PHYSICAL TASKS:JOB ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

By -

JOB ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

According to ANSI Z-365 (1995), job analysis and design serve two common purposes:

1. To identify potential work-related risk factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders after they are reported

2. To assist in identifying work-related factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders before they occur

Detailed job analysis consists of analyzing the job at the element or micro-level. These analyses involve breaking down the job into component actions, measuring and quantifying risk factors, and identifying the problems and conditions contributing to each risk factor. Job surveys, on the other hand, are used for establishing work relatedness, prioritizing jobs for further analysis, or proactive risk factors surveillance. Such survey methods may include facility walk-throughs, worker interviews, risk-factor checklists, and team problem-solving approaches.

Risk Factors and Definitions

The risk factors are job attributes or exposures that increase probability of the occurrence of work- related musculoskeletal disorders. The WRMD risk factors are present at varying levels for different jobs and tasks. It should be noted that these risk factors are not necessarily causation factors of WRMDs. Also, the mere presence of a risk factor does not necessarily mean that a worker performing a job is at excessive risk of injury. (The relationship between physical stresses and WRMD risk factors is shown in Table 22.) Generally, the greater the exposure to a single risk factor or combination of factors, the greater the risk of a WRMD. Furthermore, the more risk factors that are present, the higher the risk of injury. According to ANSI Z-365 (1995), this interaction between risk factors may have a multiplicative rather than an additive effect. However, these risk factors may pose minimal risk of injury if sufficient exposure is not present or if sufficient recovery time is provided. It is known that changes in the levels of risk factors will result in changes in the risk of WRMDs. Therefore, a reduction in WRMD risk factors should reduce the risk for WRMDs. Figure 18 shows the flow chart for the ergonomics rule for control of MSDs at the workplace proposed by OSHA (2000).

Work Organization Risk Factors

The mechanisms by which poor work organization could increase the risk for WUEDs include mod- ifying the extent of exposure to other risk factors (physical and environmental) and modifying the

Physical Tasks Analysis, Design, and-0057

stress response of the individual, thereby increasing the risk associated with a given level of exposure (ANSI 1995). Specific work organization factors that have been shown to fall into at least one of these categories include (but are not limited to):

1. Wage incentives

2. Machine-paced work

3. Workplace conflicts of many types

4. Absence of worker decision latitude

5. Time pressures and work overload

6. Unaccustomed work during training periods or after return from long-term leave

Procedures for Job Analysis and Design

Job analysis should be performed at a sufficient level of detail to identify potential work-related risk factors associated with WRMDs and include the following steps:

1. Collection of the pertinent information for all jobs and associated work methods

2. Interview of the representative sample of the affected workers

3. Breakdown of the jobs into tasks or elements

4. Description of the component actions of each task or element

5. Measurement and quantification of WRMD risk factors

6. Identification of the risk factors for each task or element

7. Identification of the problems contributing to risk factors

8. Summary of the problem areas and needs for intervention for all jobs and associated new work methods

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DUALITY THEORY:THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY

By -
Image
THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY Given our standard form for the primal problem at the left (perhaps after conversion from another form), its dual problem has the form shown to the right. Thus, with the primal problem in maximizatio n form, the dual problem is in minimization form instead. Furthermore, the dual problem uses exactly the same pa r amete r s as the primal problem, but in different locations, as summarized below. 1. The coefficients in the objective function of the primal problem are the right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the dual problem. 2. The right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the primal problem are the coef- ficients in the objective function of the dual problem. 3. The coefficients of a variable in the functional constraints of the primal problem are the coefficients in a functional constraint of the dual problem. To highlight the comparison, now look at these same two problems in matrix notation (as introduced at the beginn...
Read more

NETWORK OPTIMIZATION MODELS:THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM

By -
Image
THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM The minimum spanning tree problem bears some similarities to the main version of the shortest-path problem presented in the preceding section. In both cases, an undi r ecte d and connected network is being considered, where the given information includes some mea- sure of the positive length (distance, cost, time, etc.) associated with each link. Both problems also involve choosing a set of links that have the shortest total length among all sets of links that satisfy a certain property. For the shortest-path problem, this property is that the chosen links must provide a path between the origin and the destination. For the minimum spanning tree problem, the required property is that the chosen links must provide a path between ea c h pair of nodes. The minimum spanning tree problem can be summarized as follows: 1. You are given the nodes of a network but not the links. Instead, you are given the po- tential links and the positive length for each ...
Read more

INTEGER PROGRAMMING:THE BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS

By -
TH E BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS Integer programming has been an especially exciting area of OR since the mid-1980s be- cause of the dramatic progress being made in its solution methodology. Background To place this progress into perspective, consider the historical background. One big break- through had come in the 1960s and early 1970s with the development and refinement of the branch-and-bound approach. But then the state of the art seemed to hit a plateau. Rel- atively small problems (well under 100 variables) could be solved very efficiently, but even a modest increase in problem size might cause an explosion in computation time be- yond feasible limits. Little progress was being made in overcoming this exponential growth in computation time as the problem size was increased. Many important problems arising in practice could not be solved. Then came the next breakthrough in the mid-1980s, with the introduction of the b r an c h- and-cu t approach to sol...
Read more