The research involved the use of ergonomic audit analyses in identifying risks in each of the three case study organisations examined (see section 5.4). This section provides a definition of ergonomics, it explores the use of ergonomic programmes in the literature in connection with improving the health and safety in industrial workplaces. Ergonomics was developed during the Second World War, when technology and the human sciences were systematically applied in a co-ordinated manner. ‘An inter-disciplinary approach involving physiologists,
psychologists, anthropologists, medical doctors, work scientists and engineers worked together to address the problems of the operation of complex military equipment’ (Dul 2001
:1). The International Ergonomics Association (IEA) defines ergonomics as:
‘Ergonomics or (human factors) is the scientific discipline concerned with understanding of the interactions among humans and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and methods to design, in order to optimize human well- being and overall system performance’ (Dul 2001 :1).
A useful definition is provided by Petersen (1989 :199):
‘Ergonomics by its very definition is safety related. While it is not an exact science, it is a rational approach to the problems of designing and constructing things so that the user will be less likely to make errors resulting in accidents. It attempts to make machines more convenient and comfortable, less confusing, less exasperating, and less fatiguing’.
Close attention to the principles of ergonomics, ergonomic design, interface design and anthropometry can have significant benefits in reducing stress in the workforce, thereby promoting greater efficiency and reduced manufacturing losses (Stranks 1990).
There is considerable compelling justification for the use of ergonomic practices in industrial workplaces in the ergonomics literature. A full review of this work is out with the scope of this thesis. Simpson (1990), suggests that the implementation of ergonomics programmes in manufacturing organisations can potentially improve both productivity and safety. The use of ergonomics programmes is well represented in large automotive manufacturing organisations, with specific health improvements. Moore (1994), reports that ergonomics was used in a participatory approach to improve one task in an assembly plant, which resulted in a 29% decrease in the incidence of total musculoskeletal disorders, a 78% decrease in upper extremity disorder incidence and an 82% decrease in lost days.
The participative approach is defined as: ‘participation is seen as providing the opportunity
for real, early and full involvement of the people involved (operators, supervisors, etc.) in the making of decisions about their jobs, systems, workplace and organization’ (Wilson
1991: 69).
The participative approach has several advantages Wilson (1991: 72) states: • ‘solution ownership and therefore commitment;
• increased ergonomics awareness for all concerned;
• better solution design (from the knowledge of the people closest to the work); • better utilisation of the company’s employees; and
• reduced undesired side effects at implementation’. Wilson (1991: 73) also lists a number of disadvantages:
• ‘reduced support if participation is ‘half-hearted’ (if undertaken solely as a public
relations exercise);
• poor decision making (especially if the group decision ends up being the ‘lowest
common denominator’);
• increased time, and cost, to plan and develop solutions
• a poor result if the motivation and knowledge of participants is insufficient for the
process;
• the risk that other groups may want to be involved in a similar process when it is
unfeasible or undesirable for them to do so’.
However, there is an acknowledged support for the participative approach, Fox (1985) states that ‘commitment entails conscious choice’, support for participative approach to workstations changes. Sell (1980) suggests that an imposed workstation change breaks the psychological contract with the worker about how his job is performed.
The use of participation results in the sharing of knowledge to the participating workforce. Corlett (1991: 418), states that, in order to achieve benefits, ‘we must give ergonomics away,
transfer our knowledge and methods to others who are close to the places where changes have to be made, so that they do much of the ergonomics for themselves’.
In order to implement changes in job design, Sell (1980) suggests that a steering group is used to maintain an organisation-wide perspective. In addition he advises the use of working parties and the formation of workforce groups to enable regular communication and the sharing of knowledge. Rose (1995) discusses the use of an employee advisory group in his five step plan for ergonomic implementation.
The use of ergonomic audits, are advised to evaluate the ergonomic situation, prioritise attention and provide a consistent approach. Lovesay (1993) discusses a two stage audit approach which reviews the existing data in an organisation (medical records and absence rates) which point to potential problems and a workplace survey. He suggests three objectives for this survey:
• identify violations of ergonomic principles; • be useable in field conditions;
• give unambiguous, directive output to alert the user to redesign opportunities. Weneck, quoted in Vasilash (1994), discusses the importance of ergonomists to provide tools and methods which can be used by a wide variety of people and applied to a wide variety of processes. Naderi and Baggerman (1992) suggest a methodology where a workplace survey forms part of a review of all relevant existing documentation and completion of an ergonomics workplace checklist. The process includes a high, medium or low priority with both high and medium ratings resulting in a full ergonomic task analysis and redesign. Kittusamy et al. (1992) describe a workplace audit which considers a range of factors which may put workers at risk. The use of ergonomic audits is well established in the literature, the actual tools used, and their development is discussed in chapter 4.
2.10 Summary
This chapter has reviewed the health and safety performance of UK construction and discussed the context of health and safety including, the drivers and barriers to performance improvement. The chapter has reviewed the key theories relating to accident causation and the characteristics of accidents. The type of accidents have changed little over the years with falls accounting for almost half of all fatalities. This has achieved the first objective (1.3.2). A discussion of the ergonomic programmes used in industrial workplace have provided a background to the presentation of the development of the ergonomic tools (see section 4.5). The next chapter looks at offsite: its terms, the drivers and barriers to the use of offsite and a review of the extent and affect of offsite on occupational health and safety in the literature, thus providing a basis for achieving the second research objective (1.3.2).