Participatory ergonomics applied in installation work
Introduction
The requirements on companies to fulfill the needs of their clients and shareholders are high. Consequently, the major challenge of companies is to be innovative in markets and maximize efficiency. In this paper, a large installation company (7000 employees) tried to improve efficiency by reducing sick leave caused by musculoskeletal workload and increase the handling time during maintenance or construction operations.
However, changing working methods is difficult. Sometimes workers do not see the necessity, sometimes they are too costly, sometimes workers may refuse to use new working methods, or it is difficult to find the most appropriate improvement(s) aimed at a reduction of musculoskeletal load and efficiency in work. Participation of workers during the development of the changes may help to overcome these difficulties (Noro, 1999; Wilson, 1995; Noro and Imada, 1991).
Several strategies or models of participatory ergonomics have been reported in the literature. For instance, Wilson (1995) described the Design Decision Group to apply creativity and simulation techniques in participatory groups of workers to find solutions for problems. Haims and Carayon (1996), who presented an action-research model for continuous improvement provide another example. Participants are given practical ergonomics training as well as feedback by a trainer. In continuous learning loops of action and feedback, the participants become more conscious of their work environment and eventually take over the role of the ergonomist.
Participatory ergonomics may be structured around a team or task-force (de Jong and Vink, 2000) mostly consisting of representatives of management and workers, provided with ergonomics input and training. Zink (1996) reports another approach which uses small participatory teams of representatives of lower management and workers led by a project manager who report to a steering committee of representatives of top management.
There is no single, unifying model of participatory ergonomics (Vink et al., 1992). Because no single approach can be effective in all situations, the most appropriate strategy should be chosen for each project (Haines and Wilson, 1998). Therefore, an adjusted participatory ergonomics approach was developed for this project based on successful applications of the approach in previous studies in similar situations (Urlings et al., 1994; Vink and Kompier, 1997; Vink et al., 1997). Essentials in the approach are as direct as possible employee participation, use of ergonomists’ advice, a steering group guides the project and management support is obtained.
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effects of this approach. Our hypothesis is that the approach has no effect. To understand why some devices were adopted and others not, not only the final results of the approach are studied, but also the effects of each step and the experiences with the devices.
Section snippets
Situation
Installation work is found in construction and maintenance. It could be, for instance, installing central heating, electrical installation in the floor or ceiling, installing bathrooms or making systems for the process industry. The company that applied the participatory ergonomics approach has 10 business units each with their own specific functions. Mostly the work is done in small groups that have their own vans. Each group has its specific handtools and materials. There is a large variety
Results of step 2: Analysis of work and health
The questionnaire showed specifications of three major problems: (1) musculoskeletal problems during manual transport from the van to and from the workplace and to and from the warehouse; (2) musculoskeletal problems during working kneeling or squatting due to limited space; (3) musculoskeletal problems while working in a static posture.
Results show that manual transport solutions are needed in five types of work, solutions for kneeling in at least two types of work and static postures in at
Discussion
The hypothesis that the process had no effect is rejected. Eight out of 10 business units used at least one device and four business units use them daily. However, the effect of the project is probably larger as 60 additional solutions were developed, although no specific data are available on numbers in use. This is one of the main problems of a participatory ergonomics project in a large company of 7000 employees with a large variety in work activities and with responsibilities delegated at a
Conclusion
The company has evaluated the project as successful, because improvements aimed at reduction of musculoskeletal loading have been implemented and cost-effective outcomes were shown within a year. However, from a scientific point of view, this study has drawbacks since the solutions have hardly spread throughout the company, and the effects of the use of the solutions have only been roughly estimated and indicated by employees. The first steps in the process (introduction, analysis of work,
References (16)
- et al.
The adoption of technological innovations for glaziers; evaluation of a participatory ergonomics approach
Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
(2000) - et al.
A participatory ergonomics approach to redesign work of scaffolders
Saf. Sci.
(1997) Solution ownership in participative work designthe case of a crane control room
Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
(1995)- Bernoux, P., 1994. Participation: a review of the literature. In: M. Gold (Ed.), The Economics of Participation,...
- et al.
Psychosocial factors at work and musculoskeletal disease
Scand. J. Work Environ. Health
(1993) - Haims, M.C., Carayon, P., 1996. Implementation of an ‘in-house’ participatory ergonomics program: a case-study in a...
- Haines, H.M., Wilson, J.R., 1998. Development of a framework for participatory ergonomics. HSE Books, ISBN 0 7176...
Ergonomics in organizational design and management
Ergonomics
(1991)
Cited by (72)
A case study of motion data-driven biomechanical assessment for identifying and evaluating ergonomic interventions in reinforced-concrete work
2023, Developments in the Built EnvironmentParticipatory ergonomics: Evidence and implementation lessons
2018, Applied ErgonomicsBuilding healthy construction workers: Their views on health, wellbeing and better workplace design
2016, Applied ErgonomicsCitation Excerpt :This provides a sound basis for a participatory ergonomics approach in the construction industry; workers have good ideas/solutions to problems and are keen to share/discuss them. In previous research, the creativity and enthusiasm of the workers in manual teams has been harnessed in a variety of ways such as idea books and boards where workers write down ideas or post them up on cards (de Jong and Vink, 2002; Loch et al., 2010). More recently in keeping with modern technology, a smartphone app was trialled where employees could message an online portal with suggestions and ideas (Davies and Harty, 2014).
The application of an industry level participatory ergonomics approach in developing MSD interventions
2016, Applied ErgonomicsCitation Excerpt :However, the study has highlighted both strengths and weaknesses of such an approach. As de Jong and Vink (2002) stated, there is no single approach that can be effective in every case, while Haines and Wilson (1998) argued that “the most appropriate strategy should be chosen for each project”. It is unknown whether industry level participation with the MIHSF and engagement with a sample of industry staff and plants resulted in less useful outcomes than would the same industry level MIHSF participation, but also with plant-level staff participation.