Proactive approaches to workplace ergonomics programs emphasize prevention of WMSDs through recognizing, anticipating, and reducing risk factors in the planning stages of new work processes.

Proactive Versus Reactive Approaches

To this point, the elements outlined in this primer and illustrated by NIOSH experiences have represented reactive approaches to dealing with workplace ergonomic problems. The steps have offered a plan for identifying problems, specifically WMSDs and job risk factors linked to them, and selecting and implementing measures for controlling them. In contrast, proactive approaches are geared to preventing these kinds of problems from developing in the first place. Proactive ergonomics emphasize efforts at the design stage of work processes to recognize needs for avoiding risk factors that can lead to musculoskeletal problems (in effect, to design operations that ensure proper selection and use of tools, job methods, workstation layouts, and materials that impose no undue stress and strain on the worker). One set of guidelines for this purpose can be found in Tray 9 of the Toolbox. Others are illustrated in various ergonomic manuals listed in Tray 10 of the Toolbox.

Essential Considerations

Ergonomics issues are identified and resolved in the planning process. In addition, general ergonomic knowledge, learned from an ongoing ergonomics program, can be used to build a more prevention-oriented approach. Management commitment and employee involvement in the planning activity are essential. For example, management can set policy to require ergonomic considerations for any equipment to be purchased, and production employees can offer ideas on the basis of their past experiences for alleviating potential problems.

Decision-makers planning new work processes, especially those involved in the design of job tasks, equipment, and workplace layout, must become more aware of ergonomic factors and principles. Designers must have appropriate information and guidelines about risk factors for WMSDs and ways to control them. Studying past designs of jobs in terms of risk factors can offer useful input into their deliberations about needed improvements.

Design strategies emphasize fitting job demands to the capabilities and limitations of workers. Deciding which functions can be done best by machines and which by people is a primary objective. For example, for tasks requiring heavy materials handling and transport, ready use of mechanical assist devices to reduce the need for manual handling would be designed into the process. Large-sized units could be broken into smaller, more manageable ones, and equipment could be selected that most helps the workers using it.

Design strategies try to target the causes of potential musculoskeletal problems. For this reason, engineering approaches are preferred over administrative ones because they eliminate the risk factors as opposed to simply reducing exposure to them. For example, having machines do monotonous, repetitive, forceful work is better than subjecting workers to these risk factors. Administrative controls (such as worker rotation or allowing more rest breaks) remain stop-gap measures. They are not permanent solutions.

An example of a proactive approach to ergonomic concerns is illustrated in Exhibit 21.