Integration of musculoskeletal disorders prevention into management systems: A qualitative study of key informants’ perspectives

Tensions in sustainable warehousing: including the blue-collar perspective on automation and ergonomic workplace design

“…Related practices Management commitment Management commitment to automation and ergonomics projects increases the probability of successful implementation as this is often related to the commitment of resources being assigned to these projects (Hendrick 2003;Yazdani et al 2018) Process orientation Process orientation and the notion of continuous improvement support a clear improvement trajectory with an automation and ergonomics focus (Shevchenko et al 2018) Accountability Operational workers and managers are held accountable for complying with health and safety rules, as well as measured and rewarded for working safely (Shevchenko et al 2018;Yazdani et al 2018) Leadership and expertise Ergonomics interventions require knowledge of related (automation) technologies and their implementation (Hendrick 2003). In addition, (leadership) capabilities and an aligned human resource management strategy (e.g., in the form of training) are very relevant for effective and adequate implementation (Shevchenko et al 2018) Employee involvement Successful implementation projects also utilize the experience of operational workers in a participatory process where a professional ergonomist serves as a facilitator.…”

“…In addition, (leadership) capabilities and an aligned human resource management strategy (e.g., in the form of training) are very relevant for effective and adequate implementation (Shevchenko et al 2018) Employee involvement Successful implementation projects also utilize the experience of operational workers in a participatory process where a professional ergonomist serves as a facilitator. Obvious deficiencies that have relatively inexpensive improvements can lead to quick payoffs and more acceptance among team members ("simple solutions first") (Hendrick 2003;Yazdani et al 2018) and Guerci 2018), and in general, the recurring choice between profit and social or environmental issues (Epstein et al 2015). Such tensions are recognized as an inherent part of sustainability and organizational processes (Smith and Lewis 2011;Hahn et al 2015).…”

The APHIRM toolkit: an evidence-based system for workplace MSD risk management

“…One reason for this situation is that current workplace MSD risk management practices fail to meet some important evidence-based requirements for effective risk reduction [8–10]. To facilitate translation of research evidence into workplace practices, A Participative Hazard Identification and Risk Management (APHIRM) toolkit has been formulated [11–15].…”

“…Focus on just one hazard at a time is appropriate when managing risks that arise mainly or entirely from a specific, observable source such as a hazardous substance, or a harmful form of energy such as electricity or loud noise. However, in cases such as MSDs (or mental disorders or major accidents) where risk results from the net effect of a large and variable set of hazards, some of which can interact with each other in affecting risk, effective management requires a broad, systems-based framework and more holistic assessment of risk from all relevant hazards together rather than in isolation from each other [8, 10, 12]. Following a similar rationale, many jurisdictions have now mandated a more holistic approach to safety management in industries where there is a risk of major accidents, rather than relying on the conventional OHS risk management paradigm [34, 35].…”

“…This is problematic because most of the physical and psychosocial hazards affecting MSD risk arise from characteristics of the job and the environment in which people work – that is, from factors that are the responsibility of general managers [8, 9, 50, 54]. A closely related problem is that MSD risk management procedures are typically not well integrated with more general management systems, which reduces their potential effectiveness [10, 55]. Addressing both these issues, the APHIRM toolkit specifies inclusion of a senior general manager in the MSDs risk management team, and risk control procedures actively involve general managers in development of action plans, thereby facilitating integration of MSD risk management with broader systems of management.…”