C. Shulenberger, C. Martindale, D. Griffiths, Clayton-Bureau Veritas, Pleasanton, CA; M. Kosinski, A. Tsolinas, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA.
Genentech is a major biotechnology company with multiple sites across the United States. These sites vary in function, which includes research and development, manufacturing, distribution, and administration. Corporate health services includes the ergonomics program and support initiatives within all business units. This panel will discuss the Systems Management Approach being utilized in order to deliver a high quality and consistent ergonomics program at this rapidly growing and evolving company.
The objective of these presentations is to share with the participants the corporate goals, overall systems approach utilized, key decisions made, key stakeholders included, and internal and external systems utilized to accomplish the corporate goals. Specific examples of information management, training, and evaluation systems will be shared and discussed.
C. Shulenberger, G. Ramachandran, D. Griffiths, Clayton-Bureau Veritas, Pleasanton, CA.
The effectiveness of any industrial ergonomics training program lies in the employees understanding of the manufacturing process, and ability to apply structured methods to optimize the design of a product or process. Industrial engineering training has long been measured in terms of increased productivity, quality, and error reduction. Ergonomics, however, typically finds itself linked to safety and/or risk management measures due to workers compensation issues. For ergonomics training for engineers to succeed, it must focus on improving the competitiveness of company’s products, by addressing life cycle values such as design for manufacturability and reliability and reducing nonvalue added activities often associated with increased risk of injury. DFx ergonomics training seeks to educate engineers in the concepts and methodologies of ergonomics, quality, and lean manufacturing. DFx ergonomics training has been implemented in several companies’ user groups including technicians, line engineers and design engineers. Results have included improved productivity and product quality, reduced life cycle costs, reduction in lost work days, and error rates, and increased employee satisfaction. Key aspects addressed in the DFx training include (i) Documenting Process Steps — Both upstream and downstream, (ii) Identifying nonvalue added steps, (iii) Identifying high risk steps contributing to fatigue, discomfort and/or injury and (iv) Developing short, medium, and long-term improvement strategies. Equipped with this knowledge, employees are able to contribute to ergonomic initiatives that enhance product features, reduce life-cycle costs and development cycles, not only in their work area but also when working as a cross-functional team. To evaluate the effectiveness of the training program several case studies are provided in various manufacturing facilities. Company reported results showed a significant improvement in the value of the product, life cycle quality and employee productivity with fewer reports of discomfort from the employees. The course content and employer results will be shared in this presentation.
T. Silva, Humantech, Ann Arbor, MI.
Many companies are realizing the benefits of using the DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, control) problem solving methodology on their road to achieving a Six Sigma level of performance. Although companies are failing to realize the potential impact that good ergonomics can have on achieving that desired Six Sigma level. At the center of ergonomics is the person, the human system. Within that human system are the task demands, environment and capabilities of that person. These numerous inputs, if not controlled through good ergonomics, will lead to process variation. The goal in any Six Sigma project should be to deal with those sources of variation that are the result of poor ergonomics. Whether your project pertains to an office service function, or a heavy manufacturing facility, incorporating ergonomics into the DMAIC problem-solving methodology will allow you to more quickly achieve your Six Sigma level of performance. The objective of this session is to show how ergonomic factors contribute to variation in the process, show how to improve and control those factors to achieve a Six Sigma level of performance, and show how specific ergonomics tools and methods fit into the DMAIC problem-solving methodology.
S. Womack, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
The purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between lean production practices and work-related musculoskeletal disorder (WMSD) risk exposure. Since the late 1980s, American manufacturing firms, particularly in the automotive sector, have begun to widely adopt the Japanese Management System (e.g. Toyota’s Lean Production System) because of its superior quality and productivity measured against the traditional manufacturing systems of American and European firms. The proliferation of implementation of the lean production system within American firms gave rise to the debate over the extent to which this management system has adverse health effects, particularly regarding WMSD outcomes, on its labor force. This research investigates a methodology for operationalizing and measuring the degree of “leanness” in manufacturing jobs using value added work content as a proxy for job leanness. Thirty automobile assembly plant jobs were assessed for upper extremity ergonomic risk exposure and job leanness. The upper extremity risk factors included: forceful exertions; hand activity level (repetition); and posture of the hand/wrist, forearm, elbow, and shoulder.
A basic regression model of the relationship between physical WMSD risk exposure and job leanness was developed and the results show a statistically significant relationship with several risk factors. The assessments revealed a positive relationship between leanness and hand activity level and wrist flexion/extension. This model is limited in that the proxy for lean, value-added work content, does not capture the complexities of the independent variable, job leanness.
M. Wynn, Humantech, Ann Arbor, MI.
While some companies have shown significant improvements in WMSD incident rate, lost work days, and workers’ compensation costs, industry as a whole has not experienced consistent success. Despite increasing effort and investment, companies find that conventional ergonomics programs are struggling; WMSDs and related compensation costs are not reduced rapidly enough. According to BLS data, lost workday case rates declined only 21% between 1994 and 2000 (BLS, 2001) despite escalating government activity and substantial company investment in ergonomics programs. The missing element tends to be a proactive approach to reducing ergonomic risk. Companies that experience significant results rely on a solid foundation of risk management. They follow the basic principles of effective ergonomics risk management and use simple, straightforward methods to identify and implement workplace improvements. These include:
This session will give an overview of occupational ergonomics, effective business approaches to ergonomics, and critical success factors to maintain momentum. Real-world case studies will be used to demonstrate the success of these strategies to reduce ergonomic risk in the workplace.
M. Junge, Clayton-Bureau Veritas, Saratoga, CA; D. Cosgrove, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA.
OSHA recordable injuries and first aid cases occurred in a biotechnology pilot plant department. This particular pilot plant partnered with process sciences and manufacturing departments to enable research and development process validation, technology evaluation, and process transition to manufacturing. This department had a continuous high volume of work and was a critical link in the company’s production of pharmaceuticals. Department management and technical staff, health and safety staff, medical staff, and on-site ergonomists formed a team to define the problem, to develop recommendations, and implement solutions. The OSHA log and the medical data were analyzed along with the results of ergonomics investigations and the work procedures, to determine the root causes of the injuries and discomfort cases. Recommenda-tions were divided into short-term and long-term solutions. Equipment manufacturers were brought in to collaborate with the team and discuss potential changes to equipment design. Vendors provided sample tools on a trial basis. Ergonomics training regarding risk factors leading to musculoskeletal injuries was developed and delivered to the pilot plant department. Through trial and error, recommended solutions were refined, redesigned, and implemented. The holistic approach to problem solving proved effective in this particular situation by yielding process improvements and lowering risks in the work area. As a result, ergonomics principles were incorporated into the department processes as a proactive measure. The needs and capabilities of the technicians were met with the improved tools, equipment, and workflow. Part of the equipment build process was outsourced. New tools reduced hand repetitions and redesigned workstations brought equipment to a more comfortable working height. The equipment manufacturers provided design changes contributing to improve productivity in the department.
T. Armstrong, S. Womack, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Analysis and design of jobs for control of work related musculoskeletal disorders are an important part of many ergonomic programs. Jobs may be analyzed proactively for identification and control of possible musculoskeletal risk factors. Jobs also may be analyzed retroactively to identify causes of reported musculoskeletal disorders. At many worksites, jobs may frequently change, requiring re-analysis. This paper describes the use of a computerized database for collection of job information, analysis of jobs and tracking of job changes. The database included the department, section and job titles to identify jobs and links to video recordings of each job, standard data that were used for work allocation, ergonomic assessments based on ACGIH TLV for Hand Activity Level and user comments. Standard data were extracted periodically from the company database and compared with previous data to identify jobs that had changed and might require a new ergonomic evaluation. The Database was implemented using Microsoft Excel and VBA which is widely available. A report generator was developed so that users could extract and summarize job specific information in a Microsoft Word document. Users reported that the database significantly reduced the time required to conduct ergonomic assessments and enabled them to better track job changes. They found the ability to retrieve and play video clips of jobs particularly helpful.
D. Reynolds, Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL.
Lucent Technologies implemented a computer ergonomics program over 10 years ago. Efforts were made to provide employees with chairs with adjustable armrests and adjustable backrests. Height adjustable shelves were installed to support the keyboard and mouse. Ergonomics training was offered to employees through seminars and an ergonomics website. These efforts resulted in a major reduction in the OSHA recordable cases due to repetitive computer use. However, there are still employees who report symptoms from working on the computer. Observing employees while they work on the computer is an effective way to identify deviations from the neutral body position. These deviations can be caused from improper adjustment of equipment, typing styles, body size, and even vision. Once deviations are observed and the causes identified, an effective correction action plan can be implemented to remove or minimize the deviations. Keeping thighs level, back supported, wrists straight, and eyes looking straight ahead are key elements of the neutral position. This presentation will go beyond the basics and take a closer look at select deviations. It will illustrate specific examples including ulnar wrist deviations from using the keyboard and mouse, elbow position and its effect on the ulnar nerve, and neck deviations due to vision difficulties. For each example illustrated, the causes and corrective action will be discussed.
H. McLoone, Microsoft, Redmond, WA.
Fixed-split, ergonomic keyboards have been on the market for over a decade. Based on published university research at the time, these keyboards’ geometry reduce awkward wrist postures while maintain typing performance and have been shown to improve the functional and medical status of those persons with hand pain as well as to reduce the likelihood of developing signs and symptoms of musculoskeletal disorders such as carpal tunnel syndrome compared to typists using traditional, straight keyboards. Yet, the design can be improved. This paper describes the basic research, inspiration, and participatory design approach in creating a new fixed-split ergonomic keyboard. It has a steeper gable angle of 14 degrees (compared to 8 degrees) to further reduce wrist-forearm pronation; a curved key bed with keys on the periphery angled up and in to better match finger tip strike angle and to reduce reach distance to these keys such as Backspace; a taller, padded palm rest to reduce wrist extension; and a new palm rest lifter for a truly negative slope of keyboard (along with standard zero/flat and positive slopes) to further reduce wrist extension, especially for lower work-surface heights available on adjustable desktops and keyboard trays. Each variable was prototyped and evaluated iteratively and then combined into final keyboard design for final user testing of performance, posture and satisfaction and preference.
Posted May 30, 2006