Effects of workplace Ergonomics on Productivity/Performance

Effects of workplace Ergonomics on Productivity/Performance

ABSTRACT

Workplace ergonomics is the science of designing a workplace, considering the capabilities as well as limitations of employees. This systematic review aims to examine the effects of ergonomics on the productivity/performance of employees. A total of 487 articles were identified in the preliminary search while 7 met the inclusion eligibility. A quality appraisal was done using the Downs and Black checklist to report confounding factors, validity bias as well as external validity aspects. Most of the articles reported on the productivity function.  Two studies assessed specific work-related performance using two different visual aid interventions. Two other studies assessed the production of two distinct products; CDW tubes and oil. These studies revealed better results with the application of interventions and improved working conditions. Two studies assessed the physical and mental wellbeing of the employees and established a positive relationship between these variables and ergonomic values. One study assessed an automated workplace design that revealed improved optimization of the product function,  with decreased conveyor and platform and trunk length. These articles reported a significant impact of ergonomic values on the performance of employees across industries.

Keywords: Product function, Workplace, Visual aid, Eyestrain, Musculoskeletal Disorders

INTRODUCTION

Workplace ergonomics can be described as the study of employees in their working environments. The International Ergonomics Association Executive Council defines ergonomics as a scientific discipline that focuses on understanding the interactions among workers and their professions (Tey & Graf, 2017). Therefore, ergonomics concerns creating work environments that foster productivity and avoid institutional obstacles such as stress, injuries, and other conditions that affect the wellbeing of employees (Leskovský, et al., 2019). Improper ergonomics lead to reduced motivation as well as increased sick leaves and absenteeism which ends up decreasing the quality of employee performance.

The evidence regarding the impact of ergonomics on employee performance is equivocal. For instance, a study conducted by Leskovský, et al. (2019), reveals that office workers reported they felt more energized, focused, and productive in sit-stand workstations. In contrast, a study carried out by Ojo et al. (2018) reveals that a group of male university students recorded reduced data entry accuracy and efficiency in a data entry task while standing than sitting. Another study involving a treadmill desk reveals that walking recognized as a major hindrance to tasks comprising of typing as such tasks require

MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Search Process

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify the relevant studies. The search was conducted in the following electronic databases EBSCO, OSHROM, Embase, PsycINFO, Biological abstracts, and Ergonomic abstracts.

2.2 Eligibility

The selection was carried in two main phases; In the first phase, studies were selected based on relevance to study terms including workplace ergonomics, effects of workplace ergonomics, productivity function, performance, human factors, work design, productivity time, safety and health. In the second phase, studies were selected based on the relevance of the full text of the articles to this systematic review.

2.3 Search Results

A flow chart of the systematic selection is as shown in figure 1. The onset search process identified 487 articles which reduced to 360 after all the duplicate articles were excluded.  The titles of the remaining studies were screened using the developed inclusion criteria. 341 studies were removed due to reasons such as relevance, study objectives, and population studied. In this case, 19 studies were identified and assessed for inclusion eligibility. 11 studies were omitted after full-text assessment as some of the articles did not report the effects of human factors resulting in the inclusion of 7 articles.

2.4 Data Extraction and Quality Appraisal

Data was extracted and synthesized form studies that had complete and flawless data. To examine the quality of the included studies, study population, data source, evaluated outcomes and the methodological aspects were extracted. This followed an ardent assessment carried by two independent reviewers. The reported were resolved using scores generated by a third reviewer. Another consideration is that the eligible articles were assessed using the Downs and Black checklist model to report confounding factors, validity bias as well as external validity aspects. Although the checklist contains a total of 27 questions, 4 checklist questions were deemed not applicable to this systematic review. 3 of the questions are associated with blinding and concealment and the remaining 1 question is associated with determining power.  The model assigns a 2 point compliance criterion, which gives a total score of 24, with the cut off mark being 12.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All the included articles focused on the effects of ergonomic factors and human factors. The studies had two main intervention types namely; simulated workplace designs and visual aids. Another important consideration is that q total of 10 work performance and productivity outcomes were established. None of the articles reported ethical approval.

Two studies focused on specific tasks; sorting mails and assembly tasks. The work-related performance was assessed using visual aid interventions which revealed a 45% – 75% reduction in awkward body posters and 72% neck discomfort.  One study developed an automated simulation workplace design that improved ergonomic attributes by 76%.  Two studies focused on extensive effects of ergonomics production of two products; oil and CDW automotive tubes which reported that satisfaction level is dependent on the design of the working area. Two studies focused on mental and physical wellbeing and the results increased performance with improved mental and physical wellbeing,

This systematic review aims at determining the effects of workplace ergonomics on employee performance. The seven reviewed articles assessed both the level and quality of productivity and performance. More so, these articles were based on visual aids interventions, work-related tasks, workplace productivity in different industries, and employees health.

The studies that focused on visual aids interventions recorded significant productivity improvement. Hemphälä & Eklund (2012) pre-intervention study revealed that the postmen and women who had eyestrain reported higher incidences of MSDs as well as slower mail sorting speed. The post-intervention study revealed that less work-induced stress decreased eyestrain and increased sorting speed. These results correlate with LUTZ et al. (2001) post-intervention study which recorded better levels of posture, increases muscle activity and reduced discomfort following the mirror visual aid intervention while carrying assembly tasks.

The Harari et al. (2017) automated simulation workplace design identified the best ergonomics values in a workplace through illustrations involving handling a mass of 23 kilograms. Precisely, the product function, improved with decreased conveyor and platform and trunk length Liravi & Baradaran (2019) in their study in an offshore oil company signify that the level of employee productivity in the workplace is augmented by good working conditions and proper management. Some of the identified aspects include freedom, job feedback, workplace design and body position. Similarly, Ravindran (2019) study on CDW tubes shows that the employees reported high levels of satisfaction with improved workplace ergonomics especially office design. Deouskar (2017) study adds to the previous studies showing a positive correlation between physical and mental wellbeing and workplace ergonomics in male and female employees. Lastly, Vink et al. (2006) study four cases establish that empowerment is not always the ultimate key to employee performance success. Sometimes, the workers not have adequate influence and knowledge to change the condition of their workplaces.

Conclusions

Improper work environment affects the productivity of employees as well as increases the physical and mental wellbeing problems such as muscle strains, eyestrains, work-induced stress and memory loss among others. Considering ergonomics values a priority in an organization fosters reputation while simultaneously improving the quality of work, performance experience and productivity levels,

REFERENCES

Leskovský, R., Kučera, E., Haffner, O., Matišák, J., Rosinová, D., & Stark, E. (2019, September). A Contribution to Workplace Ergonomics Evaluation Using Multimedia Tools and Virtual Reality. In 2019 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS) (pp. 317-326). IEEE.

Ojo, S. O., Bailey, D. P., Chater, A. M., & Hewson, D. J. (2018). The impact of active workstations on workplace productivity and performance: a systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(3), 417.

Liravi, M. A., & Baradaran, V. (2019). Effects of Workplace Ergonomics on Productivity in an Offshore Oil Company. Archives of Occupational Health.

Ravindran, D. (2019). Ergonomic Impact on Employees’ Work Performance. 6. 237-242.

Deouskar, N (2017), “The impact of ergonomics on the productivity of people” International Journal of Marketing & Financial Management, ISSN: 2348 –3954 (online) ISSN: 2349 –2546 (print), Volume 5,(Issue 6, Jun-2017), pp 59-63,

Vink, P., Koningsveld, E. A., & Molenbroek, J. F. (2006). Positive outcomes of participatory ergonomics in terms of greater comfort and higher productivity. Applied ergonomics, 37(4), 537-546.

Lutz, T. J., Starr, H., Smith, C. A., Stewart, A. M., Monroe, M. J., Joines, S. M., & Mirka, G. A. (2001). The use of mirrors during an assembly task: a study of ergonomics and productivity. Ergonomics, 44(2), 215-228.

Harari, Y., Bechar, A., Raschke, U., & Riemer, R. (2017). Automated simulation-based workplace design that considers ergonomics and productivity. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 16(1), 5-18.

Hemphälä, H., & Eklund, J. (2012). A visual ergonomics intervention in mail sorting facilities: effects on eyes, muscles and productivity. Applied ergonomics, 43(1), 217-229.

Tey, F., & Graf, M. (2017). KD1-2 Professional Human Factors and Ergonomics Certification. The Japanese Journal of Ergonomics, 53(Supplement1), S36-S39.

FIGURES AND TABLES

Figur

1. A flow of the included articles