Understanding barriers that hinder the management of ergonomic risks in the construction industry

The construction industry is complex, and the dynamic nature of construction work systems makes them highly susceptible to internal and external changes. Construction work environments are not only challenging to manage, but they are also notorious for being responsible for some of the highest accident and injury rates when compared to other industries. Given the manual labour-intensive, safety-critical nature of construction tasks, and the pressure to run profitable operations, there is always a need for innovative solutions that can assist the construction industry to meet its health and safety obligations while also optimising production outputs.

Internationally and locally, organisations facing similar challenges to those in the construction industry have turned to ergonomics principles, approaches, methods, and tools to help them design more resilient work systems where productivity is achieved without compromising worker health and well-being. Numerous case studies have documented the benefits associated with managing ergonomic risks, which include a reduction in the number of accidents and injuries experienced, fewer errors, and higher levels of quality and productivity (Goggins et al., 2008).

With these examples of gains made through managing ergonomic risks, one would expect a widespread implementation of ergonomics across the construction industry. However, the management of ergonomic risks remains low. What could be the reason for this? Based on experience and discussions with various organisations, I have identified commonly occurring factors that seem to hinder the implementation of ergonomics. While these are not an exhaustive list of barriers to implementing ergonomics, they offer some insights that may assist construction organisations who may be grappling with the question of why they should implement ergonomics or what potential hurdles they may have to overcome in order to realise ergonomics implementation.

Compliance is a start, embedding is the goal

While it may be widely understood and accepted that legal and regulatory requirements for the management of health and safety risks must be complied with, it is not uncommon to find organisations not complying with those requirements. This is also true when it comes to the management of ergonomic risks in industries across South Africa, including the construction industry.

The promulgation of the Construction Regulations of 2014 and the Ergonomics Regulations of 2019 provided explicit requirements for the management of ergonomic risks in the construction industry. This was not a new requirement since ergonomics risk management was already implicitly indicated in the Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993. However, the introduction of the Construction Regulations and the Ergonomics Regulations shone a much-needed spotlight on ergonomics and brought it into the radar of construction organisations, many of which were not implementing ergonomics. The need to comply with these legislative imperatives thus became the trigger that led such construction organisations to take action to manage ergonomic risks.

However, without continuous enforcement, there is a risk that compliance-driven construction organisations will not sustain the management of ergonomic risks. Moreover, in the absence of an understanding of systemic ergonomics-related risks, such construction organisations are also not likely to be able to embed ergonomics into their safety management systems. In other cases, it has been observed that some compliance-driven organisations tend to implement ergonomics at a superficial level to enable them to tick the proverbial compliance box. It can thus be argued that the presence of legal requirements alone has not assisted the construction industry to manage ergonomics-related deficiencies. In an industry with low levels of compliance to minimum requirements for managing ergonomic risks, legislation is a critical catalyst for change. However, more ergonomics education and awareness is required to support the construction industry to understand and effectively embed ergonomics within their operations. To bridge this gap, Master Builders KwaZulu-Natal now offers training and awareness in various ergonomics topics aimed at construction personnel from entry-level to executive management levels. Contact Master Builders KwaZulu-Natal to discuss your ergonomics training needs and keep an eye on its social media platforms for information on upcoming ergonomics training.

Cost-benefit of implementing ergonomics

It can be expected that when organisations implement new requirements, resources need to be allocated to introduce and maintain that change in a sustainable manner. Organisations that had not previously been managing ergonomics-related risks have expressed concerns regarding the financial implications of needing to embed ergonomics within their organisations. While the cost of introducing ergonomics will vary between different organisations, it is true that resources are required to conduct risk assessments, update medical surveillance programs, provide ergonomics education and training for workers and management, and update policies and procedures, and many other associated activities. However, focussing on the cost of implementing ergonomics is only one side of the coin.

Often, negative system outcomes such as worker injuries and illnesses, reduced quality of output, absenteeism, high worker compensation costs, high insurance premiums, incidents and accidents are linked to ergonomic deficiencies across the organisation’s system (Goode et al., 2019). Many organisations that do not have existing measures to effectively manage ergonomics-related risks are usually oblivious of the fact that unmanaged ergonomics-related deficiencies are a major contributor to negative organisational outputs. They are also usually not aware of the cost of not implementing ergonomics because this is often not measured or considered appropriately. As an example, more and more accident investigation reports in safety-critical environments are identifying various systemic ergonomics-related deficiencies to have contributed to those accidents. Not only are ergonomics-related deficiencies linked to accidents, but evidence suggests that the implementation of ergonomics interventions and programs contributes to the prevention or reduction of accidents (Lounis et al., 2019). Another example is the costly impact of musculoskeletal disorder on workers and the organisation where workers are exposed to unmanaged physical, cognitive, organisational and psychosocial risk factors (Goode et al., 2019). These musculoskeletal disorders include lower back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome and shoulder pain, the costs of which are borne by the workers in terms of deteriorated health and performance. The organisations are also not spared, as they also have to shoulder the costs associated with absenteeism of affected workers, lowered performance outputs, and higher compensation costs.

Cost-benefit analyses that have been conducted prior to and after introducing ergonomics interventions in various organisations show that there is usually a return on investment after effectively implementing ergonomics programs (Goggins et al., 2008). This means that the benefits of introducing ergonomics can outweigh the costs associated with not managing ergonomic risks. This point does not negate the financial challenge that organisations may face of not having the resources at hand to initiate the necessary ergonomics action. It does, however, give credence to the need for more cost-effective ways of managing ergonomic risks, particularly in the construction sector where profit margins are usually tight. Reducing some of the current costs associated with unmanaged ergonomic risks would assist construction organisations in this regard. Additionally, construction organisations should also be equipped and supported to unearth and effectively manage the ergonomics-related deficiencies in their systems. They should also be capacitated to be able to measure the cost of ergonomics-related deficiencies on workers and organisational performance so that these also inform risk management-related decisions.

Management commitment should be supported by evidence-based understanding

The likelihood of ergonomics being implemented is largely influenced by the extent to which management buys into, supports, and provides the necessary resources required to implement changes. This is true even for the introduction of ergonomics into organisations, where it has been found that organisations that successfully implement ergonomics are those where management supports and endorses the ergonomics programs (Driessen et al., 2010). As critical decision-makers in construction organisations, managers can also be influential stakeholders that can assist with getting the rest of the organisation on board when it comes to introducing ergonomics.

If managers are strategic stakeholders in bringing about ergonomics changes, it is important to consider how they can be supported and enabled to make decisions and drive the necessary ergonomics changes. One such way is to provide relevant information regarding the status of ergonomic risks within an organisation and to make visible the consequences associated with those unmanaged ergonomic risks. Master Builders KwaZulu-Natal provides ergonomics awareness through various means including webinars and awareness campaigns. Through its ergonomics advisory and consulting services offered by competent ergonomics professionals, Master Builders KwaZulu-Natal provides various ergonomics assessments that can provide the empirical evidence required to empower construction managers and workers. This includes gap analyses, ergonomic risk assessments, assessments to quantify exposure to ergonomics factors across the organisation’s system and the development of tailored solutions to effectively manage identified ergonomics-related deficiencies. In line with the quote “you cannot control what you can’t measure”, empirical evidence obtained from ergonomics assessments can assist managers to make informed decisions about the ergonomic risks in their organisations and the cost-benefit of implementing ergonomics.

Overcoming the barriers

The barriers to implementing ergonomics will vary from one construction organisation to another. Understanding the barriers to implementation is a first step toward achieving widespread implementation of ergonomics in the construction sector. Through providing a suite of ergonomics services, Master Builders KwaZulu-Natal, through its partnership with Smart Ergonomics, is contributing to existing efforts to make the construction industry safer and more competitive.

Sma Ngcamu-Tukulula (CPE): Smart Ergonomics

REFERENCES

N.Goode N, Newnam  S. van Mulken MRH, Dekker S and Salmon P (2019). Investigating work-related musculoskeletal disorders: Strengths and weaknesses of current practices in large Australian organisations. Safety Science, 112: 105-115.

Driessen MT, Groenewoud K, Proper KI, Anema JR, Bongers PM, van der Beek AJ (2010). What are possible barriers and facilitators to implementation of a Participatory Ergonomics programme? Implementation Science, 5:64.

Goggins, Spielholz and Nothstein, (2008). Estimating the effectiveness of ergonomics interventions through case studies: implications for predictive cost-benefit analysis.

Lounis C, Vsevolod P and Mickael V. (2019). Flight Eye Tracking Assistant (FETA): Proof of Concept. 10.1007/978-3-030-20503-4_66.