Have you ever had a problem at work that never really went away despite trying different things? Things may have improved to a point but then stagnated. Did you eventually give up and accept that that’s just the way it’s going to be? If so, you’re definitely not alone in that experience; however, have you ever thought that the reason for the less-than-success efforts at resolving the problem was because you weren’t working on the right problem? As a business efficiency and ergonomics consultant I am often brought into organizations because despite their time and effort on trying to fix the problem it still exists. There are many reasons why this happens. Sometimes it can be the lack of expertise and knowledge or the inability to devote enough time and energy to fully resolve the problem due to the “wearing of many hats” or simply the mindset that accepts the problem as fact, i.e. “it’s always been this way” or “it’s just the cost of doing business”. However, in my experience the reason is that the problem being fixed isn’t the right problem. Let me know give you some examples to illustrate this.
One of the most common safety problems organizations have are “ergonomic” injuries, i.e. injuries that are related to strains and sprains. The most common solution to this problem, “ergonomic” injuries, is to educate workers on proper lifting/working techniques and implementation of a stretching program. My question with these “ergonomic” injuries has always been, “Are they due to workers who aren’t flexible enough or are they due to a work environment that causes them to have to bend, reach or assume awkward postures? If the work requires highly flexible workers then I’d recommend the company have a post-offer, pre-work screen on flexibility so they can screen and hire only past gymnasts. But would that truly solve the “problem”? Performing work day in, day out that requires movements outside of the neutral zones over time is nearly guaranteed to produce wear and tear that will lead to injuries no matter how flexible the person. Stretching programs may initially result in a decrease in injury due to increased worker awareness and simply by doing something different, i.e. the Hawthorne Effort. The true problem in this case is the design of the work environment, workflow, layout and/or equipment/tools used by the worker. If no changes or the wrong changes are done then the “ergonomic” injuries will not go away. As I have stated in an earlier article, stretching programs do not equate to ergonomics. Stretching programs attempt to fix the workers instead of fixing the true problem.
A very similar safety problem is from repetitive motion, such as computer use or performing tasks such as hand grinding/sanding parts. Common solutions to these problems are to do stretching programs, but in addition provide “ergonomic” equipment and possibly add in some type of job rotation. In the case of repetitive injuries due to computer use, especially the mousing hand, the true problem resides in the software that is used, i.e. it requires the user to perform numerous clicks to move about the different screens and entry fields. I know of at least of couple instances where a custom software program results in the users needing to click 2,500- 3,000 times/hour. There are jobs in which the only task a worker performs is hand grinding/sanding. Even with stretching and using an ergonomic mouse or ergonomic grinder/sander, respectively, there are bound to be injuries. For the computer injuries the true problem lies in how the software program was written, i.e. excessive mouse click with no use of short cut keys. For the hand grinding/sanding a good portion of the root cause could very well lie in the design and production process of the part itself. If the production process could result in less excessive material to grind/sand away then the amount of time spent on this task would be reduced. In both cases, changes in the process will result in lowering injuries and most likely would also improve efficiency and quality.
Another common problem is the lack of efficiency in the production process. This can occur in a variety of settings in manufacturing and construction. Typically organizations focus on improving how the products are made or services are delivered as they believe that the lack of output is directly due to the production processes. They work on reducing wasted time, efforts and materials/equipment in the process. No doubt that savings are realized by doing this; however, does the lack of efficiency completely reside in production? If one uses “silo thinking” the answer is yes. But take a couple steps back and look at the big picture. Where does production get its marching orders? From sales and scheduling. So focusing strictly on the production process itself without looking at how the processes that occur in sales and scheduling impact production will result is less than optimal improvement in production efficiency. For instance, the sales person fills out the order form and fills in the specifics of the job for the client. For instance, if the sales person leaves out or overlooks details that affect scheduling and/or production then that will result in some amount of lost efficiency. This lack of detail can start a cascading effect that leads to non-optimal scheduling which in turn leads to slower production which eventually effects customer service.
In the above example, I’ve seen organizations invest in new equipment that is “guaranteed” to increase their production by a certain percentage, say 50-75%, only to achieve a production rate much less than advertised. The reason could be that inefficiency in the production process was only partially related to the equipment, i.e. there are other elements (human and workflow) that are influencing the outcome. Another can be directly caused by the new equipment—speeding up one area production can produce bottlenecks in other production areas that weren’t designed to function at the same new speed. So in this case the solution to problem produced a new problem.
The point of this article is to make you stop and think about the problem you are experiencing in your business. Many, if not most problems, related to injuries and efficiency are due to process/business system deficiencies. What is easily visible is most likely the symptom but not the actual root cause of the problem. You can implement more training, more programs and more PPE focused on improving worker performance and safety with little long lasting success because the true problem didn’t reside there—it was somewhere or something else. If your solutions to fix the problem aren’t working, then my advice is to take another look at the “problem” and ask if you’re solving the right problem.
- Log in to post comments