A task and workplace assessment tool

• Main Authors: Chua, Harren N., Co, Michael P., Moreno, Nikki T.
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2000
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/12057
• Institution: De La Salle University

Executive Summary. The assessment of tasks and work conditions has long been a concern of ergonomics. Such assessment pinpoint ergonomic issues and possible areas of improvement. In assessing the task and workplace of a worker certain factors must be considered namely posture, force, repetition, manual material handling, and environmental factors. Questionnaires and checklists are ways by which work and workplace assessment can be done. Some questionnaires and checklists are based solely on worker responses while some ignore worker input and completely rely on input from the analyst. Also, input from the analyst can be either based on measurements or just based on observations. In order to effectively assess the task and the workplace, a workplace assessment tool must be able to assess each area of concern by taking both analyst and worker input. Worker input accommodates individuality and different perceptions of certain working conditions. On the other hand, analyst input must be gathered from direct observation and by measurements. While worker input gives judgments and perceptions, analyst measurements makes the assessment tool accurate with the use of facts that were gathered through observation and use of different equipment. The proposed assessment tool was in the form of questionnaires. One questionnaire is for the analyst and another for the worker. Thus, both measurements and worker perception are obtained. The assessment tool covers posture, force, repetition, manual material handling, illuminance, noise level and temperature. The proposed assessment tool provides scoring and action levels for posture and manual material handling. It also gives actual and recommended values for environmental factors. A pretest was conducted at LG Collins Electronics Manila. Findings from the pretest were used to make revisions on the questionnaires. The actual testing of the tool was also done at the said company. The questionnaires were used in the Final Assembly of television sets. The results were validated by comparing them to worker response. The comparison yielded accuracy levels for the tool. These accuracy levels were then compared to the accuracy level of existing tools. The proposed assessment tool proved to be more accurate compared to past assessment tools particularly in terms of postural analysis and lifting capacity. The reason for this is because both analyst and worker input were obtained. It is also more effective in pinpointing areas of improvement because the assessment was done on each body part assessed and not on the body as a whole. It was also able to accommodate localized effects of repetition and force which is a downfall of other tools. Furthermore, the tool is thorough because it covers a wide range of factors, it takes subjective and measured inputs and provides action levels.