Industrial safety is a vital issue for operations managers – it has implications for cost, delivery, quality, and social responsibility. Minor accidents can interfere with production in a variety of ways, and a serious accident can shut down an entire operation. In this context, questions about the causes of workplace accidents are highly relevant. There is a popular notion that employees’ unsafe acts are the primary causes of workplace accidents, but a number of authors suggest a perspective that highlights influences from operating and social systems. For employees in the manufacturing sector, workplace safety has evolved from an ancillary issue to an operating priority with significant economic and social implications Brown (1996). For example, the National Safety Council 1999 estimates that in 1998, the total cost of work-related deaths and injuries in the US was US$125.1 billion and that organizations lost 80,000,000 work days because of injuries. An increased awareness of these outcomes has incited a broad-based discussion of the causes of workplace accidents e.g., DeJoy (1996); Thompson. et al.(1998). A review of the literature reveals a range of hypotheses about accident causes. One school of thought suggests that nearly every accident may be traced to an employee’s unsafe act e.g., Burk and Smith(1990). However, researchers examining human information processing have documented the natural tendency for an observer to blame a person when an unfortunate event occurs e.g., Mitchell and. Wood (1980); Brown(1984). The practical result of these attributional errors in the context of safety can be a ”blame and train” prevention system DeJoy(1994) that does not always address true accident causes. The purpose of this paper is to present a review on the various perspectives on workplace safety in order to define more clearly the antecedents to safe and unsafe work behaviors in manufacturing settings. In the words of Borg (1966) the literature in any field forms the foundation upon which all future work will build. The review of some select literature and research studies is briefly explained in this paper.Research on workplace safety is scattered among fields such as occupational medicine, industrial hygiene, human factors engineering, safety engineering, labor law, organizational behavior, and human resource management. However, as noted by Brown (1996), it has been largely ignored within the field of operations management. Each discipline tends to focus on variables that fall within its domain, leaving few opportunities for readers to explore the combined effects that characterize organizational safety realities. An interdisciplinary literature search on safety uncovered causal variables ranging from the social to the technical, and from the person to the system, painting pictures that tended to be incomplete. However, we found it reasonable to group the explanations for unsafe acts, accidents, and related outcomes into three general themes: causes involving the person, causes involving the system, and causes involving system–person sequential interrelationships. Behavior based safety management focuses on the identification and modification of critical safety behaviors and emphasizes how such behaviors are linked to workplace injuries and losses. Behavior Based Safety is a process that reduces unsafe behaviors that can lead to incidents occurring in the workplace. The process works by reinforcing safe behavior and identifying the causes of unsafe behavior. Behavior Based safety management also discusses the future directions or strategies for improving the management of workplace safety. In India and abroad some researchers undertaken many surveys on Behavior Based Safety in different organizations. The report of the 8th Annual Behavioral Based Safety Conference 2012 states that the cause of most workplace accidents and incidents is directly related to human failure and error. Behavioral Based safety is frequently turned to when organisations have reached a plateau in their safety performance and the only logical step left in reducing the risk of accidents is to encourage the more active involvement of operatives themselves. The aim of implementing behavior based safety in an organisation is to get all employees to view safety in the same way and in a continuous, unconscious manner. The report has looked at how to instill a culture of BBS throughout the workplace and how to make safety a priority when recruiting, training and rewarding employees.Tharaldsen (2011) says that Behavior Based safety (BBS) approaches are rooted in behavioral psychology and makes use of stimuli – response models and principles of operant conditioning and reinforcement. A BBS approach will look for problematic behavior and will mainly be concerned with observable behavioral outputs. Behavior Based safety, which mainly is concerned with observable behavioral outputs, it tries to grasp the tacit or embodied sides of culture, to balance the formal and informal sides and may consider how external and internal conditions influence employees’ possibility of behaving in a safe or unsafe manner. In Behavior based safety approaches they examine the specific context of the employees, diagnose and treat the critical behavior, and work with the outcomes of culture. In safety research, it is generally assumed that there is a relationship between safety climate and safety performance; i.e. that the employees’ safe or unsafe practices or behaviors are a function of the underlying organizational safety culture and the reflected or measured safety climate. A mutual relation implies that safe behavior may lead to a safer culture and less accidents or reverse, that accidents may urge the organization towards a safer culture and better scores on safety climate measures. One might also finds situations where an improved safety culture involves better incident reporting and hence an apparent worsening of safety performance, and that employees with high safety awareness might expect more and, hence, be more critical than those who expect less. Safety climate, culture and reporting practices may depend on both local level engagement and trusting mechanisms between workers and management.