scholarly journals Upward Voice: Participative Decision Making, Trust in Leadership and Safety Climate Matter

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 3672 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inmaculada Silla ◽  
Francisco J. Gracia ◽  
José M. Peiró
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Safety Climate ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Trust In Leadership

A supportive upward voice environment is critical in nuclear power plants in order to provide energy in a sustainable manner. In high–reliability organizations, front–line employees’ suggestions and concerns enable the early identification of potential problems that might have catastrophic consequences (e.g., a nuclear accident). Despite this, previous research has mostly focused on person–centered antecedents of upward voice and, to a lesser extent, the influence of the supervisor–subordinate relationship, while neglecting the importance of the organizational context. This study responds to the aforementioned research lacuna. It examined the relationship between participative decision making and upward voice, and the mediating role of trust in leadership in this relationship. Moreover, it further extends previous research by examining the role of safety climate, which is expected to moderate both the direct and the indirect effect of participative decision making on upward voice. The sample was composed of 495 workers from two nuclear power plants from the same organization. Findings supported the hypothesized moderated mediation model: the indirect effect of participative decision making (PDM) on upward voice via trust in leadership was contingent upon the level of the safety climate. The indirect effect became weaker as the safety climate increased. These findings support the relevance of the organizational context.

Safety Climate at Nuclear Power Plants in Japan

2004 ◽  
pp. 45-56
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Sakuda ◽  
Hirokazu Fukui ◽  
Michio Yoshida ◽  
Naohiro Yoshiyama
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Safety Climate

scholarly journals Erratum for “Role of Offshore Nuclear Power Plants”

1976 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-232
Author(s):  
Joel L. Caves ◽  
Heber T. Newton
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants

A Framework and Model for Assessing the Design Point Performance, Off-Design Point Performance, Control, Economics and Risks of Brayton Helium Gas Turbine Cycles for Generation IV Nuclear Power Plants

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold Gad-Briggs ◽  
Pericles Pilidis ◽  
Theoklis Nikolaidis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Gas Turbine ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Design Point ◽  
Load Following ◽  
Gen Iv ◽  
Cycle Efficiency

A framework – NuTERA (Nuclear Techno-Economic and Risk Assessment) has been developed to set out the requirements for evaluating Generation IV (Gen IV) Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) at the design conceptual stage. The purpose of the framework is to provide guidelines for future tools that are required to support the decision-making process on the choice of Gen IV concepts and cycle configurations. In this paper, the underpinning of the framework has been demonstrated to enable the creation of an analyses tool, which evaluates the design of an NPP that utilises helium closed Brayton gas turbine cycles. The tool at the broad spectrum focuses on the component and cycle design, Design Point (DP) and Off-Design Point (ODP) performance, part power and load following operations. Specifically, the design model has been created to provide functionalities that look at the in-depth sensitivities of the design factors and operation that affect the efficiency of an NPP such as temperature and pressure ratios, inlet cycle temperatures, component efficiencies, pressure losses. The ODP performance capabilities include newly derived component maps for the reactor, intercooler and recuperator for long term Off-Design (OD) operation. With regard to short term OD, which is typically driven by changes in ambient conditions, the ability to analyse the cycle load following capabilities are possible. An economic model has also been created, which calculates the component costs and the baseline economic evaluation. An incorporated risk model quantifies the performance, operational, financial and design impact risks. However, the tool is able to optimise the NPP cycle configuration based on the best economics using the Levelised Unit Electricity Cost (LUEC) as a measure. The tool has been used to demonstrate a typical decision-making process on 2 Gen IV helium closed gas turbine cycles, which apply to the Gas-cooled Fast Reactors (GFRs) and Very-High Temperature Reactors (VHTRs). The cycles are the Simple Cycle Recuperator (SCR) and Intercooled Cycle Recuperator (ICR). The tool was able to derive the most efficient cycle configurations for the ICR (53% cycle efficiency) and SCR (50% cycle efficiency). Based on these efficiency figures, the baseline LUEC ($/MWh) for the year 2020 is $62.13 for the ICR and $61.84 for the SCR. However, the inclusion of the cost of contingencies due to risks and the subsequent economic optimisation resulted in a cost of $69.70 and $69.80 for the ICR and SCR respectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document