditions translate into performance outcomes (Baron and Kenny, 1986). This interpretation is consistent with evidence showing that organizational culture shapes organizational outcomes (Hogan and Coote, 2014) and that safety culture and OHS management practices contribute to safety behavior, productivity, and sustainable organizational performance (Fernández-Muñiz et al., 2012; Hajmohammad and Vachon, 2014; Génesis et al., 2022). The results therefore distinguish between a direct pathway, through which shared values, leadership commitment, communication, and change-oriented practices are associated with performance, and an indirect pathway involving the formalization and implementation of occupational health and safety practices. Because both the direct and indirect effects were statistically significant, the findings support partial rather than complete mediation (Baron and Kenny, 1986).

The positive relationship between Organizational Culture and OHS Management supports the view that cultural values and managerial practices provide an important foundation for implementing formal safety systems. This finding aligns with Schein’s (1990) theory of organizational culture, which holds that shared assumptions, values, and beliefs guide individual behavior and shape the adoption of organizational practices. It also aligns with Cooper and Phillips (2004) and Moran-Fuentes et al. (2022), who emphasize that safety practices are more likely to be accepted and consistently applied when an organizational environment prioritizes employee safety and wellbeing.

From the safety-climate perspective proposed by Zohar (2000), employees’ shared perceptions of management priorities shape how they interpret and respond to safety policies. The results of this study complement this perspective by showing that Organizational Culture is associated not only with individual safety perceptions or behaviors but also with the broader institutionalization of OHS Management. Accordingly, safety-related practices should not be interpreted exclusively as technical or regulatory requirements; they are also organizational processes embedded in leadership priorities, internal communication, shared values, and the capacity to manage change.

This relationship is particularly relevant in manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains. These organizations commonly operate under resource constraints, direct managerial supervision, operational pressure, and relatively limited formalization. Under these conditions, frequent interaction between managers and employees may make cultural signals especially important for communicating safety expectations and encouraging adherence to OHS procedures. This interpretation is consistent with Montoya-Agudelo and Boyero-Saavedra (2016), who highlight the role of Organizational Culture in shaping human resource practices. Culture can therefore function as an informal organizational infrastructure that supports the implementation of formal safety-management processes.

Change Management also provides a theoretically relevant component of the cultural context in which OHS practices are implemented. From Lewin’s (1951) perspective, organizational change requires new practices to become integrated into routine behavior before they can be sustained. In the context of OHS Management, this implies that the introduction of procedures or training activities may be insufficient unless they become part of employees’ everyday practices and shared expectations. This interpretation is compatible with Pousette et al. (2017), who emphasize that safety climate can be more closely associated with safety behavior than the mere existence of formal policies. Nevertheless, because the structural hypotheses were tested at the level of the principal constructs, the relative contribution of Change Management and the other first-order dimensions should be interpreted cautiously and should not be treated as an independently tested structural effect.

The positive relationship between OHS Management and Organizational Performance indicates that safety management should not be regarded solely as a compliance-oriented system. Instead, it can be interpreted as an organizational capability associated with risk prevention, operational continuity, employee wellbeing, and the integration of safety considerations into organizational routines. This interpretation is aligned with the resource-based view, which proposes that internally developed capabilities embedded in organizational processes can contribute to competitive advantage (Barney, 1991; Budhwar et al., 2023). In manufacturing SMEs, OHS Management may therefore support performance by reducing operational disruptions and promoting more consistent and coordinated work practices.

The association between OHS Management and Organizational Performance also suggests that its organizational relevance extends beyond accident prevention. The systematic identification of hazards, safety training, regulatory compliance, and employee participation can support the conditions under which productivity, efficiency, quality, and sustainability are pursued. This interpretation is consistent with Cardenas Bohorquez et al. (2019), who highlight the benefits of integrating occupational safety with broader management practices. However, because these performance dimensions were modeled as components of a higher-order construct, the findings should be interpreted as evidence concerning overall Organizational Performance rather than as separate causal effects on each individual dimension.

The significant indirect effect provides the principal evidence supporting H3. Organizational Culture is associated with Organizational Performance partly through its relationship with OHS Management. In substantive terms, shared values and organizational behaviors may be translated into performance outcomes when they are incorporated into structured risk identification, training, compliance, and employee-participation practices. This interpretation is consistent with Cooper and Phillips (2004) and Schein (1990), who emphasize the complementary roles of informal cultural patterns and formal management systems in shaping organizational outcomes. Importantly, the mediation result does not indicate that OHS Management amplifies or strengthens the effect of Organizational Culture. Demonstrating such a moderating mechanism would require estimating an interaction term, which was not part of the empirical model employed in this study.

The persistence of a statistically significant direct relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance after including OHS Management indicates that OHS Management does not account for the entire relationship. Other mechanisms may transmit the influence of culture to performance, including employee commitment, knowledge sharing, leadership practices, innovation, process coordination, and organizational learning. Accordingly, partial mediation provides a more appropriate interpretation than either complete mediation or moderation. The findings therefore position OHS Management as one relevant transmission mechanism without suggesting that it is the only pathway connecting culture and performance.

The findings should nevertheless be interpreted in light of the study design. First, the cross-sectional nature of the data does not establish temporal or definitive causal relationships among the constructs. Although the hypothesized directions are theoretically grounded, longitudinal or experimental research would be required to examine causal ordering more conclusively. Second, employees were nested within 16 manufacturing SMEs, but the available database did not include the organizational identifiers required to estimate intraclass correlations, multilevel SEM, or cluster-robust standard errors. Consequently, the possibility that standard errors and significance levels were affected by within-firm dependence cannot be ruled out.

Third, the study relied on self-reported information collected through a single survey. Although the authors used procedural safeguards and Harman’s single-factor diagnostic, these measures cannot fully rule out common method bias. Fourth, the empirical proximity observed among some constructs indicates that their discriminant validity should be interpreted cautiously, particularly regarding the distinction between OHS Management and Organizational Performance. Finally, the findings are context-specific and should not be generalized automatically to larger firms, other industries, or manufacturing SMEs operating outside Norte de Santander.

Future research should use longitudinal and multilevel designs, retain firm identifiers, and calculate intraclass correlations and within-group agreement statistics when aggregation is theoretically justified. Researchers could also apply cluster-robust standard errors or multilevel SEM and incorporate objective indicators of accidents, absenteeism, productivity, quality, and financial performance. They could also examine additional organizational and environmental variables, including technological capabilities, financial resources, managerial skills, human talent, process standardization, innovation capacity, digital maturity, regulatory pressure, supplier reliability, customer requirements, and construction supply chain disruptions. These extensions would provide a more comprehensive explanation of Organizational Performance and allow the mediating role of OHS Management to be tested across different organizational and sectoral contexts.

Practical and policy implications

The findings offer several practical implications for SME managers and policymakers. For managers, the results suggest that improving Organizational Performance requires more than formal compliance with OHS regulations. OHS Management was positively associated with Organizational Performance and partially mediated the relationship between Organizational Culture and performance. Accordingly, managers should strengthen top management commitment, promote clear safety communication, involve employees in risk identification, and integrate OHS practices into daily operational routines. These recommendations align with previous studies showing that safety practices are more effective when supported by leadership commitment, employee participation, and a safety-oriented culture (Cooper and Phillips, 2004; Zohar, 2000; Moran-Fuentes et al., 2022).

Safety training should not be treated as an isolated activity but as part of a broader organizational process that reinforces shared values, preventive behavior, and continuous improvement. Managers should translate cultural principles into formal practices involving risk identification, training, regulatory compliance, and employee participation. Change-management initiatives should also align with safety objectives to support the incorporation of OHS practices into organizational routines. Because the results support partial mediation, OHS Management should be understood as an important, but not exclusive, mechanism linking Organizational Culture to Organizational Performance. Consequently, OHS initiatives should be coordinated with human resource management, quality management, operations, and continuous-improvement strategies. Given the cross-sectional design, interpret these implications as applications of the observed associations rather than definitive evidence of causality.

For policymakers and support institutions, the findings suggest that OHS programs for SMEs should extend beyond inspection and regulatory enforcement. Public policies could promote integrated support schemes combining safety training, organizational culture development, managerial assistance, and incentives for adopting preventive practices. In manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains, interventions should also consider resource constraints, supplier dependence, and exposure to operational risks because recent studies indicate that SMEs in construction-related supply chains face specific challenges involving coordination, management, operational uncertainty, and sustainability (Chen et al., 2025; Argaw and Liu, 2025; Alqahtani et al., 2026). Sector-specific programs could therefore help these enterprises develop their safety-management capabilities while creating organizational conditions associated with productivity, efficiency, quality, and sustainability.

This study provides empirical evidence concerning the relationships among Organizational Culture, OHS Management, and Organizational Performance in manufacturing SMEs in Norte de Santander, Colombia. The findings indicate that these constructs should not be understood as isolated factors, but as components of an integrated model in which cultural conditions are associated with the implementation of safety-management practices and with Organizational Performance.

The study’s main theoretical contribution is identifying OHS Management as a partial mediating mechanism in the relationship between Organizational Culture and Organizational Performance. This finding extends culture-performance approaches by indicating that Organizational Culture is associated with performance through both a direct pathway involving shared values and organizational behaviors and an indirect pathway involving the formalization of safety-oriented management practices.

From an applied perspective, the study highlights the importance of aligning cultural development with OHS Management in manufacturing SMEs linked to construction supply chains. Rather than treating occupational safety solely as a regulatory requirement, the findings suggest that OHS Management should be regarded as a strategic organizational capability supported by leadership commitment, effective communication, employee participation, and the institutionalization of change.

Overall, the study contributes to a more integrated understanding of SME performance by showing the complementary roles of informal cultural dynamics and formal safety-management systems. Future efforts to strengthen SME competitiveness should therefore consider the joint contribution of Organizational Culture and OHS Management, together with the specific operational conditions of construction-related supply chains. Longitudinal and multilevel research is needed to evaluate these relationships across firms and over time.

Limitations and future research

Several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the 204 respondents were nested within 16 SMEs, but the database did not retain firm-level identifiers. Therefore, we could not estimate intraclass correlations, within-group agreement, multilevel SEM, or cluster-robust standard errors. This may have affected the standard errors and significance levels. Future studies should retain organizational identifiers and assess clustering before analyzing or aggregating individual responses.

Second, the cross-sectional design does not establish temporal ordering or causality, and self-reported data may involve perceptual and common method biases. Although procedural safeguards and Harman’s single-factor test were applied, common method bias cannot be completely excluded. Future studies should use longitudinal designs, multiple data sources, and objective indicators such as accident rates, absenteeism, productivity, quality, turnover, and financial performance.

Third, the available analytical output did not include a complete item-level matrix of error variances, factor correlations, and second-order loadings. Future research should report all first- and second-order loadings, measurement errors, factor correlations, and identification constraints to strengthen the assessment of the hierarchical measurement model. Replication in other regions, countries, sectors, and organizational sizes would also improve the generalizability of the findings.

Finally, future studies could incorporate additional organizational and environmental variables and examine other mediating or moderating mechanisms. Leadership, safety climate, employee engagement, organizational learning, digital transformation, and supply chain resilience could be tested as mediators or, when theoretically justified, as moderators through explicitly specified interaction terms.