Assessment of Occupational Health and Safety Management: Implications for Corporate Performance in the Secondary Sector

Abstract

Management of occupational health and safety (OHS) plays a critical role in building safe and effective working environments, especially in industries defined by dangerous operations like manufacturing. Secondary industries are characterized by their use of dangerous materials, complex machinery, and repetitive manual work, prompting the need for stringent OHS laws to protect employees and support business sustainability. Although extensive regulatory materials like ISO 45001 and EU Directive 89/391/EEC exist, the implementation of OHS standards varies among organizations significantly. While larger organizations adopt structured frameworks of safety management, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are often confronted by economic and technical constraints. As a result, policies only appear on paper, and their attitude toward occupational safety is passive. Employing a structured survey analysis, this study evaluates the level at which manufacturing companies in Macedonia-Thrace, a region in Northern Greece, implement OHS actions, the barriers that face them, and how OHS programs influence business performance. Based on the findings, companies that apply proactive OHS practices achieve more productivity, increased staff retention, and lower costs due to accidents, while SMEs often find it difficult to undertake comprehensive policies. The research further identifies the impact of electronic technology, regulation, and leadership on enhancing OHS performance. This study provides evidence-based recommendations on policy changes through the exploration of regionalized patterns of adoption of OHS practices by industrial companies and key policy intervention areas. By eliminating underlying structural loopholes in the implementation of OHS, this paper provides research-backed policy solutions aimed at enhancing work safety and improving corporate performance in the secondary industry. The reinforcement of OHS measures not only reduces hazards at the workplace but also improves the resilience of business, its competitiveness, and conformity to regulations.

1. Introduction

Occupational health and safety (OHS) is critical for the efficient and safe operation of industries, especially high-risk sectors such as manufacturing. Secondary industries, such as manufacturing companies, tend to include the handling of dangerous substances, complex machinery, and repetitive physical activities; therefore, they require elaborate and flexible OHS programs to safeguard employees and ensure business sustainability [1]. The manufacturing industry is one of the most dangerous occupational sectors, with elevated risks of mechanical trauma, toxic exposure, and musculoskeletal disorders [2,3]. Without systematic safety measures, these hazards translate into monetary losses, regulatory fines, heightened employee absenteeism, and long-term adverse impacts on employees. Following these recognized risks, national and international regulatory bodies have developed extensive Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) frameworks. The International Labour Organization (ILO) recognizes that workplace safety forms a fundamental human right and emphasizes the economic and operational benefits of adopting proactive OHS measures [4]. The European Union’s Directive 89/391/EEC mandates that all employers conduct occupational risk assessments, implement preventive measures, and involve workers in safety efforts [5]. In addition, ISO 45001 ISO 45001:2018; Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available online: http https://www.iso.org/standard/63787.html (accessed on 5 January 2025). Ref. [6] serves as an internationally accepted OHS management system, promoting systematic risk evaluation, compliance monitoring, and the continuous improvement of workplace safety practices [7,8].

Despite these regulations, OHS implementation remains highly inconsistent across enterprises, particularly among small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). While large corporations often integrate comprehensive safety management systems, SMEs frequently struggle with resource limitations, a lack of technical expertise, and the absence of formalized safety policies [9]. Studies indicate that many SMEs adopt a reactive approach to safety, responding to risks only after incidents occur, rather than embedding proactive, preventive strategies [10]. Furthermore, informal employment arrangements in some industrial sectors exclude workers from structured safety programs, creating additional barriers to OHS enforcement [11]. A novel contribution of this study is its focus on emerging digital solutions in OHS management, which are transforming workplace safety practices but remain underutilized in SMEs due to cost barriers and limited awareness. Technologies such as AI-driven risk assessments, automated hazard detection, and IoT-enabled real-time monitoring systems have the potential to bridge the gap in OHS compliance, offering cost-effective safety solutions for resource-constrained enterprises [12]. However, research on the adoption of such technologies in regional industrial settings, particularly among SMEs, remains scarce. This study explores how digital OHS innovations can improve risk management, optimize compliance, and enhance corporate performance in the manufacturing sector.

The relationship between OHS and corporate performance has been extensively studied, with findings indicating that well-structured safety policies contribute to higher productivity, reduced absenteeism, and cost savings from fewer workplace disruptions [13]. Companies that proactively invest in OHS not only mitigate legal and financial risks but also strengthen their competitive advantage through enhanced market reputation, stakeholder trust, and compliance with international standards [14]. Additionally, firms that achieve ISO 45001 certification [6] often experience improved investor confidence, regulatory stability, and long-term financial resilience due to reduced accident-related liabilities [15]. However, existing studies often generalize these benefits without considering the unique challenges of regional industrial environments. This study fills that gap by quantifying the impact of OHS investments on corporate sustainability in Macedonia-Thrace, an industrial region with a mix of large corporations and SMEs facing distinct safety challenges. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of OHS measures in manufacturing enterprises within Macedonia-Thrace and analyze their impact on corporate performance. By assessing OHS adoption across different company sizes and industry types, this research seeks to identify best practices, examine technological innovations in safety management, and highlight areas requiring further regulatory intervention. Furthermore, this study provides insights into how leadership commitment, government incentives, and industry collaborations can drive improvements in OHS adoption. Strengthening workplace safety is not only essential for protecting workers but also for enhancing business resilience, fostering industrial competitiveness, and ensuring compliance with evolving safety regulations.

This paper is organized into several sections to ensure a logical flow of information and facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the research topic. Following this introduction, Section 2 provides a detailed review of the literature on occupational health and safety management and its impact on corporate performance. This section sets the theoretical foundation for this study by synthesizing key concepts, frameworks, and previous research findings. Section 3 outlines the research methodology, including the design and structure of the questionnaire survey used to collect data. It describes the sampling strategy, the target population of manufacturing enterprises in a case study area, and the statistical methods employed for data analysis. Section 4 presents the results, highlighting the status of OHS practices in the region and their implications for corporate performance. Section 5 discusses the findings in the context of existing theories and practical applications. This section also addresses the limitations of this study and offers insights into how the results can inform OHS management strategies in similar industrial contexts. Finally, Section 6 concludes this paper with a summary of the key findings, policy recommendations, and suggestions for future research directions.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Occupational Health and Safety in the Secondary Sector

The health and safety of workers in relation to business operations is critical, especially in the secondary sector, where manufacturing and production are naturally prone to physical, chemical, and ergonomic hazards. This ranges from food, textiles, and machinery to chemical manufacturing in a labor-intensive and machine-based operation. Looking at the characteristics outlined above, businesses need to be well sensitized about implementing all sorts of OHS practices that can reduce workplace risks and ensure the well-being of employees [4]. Employees working in a manufacturing system can be exposed to a variety of risks with incidents involving hazardous substances, working with heavy machinery, musculoskeletal disorders related to the repetitive nature of tasks, and accidents involving fire and explosion. All these can be significantly reduced, and the general safety of the workplace improved, through the aid of a sound framework for occupational health and safety management. Industries that have good OHS protocols, according to the ILO, record fewer incidents of accidents and better morale among workers, which boosts their productivity and ensures organizational stability [1].

It is also important to observe that OHS can maintain regulatory compliance, since governments from all over the world impose strict standards concerning workplace safety. Non-compliance results in fiscal fines, legal complications, and reputational damages, thus harming corporate performance. For example, in Greece, the regulations concerning OHS are set by the European Union’s dictate, namely, the Framework Directive 89/391/EEC, whereby employers are supposed to take initiative to identify and prevent workplace hazards [5]. For an enterprise in Macedonia-Thrace, observing such dictates means respect for business principles, competitiveness in the recruitment of skilled labor, and building confidence among various categories of stakeholders. While OHS has been recognized as being important, several other aspects act to raise barriers toward effective OHS implementation in manufacturing enterprises of the secondary sector. The resource constraint, particularly for small and medium enterprises, is typically a bottleneck toward investment in advanced technologies for safety and training of personnel [7,8]. SMEs constitute a big component in the industrial structure of Macedonia-Thrace. While on one hand, resource constraints can reduce the ability to finance a detailed assessment of risks and purchasing of safety equipment, it hurts the set-up of the enterprise’s OHS.

These, apart from that, are changes related to production demand and its effects on employees, which generally create a dynamic character of manufacturing processes and a deficit of safety measures at the same level. Enterprises, therefore, have to balance operational efficiency requirements against workplace safety under competitive pressures and pressing deadlines. In fact, one study indicates that due to this, productivity may be prioritized over safety when the quota for production is higher than usual conditions [9]. New technology and management practices offer new avenues for improving OHS in the secondary sector. Digital interventions such as wearable devices, real-time monitoring systems, and predictive analytics are increasingly being adopted to identify and eliminate workplace hazards. Personal wearable sensors, for instance, can track workers’ physiological status, including heartbeat and postures, for early warnings on fatigue and unsafe behaviors [10]. Again, data-driven risk assessment models enable enterprises to predict and prevent accidents through analysis of historical data of incidents and spotting patterns within them. In tandem with technical innovation, integrating OHS into organizational culture has emerged as a parallel focus of attention for managing safety in a more sustainable way. A positive safety culture, specifically, one in which there is active participation at all levels in job and organization in the identification and control of hazards, allows an organization to achieve sustainable improvements in workplace health and safety. According to this perspective, such success emanates from a commitment by leadership, training of employees, and continuous improvement processes to achieve OHS excellence [2].

2.2. Linkage of Occupational Health and Safety and Corporate Performance

A growing body of research supports the positive correlation between OHS practices and corporate performance. Companies that actively invest in employee health and safety report higher levels of productivity, lower absenteeism rates, and improved financial performance [13]. Additionally, organizations with OHS certifications (e.g., ISO 45001) [6] tend to experience increased stakeholder trust and competitive advantages in global markets [3].

Studies highlight the economic benefits of workplace safety investments, indicating that reducing workplace injuries leads to long-term cost savings by minimizing compensation claims, litigation risks, and productivity losses [3]. However, further research is needed to quantify the direct impact of OHS on specific corporate performance metrics, particularly in industrial regions like Macedonia-Thrace. The relationship between occupational health and safety (OHS) and corporate performance is depicted in Figure 1 below.

Manufacturing enterprises operate within tightly integrated production and supply chains, making workplace accidents a significant risk to operational efficiency and financial stability [13]. Even minor incidents can cause cascading delays, affecting productivity and customer satisfaction. Companies that prioritize OHS minimize disruptions, maintain production levels, and improve overall efficiency. Research indicates that firms with proactive OHS policies experience fewer downtime incidents and increased productivity [10]. Beyond profitability, OHS plays a crucial role in employee satisfaction. A safe work environment fosters trust, job satisfaction, and loyalty, leading to lower turnover rates, reduced recruitment costs, and stronger team cohesion—especially critical in manufacturing, where skilled labor retention is vital [14]. Worker participation in safety activities, such as hazard identification and audits, strengthens employee–management relationships, enhances safety effectiveness, and improves perceptions of organizational commitment to worker welfare [15]. In Macedonia-Thrace, where labor attraction and retention are ongoing challenges, strong OHS policies serve as a competitive advantage.

The economic benefits of occupational health and safety (OHS) extend beyond direct savings generated from reduced injuries. Competent management of OHS reduces legal and reputational risks, as non-compliance can result in fines, liabilities, and damage to the company’s reputation. On the other hand, organizations with good safety track records are better placed to attract investment, win contracts, and engage positively with stakeholders [5]. Furthermore, avoiding workplace accidents and illnesses helps to reduce costs related to compensation, medical expenses, and insurance premiums—a critical consideration for manufacturing firms that operate on tight margins. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that for every USD 1 invested in OHS, there is a potential return of up to USD 4 in cost savings and productivity gains [1]. Excellence in OHS also supports corporate social responsibility (CSR), thus improving brand reputation, building customer loyalty, and facilitating talent acquisition.

2.3. Review of Occupational Health and Safety in Case Study Area

Macedonia-Thrace is an important industrial hub in Northern Greece, hosting a wide range of manufacturing industries, including food processing, textiles, machinery, chemicals, and metals. Although these industries contribute heavily to national gross domestic product (GDP) and employment rates, they also present high occupational hazards [16]. The implementation of effective occupational health and safety (OHS) management practices is essential; however, the level of implementation varies among large enterprises and small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) [17]. Although larger organizations have the financial capacity to develop extensive OHS policies, SMEs are often constrained by economic and technical factors, leading to safety compliance and formalization deficits [18]. OHS adoption in the region differs across industries due to variations in resources, organizational culture, and regulatory awareness. Larger enterprises are more likely to implement comprehensive OHS management systems, incorporating periodic safety audits, employee training, and PPE provisions [19]. Many follow international standards like ISO 45001 [6] for regulatory and competitive reasons, while SMEs tend to adopt a reactive approach, addressing safety concerns only after incidents occur. The key barriers for SMEs include cost constraints, partial awareness of OHS benefits, and short-term cost-saving priorities [20]. Informal work arrangements in some sectors further complicate OHS enforcement, as they often exclude workers from formal safety programs [21].

Resource limitations remain a primary challenge, particularly for SMEs, preventing investment in advanced safety technologies, risk assessments, and training [22]. Cultural attitudes toward safety also hinder progress, with some businesses viewing OHS as a regulatory burden rather than a strategic priority. Additionally, employees often lack awareness of their safety rights and responsibilities, reducing participation in workplace safety initiatives. While Greece has aligned its OHS legislation with EU Directives, enforcement remains inconsistent due to limited labor inspection resources, especially in remote areas of Macedonia-Thrace [18]. Despite these challenges, opportunities exist for improving OHS in the region. Digital safety technologies, such as real-time monitoring systems and data analytics, offer cost-effective solutions for SMEs, helping to enhance hazard identification and risk mitigation [23,24]. Establishing a strong safety culture through employee engagement, open communication, and managerial commitment can further improve OHS performance [25]. Stronger collaboration among enterprises, government agencies, and academic institutions can also enhance regional OHS capabilities by facilitating knowledge sharing, training programs, and industry-specific safety guidelines [26]. Additionally, government incentives, such as subsidies for safety equipment or tax benefits for OHS-certified companies, can encourage businesses to invest in workplace safety improvements.

Occupational health and safety (OHS) management in the Macedonia-Thrace region has a notable impact on organizational performance. Safety-oriented enterprises are expected to enjoy higher productivity, less absenteeism, and greater employee satisfaction, which enhance their competitive advantage—particularly in export businesses where compliance with international safety standards is crucial [16]. Proactive approaches in OHS also reduce the financial consequences of workplace accidents in the long run, including compensation claims and medical expenses. Even marginal improvements in investments in safety bring substantial economic benefits, particularly to small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The International Labour Organization (ILO) confirms that well-managed OHS systems improve business sustainability and support regional economic stability.

3. Research Methodology

3.1. Research Design

The methodological framework of this study follows a structured quantitative research design, centering on a questionnaire survey aimed at assessing the existing OHS management practices among manufacturing enterprises in the Macedonia-Thrace region. The proposed research design should have the primary objective of enabling a methodical, objective basis for the assessment of the implementation and effectiveness of the various OHS measures across the enterprises of different scales and sectors. It also makes it possible for the identification of trends, challenges that are being faced, and the inter-relationship that may exist between OHS practices and the enterprises’ corporate performance. These four main objectives have guided this research design: firstly, to determine the prevailing status of OHS management in the region; secondly, to investigate specific actions and procedures put in place and implemented by enterprises for workplace safety; thirdly, to know such effects that exist between OHS practices and corporate performance metrics such as productivity and employee satisfaction; and lastly, to provide evidence-based recommendations within the regional context. Each of these shall be useful in the development of the practical and theoretical dimensions of OHS management.

The adopted methodology is a cross-sectional survey, since the data studied can be collected from a wide population of manufacturing enterprises within a specified period. The methodology was efficient enough to explore, as widely as possible, a spectrum of data while ensuring that the data would at least be comparable among different sizes of enterprises and different industry types. Based on the established OHS frameworks, a structured questionnaire was prepared, taking into account the industrial and regional particularities of Macedonia-Thrace. It captures quantitative data on key dimensions of OHS management, including the presence of safety policies, employee training programs, risk assessment practices, and the perceived effects of their presence on operational outcomes. To ensure the reliability and validity of this instrument, a pilot test was conducted on a small sample of enterprises, and the resulting feedback was used to refine the survey structure and content.

A stratified random sampling approach has been used to attain maximum representativeness of the sample. According to [27,28], the manufacturing enterprises were divided into sub-samples based on enterprise size, namely micro, small, medium, and large, and also by industry type. This means that this research will indicate how micro-enterprises, having limited resources, operate compared with the large organizations that have an extended infrastructure in relation to safety. Ethical considerations were included in the research design to make sure the integrity and transparency of the research are beyond reproach. Participation in the survey was on a totally voluntary basis, and the management of respondents was assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. Regarding informed consent, the purpose of the research was explained to participants, who had all the opportunity to ask for clarifications before answering the questionnaire. Application of these ethical standards helps to gain confidence in the survey respondents and encourage honest answers, hence ensuring the quality of the data collected.

The sampling strategy followed in this research aimed at a diversified and representative dataset of the manufacturing enterprises in the Macedonia-Thrace region. The aims of the research were to assess OHS management practices and their influence on corporate performance; thus, the enterprises were sampled in such a way that the sample would include small, medium, and large enterprises from various industries within the manufacturing sector. This was necessary in order to have an overall picture of OHS practices and to explore whether such practices are different between small or large enterprises or between diverse industries. The target population included all active manufacturing enterprises in Macedonia-Thrace during the period of surveying (February to May 2021). Manufacturing enterprises were considered because of the important role they play in the regional economy and because occupational risks are higher compared to other industries. The sampling frame was derived from public business directories, state registries, and databases of industry associations to identify the pool of eligible enterprises. Textile, food production, chemical, and machinery industries were involved in the sampling frame so that the industrial diversity of the region would be represented.

Stratified random sampling was performed in order to obtain a representative sample. Enterprises were stratified by size into six categories. In doing so, this study aimed at the ability to identify whether the status of OHS implementation and its relation to corporate performance differ among enterprises of different sizes. The distinction is of high importance in the Greek context, where a great number of enterprises are micro and small enterprises, while larger ones play a significant role in manufacturing. The sample size was 103 manufacturing enterprises covering a wide range of sizes and types of industry. Such a sample was necessary in order to fulfill the research questions of this study and provide some very valuable insights into the nature of the variation existing between enterprise size and OHS management. Sampling participants within each enterprise emphasized owners, chief executive officers, managers, department heads, and safety technicians who were directly involved in workplace safety or had deep knowledge of OHS practices. Their experience was fundamental in having responses that were both correct and representative of their organization’s OHS practices and challenges.

The data collection was performed using a structured electronic questionnaire on Google Forms. The method proved efficient and less cumbersome since the respondents had adequate opportunity to take their time in responding [29]. The link was sent directly to the target respondents to the specific email addresses of the target population in every enterprise. For maximum participation and clarification of research intent, a follow-up was made through telephone contact with selected respondents. During this time, the objectives of this study were explained to them, and this population was further solicited for a response. This not only increased the response rate but also ensured that qualified participants understood why their contribution to this research was important.

The survey questionnaire was structured to evaluate OHS implementation and corporate performance across different industries and company sizes. It consists of five key sections, each focusing on specific variables influencing workplace safety and risk management. The following the

Table 1. Structure of the survey questionnaire and response format.

Section	Question	Response Format
1. Demographic and Professional Information	Gender	Female, Male, Other
	Age	20–30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60, >60
	Education background	Technical University, University, MSc/MBA, PhD
	Industry sector of the company	Open-ended
	Number of employees in the company	1–20 (Micro), 21–50 (Small), 51–100 (Medium), 101–250 (Medium), 251–500 (Large), >500 (Large)
	Role in the company	Owner/Board Member, CEO/Managing Director, General Manager, Director of OHS, Production Manager, Department Supervisor, Health and Safety Officer, Other
	Number of years in the company	0–5, 6–10, 11–20, >20
	Number of employees under responsibility	1–10, 11–20, 21–50, 51–100, >100
2. OHS Compliance with Legal Obligations	Does the company employ a safety technician?	Yes/No
	Does the company employ an occupational health doctor?	Yes/No
	Does the company maintain a legally certified health and safety logbook?	Yes/No
	Does the company have a written occupational risk assessment?	Yes/No
	Does the company have an emergency response plan?	Yes/No
	Does the company implement an occupational health and safety management system (OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001) [6]?	Yes/No
3. Lagging Indicators—Workplace Safety Performance	Have there been any workplace accidents in the past year?	Yes/No
	If yes, how many?	No Accidents, 1 Accident, 2–5 Accidents, 6–10 Accidents, 11–20 Accidents
	Have there been any near-miss incidents in the past year?	Yes/No
	If yes, how many?	No Incidents, 1 Incident, 2–5 Incidents, 6–10 Incidents, 11–20 Incidents
4a. Workplace Inspections and Audits	Are workplace inspections conducted by the health and safety officer?	Never, Rarely (1–2 times/year), Occasionally (2–3 times/year), Often (once a month), Always (every week)
	Does the health and safety officer record recommendations in the health and safety logbook?	Never, Rarely, Occasionally, Often, Always
	Are inspections conducted by a competent person within the company?	Never, Rarely, Occasionally, Often, Always
	Are measurements of harmful workplace factors conducted?	Never, Rarely, Occasionally, Often, Always
4b. Preventive Actions	Are workplace accidents investigated by the safety officer?	Yes/No
	Is there a documented procedure for investigating workplace accidents?	Yes/No
	Are near-miss incidents investigated?	Yes/No
	Is there a documented procedure for investigating near-miss incidents?	Yes/No
	Following an accident, are measures taken to prevent recurrence?	Yes/No
	Following a near-miss incident, are measures taken to prevent recurrence?	Yes/No
	Is the implementation of these measures monitored by a responsible person?	Yes/No
	Is personal protective equipment (PPE) provided to employees?	Yes/No
	Is there a documented procedure for the provision of PPE?	Yes/No
	Is preventive maintenance carried out on mechanical equipment?	Yes/No
	Is there a documented procedure for preventive maintenance?	Yes/No
	Are external contractors and subcontractors monitored for compliance?	Yes/No
	Is there a documented procedure for training and monitoring subcontractors?	Yes/No

presents the full set of questions used in the survey, along with their corresponding response formats.

The survey questionnaire was carefully crafted to measure compliance with occupational health and safety (OHS) regulations and how it influences the operational effectiveness of manufacturing businesses. Every section of the survey was carefully crafted to gather fundamental information on safety practices, compliance with regulations, and the mechanism of reporting accidents. This systematic approach ensures that the data garnered provides inclusive insights into the level of compliance with OHS across business sectors and organizational sizes.

The first section of the survey focuses on the collection of demographic and professional information, including variables of gender, age, level of education, industry sector, organizational size, job title, years of service, and the number of employees supervised by the respondent. These factors significantly influence safety consciousness and inform decision-making processes in the workplace environment. By categorizing respondents based on these characteristics, this study is in a position to identify trends in OHS compliance based on different levels of expertise, organizational structures, and industry types. For example, comparing whether veteran top-level professionals differ in prioritizing safety compared to less experienced staff provides critical information regarding safety culture and leadership roles in the adoption of OHS practices. The following section assesses compliance with legal mandates in terms of occupational health and safety (OHS), with a special focus on how often organizations utilize safety technicians and occupational health doctors, and hold appropriate safety documentation, i.e., health and safety logbooks, written occupational risk assessments, and emergency response plans. In addition, this section assesses whether organizations have adopted occupational health and safety management systems (OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001) [6]. These questions carry great significance as effective safety management systems have been linked with low rates of accidents, better risk management practices, and better compliance with regulations. Based on the responses received, this study aims to find out whether organizations following formal safety procedures achieve better workplace safety.

The third section examines lagging indicators relevant to workplace safety performance with a focus on recorded workplace accidents and near-miss incidents. Lagging indicators are physical proof of workplace hazards and OHS deficiencies, and examination of these indicators provides insights into the effectiveness of safety measures adopted by organizations. The inclusion of this part enables correlation analysis between the implementation of OHS policies and the actual performance of workplace safety. Results obtained from this part help identify if organizations with excellent OHS procedures have a lower accident rate and maintain superior levels of operational efficiency. The fourth section is divided into two distinct subsections. The first subsection, Workplace Inspections and Audits, analyzes the method used by health and safety officers when conducting workplace inspections, the frequency of inspections, and the thoroughness of documentation on safety recommendations. Periodic safety audits and inspections of possible hazard working conditions, i.e., exposure to harmful substances, noise pollution, and air conditions, provide critical guidelines for hazard identification before becoming workplace accidents. The second subsection, Preventive Actions, reviews whether companies carry out investigations into accidents, devise remedial action after accidents, and comply with safety guidelines for workers and subcontractors. Such measures are essential to the systematic handling of hazards and the long-term effectiveness of safety measures.

Each section of the survey is aligned with the research objectives to capture different dimensions of OHS implementation and its effect on corporate performance. By framing questions that assess demographic influences, compliance levels, workplace accident trends, and proactive safety measures, the survey provides a comprehensive dataset for evaluating the effectiveness of OHS strategies. These insights contribute to a broader understanding of how workplace safety practices can enhance corporate sustainability, reduce operational risks, and improve employee well-being.

3.2. Data Collection and Analysis

Data collection in this research was carried out in a way that accurately and effectively captured information on the status of the management of OHS in manufacturing enterprises in the region of Macedonia-Thrace. Furthermore, data collection has been carried out in a way that tries to minimize biases in any form, improves response rates, and caters for variance within enterprises. The key data collection instrument was a structured questionnaire, which was used to elicit data. This was administered online using Google Forms. The digital mode of data collection was selected for its efficacy in accessing a widely dispersed sample and at the same time offering targeted respondents an opportunity to conveniently offer their responses. Questionnaire collection took place between February and May 2021 and remained open for four months to afford the enterprises sufficient time to react.

Emails were therefore sent directly to the decision-makers or professionals with considerable knowledge of their organization’s OHS practices: managers, departmental heads, CEOs, and technical staff specializing in safety. The type of target respondents chosen was essential in obtaining effective, detailed data on safety policies, procedures, and concerns faced by enterprises. The email invitations gave a quick overview of the study’s purpose and instructions on how to complete the questionnaire. Finally, to further enhance participation, follow-up telephone calls were made to selected respondents. These served to explain in detail the purpose of the research, answer any questions that may be entertained concerning the questionnaire, and encourage them to complete it on time. Such personal contact resulted in an increased response rate and better quality of the data received.

No personal data are collected that may point to a particular participant; the identities of respondents are anonymized in the course of data analysis to protect personal information and ensure confidentiality. During the data collection process, the voluntary character of the participation was pointed out, and the right of the respondents to withdraw from the research process at any moment was made known. In the end, 103 valid answers from enterprises of different sizes and sectors of the manufacturing industry were gathered. A multi-spectral composition of respondents provided a good base for analyzing OHS practices among micro, small, medium, and large enterprises. Data reflect real conditions regarding OHS management in Macedonia-Thrace, thus establishing a very good basis for further analyses. Certain precautions were taken to reduce the biases that may arise from this data collection process. Nevertheless, there are some recognized limitations. For instance, possible weaknesses that could have occurred in this research include eliminating businesses that do not have developed electronic access and, therefore, could not participate in an electronically distributed questionnaire. In addition, when reporting information about themselves, respondents may suffer from social desirability bias. The use of follow-ups beforehand and the assurance of anonymity reduced such issues and made this dataset more reliable.

Data analysis in this study was meant to extract useful information from the responses generated throughout the structured questionnaire survey. Analysis was supposed to take a critical consideration of the present situation regarding OHS management practices adopted by manufacturing enterprises operating in the region of Macedonia-Thrace and their impact on firm performance. A systematic and quantitative approach to analysis was required so that the outcomes would be reliable and replicable with a guarantee that these results would also be compatible with the goals of this study. The first stage of data analysis included the preparation of the dataset for analysis. Responses assembled with the help of the Google Forms web-based solution were exported in spreadsheet format and thus allowed quick and efficient data cleaning and arrangement. Completeness and coherence checks were performed on the dataset, and incomplete or incoherent responses were removed to ensure that the validity of the results is guaranteed. Each response sheet was given a unique code number, maintaining anonymity and ensuring easy tracking during analysis. The data were categorized by major variables such as enterprise size, type of industry, and nature of OHS practices. Such categorization enables this study to find some patterns or relations in its dataset.

This research employed descriptive statistics for the summarization of sample characteristics and to provide an overall picture of OHS practices in the entire region. These include frequency, percentages, means, and standard deviations computed on variables relating to safety policies, training frequency of employees, and personal protective equipment. With respect to the establishment of the relationship that might exist between such variables, the research employed some inferential statistical techniques. There was the use of cross tabulation and chi-square tests to find out if there is any relationship between the enterprise size and implementation of the OHS practices, one of the major objectives of this study [30]. Furthermore, correlation analysis was carried out with the intention of testing the predictive relationship present between OHS practices and various indicators of corporate performance, such as productivity and employee satisfaction.

The analysis also attempted to establish whether or not the level of implementation of OHS varies with the size of the enterprise. For reasons identified above, responses were divided into categories on the basis of enterprise size. This provided for comparison across these four enterprise sizes to draw out general trends, for example, whether or not formalized OHS systems are more common in larger enterprises, or whether or not there is some sort of particular barrier to the implementation of OHS in smaller enterprises. The statistical tools used included SPSS Statistics V25 and Microsoft Excel (version 2402). SPSS provided a facility for higher-order statistics such as chi-square and correlation analysis, while Excel provided an avenue for data arrangement and representation in summary form. Ref. [31] shows that accuracy in calculation and clarity in the results are key elements of analysis. The results of the analysis have been summarized under key headings in a systematic manner. This is achieved using descriptive statistics, which summarize key sample characteristics and the incidence of specific OHS practices in tabular and chart form.

These findings pointedly bring into view some important associations and correlations that have a bearing on the conclusions of this study. The results are accordingly presented in sections to follow, organized according to the objectives of this study and research questions. Although all attempts were made to carry out the data analysis without any discrepancies, a few drawbacks must also be taken into consideration. First, self-reported data may be unrepresentative since some respondents might have overstated or understated the implementation of OHS practices. Second, the survey may be at variance in drawing causality on how OHS practices relate to corporate performance since it is a cross-sectional study. Future studies addressing these limitations would do well to include longitudinal data or methodological triangulation. Basically, the outlined data analysis procedure followed both descriptive and inferential statistical procedures of testing OHS practices and their implications on corporate performance in Macedonia-Thrace. Its nature of the proceedings was systematic, and the use of statistical tools has ensured that the findings are not only robust but also reliable and valid for the purposes of this study. These form a basis upon which all discussions and recommendations in this study are found.

3.3. Reliability and Validity Testing

To ensure the accuracy and consistency of the survey instrument, reliability and validity tests were conducted using Cronbach’s alpha and Bartlett’s test for sphericity.

Reliability Testing: Cronbach’s Alpha

Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, a widely used measure of internal consistency that determines whether survey items measuring the same construct yield consistent results. The formula for Cronbach’s alpha is expressed as follows:

$$\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{N}{N-1}}(1-{\displaystyle \frac{\sum {\sigma }_i^2}{{\sigma }_{total}^2}})$$

(1)

where N is the number of survey items; ${\sigma }_i^2$ represents the variance of each individual item, and ${\sigma }_{total}^2$ represents the variance of the total summed scores across all survey items.

In this study, four OHS compliance variables were selected for analysis, focusing on key legislative obligations. These variables include the following:

• Health & Safety Logbook Compliance—Whether the company maintains an officially certified Health & Safety Logbook.
• Written Occupational Risk Assessment—Whether the company has a formalized risk assessment document.
• Emergency Response Plan—Whether the company has an emergency preparedness strategy.
• OHS Certification (ISO 45001/OHSAS 18001)—Whether the company implements an internationally recognized occupational safety management system.

Validity Testing: Bartlett’s Test for Sphericity

To test whether the dataset was suitable for factor analysis, Bartlett’s test for sphericity was conducted. This test assesses whether the correlation matrix of survey items significantly differs from an identity matrix, indicating sufficient inter-item correlations for factor extraction. The formula for Bartlett’s test is expressed as follows:

$${\chi }^2=-(n-1-{\displaystyle \frac{\left(2p+5\right)}{6}})\ln \left|R\right|$$

(2)

where n is the number of observations, p is the number of variables, and R is the determinant of correlation matrix

4. Results

Demographic profiles, professional roles, and data on organizational contexts of the survey participants are presented in

Table 2. Demographic, employment, and organizational characteristics of participants (n = 103).

Variables	Descriptive Statistics n (%)
Age
20–30	5 (5)
31–40	28 (27)
41–50	35 (34)
51–60	34 (33)
>60	1 (1)
Gender
Female	67 (65)
Male	36 (35)
Education Background
Technical University	22 (21)
University	34 (33)
MSc/MBA	44 (43)
PhD	3 (3)
Role in the Company
Owner/Board Member	24 (23)
CEO/Managing Director	8 (8)
General Manager	11 (11)
Director of Occupational Health and Safety Department	9 (9)
Production Manager	13 (13)
Department Supervisor	12 (12)
Health and Safety Officer	15 (15)
Other	11 (11)
Number of Years in the Company
0–5	31 (30)
6–10	23 (22)
11–20	27 (26)
>20	22 (21)
Number of Employees Under Responsibility
1–10	41 (40)
11–20	10 (10)
21–50	21 (21)
51–100	18 (18)
>100	12 (12)
Number of Employees in the Company
1–20 (micro-enterprises)	18 (17)
21–50 (small enterprises)	14 (14)
51–100 (medium enterprises)	27 (26)
101–250 (medium enterprises)	29 (28)
251–500 (large enterprises)	11 (11)
>500 (large enterprises)	4 (4)

. The majority of respondents are male, aged between 31 and 50 years old. A significant proportion of the respondents hold advanced qualifications, with 43% having a MSs/MBA, followed by university graduates (21%). Respondents’ roles span across various levels of responsibility within the organization. The predominant group comprises owners/board members, followed by production managers (13%) and health and safety officers (15%). A significant proportion of respondents has been with their current firm for less than 5 years, whereas a notable percentage has 11–20 years of employment (26%). A significant number of respondents manage 1–10 employees (40%), while fewer oversee larger teams, such as more than 100 employees (12%). The majority of companies (54%) are medium-sized (51–250 employees), followed by micro-enterprises (17%) and large enterprises (more than 250 employees, 15%).

All enterprises included in the survey are in the manufacturing sector, covering a diverse range of activities, including food and beverage, chemical, apparel, metal, energy, printing, specialized, and other manufacturing activities.

In addition, employers’ experience is a leading factor toward the adoption of occupational health and safety (OHS) practice, given its impact on adherence to policies, safety culture, and regulatory compliance in manufacturing environments. The evidence that 48% of the respondents have more than ten years of experience, as shown in Table 2, supports the existence of a robust professional base in organizations. As such, most OHS programs are led by and safety-related decisions are made by highly experienced and skilled professionals in the industry. Management staff and employees with high levels of experience tend to have a better grasp of risk management, regulatory compliance, and the safety culture in the workplace. However, 30% of the respondents have less than five years of experience, which may hinder the adoption of OHS policies. Organizations with a high percentage of new employees will be required to invest in more safety training and official onboarding procedures to guarantee complete adherence to safety measures.

The statistics also show a high correlation between experience levels and the formalization of occupational health and safety (OHS) practices. Organizations run by people with high levels of experience are likely to adopt certified safety programs like ISO 45001 [6], carry out systematic risk analysis, and provide regular safety training workshops. On the other hand, organizations with less experienced employees are likely to have gaps in OHS knowledge and compliance awareness, calling for targeted policy interventions. These findings highlight the need for continuous safety education and the leadership role in developing a proactive safety culture. Additionally, organizations can benefit from mentorship programs, where experienced staff mentor less experienced employees on best safety practices, thus ensuring consistent adherence to OHS standards at all organizational levels.

The surveyed manufacturing enterprises in Macedonia-Thrace represent a broad spectrum of industrial activities, spanning from food production and chemicals to metal fabrication and printing services. Given this diversity, the level of occupational hazards and OHS implementation strategies vary significantly across enterprises. To provide a structured analysis, we categorized companies into three risk levels, including high, moderate, and low, based on their industry type, exposure to hazardous materials, and accident potential.

Table 3. Classification of manufacturing enterprises by occupational risk levels.

Risk Level	Industry Type	Key Occupational Hazards	Common OHS Measures Implemented
High	Chemical Manufacturing	Exposure to hazardous chemicals, fire/explosion risks, toxic gas leaks	Hazard control systems, emergency response plans, safety audits
	Metal Production and Fabrication	Heavy machinery, high temperatures, metal fumes, ergonomic strain	PPE use, ventilation systems, automated safety monitoring
	Energy Production	Flammable substances, high-pressure systems, confined space risks	Process safety management, real-time hazard detection, advanced fire suppression
Moderate	Food and Beverage Manufacturing	Machine-related injuries, food contamination risks, ergonomic strain	Sanitation protocols, machine safety training, PPE
	Printing and Packaging	Repetitive strain injuries, exposure to chemical fumes	Ergonomic workstations, protective gloves, proper ventilation
	Automotive and Equipment Manufacturing	Mechanical hazards, exposure to lubricants and fumes	Protective barriers, frequent safety drills, machine maintenance
Low	Textile and Apparel	Needle injuries, repetitive motion, minor fire hazards	Fire safety measures, ergonomic assessments, manual handling training
	Retail and Distribution	Logistics-related injuries, material handling risks	Forklift safety training, PPE for handling goods, periodic risk assessments

presents a classification of the analyzed enterprises by occupational risk level, highlighting the key hazards and common OHS measures adopted within each category.

The survey findings suggest that industries with dangerous operations (such as the manufacture of chemicals, metalworking, and power generation) adopt more structured and codified occupational health and safety (OHS) measures, primarily due to regulatory needs and the serious implications related to work-related incidents. Organizations in such industries report increased use of OHS certifications (ISO 45001) [6], emergency response measures, and periodic safety audits. Such measures play an especially prominent role in reducing the likelihood of tragic events like chemical spills, explosions, or collapses. Moderate-risk industries, including food processing, automotive manufacturing, and printing, show varying levels of OHS adoption. While basic safety mechanisms (e.g., protective equipment and machine safety training) are widely used, formal risk management systems are less frequently implemented compared to high-risk sectors. This is particularly evident in smaller enterprises, where cost constraints limit safety investments. Industries with low hazards, such as clothing manufacture and distribution, uniformly stress ergonomic safety, fire protective measures, and handling materials in safe conditions. Such organizations exhibit relatively low rates of compliance with formal occupational safety and health schemes, often due to perceived absence of hazard rather than because of cost-related constraints.

4.1. Survey Analysis Key Results

Implementation rates of various occupational health and safety measures across companies of different sizes are presented in Figure 2. As shown, there is a nearly 100% implementation of health and safety officers across all company sizes, with only a slight gap in smaller ones (app. 95%). Together with health and safety officers, authorized logbooks and written occupational risk assessments are generally prioritized and seem to be implemented at an earlier growth stage by the majority of companies. Smaller companies (1–50 employees) generally fail to implement the measures of occupational doctor and OHSMS.

The percentage distribution of different practices of inspections/assessments of working conditions across company size is presented in

Table 4. Percentage distribution of inspections/assessments of working conditions by company size.

	Never	Rarely (1–2 Times/Year)	Occasionally (2–3 Times/Year)	Often (Once a Month)	Always (Every Week)
Inspections by the Health and Safety Officer
1–20	0	6	17	78	0
21–50	0	7	0	71	21
51–100	0	4	4	74	15
101–250	0	0	3	31	66
250–500	0	0	0	18	82
>500	0	0	0	25	75
Recommendations by the Health and Safety Officer in the Logbook
1–20	6	11	11	72	0
21–50	0	0	7	71	21
51–100	0	0	26	59	15
101–250	0	3	24	41	31
250–500	0	0	0	45	55
>500	0	0	25	50	25
Inspections by a Competent Person
1–20	0	11	11	50	28
21–50	0	14	7	43	36
51–100	4	4	15	56	22
101–250	0	0	3	59	38
250–500	0	0	9	36	55
>500	0	0	0	50	50
Measurements of Harmful Factors
1–20	50	17	0	28	6
21–50	21	36	14	21	7
51–100	4	41	37	11	7
101–250	0	41	31	10	17
250–500	0	55	18	27	0
>500	0	50	50	0	0

. The practices include inspections by the health and safety officer, recommendations by the safety technician in the logbook, inspections by a competent person, and measurements of harmful factors. The data are categorized by company size and frequency of practice (never, rarely, occasionally, often, always). The results reveal significant differences in workplace inspections and assessments across enterprises of varying sizes. Larger companies (251+ employees) consistently conduct structured inspections by health and safety officers and external safety experts, ensuring higher compliance with OHS regulations. They also document safety recommendations more frequently, maintaining formalized logbooks for risk assessments and corrective actions. Mid-sized firms (51–250 employees) show mixed compliance, with some adopting regular inspections while others lack systematic monitoring mechanisms. In contrast, smaller enterprises (1–50 employees) report the lowest rates of structured inspections and environmental hazard monitoring, suggesting greater reliance on informal safety practices. This disparity highlights the need for regulatory support, financial incentives, and training initiatives to enhance safety compliance, particularly in SMEs, ensuring a more standardized approach to workplace risk assessments.

To examine variations in the application of occupational health and safety (OHS) practices, an independent t-test was applied to compare the safety compliance levels across high-risk and low-risk sectors. The results obtained through the t-test provided a statistically significant difference (t = 2.79, p = 0.006), implying that high-risk sectors make use of more standardized safety procedures as opposed to low-risk sectors. The statistical method that the independent t-test applies toward comparing the means between two distinct entities makes the identification of whether the found discrepancies are statistically significant easier. This research set out specifically to find out whether high-risk categories involving the manufacture of chemicals, metal fabrications, and the production of power leads to higher adherence to OHS laws as compared to low-risk categories involving the food industry, packaging, and textile production. The significant p-value (p = 0.006, below the 0.05 value) supports the belief that the found difference is not likely to be the result of chance.

The findings show that high-risk industries prioritize the enforcement of more robust occupational health and safety (OHS) measures both due to regulatory requirements and the inherent risks in their operational environments. Industries that deal with hazardous materials, heavy machinery, and high-temperature conditions are compelled to follow strict safety procedures, including accredited safety management systems such as ISO 45001 and OHSAS 18001 [6], which formalize risk assessments and safety processes. Periodic safety audits and inspections enable the early detection and minimization of workplace hazards. Mandatory use of personal protective equipment (PPE) protects employees from physical and chemical hazards. Stringent monitoring of subcontractor compliance ensures uniform enforcement of safety standards in all operations.

In contrast, low-risk industries tend to have less structured safety frameworks, as their operational hazards are perceived as lower in severity. While these industries still face ergonomic risks, machine-related injuries, and hygiene-related hazards, they often lack external regulatory pressure to enforce high-level safety measures. The results indicate that although OHS compliance in high-risk industries is driven by legal requirements, low-risk enterprises could still benefit from adopting more structured safety policies.

The findings highlight the importance of tailored OHS policies, ensuring that low-risk industries also strengthen workplace safety standards despite facing fewer immediate hazards. While high-risk industries are subject to comprehensive safety regulations, organizations in less hazardous sectors should proactively enhance their OHS measures by implementing structured risk assessments to mitigate potential health risks, even in low-hazard environments. Employee safety training programs should be expanded to raise awareness of workplace hazards and accident prevention. Cost-effective digital monitoring tools should be adopted to track safety compliance without excessive financial burdens. A stronger OHS culture, where management prioritizes workplace safety beyond minimum legal requirements, would further improve compliance across all sectors.

The implementation rates of various precautionary measures across companies of different sizes are presented in Figure 3. Overall, a trend can be observed whereby larger companies demonstrate higher implementation rates for precautionary measures. Data show that the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and preventive maintenance of mechanical equipment are well-adopted practices across all company sizes. Interestingly, documented procedures generally have lower implementation rates compared to the actual execution of precautionary measures.

Regarding the distribution of workplace accidents in relation to the size of the enterprise, it has been found that with the increase in the size of the enterprise, the percentage of enterprises reporting no workplace accidents went down gradually, while the number of accidents being reported correspondingly increased, which is depicted in Figure 4. It is indicated that large-scale enterprises are very likely to have workplace accidents due to the complications of and variety in their operation activities. Large organizations, in most cases, involve more complicated manufacturing, employ more workers, and deploy more machinery, which is predisposed to raising the possibility of accidents.

The same trend applies to near accidents, as sown in Figure 5. The rate of near accidents is higher in larger companies, which further proves the more complex nature of their operating environment and, therefore, exposure to risk factors. Alternatively, this may be because larger enterprises are more likely to have better reporting and monitoring mechanisms for such incidents, as larger companies more often have more formal OHS mechanisms, including health and safety officers, occupational doctors, or certified OHS management systems. These mechanisms enhance awareness and also encourage recording incidents, such as near accidents.

Higher rates of both accidents and near accidents that are reported do not mean worse safety performance in large companies; rather, they may be indicative of greater transparency and/or a more systematic approach to reporting. This is consistent with earlier findings in this study showing that enterprises where such safety mechanisms can be identified, such as holding an OHS certification like OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001 [6], report incidents more rigorously. Correspondingly, small companies usually have poorly developed active safety systems and often under-report accidents, or record them poorly; this artificially boosts the appearance of a better safety record for these companies.

These findings have thus far highlighted the need for effective OHS systems across enterprises irrespective of size. For larger enterprises, therefore, the need is for further enhancement of risk management and safety systems to keep pace with the intrinsic complexity of their operations. For smaller enterprises, the need is more in terms of instilling safety culture and mere mechanisms for reporting so that all incidents, including near-accidents, are properly documented and dealt with.

Table 5. Distribution of workplace accidents based on the implementation of occupational health and safety measures.

Distribution of Workplace Accidents Based on the Implementation of	No Accident	1 Accident	2–5 Accidents	6–10 Accidents	11–20 Accidents
Health and Safety Officer
Yes	59	22	16	2	1
No	50	50	0	0	0
Occupational Doctor
Yes	49	25	21	3	1
No	86	14	0	0	0
Authorized Logbook
Yes	62	19	16	2	1
No	67	33	0	0	0
Written Occupational Risk Assessment
Yes	58	22	17	2	1
No	73	27	0	0	0
Emergency Plan
Yes	58	21	18	2	1
No	69	31	0	0	0
OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001
Yes	53	24	18	2	2
No	64	21	14	2	0

presents the distribution of workplace accidents in relation to the implementation of various occupational health and safety (OHS) measures. It is clear from the results that the distribution of reported workplace accidents is related to the presence of relevant safety mechanisms. Workplace accidents are more often reported in those cases where safety mechanisms have been developed, such as having health and safety officers, occupational doctors, risk assessments, emergency plans, or certification of OHS management systems like OHSAS 18001/ISO 45001 [6]. Such findings explain that the comprehensive development of safety systems is related to a more systematic reporting of workplace accidents. Mechanisms like certified OHS management systems build an accountability culture and further openness in which recording incidents within workplaces is more comprehensive. For example, workplaces with developed and certified systems also show a more scattered profile of workplace accidents, showing a systematized way of recording and analysis of incidents affecting safety.

On the other hand, workplaces that report sparse to no basic safety measures record much fewer accidents. This may indicate that there is underreporting rather than improved safety performance taking place. Without health and safety officers, occupational doctors, or other formalized risk assessment processes in enterprises, active systems of tracking and documenting workplace accidents may not exist. The result of this could be a masking of actual safety performance. The importance of safety measures for all enterprises is greatly demonstrated by the results shown in Table 5. Workplaces with comprehensive safety systems assure not only better transparency but also increased competencies in highlighting emerging trends, establishing root causes of accidents, and thus implementing remedial and preventive measures. In enterprises where such systems are not in place, the creation of basic mechanisms of tracking and reporting is required in order to ensure a better representation of actual safety conditions and then conduct further improvements in workplace safety. The findings have pointed to the dual task of safety measures in improving safety conditions on the ground and increasing accountability of workplace incidents through better documentation, thus opening the way toward a more active and targeted approach to safety.

4.2. Reliability and Validity Tests Results

The calculated Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.476, indicating low internal consistency. This result implies that the items in the survey measure different aspects of occupational health and safety observance as opposed to measuring a single construct, thus showing the complexity that characterizes workplace safety policies. Since OHS practices are made up of many independent factors, it would be expected that a lower alpha value arises from a dataset that aggregates many different aspects of workplace safety. The low Cronbach’s alpha value indicates that observance of OHS entails a multidimensional concept, with the survey measuring different but related aspects of workplace safety practices. This result aligns with the literature, which asserts that workplace safety has many components, which include policy observance, training, and inspections.

The findings on the test results proved to be statistically significant (χ² = 105.77, p < 0.001), thus supporting the claim that the survey data show strong inter-item correlations, which make the data appropriate to multivariate analysis. These findings suggest that factor analysis would be available for use in future research to determine the underlying OHS compliance action structure. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was considered for further validation, but sample size and variable form constraints prevented its use in the current research. Nevertheless, future research should seek to expand the dataset and perform factorial tests to improve OHS measurement models.

5. Discussion

The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the management of occupational health and safety (OHS) in manufacturing companies in Macedonia-Thrace, particularly regarding areas of implementation deficiencies, trends in accident reporting, and corporate performance implications. This section positions the findings within the existing literature, exploring inconsistencies in formalizing safety procedures, differences in accident reporting by company size, and the strategic value of OHS in advancing business sustainability. One of the key findings is the gap between OHS implementation and formalization. While many enterprises claim to follow safety protocols, essential elements such as written occupational risk assessments, emergency plans, and compliance tracking remain inconsistent [32,33,34]. Research shows that firms with structured and well-documented OHS policies exhibit greater compliance, reduced incidents, and improved operational efficiency [1,2]. Without proper documentation, safety procedures often become informal, leading to weaker regulatory adherence and higher risks of non-compliance penalties.

Another major observation deals with accident reporting in terms of the organization’s scale. Larger organizations report more frequent workplace accidents; however, this does not always mean that the organization is exposed to increased risk. It simply indicates increased reporting techniques, the presence of safety staff, and proper monitoring frameworks set in place [3]. Smaller organizations, on the other hand, record fewer events, possibly not representing the real work environment but simply implying under-reporting due to poor safety monitoring techniques [4]. This study highlights the importance of standardizing accident data on a per-worker basis rather than relying on total accident counts. There is evidence that smaller firms, while reporting fewer accidents in total, often have higher accident rates per worker compared with their larger equivalents, with incidence rates two to three times as high [5,7]. This situation is associated with limited resources being set aside for safety precautions, poorer employee training programs, and a lack of formalized risk assessment procedures. The absence of systematic safety programs among smaller firms creates concerns about unreported occupational hazards, thus promoting the need for increased regulatory vigilance and greater compliance support to SMEs.

While the study presented herein is based on self-reporting systems, several jurisdictions employ Worker Compensation (WC) records to provide more objective information about accidents since such datasets avoid the under-reporting biases [8]. Therefore, future studies should consider regional WC dataset integration to provide a more comprehensive assessment of occupational accident hazards. This would validate self-reported accident patterns and provide a more consistent indicator of occupational health and safety (OHS) performance. Beyond accident reporting, this study confirms that structured safety mechanisms contribute to workplace accountability. Enterprises with certified OHS management systems (such as ISO 45001) [6], health and safety officers, and occupational doctors tend to document incidents more systematically, leading to better risk assessment and preventive measures [9]. Conversely, firms lacking formalized safety programs risk overlooking workplace hazards and failing to track incident trends effectively.

From a corporate performance perspective, the results reaffirm that effective OHS policies contribute to improved productivity, operational efficiency, and workforce retention. Companies with strong safety measures report lower absenteeism, reduced costs related to workplace injuries, and greater organizational stability [10,11]. Additionally, compliance with recognized safety standards enhances regulatory stability, strengthens stakeholder trust, and improves competitiveness, particularly for firms engaged in international trade [12]. These findings have several practical implications. First, bridging the gap in OHS formalization requires better documentation practices and regulatory alignment. Enterprises should adopt structured compliance frameworks, standard risk assessment protocols, and ongoing safety audits. Policymakers can support this process by offering incentives, compliance training, and standardized safety reporting tools.

Second, OHS interventions should be tailored to the organization’s size. While big companies may benefit from advanced safety analytics and automation in risk assessment, small businesses need simpler compliance systems, economically feasible safety programs, and digital tools for hazard surveillance. Marketing affordable OHS solutions, such as artificial intelligence-powered safety management and IoT-enabled incident reporting, can help SMEs achieve better safety outcomes without causing significant financial burdens [13]. While this study provides critical insights, it has certain limitations. The reliance on self-reported data introduces the possibility of reporting bias, as some firms may overstate compliance or under-report workplace incidents. Additionally, this study’s cross-sectional design does not establish causality, meaning that while relationships between OHS practices and corporate performance are identified, long-term effects require further study. Future research should explore longitudinal analyses and case studies to assess how sustained OHS investments impact business performance over time.

6. Conclusions

This study undertakes an in-depth review of occupational health and safety (OHS) management practices for manufacturing companies in the Macedonia-Thrace region with regard to implementation, documentation, and impact on performance at the organizational level. Results show that while most organizations claim compliance with the OHS laws, the official drafting of the safety policies deviates substantially from the implementation. This divergence is most notable in small- and medium-sized enterprises due to the constraints in the availability of resources for the formulation of structured OHS mechanisms [15]. Larger organizations, with the highest rates of incidence documentation, generally have increased transparency and accountability in the reporting of safety-related events. Research indicates that more advanced safety systems, including the presence of health and safety officials, occupational doctors, and ISO 45001 [6] certification, enable structured reporting of incidence and are related to better workplace safety [17]. The lack of such systems in small organizations is a cause for serious concern about the possibility of under-reporting of accident cases, thus highlighting the need for greater regulatory scrutiny and tailored compliance support.

This study reinforces the critical link between OHS practices and corporate performance. Effective OHS management enhances productivity, reduces operational downtime, and improves employee satisfaction, leading to stronger workforce retention and business resilience [18]. Furthermore, adherence to international OHS standards enhances market reputation, regulatory stability, and financial sustainability, providing a competitive edge in global industries [19]. Based on these findings, several important recommendations are presented. First, there is a need for organizations to prioritize formalization of OHS policies through the development of structured documentation, risk assessment frameworks, and compliance monitoring systems. Policymakers, in this respect, should support this effort by developing user-friendly regulatory templates and providing financial incentives to encourage certification adoption. Second, the OHS policies must be tailored based on enterprise size. Large enterprises should focus on advanced risk management approaches, while small businesses require cost-saving, simplified compliance tools that can be easily integrated into their daily operations [20,35,36]. Third, there must be encouragement of the use of digital safety technologies. New solutions such as AI-powered safety audits, real-time hazard detection systems, and automated compliance tracking software have the potential to greatly enhance OHS efficiency at affordable costs to SMEs [21].

Despite its contributions, this study acknowledges certain limitations, particularly the reliance on self-reported data and cross-sectional analysis, which may introduce reporting biases and limit causal interpretations. Future research should expand on these findings using longitudinal studies, qualitative interviews, and sector-specific case studies to provide a more comprehensive understanding of OHS implementation in diverse industrial settings. In conclusion, bridging the gap between OHS execution and formalization, improving regulatory compliance for SMEs, and leveraging digital innovations in workplace safety are essential for fostering a safer, more productive industrial environment. Collaboration among business leaders, policymakers, and industry stakeholders will be key to ensuring that OHS is not only a regulatory obligation but also a strategic asset for long-term corporate success.