A Macroergonomics Tool for Assessing Work System Processes: Systems Analysis Tool (SAT)

Abstract

A macroergonomics tool for assessing work system processes, the Systems Analysis Tool (SAT) is described. The seven-step methodology is discussed involving defining the problem and, developing and evaluating strategic systematic solutions. An evaluation scorecard which includes an Economic Advantage analysis is used to determine the cost/benefits of each proposed alternative or program solution based on direct and indirect costs and compensation. A decision criteria table is constructed providing a basis for a trade-off comparison of microergonomic and macroergonomic alternative solutions. The benefit of the SAT is the integration of micro- and macroergonomic approaches for solving organizational problems. Work system changes implemented by companies that incorporate a macroergonomic, systems approach demonstrate positive results in minimizing negative health effects based on financial and indirect costs and improved employee and business unit effectiveness.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brill

Margulis

Konar

(1984). Using office design to increase productivity. Vols. 1 and 2. Buffalo, NY: Workplace Design and Productivity.

Carayon

Haims

M. C.

Lim

S. Y.

(1996). Longitudinal study of ergonomic and psychosocial work stressors and musculoskeletal discomfort among computer users. In Brown

Hendrick

H. W.

, Human factors in organizational design and management - V (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 273–278.

Hall

A. D.

(1969). A three dimensional morphology of systems engineering. IEEE Transaction System Science Cybernetics, Vol. SSC-5, 156–160.

Hedge

Sterling

Sterling , (1986). Evaluating office environments: The case for a macroergonomic systems approach. In Brown

Jr. Hendrick

H. W.

Human Factors in Organizational Design and Management - II, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland), 419–424.

Hendrick

H. W.

Kleiner

B. M.

(2002a). Macroergenomics: An introduction to work system design. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA

Hendrick

H. W.

Kleiner

B. M.

(2002b). Macroergonomics: Theory, Methods, and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey.

Kleiner

B. M.

(1997). An integrative framework for measuring and evaluating information management performance. International Journal of Computers and Industrial Engineering, 32(3), 545–555.

Mosard

(1982). A generalized framework and methodology for systems analysis. IEEE Transaction Engineering Management, Vol. EM-29, pp. 81–87.

Mosard

(1983). Problem definition: Tasks and techniques, Journal of Systems Management, 34, 16–21.

10.

O'Neill

M.J.

, (1998). Ergonomic Design Organizational Effectiveness. Lewis Publishers, New York.

11.

Oxenburgh

M. S.

(1997). Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ergonomics Programs, American Industrial Hygiene Association, 58, 150–156.

12.

Robertson

Rahimi

(1990). A systems analysis for implementing video display terminals. IEEE Transactions Engineering Management, 37(1), 55–61.

13.

Robertson

M. M.

O'Neill

M.J.

(1994). A systems analysis for integrating macroergonomic research into office and organizational planning. In Grieco

Molteni

Occhipitini

Piccoli

, Work With Display Units, Selected Proceeding for WWDU'94, (Elsevier, North Holland), A6–A7.

14.

Robertson

M.M

Kleiner

O'Neill

M.J.

(2002). Macroergonomics systems tools. In H. Hendrick & B. Kleiner, Macroergonomics, Macroergonomics: Theory, Methods, and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey, 67–96.

15.

Robertson

M.M

Robinson

O'Neill

M.J.

Sless

(1998). Measuring the impact of work environment change programs: A systems approach. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting. (Santa Monica, CA), 984–988.

16.

Taylor

J. C.

(1986). Long-term socio-technical change in a computer operations department. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22, 3, 303–313.