holistic work system design and management : — a...

ABCDEFG

UNIVERSITY OF OULU P .O. B 00 F I -90014 UNIVERSITY OF OULU FINLAND

A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I S

S E R I E S E D I T O R S

SCIENTIAE RERUM NATURALIUM

HUMANIORA

TECHNICA

MEDICA

SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM

SCRIPTA ACADEMICA

OECONOMICA

EDITOR IN CHIEF

PUBLICATIONS EDITOR

Professor Esa Hohtola

University Lecturer Santeri Palviainen

Postdoctoral research fellow Sanna Taskila

Professor Olli Vuolteenaho

University Lecturer Hannu Heikkinen

Director Sinikka Eskelinen

Professor Jari Juga


Publications Editor Kirsti Nurkkala

ISBN 978-952-62-0218-1 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-0219-8 (PDF)ISSN 0355-3213 (Print)ISSN 1796-2226 (Online)

U N I V E R S I TAT I S O U L U E N S I SACTAC

TECHNICA


TECHNICA

OULU 2013

C 463

Arto Reiman

HOLISTIC WORK SYSTEM DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT– A PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT APPROACHTO DELIVERY TRUCK DRIVERS’ WORK OUTSIDE THE CAB

UNIVERSITY OF OULU GRADUATE SCHOOL;UNIVERSITY OF OULU,FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

C 463

ACTA

Arto R

eiman

C463etukansi.fm Thursday, September 26, 2013 12:49 PM

A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I SC Te c h n i c a 4 6 3

ARTO REIMAN

HOLISTIC WORK SYSTEM DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT — A participatory development approach to delivery truck drivers’ work outside the cab

Academic dissertation to be presented, with the assentof the Doctoral Training Committee of Technology andNatural Sciences of the University of Oulu, for publicdefence in Wetteri-sali (IT115), Linnanmaa, on 18October 2013, at 12 noon

UNIVERSITY OF OULU, OULU 2013

Copyright © 2013Acta Univ. Oul. C 463, 2013

Supervised byProfessor Seppo VäyrynenDocent Mikael Forsman

Reviewed byDocent Kari HäkkinenDocent Ritva Ketola

ISBN 978-952-62-0218-1 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-0219-8 (PDF)

ISSN 0355-3213 (Printed)ISSN 1796-2226 (Online)

Cover DesignRaimo Ahonen

JUVENES PRINTTAMPERE 2013

OpponentsProfessor Eila JärvenpääDocent Kari Häkkinen

Reiman, Arto, Holistic work system design and management— A participatory development approach to delivery truck drivers’ work outsidethe cabUniversity of Oulu Graduate School; University of Oulu, Faculty of Technology, Department ofIndustrial Engineering and ManagementActa Univ. Oul. C 463, 2013University of Oulu, P.O. Box 8000, FI-90014 University of Oulu, Finland

Abstract

The road freight transport industry as a labour-intensive sector is dependent on the work abilityand well-being at work of employees. The majority of the occupational accidents are related towork phases outside the cab. These work phases, which are performed in various different workenvironments, contain several kinds of ergonomic discomforts. This poses complex challenges forthe employers from a safety and productivity point of view.

The framework of this thesis is based on the foundations of ergonomics and design science.The main objective was to provide knowledge that can be implemented into the design andmanagement of work systems for local and short haul delivery operations. Material was obtainedfrom two sources. A meta-synthesis was performed to frame holistic management in a humanperspective. Furthermore, additional in-depth design knowledge was obtained throughparticipatory ergonomics video analyses on drivers’ work outside the cab.

Video analyses resulted in 262 identifications of demanding work situations where ergonomicdiscomforts and risks of accidents occurred. Sudden over-exertions and strains, falls and slips aswell as losing control of work equipment were the most common deviations related to drivers’work outside the cab and mainly related to physical activities of movement and carrying by hand.The majority of the work situations identified were performed in cargo spaces or elsewhere withinthe truck structure or at premises and yards that are administered by the customers or otherstakeholders. In these environments, drivers tend to perform their work manually or usingdifferent types of work equipment.

This thesis provides new in-depth knowledge on drivers’ work outside the cab. The resultsshow that different stakeholders can contribute to drivers’ work systems. The knowledge providedby drivers and other stakeholders can be applied to holistic design and management processes atcompany level. Moreover, the knowledge can also be applied to broader value chain design andmanagement processes.

Keywords: design science, freight transport by road, holistic management, local andshort haul operation, participatory ergonomics, safety at work, video analysis, worksystem

Reiman, Arto, Kokonaisvaltainen työjärjestelmien suunnittelu ja johtaminen

— Osallistuva lähestymistapa jakelukuljettajien ohjaamon ulkopuolisen työn

kehittämiseen

Oulun yliopiston tutkijakoulu; Oulun yliopisto, Teknillinen tiedekunta, Tuotantotalouden osastoActa Univ. Oul. C 463, 2013Oulun yliopisto, PL 8000, 90014 Oulun yliopisto

Tiivistelmä

Tieliikenteen tavarankuljetus työvoimavaltaisena toimialana on riippuvainen henkilöstön työky-vystä ja -hyvinvoinnista. Suurin osa tapaturmista liittyy työtehtäviin ohjaamon ulkopuolella.Näitä töitä tehdään hyvin vaihtelevissa työympäristöissä ja niihin työtehtäviin liittyy monenlai-sia ergonomisia haittakuormitustekijöitä. Tämä asettaa haasteita niin työsuojelun kuin tuottavuu-den näkökulmasta.

Väitöskirjan viitekehys pohjautuu ergonomiaan sekä suunnittelutieteeseen. Tavoitteena ontuottaa tietoa, jota voidaan hyödyntää työjärjestelmien suunnittelussa ja johtamisessa erityisestimaaliikenteen jakelukuljetuksissa. Materiaali koostui kahdesta osiosta. Metasynteesillä muodos-tettiin näkemys kokonaisvaltaisesta johtamisesta ihmisnäkökulmasta. Lisäksi kuljettajat ja sidos-ryhmien edustajat analysoivat osallistuvan ergonomian keinoin videoaineistoa jakelukuljettajientyöstä ohjaamon ulkopuolella.

Videoanalyyseissa tunnistettiin yhteensä 262 työtilannetta, jossa esiintyy erilaisia ergonomi-sia haittakuormitustekijöitä sekä mahdollisia tapaturmariskejä. Äkilliset fyysiset kuormitukset,putoamiset, liukastumiset ja kaatumiset sekä työvälineiden hallinnan menettäminen olivat ylei-simpiä tunnistettuja poikkeamia kuljettajan työssä. Pääasiassa nämä liittyivät kuljettajan liikku-miseen sekä erilaisten taakkojen kantamiseen. Valtaosassa (85 %) havainnoista kuljettaja työs-kenteli ajoneuvon kuormatilassa tai päällirakenteissa tai asiakkaiden tai muiden sidosryhmienhallinnoimissa työympäristöissä. Näissä työympäristöissä kuljettaja työskenteli sekä manuaali-sesti käsin että hyödyntäen erilaisia apuvälineitä.

Väitöskirja tarjoaa uudenlaista syvällistä tietoa kuljettajan työstä ohjaamon ulkopuolella. Erisidosryhmät voivat osaltaan vaikuttaa kuljettajan työjärjestelmiin. Kuljettajien ja sidosryhmientuottamaa tietoa voidaan soveltaa työjärjestelmien kokonaisvaltaisessa suunnittelussa ja johtami-sessa niin yritystasolla kuin myös suunniteltaessa ja johdettaessa laajempia arvoketjuja.

Asiasanat: jakelukuljetus, kokonaisvaltainen johtaminen, osallistuva ergonomia,suunnittelutiede, tieliikenteen tavarankuljetus, työjärjestelmä, työturvallisuus,videoanalyysi

7

Acknowledgements

This thesis was carried out in the Department of Industrial Engineering and

Management at the University of Oulu.

My warmest gratitude goes to my main supervisor, Professor Seppo

Väyrynen who provided me with the facilities and support to write this thesis.

I also wish to thank my other supervisor Adjunct Professor Mikael Forsman

for his patient support and guidance throughout this process.

I would like to acknowledge the pre-examiners, Adjunct Professor Kari

Häkkinen and Adjunct Professor Ritva Ketola for their careful review. Their

valuable recommendations and risk identifications guided me in finalizing this

work.

I acknowledge the co-authors of the original publications, Professor Emeritus

John Abeysekera; Mika Nyberg, MSc; and Ari Putkonen, PhD for their valuable

comments and efforts during the article-writing processes. Special thanks goes to

Janne Pekkala, MSc on his efforts in data collection, analysis and article writing.

While writing my PhD thesis I was privileged to work in co-operation with

several people. I thank my colleagues at the Finnish Institute of Occupational

Health for providing with me a work environment which made it possible for me

to finalize my PhD thesis project. I especially want to express my gratitude to

Professor Nina Nevala for her support and encouragement. Thanks also to Kirsi

Jussila, MSc; Pirjo Juvonen-Posti, LicMed; Professor Jaro Karppinen; Paula

Kärmeniemi, MSc; Jouni Lehtelä, MSc; Drew Morris, BSc; Juha Oksa, PhD;

Tiina Rajala, MSc; Professor Hannu Rintamäki, Sirkka Rissanen, PhD; and Erja

Sormunen, PhD for both their major and minor comments, ideas, thoughts,

questions and support during the writing process.

I thank my former colleagues at the University of Oulu, Tommi Autio, BSc;

Henri Jounila, MSc; Lasse Ketola, MSc; Jukka Latva-Ranta, BSc; Juha Lindfors,

PhD; Pauliina Marjala, PhD; Maarit Niemelä, MSc; and Janne Sinisammal, PhD.

They made it possible for me to grow as a researcher and provided important

support, especially during the early stages of my thesis. In particular I thank Kari

Kisko, PhD for teaching me some very important lessons about science and

working life.

This thesis would not have been written without support and guidance from

my family. I want to express my gratitude to my mother Seija, my late father Ari

and my sisters Mervi and Liisa-Maija for their support and encouragement. I am

truly sad that my father did not have a chance to see me at this phase.

8

Finally I want to express my deepest gratitude to my young sons Sakari and

Ilmari. During the last few years they have truly endeavored to keep my thoughts

strictly away from scientific writing. I must admit that at times they almost

succeeded. And without the patient support of my wife Sanna I would never have

completed this thesis. Thank you. Personal financial support was gratefully received from the Auramo

Foundation, the Tauno Tönning Foundation and the Industrial Engineering and

Management Doctoral Programme in Finland.

9

List of abbreviations

ESAW European Statistics on Accidents at Work

GAT model General approach and theory model

HSEQ Health, Safety, Environment and Quality

IEA International Ergonomics Association

L/SH Local and short haul

MMH Manual materials handling

OHS Occupational Health and Safety

PE Participatory Ergonomics

RQ Research question

VIDAR Video- och Datorbaserad Arbetsanalys, i.e. Video and computer-

based work analysis

WMSD Work-related musculoskeletal disorder

11

Key definitions

The following definitions are provided to clarify the meaning of the main terms

used in this thesis.

Accident: An undesired event giving rise to death, ill health, injury, damage or

other loss (OHSAS 18002 2000).

Deviation: The last event deviating from normality and leading to the

accident (ESAW 2001).

Hazard: Source or situation with a potential for harm in terms of human

injury or ill health, damage to property, damage to workplace environment or a

combination of these (OHSAS 18002 2000).

Hazard identification: Process of recognising that a hazard exists and

defining its characteristics (OHSAS 18002 2000). Hazardous situation: Any situation in which a person is exposed to a hazard

or to hazards (EN 292-1 1991).

Incident: Event that gave rise to an accident or had the potential to lead to an

accident. An incident where no ill health, injury, damage or other loss occurs is

also referred to as a “near-miss”. The term incident includes “near-misses”

(OHSAS 18002 2000). Job: Organization and sequence in time and space of an individual’s work

tasks or the combination of all human performance by one worker within a work

system (EN ISO 6385 2004).

Risk: A combination of the probability and the degree of the possible injury

or damage to health in a hazardous situation (EN 292-1 1991). Risk identification: Process of finding, recognising and describing risks (ISO

Guide 73 2009).

Stakeholder: Person or organisation that can affect, be affected by, or perceive

themselves to be affected by a decision or activity (ISO Guide 73 2009).

Supply chain: linked set of resources and processes that begins with the

sourcing of raw materials and extends through the delivery of products or services

to the end user across the modes of transport (ISO 28000 2007). System: A system is a group of interacting, interrelated or interdependent

elements forming or regarded as forming a collective unity (Roland & Moriarty

1983).

Work environment: Physical, chemical, biological, organisational, social and

cultural factors surrounding a person in his or her work space (EN 614-1 2006).

12

Work equipment: Tools, including hardware and software, machines, vehicles,

devices, furniture, installations and other components used in the work system

(EN ISO 6385 2004).

Work task: Activity or set of activities required by the worker to achieve an

intended outcome (EN ISO 6385 2004).

Work System: System comprising one or more workers and work equipment

acting together to perform the system function, in the work space, in the work

environment, under the conditions imposed by the work tasks (EN ISO 6385

2004).

13

List of original publications

This thesis is based on the following publications:

I Reiman A & Väyrynen S (2011) Review of Regional Workplace

Development Cases: A Holistic Approach and Proposals for Evaluation and

Management. International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge

Development 3(1): 55–70.

II Reiman A, Pekkala J, Väyrynen S, Putkonen A, Abeysekera J & Forsman M

(2013) Delivery Truck Drivers' and Stakeholders Video-assisted Analyses of

Work Outside the Truck Cabs. International Journal of Sustainable

Transportation. In press.

III Reiman A, Pekkala J, Väyrynen S, Putkonen A & Forsman M (2013)

Participatory Video-assisted Evaluation of Truck Drivers’ Work outside the

Cab – Local Deliveries in two Transportation Companies. Journal of

Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. In press.

IV Reiman A & Putkonen A (2012) Ergonomics development needs in truck

body design – From video analyses to solution proposals. International

Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics 1(1): 58–73.

The author of this thesis has been the primary author in all publications. With

regard to publication I, the author's contribution was in formulating the research

problems and research questions and concluding and summarising the results. The

theoretical framework and the collection of empirical materials was conducted in

cooperation with the co-author. In publications II, III and IV the author has been

responsible for formulating the research problems and research questions, for the

theoretical frameworks and concluding and summarising the results. The

collection of empirical materials and analyses of materials in publications was

conducted in cooperation with the co-authors.

15

Contents

Abstract

Tiivistelmä

Acknowledgements 7 List of abbreviations 9 Key definitions 11 List of original publications 13 Contents 15 1 Introduction 17

1.1 Background and research environment ................................................... 17 1.2 Scope and research problem .................................................................... 19 1.3 Research approach .................................................................................. 22

2 Theoretical foundation 25 2.1 Strategic management in different organisations .................................... 25 2.2 Holistic view on management ................................................................. 27 2.3 Work system and safety at work ............................................................. 29 2.4 Concepts of ergonomics .......................................................................... 30 2.5 Human centred design ............................................................................. 32 2.6 Effectiveness of ergonomics ................................................................... 33 2.7 Ergonomics and safety at L/SH truck drivers work ................................ 35

3 Methods and material 39 3.1 Meta-Synthesis (article I) ........................................................................ 39 3.2 Ergonomic observations (articles II, III, IV) ........................................... 40 3.3 Material ................................................................................................... 41

4 Findings 43 4.1 Holistic management processes (RQ1) ................................................... 43 4.2 Deviations related to physical activities at L/SH drivers’ work

(RQ2) ...................................................................................................... 44 4.3 Work equipment used in L/SH truck drivers’ work (RQ3) ..................... 46 4.4 Work environments out of the cab in L/SH drivers’ work (RQ4) ........... 47 4.5 Organisational contributions to L/SH drivers’ work system

design and management processes (RQ5) ............................................... 48 5 Discussion 51

5.1 Holistic design and management issues .................................................. 51 5.2 Work system management in L/SH operations ....................................... 55 5.3 Work system design in L/SH operations ................................................. 58

16

5.4 Theoretical contributions......................................................................... 60 5.5 Reliability and validity ............................................................................ 61 5.6 Recommendations for further research ................................................... 62

6 Conclusions 65 References 67 Original publications 87

17

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and research environment

Companies are continuously facing complex and shifting challenges at both

operational and strategic levels when trying to maintain and improve their

competitiveness (Ireland & Hitt, 2005, Kellogg et al. 2006, Schreyögg & Sydow

2010). Kaplan and Norton (2004: 5) emphasise long-term value creation in which

sustainability is included. Sustainability and sustainable development as a process

towards the dynamic state of sustainability include social, environmental and

economic perspectives which form the basis for durable economic success

(Docherty et al. 2008, Zink et al. 2008). Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) emphasise

that in a company level context, sustainability issues can be discussed under the

concept of corporate sustainability which requires that different stakeholders’

needs are met without compromising the company’s ability to meet the needs of

future stakeholders as well. Different intra- and inter-organisational stakeholders

form the company's value network (Feng et al. 2010).

Economic, environmental and social challenges also affect Finnish working

life (Kasvio & Kandolin 2010). The fact that Finland is distanced from the

primary market areas increases the need for competitive solutions and innovations.

The ability to maintain financial activities is an essential factor affecting the

welfare of Finland (Federation of Finnish Technology Industries 2011). The

northern climate in Finland also affects humans. Coldness and darkness combined

with long distances can cause mental and physical strain at work (Risikko et al. 2008). Darkness and coldness may also increase the hazards of cold working

environments (Anttonen et al. 2009). Natural factors and long distances also

increase costs in both investments and transportation and thereby weaken the

competitiveness of Finland (Paavola et al. 2012).

Improvements in working conditions (e.g. Eklund 2000, Fernández-Muñiz et al. 2009, Niemelä et al. 2002), work environment (e.g. Chandrasekar 2011,

Leblebici 2012, Vischner 2007) and occupational health and safety (OHS) in

general (e.g. Harms-Ringdahl 2001: 11, Jackson et al. 2011: 476) can increase

productivity and effectiveness and thus bring economic benefits to a company.

These potential benefits can be gained directly and indirectly through fewer days

lost, reduced work stress and anxiety, enhanced morale, better reputation, reduced

insurance premiums and compensation payments, reduced production losses,

18

improved customer satisfaction, brand value and goodwill (European Foundation

for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions 2011, Foot & Hook 2005:

366, Harms-Ringdahl 2001: 228, Jackson et al. 2011: 476).

The benefits of OHS actions are multifaceted and include indirect and hidden

savings. Thus companies often have difficulties in understanding the true value of

OHS work. (Roughton & Mercurio 2002: 8). Companies need strong enforcement

guidelines to comply with OHS issues (ILO 2005). Thus laws and regulations are

also needed. According to the Finnish law (Occupational Safety and Health Act

738/2002), the employer must know the hazards and problems that are present in

the work environment. Furthermore the law (738/2002) provides that the

structures of a workstation and the work equipment used at work shall be chosen,

designed and placed in an ergonomically appropriate way by taking the nature of

the work and the employee’s capacities into consideration. Freight transport by road presents a challenging environment for OHS. A

majority of the employees in the industry in Finland are employed by small and

medium-sized companies. Thus, as a labour-intensive sector it is strongly

dependent on the health and well-being of employees. Nonetheless the mortality

and morbidity rates are high among professional drivers (Apostolopoulos et al. 2010). Local and short-haul (L/SH) operations are one form of transportation, and

they comprise the largest segment of the trucking industry (Hanowski 2000).

Multiple daily stops, frequent manual materials handling (MMH), and variable

customer environments are characteristic of commercial L/SH operations (Olson

et al. 2009). Cantor (2008) states that workplace safety deficiencies are not fully

understood as sources of risk by logistics and transportation firms. Different

stakeholders may tend to minimise their costs and act in the light of their own

objectives, considering drivers to be flexible components (Anumba et al. 2000,

Cantor 2008, Custodio & Oliveira 2006, de Langen & Chouly 2009, Perttula 2011,

Trimpop 2003).

Ergonomics is one framework for improving compatibility, effectiveness,

safety, ease of performance, human well-being and quality of life (Karwowski

2005). Ergonomics as a scientific discipline is concerned with the understanding

of interactions among humans and other elements of a system (IEA 2012). The

definition of a system is broad in this context. A system may be as simple as

single individual using a hand tool or as complex as multinational organisation

(Hendrick 2002: 1). Furthermore, a system can be understood as a work system,

where the human is a worker performing a specific operational task or function

within a specific environment, or a product or service system where a human is a

19

product user or person who receives the service (Carayon & Smith 2000, Dul et al. 2012, EN ISO 6385 2004, Roland & Moriarty 1983, Smith & Carayon 1995,

Smith & Carayon 2000). Ergonomics is also a profession that applies theoretical principles, data and

methods to design in order to optimise human wellbeing and overall system

performance (IEA 2012). Generating and optimising distinct solutions at certain

workplaces is often referred to as microergonomics whereas development and

optimisation of structures, processes and policies in wider sociotechnical systems

is referred to as macroergonomics (Hendrick 2002, Zink 2000). Kleiner (2006)

emphasises that micro and macroergonomics need be implemented jointly, as

macroergonomics enables larger system level acceptance to microergonomics

interventions. Hendrick (2002) concludes that effective macroergonomic design

drives much of the microergonomic design and insures optimal ergonomic

compatibility of different components with the overall system structure. Employee participation is a highly topical subject in current views on holistic

health and safety management processes, and emphasised by recent publications

by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2012a, 2012b).

Stakeholders participating in design processes may vary greatly and may include

system actors (i.e. employees, product users), system experts (i.e. professionals,

such as engineers, psychologists, ergonomists), system decision makers (i.e. managers) and system influencers (i.e. media, governments, standardisation

organisations, regulators) (Dul et al. 2012).

1.2 Scope and research problem

The main objective of this thesis is to provide ergonomics knowledge that can be

implemented into the design and management of holistic work systems in the

L/SH transport sector. Knowledge is acquired by applying inductive knowledge

on holistic work environment management processes to the knowledge gained

through a participatory ergonomics development approach on work outside the

cab in L/SH operations (Fig 1).

20

Fig. 1. Illustration of the research scope within the contextual framework of this thesis.

The research problem of this thesis is as follows: Ergonomics can be implemented

in holistic design and management processes. Broad work systems such as L/SH

drivers’ work environments outside the cab are complex to design and manage.

What kinds of physically and psychosocially demanding work situations and

hazard risk situations exist in L/SH drivers’ work outside the cab and how can

different stakeholders contribute to the work system design and management in

that context?

This thesis contains five research questions (Table 1) that are answered within

journal articles I-IV. The first research question is discussed in article I as it

provides guidelines for implementing sociotechnical aspects into holistic work

environment management processes within industrial environments. Articles II-IV

discuss work system management and design issues in the L/SH transport sector.

Article II discusses human interactions with work tasks (RQ2). Article III

discusses human interactions with work equipment (RQ3) and article IV discusses

human interactions with work environments (RQ4). Human interactions with

organisations are pooled from the contributions contained in articles I-IV (RQ5)

(Table 1).

21

Table 1. Research questions and points of view of the articles from a work system

perspective.

RQ Research question Article Point of view

RQ1 What kind of management issues must be taken into

account in holistic work environment management

processes?

I Holistic management processes

RQ2 What kinds of deviations occur in physical work

activities that the L/SH drivers perform outside the

cab?

II Human interactions with work

tasks

RQ3 What work equipment do the drivers use in the

physically and psychosocially demanding work

situations and hazard risks identified in two types of

L/SH operations?

III Human interactions with work

equipment

RQ4 Which work environments outside the cab are the

physically and psychosocially demanding work

situations and hazard risks identified related to in L/SH

operations?

IV Human interactions with work

environments

RQ5 How can transportation companies improve

deficiencies in L/SH drivers’ work systems and what

kinds of contribution can different stakeholders make?

I, II, III,

IV

Human interactions with

organisations

Research questions 2–4 contain microergonomics development aspects as the

material consists of concrete identifications of occasional work situations in

certain circumstances. Nonetheless they also contain firm macroergonomics

features as they were conducted within a participatory approach, where

employees and other intra- and inter-organisational stakeholders participated into

the development processes. Furthermore the company’s strategic policies and

external political, cultural and economic factors, such as laws, regulations and

competition for market shares must be taken into account in these development

processes of complex work system entities. Research questions 1 and 5 are

discussed by exploring organisational factors and can be referred to as

macroergonomics. This positioning is depicted in Figure 2. The positioning of

human interaction with both micro and macroergonomics aspects is central to the

research approach of this thesis.

22

Fig. 2. Positioning this thesis into micro- and macroergonomics contexts.

1.3 Research approach

This thesis provides knowledge that can be used in designing solutions to

ergonomics problems in work systems and its elements. Thus the theoretical

framework of this thesis is based on the foundations of ergonomics and design

science. Ergonomics in general is a design-oriented and human-centred discipline

that focuses on work system design and management (Karwowski 2005). Design

science contains many similar aspects to ergonomics as it is technology-oriented

discipline which seeks to improve human condition (Hevner & Chatterjee 2010: 5,

March & Smith 1995, Van Aken 2004, Van Aken & Romme 2009). Design

science can be referred to action research in many respects as emphasised by

Järvinen (2007). Van Aken (2004) defines that the ultimate mission for design science is to

develop valid and reliable design knowledge that can be used by different

professionals in designing solutions to different problems. Often, as emphasised

by Järvinen (2007) the design knowledge is heuristic in nature, i.e. the design

knowledge is itself general and it must be translated to the specific problem at

23

hand. Both design science knowledge and ergonomics knowledge are

multidisciplinary fields which are applied by such professionals as engineers,

architects, medical doctors and physiotherapists (Järvinen 2004, Karwowski 2005,

Van Aken 2004). A recent study by Rajala (2011) emphasises that design science

approach is applicable in developing OHS issues in small and medium sized

companies.

The concept of a work system is used as a combining framework in this thesis

to pool together the micro and macroergonomics aspects in L/SH drivers’ work

outside the cab into one holistic entity. Design knowledge is attained in this thesis

both through microergonomics and macroergonomics aspects.

Articles II, III and IV provide material attained through ergonomics

observations by different stakeholders. The observations contain descriptive in-

depth data on the discomforts and risks that are provided by the stakeholders. The

purpose for observational data is, as described by Patton (1987: 124) to describe

the setting that has been observed, i.e. the activities that took place, the people

that participated in the activities and the meanings of the setting. Thus the

observation data in this thesis is subjective. Article I provides material that is

based on authors’ meta-synthesis on existing case material and is thus subjective

in nature.

One might argue, as referred to Saunders et al. (2009: 110-111), that the work

the drivers’ perform is based on objective job descriptions and operating

procedures that they are supposed to adhere and that they are a part of a formal

hierarchy and thus they can be discussed as an objective entity. Nonetheless this

thesis aims in providing in-depth design science knowledge. That requires

understanding of the subjective meanings of different actions while performing

the work. The microergonomics and macroergonomics findings in this thesis are

utilised in providing knowledge to work system design and management purposes.

Thus this thesis is inductive in nature. The design science knowledge data is

qualitative and interpretative in nature although the observational approach in

articles II, III and IV also includes quantitative aspects as the data collected

through observations was analysed numerically.

25

2 Theoretical foundation

2.1 Strategic management in different organisations

All organisations have a purpose for their existence. Strategy defines how and by

which means an organisation fulfils this purpose, generates profits and improves

competitiveness (Jackson et al. 2011: 60, Thompson & Martin 2010). Kaplan and

Norton (2004) as well as Porter (1996) emphasise that the strategy describes how

the organisation will create value for different stakeholders. According to Porter

(1996) the essence of strategy is in the choices an organisation makes; to perform

activities differently or to perform different activities than their rivals. Minzberg

(1994: 25) discusses emerging strategies that may evolve with time as

organisations are learning what works in practice.

Inside the organisation, different sectors, units and departments may have

their own strategies (Kaplan & Norton 2001). Kaplan and Norton (2001)

emphasise that these strategies must be linked together and integrated. As pointed

out by Oeij and Wiezer (2002: 6) some diversity exists in organisational thinking.

One stresses cost-effective production whereas some other may stress the quality

of working life. Studies by Pot and Koningsveld (2009) as well as Ramstad (2009)

have shown that it is possible to improve both working life and company

performance simultaneously. Both of the aforementioned studies emphasise the

commitment of top level management and employee participation as significant

factors in improvement work. Jackson et al. (2011: 478) and Zink (2005) point out that effective OHS

actions can support organisations' strategies and thus improve performance. For

example, Ahonen et al. (2011) and Parvinen et al. (2010) have in their recent case

studies in Finland shown that incorporating work ability management into holistic

management processes has resulted in clear cost savings and improved overall

performance.

A well-defined strategy enhances competitiveness and thereby helps to create

competitive advantages and thereby helps the company to gain, maintain and

deepen its customer base (Kaplan & Norton 2001). Traditionally, strategy work is

considered necessary only in bigger companies, while smaller companies are

more or less controlled in an old fashioned style from top to bottom (Kaplan &

Norton 2001). Strategy work can be adapted for use by smaller companies

through providing more practical tools and means for executing the strategy.

26

Strategic management also includes human aspects. Christopher (2005: 5)

emphasises relationship management in strategy work. Coakes and Coakes (2009)

emphasise the human perspective and point out that employees' knowledge and

needs must be taken into account in comprehensive strategic management

processes. When all the employees and management have the same shared

strategic vision, togetherness is strengthened in the whole working community

(Cooper 1998). Sparks et al. (2001) emphasise that leadership which provides

social support and feedback advances the well-being of employees. Additionally,

other stakeholders need to be accommodated in the strategy work as Jackson et al. (2011: 4) emphasise.

Schendel and Hofer (1979) point out that in strategy work it is important to

piece together the whole work process and to understand how different chances

affect it. Dzissah et al. (2000) point out that complex issues, such as quality,

ergonomics, safety, marketing, purchasing must be implemented in strategic

management processes. Leino and Mattila (2000) emphasise that the origins of

quality, safety and ergonomics problems are often derived from the same faults.

In concurrence, Eklund (1997) states that in many cases these faults can be traced

to the design of work, workplace and environment.

Within integrated management systems it is possible to reduce different faults

and waste and improve the company’s performance and save resources. A

pertinent issue is that the work must be done continuously and within regular

evaluation intervals (Leino & Mattila 2000). Concepts of Lean Management

(Liker 2004, Womack & Jones 2003) and Lean Ergonomics (Silverstein et al. 2006), Integrated Management Systems (IMS) (Sinay 2000, Wilkinson & Dale

2001, 2007), Total Quality Management (TQM) (Hackman & Wageman 1995)

and Health, Safety, Environment and Quality (HSEQ) management (Väyrynen et al. 2008, 2012) all emphasise continuously improving and implemented

management processes.

Hendrick (2008) states that in order for ergonomics to be effectively applied,

it would be wise to integrate it with the hot management program or fad at the

time. Dul and Neumann (2009) argue that currently ergonomics is too often

considered separate from the main strategic goals and forced by legislation. Thus

it is easily delegated to OHS departments which are not directly connected to

strategic decision making processes.

27

2.2 Holistic view on management

Companies must be managed comprehensively. Even though there are certain

differences between private and public organisations (Lane 2000) they are often

treated as one in holistic management approaches as emphasised by Eskildsen et al. (2004). According to Anthony (1965) there are strategic, tactical and

operational levels that need to be managed. Savory and Butterfield (1999: 8)

discuss that holistic management includes social, environmental and economic

aspects that all need to be taken into account jointly when making management

decisions. Furthermore, they (1999: 16) emphasise the understanding of entities

and discuss that they cannot be predicted by studying any aspect in isolation.

Holistic management is in many respects analogical to the concept of

sustainability. Clayton and Radcliffe (1996: 13) discuss the term of sustainability

in a systems theory framework. According to systems theory, the world can be

considered a very large and complex system that contains various subsystems;

such as ecological, biological, weather, human social and economic systems that

interact continuously. Systems thinking is one approach to understanding complex

entities (Aramo-Immonen & Vanharanta 2009, Imada 2002).This complexity of

systems and systems thinking is emphasised in Sinclair’s (2007) visions on future

systems. Additionally ergonomics can also be associated with the concept of

sustainability from a human factor perspective as Zink (2011) and Haslam and

Waterson (2013) emphasise. Zink (2011) points out that from an ergonomics point

of view society, shareholders, employees and customers all have their own effects

on work and its development.

Complex work systems can be considered sociotechnical work systems, as

Carayon (2009), Kleiner and Hendrick (2008) and Hendrick (2002) emphasise. A

sociotechnical work system consists of technical and social subsystems that are

interrelated (Trist 1981). Technical subsystems are technologies and work

processes used in the work whereas social subsystem focuses on worker’s

perceptions of the work environment (Carayon & Lim 2006). These can be

referred to the five elements of a work system; individual, tasks, tools and

techniques, physical environment and organisational conditions presented by

Smith and Carayon-Sainfort (1989). Furthermore, the subsystems can be referred

to as a model of work system subsystems (consisting of personnel, technological,

internal environment, external environment and task and organisational design

subsystems) according to Hendrick and Kleiner (2001) and Kleiner (2008).

28

Systems are also engaged in transactions with other systems, and managing this

complexity is a challenge (Eason 2005, Kleiner & Hendrick 2008).

It can be considered that all these subsystems produce physical, psychosocial

and cognitive loads on the human (Carayon 2009). A human reacts to the loads

with physiological and psychological reactions and often with detrimental effect.

Thus the strains can lead to poor outcomes such as low motivation, increased

stress and poorer health (Smith & Carayon 2000). Furthermore the loads can

reduce individual performance and lead to a greater propensity for human errors

and violations (Kraemer et al. 2009). The loads are wide-ranging. For instance,

noise, air quality and housekeeping can be identified as environment related job

stressors and overload, underload, repetitiveness, meaningfulness, low task

content, lack of control and high demand as task related stressors. (Smith &

Carayon 2000, Smith &Carayon-Sainfort 1989). Furthermore physical

characteristics of work equipment, poor work station design and lack of adequate

skills are examples of technology related stressors and organisational support,

career development, work schedules and overtime are examples of organisational

factors that may reduce motivation and cause stress (Smith & Carayon 2000,

Smith & Carayon-Sainfort 1989).

Smith and Carayon-Sainfort (1989), Smith and Carayon (2000) and Carayon

(2009) emphasise that work systems need to be balanced. According to Smith and

Carayon (2000) the whole system balance can be improved by enhancing the

positive aspects of other elements if negative aspects cannot be improved or

totally eliminated. In that sense ergonomics principles in balanced work system

design and management are in many ways akin to principles of lean philosophy.

The negative aspects of the work system can be attributed to different

inefficiencies and waste that lean philosophy seeks to eliminate (Moody 2012,

Silverstein et al. 2006).

In a balanced work system all elements are taken into account and developed

continuously. A balanced work system produces two kinds of outputs; desired and

undesired. Productivity, quality, safety, commitment to the work and wellbeing at

work are considered as desired outputs whereas undesired outputs are negative

by-products of the work system; such as physiological and psychological

discomfort and stresses, incidents, accidents, injuries and material and

environmental losses. (Carayon et al. 2006, Carayon 2009, Karwowski 2005,

Väyrynen 2010). Desired outputs can be promoted by applying ergonomics

knowledge to work system design (Reiman & Väyrynen 2011).

29

A central element in the work system is the individual who performs the work

task. Employees are a valuable resource in solving problems concerning job

design. (Noro & Imada 1991). Human behaviour and technology are interrelated

and changes in how technologies and tools affect employees' attitudes and

feelings about work. Additionally they affect social relationships inside the work

community. (Hatch & Cunliffe 2006). It is very complicated to strategically

balance the work system in a way that satisfies the employee and also enhances

effectiveness and quality and produces satisfactory outputs (Carayon & Smith

2000).

2.3 Work system and safety at work

Imada (2008) points out that too often companies focus only on survivability

rather than sustainability. Thus a holistic view on development may be neglected.

An ergonomically balanced work system considers human beings as the main

factor and an integral part of the work system. A well-balanced work system does

not cause any detriment to employees' health, well-being or safety (EN ISO 6385

2004). EN ISO 6385 (2004) points out that the optimisation of the work system

may be evaluated based on measures of three categories (1) health and wellbeing,

(2) safety, and (3) performance (the quantity and quality of production).

According to this holistic thinking, occupational risks represent a threat to both

factors of wellbeing and productivity at work (EN ISO 6385 2004).

All activities of a company involve some risks (ISO 31000 2009). According

to Harms-Ringdahl (2001: 6) companies may face commercial risks, occupational

injuries and health risks, fires and explosions, damage to machinery and work

equipment, transportation injuries and related damage, product liability and

related damage, and harm to the environment and sabotage. Risks can also affect

the company's performance indirectly through other stakeholders’ actions in the

company's value network (Väyrynen et al. 2012). Risks that do not result in

accidents immediately will sooner or later cause injuries or near misses if they are

not remedied (Kjellen 2000: 282).

Similarly as risks also accidents can be defined broadly. Hughes and Ferrett

(2003) have defined accidents as any unplanned event that results in injury or ill-

health of people or damage or loss to property, plant, materials or the environment

or a loss to business opportunity. Brauer (2006: 22) emphasises that there are two

fundamental types of accident causes; unsafe acts and unsafe conditions.

Nevertheless, as pointed out by Imada (2002) human errors and accidents also

30

have multiple causal factors and dimensions. An individual employee’s technical

skills and way of thinking have an effect on the possibility of the human error and

accident. Management must be aware of these possibilities. Haro and Kleiner

(2008) have discussed how holistic accident causation models can be utilised in

risk prevention and management processes. Luczak (1998) discusses the interaction of (T)echnology, (O)rganisation and

(P)ersonnel in a risk prevention framework. This so-called TOP system can be

considered as a simplified work system. Harms-Ringdahl (2001: 30) adds one

more aspect to this system, as he also includes surroundings (as well as society) in

the elements that may suffer from possible accidents. Luczak (1998) emphasises

that risks may arise from any part of the system. Thus holistic risk prevention is

needed.

2.4 Concepts of ergonomics

Ergonomics can be referred to a discipline of human factors (Bridger 2003: 18-

19). In general these disciplines have much in common and they are used

synonymously (Bridger 2003: 18–19, Dempsey et al. 2000, Hendrick 2000,

Karwowski 2005). Ergonomics can also be discussed in the domain of

specialisation; e.g. physical, organisational and cognitive ergonomics (IEA 2012).

In this thesis, ergonomics is mainly discussed under the concepts of micro

and macroergonomics and participatory ergonomics (PE). Microergonomics focus

on distinct components in a certain workplace (Hendrick 2007a). Nonetheless

microergonomics do not take into account the complexity of the organisational

environment (Smith & Carayon 2000). Hendrick (2002) emphasises that in purely

microergonomic approaches there is a high probability of creating work systems

in which the personnel subsystem is forced to adapt. According to Hendrick

(2007b) microergonomic elements of job must be designed to harmonise with the

overall work system structure and processes. Thus combinations of micro and

macroergonomics in work system design should be emphasised (Hendrick 2007b).

A macroergonomic study on distribution centres by García Acosta and Lange

Morales (2008) strengthens Hendrick’s (2007b) perceptions and presents a fine

case example on ergonomics studies in the context of this thesis. Furthermore

macroergonomics and ergonomics in general can be applied to safety

management as emphasised by Haro and Kleiner (2008) and Horberry (2012). Macroergonomics is a holistic sociotechnical framework concerned with

work system challenges from the human perspective (Hendrick 2002: 3).

31

Macroergonomics can pool management concepts, ergonomic technologies,

change management strategies and participatory techniques, and thus help

companies to fulfil their economic, social and environmental goals (Imada 2008).

Hendrick (2007a) points out that despite its conceptual top-down premise,

macroergonomics also contains middle-out and bottom-up -aspects as it involves

relevant stakeholders’ participation in all company levels.

Active participation and continuous interaction between stakeholders and

system design, long-run system adaptability, organisational learning, and sense-

making of on-going changes are key characteristics of macroergonomics

approaches (Carayon 2006). Hendrick (2007b) states that most of the traditional

research methods, such as laboratory and field experiments, field studies,

organisational questionnaire surveys, interview surveys, and focus groups have

been modified and adapted for macroergonomics application.

One of the primary approaches to macroergonomics studies is PE (Brown

2002, Nagamachi 1995, Wilson et al. 2005). In PE, necessary stakeholders are

invited to participate in problem solving (Kuorinka 1997). The participation may

be realised in many different levels by various stakeholders (Haines & Wilson

1998, Haines et al. 2002, Vink et al. 2008).

Van Eerd et al. (2010) emphasise that there is no “one best way” to

implement PE into practice. Furthemore there can be differences in how

participatory ergonomics processes are managed (Liker et al. 1989). Nonetheless

as pointed out by Brown (2002), the management’s commitment and support is

considered to be essential. In addition to that the role of middle management and

supervisors in PE is emphasised as they are the people who must deal with a

variety of pragmatic production issues besides development work (Dixon et al. 2009).

Haims and Carayon (1998) emphasise that successful PE interventions

include both internal participants and external experts, i.e. ergonomists.

Ergonomist’s role in PE processes is flexible and dynamic and may include tasks

that belong to facilitators, group consultants, technical advisors, problem solving

assistants, educators, advocates and supporters (Haims & Carayon 1998, Wilson

1991). Furthermore Haims and Carayon (1998) argue that the role of the internal

experts evolves over time.

32

2.5 Human centred design

Ergonomics is a profession that applies theory, principles, data and methods to

design in order to optimise human well-being and overall system performance

(IEA 2012, Karwowski 2005). Ergonomics can be applied to work system in both

design and redesign phases (EN ISO 6385 2004). In human centred design

ergonomics knowledge is applied to the design of a product, system, job or

environment (Karwowski 2012). A basic assumption in ergonomics design is that

human physical and mental functions and features must be thoroughly considered.

(Yoshimura 2010: 69). Ergonomics knowledge can also be utilised in an

organisation's innovation processes (Slappendel 1992). Van de Ven (1986)

emphasises that quite commonly technical innovations require institutional and

organisational arrangements in order to be implemented successfully. It is important to know when a problem exists and to understand its nature to

be able to successfully solve problems. A holistic approach enables seeing the

causes, spread and consequences for different situations and groups as an

interlinked whole (Mumford 2003: 4). In many ways, holistic approaches require

the relevant stakeholders’ participation in different stages of the design processes

(Vink et al. 2008).

Human needs and requirements must be taken into consideration in design

processes (Bergqvist & Abeysekera 1996). Darses and Wolff (2006) emphasise

the need for designers to have direct input from the actual end-users. Shephard

(1974: 4) points out that design is a compromise between function and appearance.

Sometimes ergonomists encounter aesthetic demands that may contradict

ergonomics premises. According to Kuorinka (1997), participation adds value to

product design and adds realism to complex systems design. Nonetheless a

participatory approach to design and development requires resources and is time-

consuming (Wilson et al. 2005).

Kuorinka (1997) highlights that there are several methods (e.g. simulations,

mock-ups, production games) that can be used in concretising the work for design

purposes. In addition Bengtsson and Johansson (2002) have studied computer

animated visualisation in that context. Video material provides suitable material

for work environment and product design purposes. Kuorinka (1997) points out

that in participatory design, the mental image of the object must be shared with

and enriched by different participants. Kuorinka (1997) concludes that

conventional tools, tables and drawings may be too complex for participatory

design purposes. Helander (1995: 1-3) emphasises systematic and

33

interdisciplinary approaches in human centred design. According to Putkonen

(2010) design processes are rarely discussed from a macroergonomics and

sociotechnology point of view, and concludes that macroergonomics can enrich

product development processes.

2.6 Effectiveness of ergonomics

Hendrick (2001) generalises in a rather challenging way that good ergonomics is

goods economics. Nonetheless ergonomics issues are often under-exploited and

the value of good ergonomics is unclear to many stakeholders (Dul et al. 2012,

Stanton & Baber 2003). Many stakeholders are not aware of the benefits of

ergonomics and thus do not exhibit strong demand for ergonomics. Ergonomics

solutions and applications may also be too limited in scope. (Dul et al. 2012).

Koningsveld (2009) emphasises that ergonomics has potential to increase

productivity, lower operational costs, improve competitiveness and affect a

company’s values and standards. This potential is also emphasised in European

standards EN 1005 (2010) and EN ISO 6385 (2004) which state that properly

designed work systems enhance safety, effectiveness and efficiency, improve

human working and living conditions and counteract adverse effects on human

health and performance. Furthermore as emphasised in standard EN 292-2 (1991),

taking into account ergonomics principles when designing machinery, contributes

to increased safety by reducing stress and physical efforts of operator and reduces

the probability of human errors. The concept of usability is closely linked to ergonomics. According to Dumas

and Redish (1999: 4) usability is an attribute of every product and good usability

benefits different stakeholders in different ways. For instance, end-user

companies benefit from good usability in work equipment by improved

employees’ work performance and safety, reduced training and support costs and

reduced needs for updates and maintenance releases (Dumas & Redish 1999: 14,

Jordan et al. 1996).

Different authors have debated on the effectiveness of ergonomics for

decades, but the topic is in general in many ways still unclear and has been under

critical scrutiny (e.g. Beevis & Slade 1970, Beevis 2003, Dempsey 2007,

Driessen et al. 2010, Driessen et al. 2011, Martimo et al. 2010, Westgaard &

Winkel 1997, 2011). Dempsey (2007) states that the effectiveness of ergonomics

is now quite widely studied and is rather topical in general. Dempsey (2007)

concludes that this is largely due to the contentious political nature of work-

34

related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and the consequent debate on cost-

effectiveness. Nonetheless as emphasised by European Agency for Safety and

Health at Work (2010a) there are difficulties in general in calculating costs of

WMSDs due to differences between country-specific insurance systems, lack of

standardised assessment criteria and validity of reported data. From a management point of view the main parameter in evaluating the

effectiveness of investments in ergonomics is profitability (Hägg 2003).

Nonetheless objective data on the benefits of ergonomics investments is not

always easily acquired (Koningsveld 2009). Dempsey (2007) highlights problems

related to measuring the effectiveness. In ergonomics studies the effectiveness is

traditionally measured by monitoring incident, accident and/or sickness absence

rates over a certain time period. This is rather questionable because in many cases

WMSDs do not have distinct starting points. It may also be hard to evaluate the

length of the absence and possibility for recurrence. Westgaard (2010) points out

that organisational changes and psychological strain resulting from that may have

its own impact on effectiveness. Additionally Dempsey (2007) concludes that the

exposure and morbidity history accumulated before the intervention may still

have an effect and the recurrence of an earlier episode after the intervention may

cloud the benefits.

Driessen et al. (2010) have reviewed randomised control trials in ergonomics.

According to their review there is relatively little evidence for the effectiveness of

ergonomics interventions. Nonetheless randomised control trials are often very

difficult to arrange in the workplaces (Silverstein & Clark 2004). Westgaard

(2010) emphasises that also other study designs need to be reviewed in order to

get more proof on the effectiveness. Silverstein and Clark (2004) state that multi-

component interventions (including macroergonomics features) are more likely to

succeed than single interventions. Dul et al. (2012) point out that due to its

multidisciplinary nature ergonomics often lacks explicit references and may be

incorporated into established disciplines such as engineering and psychology. The benefits of PE interventions are contributed in the form of improved

physical comfort, reduced musculoskeletal complaints and fewer injuries (Rivilis

et al. 2006, 2008, Sockoll et al. 2006, Straker et al. 2004). The interventions have

also contributed to reduced absenteeism and in the number of compensation

claims (Hignett et al. 2005, Imada 2002, Rivilis et al. 2008), increases in

productivity (Nagamachi 1995) and savings in rejection costs and rates (Yeow &

Nath Sen 2003). However studies indicating the ineffectiveness of PE

interventions also exist (e.g. Cole et al. 2007, Driessen et al. 2011) and Haims and

35

Carayon (1998) especially criticize the fact that PE studies often lack guidelines

on how to proceed further in order to achieve long-term outcomes.

Dempsey (2007) questions why ergonomics improvements in general are

often under additional scrutiny and demands are set high. Hendrick (2008)

encourages looking for simple, economic solutions first. Furthermore Dempsey

(2007) suggests that small continuous improvements should be acknowledged in

ergonomics interventions just as production engineers do in their field. The

positive aspects of using ergonomics in increasing comfort and productivity

should be highlighted (Vink et al. 2006).

2.7 Ergonomics and safety at L/SH truck drivers work

Land transport is the largest sub-sector of the transportation and storage industry,

accounting for nearly 90% of employees (European Agency for Safety and Health

at Work 2011a). Land transport is a labour-intensive and strongly male-dominated

sector (Belzer 2002, E-Fact 47 2010). The average age for the employees is in

general higher than the average age across all sectors (E-Fact 47 2010, European

Agency for Safety and Health at Work 2010b, European Foundation for the

Improvement of Living and Working Conditions 2008).

Road freight transport as a part of land transportation is performed by various

kinds of vehicles, such as lorries, light vans, taxis, buses, motorcycles, mopeds

and bicycles (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work 2010b). Nearly

70,000 employees work in the road transport industry in Finland (Miilunpalo &

Olkkonen 2013). The employees are mostly (90%) employed by small companies,

employing ten or less employees (European Agency for Safety and Health at

Work 2010b, Kärmeniemi et al. 2007).

In the industry the accident rates and absences due to sickness are among the

highest in Finland (Confederation of Finnish Industries 2011, European Agency

for Safety and Health at Work 2011a, FAII 2011, Miilunpalo & Olkkonen 2013).

Despite high adverse health outcomes, good examples of successful management

processes can also be found in Finnish companies that are performing L/SH

operations. As an example Ahonen et al. (2011) have reported on successful

holistic management processes and stakeholder cooperation at the Lassila &

Tikanoja Corporation.

Different psychosocial factors, such as working alone, economic pressures

and competition from other carriers nationally and internationally, low level of

control of own work, lack of communication, violence and low social support

36

affect drivers' work (Braver et al. 1992, European Foundation for the

improvement of Living and Working Conditions 2004, Miilunpalo & Olkkonen

2013, Trimpop 2003). Furthermore, fatigue and stress have been associated with

truck drivers’ work (Gander et al. 2005, Pylkkönen et al. 2013). Nonetheless a

study by Hanowski et al. (2003) indicates that particularly in L/SH operations the

off-duty behaviour of the drivers was likely to be the primary contributing factor

in the level of fatigue. A recent addition (Ministry of Social Affairs and Health

2013) to Finnish Occupational Safety and Health Act 738 (2002) requires that the

employer must be aware of the hazards that are caused by working hours.

ISO Standard 28002 (2011) emphasises that each node of the supply chain

involves a set of risks and all these risks must be taken into account in an

organisations’ holistic management processes. The work of L/SH drivers outside

the cab is usually performed in different kinds of work environment (McClay

2008, Shibuya et al. 2010). The quality and safety of these work environments

varies widely (Shibuya et al. 2010). Due to the customer-supplier relationship, the

employer faces challenges in controlling these work environments (Cantor 2008,

Shibuya et al. 2010). Interestingly, Hale and Borys (2013) discuss the fact that

companies basically have two options in such situations; they either place their

trust in their employees’ ability to decide on detailed actions on a case by case

basis or provide them specific action rules for all situations they can envisage.

One specific feature that must be taken into account especially in Finland and

in other Nordic countries is how to solve the situation where drivers combine

outdoor work in cold winter conditions and indoor work within truck cabs and at

customer premises during the work shift. Such kinds of environmental conditions

and activity levels require continuous thermoregulatory adjustments, which may

cause stress (Risikko 2009). Furthermore vibration and cold may add risk for

WMSDs as Cohen et al. (1997) have highlighted. For example, Anttonen et al. (2009) Risikko et al. (2003) and Pekkarinen (1994) provide guidelines and

instructions on the topic. It is recognised that winter can last up to six months of a

year in Nordic countries (Gao and Abeysekera 2004). Njå and Fjelltun (2010) have noted that there are differences with regard to

how transportation companies’ managers in general approach HSEQ issues.

Shibuya et al. (2008) stress the fact that the work of L/SH drivers differs greatly

from work that is done in the factories. The majority of the ergonomics and safety

methods and procedures are designed for such environments and cannot be

applied for use in the L/SH industry directly (Shibuya et al. 2008). In addition,

the work of L/SH drivers also differs from long-haul drivers’ work. As

37

highlighted by Hanowski et al. (2003) long-haul drivers’ work mainly consists of

operating the vehicle behind the wheel. Long-haul operations may be on the road

for several days, whereas L/SH drivers usually start and end their work shift at

their home base (Hanowski et al. 2003).

Several studies have shown that L/SH drivers’ work contains varying safety

and ergonomics related development needs. Static work postures while driving,

whole-body vibration, severe trunk postures, and demanding manual materials

handling (MMH) tasks are all risk sources for WMSDs in the professional truck

drivers’ work (Kaila-Kangas et al. 2011, Kuiper et al. 1999, McGlothlin 1996,

Okunribido et al. 2006, Robb & Mansfield 2007, Shibuya et al. 2010, Waters et al. 2008). Car driving has been associated with lower-back disorders by several

studies (Kelsey & Hardy 1975, Porter & Gyi 2002, Troup 1978). However a

recent study by Kaila-Kangas et al. (2011) indicates that the increased risk of

lower-back disorders for drivers in general is more likely due to the strenuousness

of the work than to driving.

Most truck drivers’ accidents at work are related to physical activities outside

the cab (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working

Conditions 2004, FAII 2011, 2012, Shibuya et al. 2010). Falls from heights, slips, overexertion, repetitive motion injuries and being caught between or under

objects are the most typical accidents occurring in this sector (FAII 2011,

Nenonen 2013, Nicholson & David 1985, Perttula & Salminen 2012, Shibuya et al. 2008, 2010, Yeoh et al. 2013). Several studies state that various tools and aids

have been developed to ease drivers’ work when out of the cab (Jung et al. 2005,

Keyserling et al. 1999, McClay 2008, Roebuck & Norton 2002). Nonetheless as

Fathallah et al. (2000) and Rislund (2006) have stated many drivers ignore these

due to insufficient opportunities for learning, and inexperience and poor design.

Cantor (2008) emphasises that safety and ergonomics must be incorporated

into a company’s strategy and social responsibility. According to Perttula (2010)

the risks in the sector are often considered as general business risks. Shibuya et al. (2010) state that previous studies on the safety of drivers’ work have been mainly

epidemiological in nature, and they lack important in-depth information (Shibuya

et al. 2010).

39

3 Methods and material

Two data collection and analysis methods were utilised in this thesis. A meta-

synthesis was conducted in article I. Ergonomics video observations were

conducted in articles II, III and IV. The methods were selected on the basis of the

author's and other participating researchers’ choices and experiences. The

methods selected have been reported in earlier studies. Nonetheless the

ergonomics video analysis method utilised in II, III and IV was utilised for the

first time in this thesis to assess work that involves several different work

environments. Earlier it has been used mainly on assessing daily work in singular

workplaces.

3.1 Meta-Synthesis (article I)

Meta-Synthesis (Jensen & Allen 1996, Walsh & Downe 2005) is utilised in this

thesis to explore existing qualitative material. Meta-synthesis is utilised in

synthesising qualitative research and thus it differs from meta-analysis which is a

statistical method (Barnett-Page & Thomas 2009). The approach was utilised to

summarise and synthesise the case-specific data from three different cases. The

material was gathered by exploring existing data from the cases. The data

included case-specific reports, articles, interviews, notes, observations and

questionnaires. The synthesis approach in this thesis is close to an approach by

Suri (1999). Suri (1999) utilised open coding schemes when forming the

qualitative synthesis. Thus this thesis approach can also be referred in many parts

to as an open coding approach in Grounded theory (Järvinen, 2004, Strauss &

Corbin 1998: 101).

In open coding written data is conceptualised into separate incidents, ideas,

events and acts, and is given a name that represents or stands for it (Strauss &

Corbin 1998: 105). Usually certain concepts can be grouped and categorised in

order to reduce the amount of different concepts (Strauss & Corbin 1998: 105).

The meta synthesis approach in this thesis was executed by perusing entire

documents. The coding was made on the basis of three of the five different

categories; 1) Actions and methods utilised in the development processes, 2)

Effects on sociotechnical system integration, 3) Effects on health, safety,

environment and quality, 4) Effects on participation between different

stakeholders and 5) Concrete outputs of the development processes. Categories 2,

40

3 and 4 were coded on the basis of what the participated companies needed and

what they learned in the context.

3.2 Ergonomic observations (articles II, III, IV)

Video analyses have been used in ergonomics assessments in various studies (see: Capodaglio et al. 1997, Forsman et al. 2003a, 2003b, 2006a, 2006b, Hakkarainen

et al. 2011, Hanse & Forsman 2001, Kadefors & Forsman 2000, Karhu, et al. 1977, May et al. 2000, Oikarinen 2011, Pehkonen et al. 2009, Takala et al. 2010,

Väyrynen 1986, Väyrynen & Saaranen 2006). Dempsey et al. (2005) state that

video cameras are very useful basic tools in ergonomics studies. Van der Beek

and Frings-Dresen (1998), Carey and Galwey (1998) and Mackenzie and Xiao

(2003) have highlighted that video observations provide illustrative material that

can be analysed more carefully later, frame by frame if necessary. Video material

can also be used for product design purposes (Ylirisku & Buur 2007).

Ergonomics observations were conducted within a Swedish video based

observation method VIDAR (Video- och datorbaserad arbetsanalys in Swedish)

(Kadefors & Forsman, 2000, Forsman et al. 2003a, 2006a, Forsman 2008). The

method is mainly used in assessing a general workload (Takala et al. 2010) and it

is based on previously recorded material video on an employee performing daily

(routine) work. The method is participatory in nature, as it allows employees and

other stakeholders to participate in analyses (Forsman et al. 2003b). Participation

can be conducted in different ways. Usually a single employee analyses the video

material from his/her own work. Additionally other stakeholders and employee

groups may analyse video material. (Forsman et al. 2003a, 2003b).

In the analysis sessions the video material, which can be hours long, is

condensed into a limited number of ergonomic problems at work (Kadefors &

Forsman 2000). Usually ergonomists act as secretaries who operate the computer

and do not participate in the actual observation. Ergonomists may later analyse

the same material to check whether the participants missed anything.

As the analysis is performed by individuals, the method is subjective by

nature (Forsman 2008). The basic assumption in the method is that the employees

are to be recognised as the experts in their own work, at least in the familiar work

tasks that are done routinely and that they provide valid assessments. Many of the

unreliability issues are related to a lack of expertise on the part of the user.

(Forsman 2008, Kadefors & Forsman 2000). There are no strict guidelines on

how many participants should participate in the analyses.

41

There are two kinds of identifications, i.e. demanding work situations where

the employee may identify: physical discomfort, and psychosocial discomfort

including hazard risks. A report of saved situations may be printed directly after

the analysis. The report includes a picture frame of a situation, special notices and

the frequency of how many times it occurs in a certain period. Afterwards similar

identifications may be merged and prioritized for further discussions by the

ergonomists (Forsman 2008). The current version of the method contains also two

checklists (Quick Exposure Check [QEC] and Arbetarsskyddstyrelsen

Författningssamling, i.e. the Swedish name for the Swedish ergonomics

regulations document [AFS]) extensions for professional use. (Forsman et al. 2006a, 2006b, Forsman 2008).

3.3 Material

The metal industry companies and principal companies in study I were selected

because of their willingness to participate. Furthermore the principal companies

selected their key supplying companies which agreed to participate in the study.

The companies in articles II, III and IV were selected because of their willingness

to volunteer and develop the work outside the cab. The individual participants in

studies II, III and IV were selected on a voluntary basis. The volunteer employees

were individually informed about the study, and they signed a written consent

form before the study began. A summary of the material in this thesis is in Table 2.

42

Table 2. Summary of the material in this thesis.

Article Companies (n) Participating

employees (n)

Other stakeholders

involved directly (n)

Other stakeholders

involved indirectly

I a) Small and medium

sized metal industry

companies (18)

b) Principal

companies: large

process industry

plants, (11) and their

supplier companies

(15)

c) Principal

companies: large

process industry

plants (15) and their

key supplier

companies

a,b and c) Number

of employees

participating varied

(from all

employees in the

company into

limited work

groups) between

companies

b and c) Industrial

safety group members

and representatives of

the management

(case-sensitive,

differences between

the companies)

Workers’ union,

industrial safety district,

employers’ federation,

insurance business

II Transportation

companies (3)

L/SH drivers (11) Drivers’ immediate

superiors (3)

Industrial safety group

members (3)

R&D personnel (2)

Workers’ union,


insurance business

III Transportation

companies (2)

L/SH drivers (8) None Workers’ union,


insurance business

IV a) Transportation

companies (5)

b) Truck body and

trailer manufacturing

companies (19)

a) L/SH drivers

(19)

a) Drivers’ immediate

superiors (3)


members (3)

R&D personnel (2)

b) R&D personnel

(differences between

the companies)

Workers’ union,

employers’' federation,

insurance business

43

4 Findings

The findings documented in this chapter are picked up from the results presented

in the articles I-IV. Thus some of the important findings in the articles are not

discussed in this thesis but in the articles. The findings picked up here are the key

results supporting the holistic work system design and management approach in

this study.

4.1 Holistic management processes (RQ1)

Research question 1 is answered within Article I. Article I provided material for

holistic work environment management processes. Work environment issues,

quality of working life, occupational risk prevention, productivity and ergonomics

must all be discussed under a certain concept. Article I provides a general approach and theory model for work environment management (GAT). GAT

consists of ten statements and theories that the organisations need to acknowledge

when designing and executing development actions. The statements and theories

propose that:

– Strategic goals, both long and short term are needed

– The organisation must have the ability to react to changes

– Complex work system must be understood

– Development work must be continuous

– The interactions between productivity and well-being must be understood

– HSEQ issues must be managed jointly

– Quality must be seen as everybody’s business

– All losses must be seen as affecting the company’s total performance

– All personnel groups must participate in development work

– Development work must also contain concrete microergonomic aims

Additionally there are also external factors such as laws and regulations, and

competition for market shares that must be taken into account when designing and

executing development processes. The results propose that by acknowledging

these proposals non-desired outputs, such as HSEQ losses and different loads to

the humans can be minimised on the work system and desired outputs such as

increases in productivity and quality and decreases in adverse health outcomes

can be attained.

44

As an answer to RQ1, it can be concluded that the relationships between

humans, tasks, technologies, and environmental aspects must be understood in

order to be able to make holistic strategic choices. All losses must be seen as

affecting the company's overall performance. Organisations’ must continuously

involve their personnel extensively when designing and executing development

actions.

4.2 Deviations related to physical activities at L/SH drivers’ work (RQ2)

Research question 2 is answered within Article II. Article II provided material on

drivers’ (n=11) and other stakeholders’ (n=8) identifications of physically and

psychosocially demanding work situations and hazard risks (n=202) in L/SH

drivers’ work outside the cab. Each identification was further analysed by the

researchers by identifying the physical activity that was performed during the

identified work situation and by identifying different deviations that existed in the

work situation. A single identification may include one or more physical activities

and one or more deviations. The categorisations for physical activities and

deviations were based on Eurostat’s European Statistics on Accidents at Work

(ESAW 2001) categorisations.

The connections between the physical activities and the deviations are

presented in Figure 3. The most frequent deviations were “sudden overexertion or

straining”, “Falling down, jumping, falling over, slipping” and “losing control of

a work equipment”. A combination of a physical activity of carrying by hand and

sudden overexertion or straining existed in all together 78 identifications. That is

39% of all identifications that were made. Furthermore sudden overexertion or

straining was also related to movement in 61 identifications (30%). Falling down,

jumping, falling over, and slipping was related to carrying by hand in 55

identifications (27%) and to movement in 48 identifications (24%). Losing

control of work equipment was related to physical activities of carrying by hand

(17%), operating some work equipment (16%) and movement (15%).

45

Fig. 3. Physical activities and deviations in identified physically and psychosocially

demanding work situations and hazard risks (n=202). Each identification can include

one or more physical activities and deviations. Modified from Article II with permission

of Taylor & Francis.

As an answer to RQ2 it can be concluded that L/SH drivers’ work is a

combination of several physical activities. These physical activities may be

infringed by various deviations. The most frequent deviations are “sudden

overexertion or straining”, “Falling down, jumping, falling over, slipping” and

“losing control of a work equipment”. The wide-range of different deviations

poses challenges to holistic management processes. Employers, as system

decision makers, are responsible for providing adequate risk management

processes for their employees. Furthermore other stakeholders’ contributions are

needed as the work is mainly performed in work environments that are

administered by other parties. Employees as system actors are responsible for

working safely in all circumstances.

46

4.3 Work equipment used in L/SH truck drivers’ work (RQ3)

Research question 3 is answered within Article III. Article III provided material

on the identification of physically and psychosocially demanding work situations

and hazard risks for the drivers from two different types of L/SH operations; daily

deliveries of different packages (4 drivers), later “General” and daily deliveries of

dairy products (4 drivers), later “Dairy”. Both L/SH operations are performed

daily at several locations and contain work tasks that include MMH and

movement outside the cab.

The observations resulted in altogether 117 identifications by the drivers and

researchers. Researchers further analysed the identifications by looking at the

different origins for the discomfort or hazard risk in the identification. Each

identification can include one or more different origins. One identification may

contain for example a hazardous physical work activity performed by the driver

(possible origin) within non-functional work equipment (possible origin) in a

hazardous work environment (possible origin). The identifications contained

altogether 116 origins that were related to some work equipment (Table 3). The

work equipment is in this context is understood broadly as in EN ISO 6385

(2004).

Table 3. Identifications (n=117) divided by work equipment related origins (n=116) that

could have caused the physically and psychosocially demanding work situation

and/or risk for hazard. Modified from Article III with permission of Central Institute for

Labour Protection – Research Institute (CIOB-PIB).

Work equipment General: work equipment

related origins (n)

Dairy: work equipment

related origins (n)

In total (n)

Truck and trailer bodies and structures

Cargo space 10 8 18

Tailgate loader 15 13 28

Remote control for

the tailgate loader

0 1 1

Manual transport equipment

Roll cage 1 22 23

Dolly 0 18 18

Rack with wheels 2 0 2

Pallet converter with

wheels

3 0 3

Lifting hook 0 7 7

Fork truck 1 0 1

47

Work equipment General: work equipment

related origins (n)

Dairy: work equipment

related origins (n)

In total (n)

Hand truck 0 6 6

Pallet truck 9 0 9

In total 41 75 116

Dairy deliveries contained 41 work equipment related origins whereas general

deliveries contained 75 origins. A majority (61%) of the work equipment related

origins in general deliveries were related to truck and trailer bodies and structures

whereas in dairy deliveries these were included only in 29% of origins. A majority

of the origins in dairy deliveries were related to different manual transporting

equipment (71%). As an answer to RQ3, it can be concluded that similar kinds of daily L/SH

operations contain various work equipment related origins to demanding work

situations and risks for hazards. The employers, as system decision makers, are

responsible for providing and ensuring that adequate work equipment is available

and the employees as system actors must utilise the work equipment available in a

safe way. In general in L/SH deliveries, the origins related to work equipment are

mainly related to trucks and trailer bodies and structures, whereas in dairy

deliveries the origins are relatively more related to different manual transporting

equipment.

4.4 Work environments out of the cab in L/SH drivers’ work (RQ4)

Research question 4 is answered within Article IV. Article IV provided material

on L/SH drivers' (n=19) and other stakeholders' (n=8) identifications of physically

and psychosocially demanding work situations and hazard risks (n=262) that

drivers face daily during their work shift while working out of the cab. From the

Figure 4, it can be seen that the identifications can be divided roughly into three

categories on the basis of the work environment where they were performed.

Nearly half (48%) of the identifications are related to trucks, truck bodies and

trailers. Over one third (37%) of the identifications can be linked to customers'

yards and premises.

48

Fig. 4. Identifications of physically and psychosocially demanding work situations and

hazard risks (n=262) divided into work environments where they were performed.

Modified from Article IV with permission of Inderscience Publishers.

As an answer to RQ4 can be condensed that L/SH drivers' work is performed

within several work environments besides the cab. The identifications are mainly

located in two kinds of work environments; trucks, truck bodies and trailers and

customers yards and premises. Employers, as system decision makers are

responsible for providing safe work equipment and environment to employees

regardless of the actual location where the work is performed. Thus cooperation is

needed between employers and different parties that own or administer these

work environments. Employees as system actors are responsible for working

safely in all circumstances.

4.5 Organisational contributions to L/SH drivers’ work system

design and management processes (RQ5)

The answer to research question 5 is taken from all four articles results. Different

intra- and inter-organisational stakeholders all may affect work system design and

management processes. The articles’ findings are discussed within potential intra-

and inter-organisational contributors in Table 4.

49

Table 4. Summary of the contributions and main intra- and inter-organisational

stakeholders who can contribute to work system design and management processes.

Article Main findings Potential intra- and inter-orgnisational contributors to the work system

design and management processes

I The relationships

between humans,

technologies, and

environmental

aspects must be

understood in

order to be able to

make holistic

strategic choices

• System decision makers by providing holistic management

processes that takes into account social, environmental and

economic aspects of the work

• System actors by following the instructions and regulations

provided by other stakeholders and by participating into work

system design processes

• System experts by providing reliable knowledge that can be used

in implementing and executing development actions

• System influencers by providing their contributions on strategic

nationwide questions

II L/SH drivers work

contains various

physical work

activities, which

include various

kinds of

deviations.

Different

stakeholders

contributions are

needed in work

system design and

management

processes.

• System decision makers by providing adequate and safe work

equipment to perform work

• System decision makers by providing training to employees

• Employers and customers as system decision makers by

providing achievable schedules

• Customers as system decision makers by providing safe work

environments on their premises and employers by ensuring that

the adequate OSH level in these work environments is achieved.

• System actors by choosing safe ways to perform work

• System experts such as occupational health care services by

providing detailed knowledge and practical measures for OSH

work

• System influencers by providing safety in common areas

III Similar kinds of

L/SH operations

can be performed

with different work

equipment. Safety

and ergonomics of

this work

equipment must

be at an adequate

level.

• Employees as system decision makers by providing proper work

equipment that the system actors can take with on their route

• Customers as system decision makers by providing work

equipment that can be used at their premises and yards

• System actors by utilising work equipment available in a safe way

• System experts such as work equipment manufacturing

companies by designing and providing safe and well-designed

and work equipment

50

Article Main findings Potential intra- and inter-orgnisational contributors to the work system

design and management processes

IV Discomfort and

risks occur in

various work

environments.

Several

stakeholders can

contribute to the

work environment

design and

management

processes.

• System actors by choosing safe ways to perform work

• System decision makers by providing adequate risk assessments

on the work environments

• Customers as system decision makers by providing risk

assessments on their work environments and by improving and

maintaining their safety continuously

• System influencers by providing safety in common areas

• System experts, such as truck, trailer, cargo space and tailgate

manufacturers by providing safe and well-designed work

equipment and work environment

51

5 Discussion

5.1 Holistic design and management issues

Current trends in working life emphasise holistic approaches to management in

order to fulfil sustainability goals. The concept of holistic management in this

thesis is quite similar to the definition given by Zink (2005). Zink (2005)

emphasises that the concept of holistic includes an evaluation of results and

potentials, strong emphasis on prevention, multidimensional goals, systematic use

of synergies and mid- and long-term orientation. Kira and van Eijnatten (2008)

emphasise that sustainable organisations are able to function in the changing

situations that they face. Companies, in many respects regardless of their size, are

keen partners of different value networks. Value networks and external

environment in general provide different expectations of the company.

In addition the company’s personnel’s expectations and well-being must be

taken into account. Stakeholder participation into OHS processes and practices is

a highly topical issue as emphasised in two recent publications by the European

Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2012a, 2012b). A good example of

successful long-lasting stakeholder interaction is provided by Väyrynen et al. (2012). They have studied how basic industry principal and supplier companies in

Northern Finland have successfully developed cooperation procedures within

HSEQ issues for years. Stakeholder cooperation is also emphasised in another

example from Sweden provided by Målqvist and Parmsund (2008). The broad

cooperation within different stakeholders in the brewery sector has led to a

national standard that limits deliveries stairs to five steps. Otherwise lifts, hoists,

ramps or other measures are required. This thesis provided general guidelines and criteria in the form of a GAT

model for holistic management purposes, in order to diagnose needs and design,

redesign and implement development actions. The development actions include a

variety of different possibilities from practical, often microergonomics

improvements to changes in complex sociotechnical systems and management

contexts. The participatory approach utilised in articles II, III and IV can support

companies in fulfilling GAT criteria (Table 5).

52

Table 5. GAT model elements (article I) compared to the theoretical foundation with

regard to the transportation industry and articles II-IV. Suggestions for different

actions towards fulfilling GAT criteria are also presented.

GAT model

criteria

(Article I)

GAT from a transportation

industry perspective according

to the theoretical foundation

Articles II-IV from a GAT

perspective from the

transportation company’s point

of view

Suggestions and views on

future work

Strategic goals Holistic workplace safety

studies are needed in the

industry. Safety and

ergonomics need to be

incorporated into a company’s

strategy and social

responsibility (Cantor 2008).

Ergonomics issues can

contribute to the company’s

performance. Identifications

provided visualised material

that was used in discussions

with different stakeholders.

Such material may be used in

setting and measuring short

and long term goals for

different stakeholders (Article

II).

Visualisations, when gathered

at an adequate level, can be

used to check the work done

and highlight possible

development needs. Video

analyses can be used

alongside accident statistics to

setting goals at company level

as suggested by Pekkala et al.

(2010).

Ability to

manage

changes

A majority of the companies

are small in terms of employee

numbers. Due to the

customer-supplier relationship

there are challenges for

employers in controlling the

work environments where

drivers work. Humans are

often considered to be the

flexible part (Cantor 2008,

Perttula 2010, Shibuya et al.

2010).

The identification of

discomforts provides

visualised evidence on

different deficiencies at work.

Transport companies as

independent actors need proof

to be able to require changes.

Article II provides an example

of how this material can be

analysed in greater depth to

obtain information that can be

used in justifying changes.

Visualisations and in-depth

analyses provide instant

information about the work.

This material enables a mutual

view to be developed and acts

as a basis for actions if an

adequate number of different

stakeholders participate.

Understanding

complex work

system entities

Work outside the cab is

comprised of many different

tasks and is performed in

many kinds of work

environment using different

items of work equipment or

manually (Olson et al. 2009).

Articles II-IV showed that all

work system elements need to

be developed.

This thesis provides a holistic

view on understanding work

systems and their complexity,

specifically from a human

perspective. From a

sustainability point of view,

environmental and economic

aspects must be taken into

account more profoundly.

53

GAT model

criteria

(Article I)







of view


future work

Continuous

development

work

Current management trends

all emphasise continuous and

structured processes (e.g.

Ahonen et al. 2011, Hackman

& Wageman 1995, Liker 2004,

Wilkinson & Dale 2001, 2007).

New participatory cooperation

processes that can be used in

continuous development

processes were introduced

(Article IV).

Video analyses can be used

as one tool in regular

evaluations of the work

environment.

Understanding

the

interactions

between

productivity

and well-being

Transport industry as a labour-

intensive sector is dependent

on healthy employees. The

accidents rates and absences

due to sickness are among the

highest in Finland (European

Agency for Safety and Health

at Work 2010b).

Video analyses showed which

kinds of work tasks were the

most demanding and thus

provided valuable information

on where to concentrate

development work in order to

improve productivity and well-

being (Articles II-IV).

The costs of absenteeism can

be calculated and presented to

the relevant stakeholders (see

Ahonen et al. 2011). The costs

and visualisations of

demanding work situations

support each other for

management and safety

training purposes.

Integrated and

synergic

management

system

The origins of quality, safety

and ergonomics problems are

often derived from the same

faults (Leino & Mattila 2000).

There are differences in how

transportation companies

understand and manage

HSEQ issues (Njå & Fjelltun

2010).

Video analyses can be

analysed in-depth within

different objectives. Article II

provides an example on in-

depth analyses from OHS

point of view.

In-depth video analyses can

also be designed to study

environmental and quality

issues.

Understanding

that everyone

is responsible

for quality

Each element of the supply

chain has its own set of risks

which must be recognised in

an organisations’ holistic

management processes (ISO

28002 2011).

Demanding work situations

are found within work

environments that are

controlled by different

stakeholders (Article IV) and

the driver may be required to

use equipment provided by

different stakeholders or carry

things out manually (Article

III). Thus different

stakeholders can contribute to

the quality (Article II).

Some key stakeholders, such

as customers or work

equipment designers can be

invited to participate in the

video analyses.

54

GAT model

criteria

(Article I)







of view


future work

Understanding

that all losses

affect the

company’s

overall

performance

Risks are considered simply

as general business risks and

workplace safety deficiencies

are not fully understood as

sources of risk. Humans are

mainly considered to be

flexible components in this

context (Cantor 2008, Perttula

2010).

Articles II-IV discuss and

provide in-depth information

on the different risks from a

human perspective.

In-depth examples of typical

losses and their respective

costs, supplemented with

visualisations (as e.g. Rajala

et al. (2012) have suggested)

can be provided in order to

present how losses can affect

company performance. This

material can be used for safety

training purposes.

Participatory

development

processes

L/SH operations are

performed within various work

environments and this poses

challenges for management

(Cantor 2008, Shibuya et al.

2010). Holistic approaches

require the participation of

relevant stakeholders. (Vink et

al. 2008).

Drivers, drivers’ immediate line

managers,


members and

R&D personnel participated.

Results show that different

stakeholders can contribute

effectively to development

processes (Articles II-IV).

To obtain more valid results,

the number of participants in

each group needs to be

higher. Additionally

participation is lacking from

some key stakeholders, such

as customers.

Concrete

micro-

ergonomics

aims

Different pieces of work

equipment have been

developed to ease drivers’

work (Jung et al. 2005,

McClay 2008, Roebuck &

Norton 2002). Nonetheless

there are differences with

regard to how employees have

been trained to use them, how

well they are designed and

whether they are available and

accepted for use (Fathallah et

al. 2000, Rislund 2006).

Identifications of demanding

work situations were further

analysed and divided on the

basis of work environment

(Article IV) and work

equipment (Article III) to show

how complex work systems

can be improved with

microergonomics development

actions.

Article IV provides some

examples of microergonomics

problems which were

processed in participatory

design sessions. More reliable

evidence is needed on the

effectiveness of such

sessions.

The approach used in this thesis to study L/SH drivers’ work concentrated mostly

on the social and technological aspects of sustainable work systems. Schiller et al. (2010) and Black (2010) emphasise that in general, current transportation systems

are non-sustainable. Economic and environmental aspects are discussed only

indirectly as by-products of the drivers’ work performance. Nevertheless, it is

55

worthwhile to acknowledge the issue raised by Dekker et al. (2013), that

questions whether there is a simultaneous negative impact elsewhere if

ergonomics goals in terms of design and efficiency are achieved. Dekker et al. (2013) challenge us to consider sustainability in the light of Hendrick’s (2001)

argument that “good ergonomics is good economics”. As an example, in the

context of the transportation industry they (Dekker et al. 2013) mention that

increasing ethanol content in fossil fuels reduces local or national carbon dioxide

emissions but then the change also has negative effects on food prices. Zink and Fischer (2013) encourage whole value creation chains to be

considered as a way to trigger new innovative approaches. In the context of a

sustainable value chain, environmental issues can be affected various ways. For

instance, Young et al. (2011) have quite recently discussed the environmental

issues brought to light by the concept of green driving. They highlight proper

planning, smooth acceleration, moderate engine speeds and obeying speed limits

as some practical measures that the drivers can observe. Many of these measures

also contain social aspects; for example, managers and end customers could relax

their delivery schedules in order to reduce motor idling and speeding. From a

human perspective, more options would be available to the individual truck driver

with respect to selecting appropriate and safe ways to perform his or her work.

5.2 Work system management in L/SH operations

As shown in articles II, III and IV professional L/SH drivers work in complex

work systems where people, technological and environmental variables and their

interactions are present. The land transport industry as a labour-intensive sector is

in need of human centred ergonomics approaches. According to studies by

Hanowski et al. (1999) and Pekkala (2008) L/SH drivers on local routes spend

only about one third of their work shift driving. Most of the work is consists of

different tasks out of the cab. The accidents and incidents within the industry are

strongly associated in particular to such work tasks. Additionally as emphasised

by Kaila-Kangas et al. (2011) there is evidence that the increased risk of lower-

back disorders in the industry is more likely due to the strenuousness of the work

out of the cab rather than being attributable to driving. Findings, emerging both

from literature and the empirical results of this study, question how current work

system design and management practices can overcome these complex challenges. The relationships between the driver, vehicle and environment in an accident

causation context have been understood for decades, as noted by McFarland

56

(1958). The wide variety of different tasks, work equipment and work

environments, shown in articles II, III and IV poses challenges in terms of

information collection regarding different types of discomfort, risks, deviations

and other problems at work. More precisely, article II shows the diversity of the

connections between the physical activities that the driver performs daily and the

possible deviations. Besides management, the varying nature of the work poses

challenges for OHS personnel, who need additional tools to raise awareness of the

sources accident risks and WMSDs in drivers’ work.

The identifications made by different stakeholders represent work situations

that are causing physical and/or psychosocial discomfort to the driver. It is

possible that these work situations, when performed regularly may lead to

WMSDs such as chronic back pain and thus lead to possible work disability. A

good example of such discomfort is sudden overexertion or straining that can

occur when performing daily, routine MMH tasks unsafely. Risks such as this are

emphasised in L/SH drivers’ work, which is a combination of static work (sitting

while driving) and physical work. However, drivers also identified several unsafe

acts where they put themselves at constant risk of acute accidents that can lead to

human, economic and environmental harm.

Employers as system decision makers are responsible for providing safe work

environments and work equipment to their employees regardless of the physical

location of the actual work environment. Additionally employers are responsible

for guidance, maintenance, supervision and job planning issues. This is

challenging in a context such as L/SH operations, where work environments and

working conditions vary greatly during the workday. Article IV shows that

improvement needs for work environments were especially identified in a)

customers’ yards and premises and b) trucks, truck bodies and trailers. Often

L/SH drivers work alone in these environments. In the event of an accident,

assistance is not always available easily or quickly. Both of these examples

represent work environments in which permanent management requires the

participation of other stakeholders. Employers, often as small actors in the field of

L/SH transportations, need concrete support from system influencers, such as

public authorities in order to disseminate new OHS practices. Transportations

companies must also be able to cooperate together to promote shared needs in

terms of OHS in drivers’ work environments. Cooperation is needed despite the

fact that the companies are competing in same markets.

Nordic conditions; cold, darkness, wind, wet weather and slippery conditions

also increase the risk of accidents and WMSDs, if they are not systematically

57

managed. Personal protective equipment is one way to protect drivers.

Nonetheless, as pointed out by Anttonen et al. (2009) some compromises may

have to be made. For example, heavy clothing in winter time interferes with

movement, perception and the driver’s ability to feel the surrounding and thus

may affect productivity. Optimising clothing is also problematic due to varying

environmental conditions (continuous changes from warm cabs to cold outdoor

environments) at wintertime. This poses challenges, not only to drivers and

employers, but also to clothing designers as well as customers who could provide

indoor loading platforms to prevent risks related to varying environmental

conditions. If indoor loading platforms cannot be provided, other measures

innovative solutions, such as heaters can be introduced. The dissemination of good working practices at employee (system actor)

level seems to be inadequate or drivers simply do not tend to use them due to old

habits. There are several practical guidelines and regulations provided by system

influencers, system experts and system decision makers that can be used in safety

management processes. Drivers can reduce the risks for slips and falls in cab or

cargo space access situations by following the simple three point support

instructions provided by the standard CEN/TR 614-3 (2010). Three point support

means that when climbing into or out of the cab/truck, the driver simultaneously

uses two hands and one foot or two feet and one hand in contact with the vehicle

when accessing or moving about on the vehicle.

A practical tool for safety management use in illustrating forces generated

exiting a cab or trailer of a large truck is provided by TIRES (2012). In addition to

that several national and international authorities provide guidelines and

regulations for manual materials handling and lifting situations (see NIOSH 2007,

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 2006, VnP 1409 1993) and the

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health hosts a database for sharing good

ergonomics practices in the road transport industry (FIOH 2012). Swuste (2008) criticises that management systems in smaller companies often

lack focus on risk and hazard identification. In order to succeed in holistic

management, Kaplan and Norton (2004) emphasise that smaller companies need

more practical tools. According to Bisantz and Drury (2005) both observational

and archival studies are needed when it is essential to understand the full

complexity of a natural environment and when there are limited possibilities for

controlled experiments. L/SH operations present a fine example of such a

situation. Furthermore as emphasised by Sinclair (1991) subjective observations

58

made by several different stakeholders can produce deeper, more complex and

more subtle data than simply external observers’ perceptions.

One practical approach for combining micro and macroergonomics and

archival and observational measures is discussed in article IV by Reiman and

Putkonen (2012). According to their study, accident information and accident

statistics can be analysed to find out the work tasks, tools and environments on

which development actions are to be focused. Furthermore sick leave statistics

also provide valuable information for that purpose. The needs can be concretised

for further design processes within video material on actual work situations. This

approach contains similar aspects to Olsen’s study (2005) in which VIDAR

findings were utilised in small scale project groups to find solutions to the

problems identified. As pointed out by Olsen (2005), VIDAR analyses allowed

participants to point out and concretise physical and psychosocial loads in their

work and thus create a basis for further discussions. Gunasekaran et al. (2001)

have listed several strategic, tactical, and operational level metrics that can be

measured to accompany video analyses in order to attain more evidence for

justifying the need for improvements.

Furthermore video material can also be used for training purposes. Video

material on L/SH drivers work has already been incorporated into periodic

training for professional drivers (Directive 2003/59/EC 2003) by Kärmeniemi et al. (2012). The use of illustrative and descriptive material has been recommended

for practical risk prevention and safety promotion practices by Rajala and

Väyrynen (2010).

5.3 Work system design in L/SH operations

The results of this study show that the work environments where the drivers work

out of the cab constitute a complex problem from a work system design and

management point of view. To a certain extent safety and ergonomics deficiencies

in drivers’ work systems constitute a complex social problem, and requires large

strategic level improvement measures that have not yet been taken. Weick (1984)

suggested that such complex and widespread problems could be divided into a

series of smaller problems that can be solved step by step with concrete and

complete solutions. That approach is supported also by Hendrick (2008) and

Liker et al. (1991) who recommend in their ergonomics studies to first solve

straightforward problems before any attempts are made on complex problems.

59

Davies et al. (2003) and Perttula and Salminen (2012) have listed several

practical measures, such as proper working methods, appropriate equipment for

MMH, non-slip shoes, proper flooring materials, suitable lighting, clear

workspaces and avoiding changes in floor levels that can be used to reduce work

environment related risks. However, these work environments such as enclosures

and buildings, public places and sites may be administered by different parties

and are thus challenging for the employer to design permanent solutions. Often

employers are only able to hope that the customers monitor OSH at their premises

and yards continuously. In many cases the employer must consider whether to put

their faith in their employees’ ability to perform the work in such environments or

to provide specific action rules for all situations. For instance, the European

Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2011b: 20), Reiman et al. (2010) and

Özcelik (2010a, 2010b) provides new ideas and interesting discussions on the use

of different kinds of mobile information and communications technology (ICT)

tools for communication and work system management purposes in the L/SH

transportation system. In this context manual work equipment can be seen as a concrete problem

that is easier to approach. Haeflinger (2012) concludes that even if the product, as

in this context, work equipment, is intrinsically safe its adaptation to a certain

work situations might not be guaranteed. Article III discussed L/SH drivers’ work

outside the cab in work equipment context. According to the results and literature

different kinds of work equipment exist. Nevertheless there seems to be

differences between the types of transportation and whether such equipment is

available and actually used.

Eichendorf (2012) highlights that despite considerable progress in the area of

health protection in product design; ergonomics has still remained rather

challenging area for designers. These challenges are in many respects emphasised

in L/SH operations. The work equipment is rather space and time consuming for

the driver to carry on local deliveries where a large number of customers is served

during a work shift. Furthermore the customers are often so small in size that they

are willing to plead that they do not have enough resources to provide adequate

work equipment. This is especially emphasised within smaller customers, such as

kiosks and restaurants.

It is also possible that other parties own the work equipment used and have

their own requirements for its use. In Finland the roll cages and dollies are often

not owned by the customers or the transportation company but by a third party

that pools and allocates equipment throughout the whole country. That poses

60

challenges to the end-users to share their knowledge on different problems related

to that particular technology. Quite often these devices have been developed to be

used in normal working environments. For example, it may not be known how the

special conditions in a northern climate affect the tyre function on snowy ground.

Cold weather may also affect the functionality of mechanical systems and

increase risks of accidents, as Anttonen et al. (2009) have emphasised. In addition

to cold temperatures, Häkkinen (1997) also points out that also other specific

conditions such as corrosive atmospheres, heat and seawater may affect materials

and devices, especially if they are not designed to withstand such conditions.

Video filming is an illustrative approach to portray how end-users perform

their work in real work environments. Further in-depth analyses by researchers

and other stakeholders can be used as a basis to decide where to focus

development work. Furthermore, video material enables suitable stakeholders to

be identified, whose participation is needed for future development. Article IV

shows how video material can be used in participatory design sessions in

confronting both micro and macro-level challenges.

5.4 Theoretical contributions

There has been some debate regarding the role of design science in scientific

research as Hevner and Khatterjee (2010: 3) and Järvinen (2006) have highlighted.

This is due to the fundamental characteristics of design science research. Design

science aims to provide valid and reliable knowledge that different practitioners

can use when solving design and construct related problems. According to March

and Smith (1995) design science is prescriptive in nature.

This thesis combines ergonomics knowledge and design science principles in

the context of L/SH drivers’ work systems. The knowledge provided by the

drivers’ work system is, as referred to Hevner & Khatterjee (2010: 4) rather

fundamental but still useful for only restricted subjects, i.e. drivers and other

stakeholders in the value network. The material provided by articles, II, III and IV

in general mainly parallels the outcomes of previous studies on the subject.

Nonetheless the articles provide valuable new and in-depth information on L/SH

drivers’ work. As pointed out by Shibuya et al. (2010) the majority of studies on

the road transport sector have been epidemiological in nature and that there is a

need for other approaches also.

The design knowledge provides in-depth data on L/SH drivers’ work outside

the cab. Different professionals that are willing to utilise that knowledge must, to

61

the appropriate extent, translate it to the specific problems that they are aiming to

solve. This thesis adds participatory knowledge on different work system

elements of drivers’ work to the ergonomics and safety framework. Additionally

this thesis provides new participatory cooperation approaches, guidelines for

holistic management processes and material for design science purposes.

5.5 Reliability and validity

The observation material in this thesis consisted of participatory observations

made widely across the Finland. The results mainly support and complete existing

knowledge on L/SH drivers’ work systems. Thus it is likely, but not proven in this

thesis, that the results hold at least at other Nordic countries and can be

generalised also wider.

Design science is about finding reasons for and constructing improvements

and innovations, and further evaluating them. The participatory approach applied

in this study shows itself to be useful for design science and furthermore

especially for practical engineering and risk management practices. Nonetheless

epidemiological evidence – health and safety outcomes – remains a question for

further studies.

Some notices must be made as regards to the validity and reliability of the

design knowledge provided by this thesis. Ergonomics observations in articles II,

III and IV were based on subjective assessments through videos. The validity of

the method is not clarified as noted by Takala et al. (2010) in their epidemiology-

centred review. In a study by Forsman et al. (2003a) three different ways of using

the VIDAR method were compared in three branches. The group analyses

produced less identifications than individual employees in personal analyses.

Nonetheless, the test subjects concluded that group analyses were the most time-

efficient. Similarly a study by Mathiassen et al. (2012) supports that finding, by

stating that it can be highly cost-efficient to have multiple repeated observations

rather than a collection of larger video data and having the data observed fewer

times. Additionally as emphasised by Patton (1987: 137) video cameras have a

limited field of vision which narrows down the possibilities to capture all

affecting elements of the work situation.

The amount of participants varied from the minimum of eight individual

drivers (article III) to the maximum of sixteen individual drivers (article IV).

Additionally group analyses were also done. From an epidemiological study

perspective, the subject group in this thesis is indisputably insufficient. Earlier

62

literature does not state how many subjects must participate in such combinations

of ergonomics and design science studies to fulfil reliability and validity criteria.

Nonetheless the amount of subjects (from eight to sixteen individuals) in this

thesis is quite equal (or even higher) to earlier studies on VIDAR by Kadefors and

Forsman (2000), Hanse & Forsman (2001), Forsman et al. (2003a; 2003b) and

Olsen (2005). Additionally the amount is also equal to the ergonomics studies on

delivery operations by McGlothlin (1996) and Okunribido et al. (2006).

The subject group in articles II, III and IV was male-dominated and the

average age was quite low referring to national average age for the drivers in the

transport and storage sector in Finland. However the youthful age and male-

intensity are typical characteristics for local and short haul deliveries. As noticed

by Perttula (2011) quite commonly younger drivers are placed in jobs that require

more materials handling and older more experienced drivers tend to drive the long

distance routes. Thus, the participants are representative of a rather prominent

sample in the actual situation. Additionally, the point in time of the analysis (in

parallel, immediately after or later) must be noted.

Subjectivity is a question that must be considered when reviewing the results.

For example, the subjective CR-10 ratings by the drivers in article III were

performed within few days of the video filming. Usually, as instructed by Borg

(1998) they are evaluated immediately after the test. There is also a possibility

that the natural behaviour of the participants is influenced by the video recordings.

That is noted also by Kadefors and Forsman (2000). Nonetheless they (Kadefors

& Forsman 2000) argue that a more significant risk is that the subjects may

change their standards and angle of analysis during the analysis phase.

The meta-synthesis (article I) was based on three different development cases

in Northern Finland. The cases were conducted by a researcher group in which

the author of this thesis also participated. Nonetheless the meta-synthesis was

made by two researchers, i.e. the authors which reduces the possibilities of single

researcher’s selective perceptions and biases. The contributions are based on

qualitative analyses afterwards and are thus interpretative in nature.

5.6 Recommendations for further research

The studies included in this thesis incorporate in-depth only road transport sector

and more precisely L/SH drivers work outside the cab. For to provide a totally

holistic view on drivers work also driving phases need to be studied. Concrete

63

ideas for further research in the field of GAT and transportation industry are

presented in Table 5.

Future research can be more precisely directed towards studying the validity

and repeatability issues of the video observation method used in this study. The

method differs from other video analysis methods, as noted by Takala et al. (2010), as it allows employees to participate in assessing general workload.

Pehkonen et al. (2009) provide an example where validity and inter-observer

repeatability of a video-based observation method in kitchen work has been tested. Furthermore the utilisation process of design science knowledge must be

studied more profoundly. Article IV discusses the use of video observation

material in product design purposes in more detail. Article IV reveals that cargo

space designers are not fully aware of the risks that are related to products they

design. In the future product designers’ attitudes towards human-centred design

need to be studied in greater detail. Furthermore the design process must be

studied more profoundly. Future studies can develop answers to questions, such

as: how relevant were the improvement ideas gained through participatory

analyses and in which form the information should be provided so that it can be

utilised in the design processes. Future studies can also include approaches that

clarify whether the improvement ideas through video analyses had any long-

lasting effect.

Finnish legislation (Occupational Health Care Act (1983/2001); Occupational

Safety and Health Act (738/2002)) requires that employers, taking the nature of

the work and activities into account, systematically and adequately analyse and

identify the hazards and risks related to work. This thesis provides an example of

how participatory video analyses can be utilised for that purpose. One aim for

future studies in that context can be used to study how this participatory

procedure and supporting ICT tools can fulfil that requirement and if it is feasible

for that purpose. The effectiveness of ergonomics studies has been a topical subject for a long

time. The perceptions of ergonomists and other stakeholders regarding the

benefits of ergonomics interventions may vary. The benefits of the video

observation approach are discussed only briefly in article II. In future a possibility

of before and after studies must be considered more carefully. For such purposes

the hidden costs and indirect benefits of the intervention are to be recognised and

taken into account. For the effectiveness studies, Verschuren and Hartog (2005)

provide general guidelines and criteria for evaluation in the design science

context.

65

6 Conclusions

The work of L/SH drivers is characterised by various kinds of physically and

psychosocially demanding work situations and hazard risks in different work

environments outside the cab. L/SH drivers’ work systems are complex entities

and contain various sources of physical, psychosocial and cognitive loads for the

person. The results show that the OHS risks in L/SH drivers’ work are often

related to customers’ premises and yards and the trucks, truck bodies and trailers.

Work in these environments is of a physical nature that may result in a number of

deviations, from which sudden overexertion and straining and different kinds of

falls and slips were the most common.

All loads and different losses affect the company's overall performance.

Systems and their interactions must be understood in order to be able to make

holistic strategic choices. Ergonomics provides a human perspective on a holistic

and sustainable work system design and management process. This thesis shows

how different stakeholders’ can contribute in order to succeed in holistic design

and management processes of L/SH drivers’ work systems.

1. Employers, as key system decision makers, are responsible for providing safe

work environments and work equipment for their employees regardless of

where the work is performed. Furthermore, employers are responsible for

designing and planning the work itself so that hazards and risks affecting the

OHS of employees as a result of workload factors are avoided completely or

at least reduced.

2. Employers and customers both as system decision makers must interact in

order to assure that the work environments are safe. The cooperative OHS

work must be continuous and holistic. As the premises and yards might be

administered by other parties, complex demands are placed on work

environment design and management. Cooperation practices must also

include these parties.

3. Work outside the cab can be performed with various items of work equipment.

It is possible that the customers may provide work equipment for use at their

premises. L/SH drivers also carry some work equipment with them on their

delivery routes. Thus, several stakeholders can contribute to work equipment

and its design and management. Currently, there is need for improvement in

how designers collect feedback from the end-users. Work equipment issues

must be continuously discussed by the employers, employees, customers,

66

work equipment manufacturers and suppliers in order to be able to provide

adequate work equipment for different work situations.

4. Employees as system actors are responsible for performing work using the

equipment available in a safe way, regardless of the location where the work

is performed and by accommodating the instructions and regulations that are

provided to them by other stakeholders. Currently, employers lack the tools to

monitor OSH in different work environments and they are, in many cases,

forced to rely on their employees and customers’ own skills in OSH issues.

5. Individual and small transportation companies are often not powerful enough

to provide nationwide requirements for work environment design and

management processes. System influencers such as regulators and other

authorities must be included in work system design and management

processes in order to make strategic, long-lasting and nationwide decisions on

improvements in drivers’ work outside the cab.

6. Drivers’ work outside the cab consists of various different physical work

activities. These work activities performed within complex work systems

may lead to several kinds of deviations if safety issues are ignored. Video

material of the work provides valuable and illustrative information that can

be used in work system design and management processes and for different

stakeholders to use.

7. Video material facilitates a mutual view of a rather complex issue, in which

an employee works in environments that are not directly managed by the

employer. Despite its constraints (in giving only a limited view of the

situation), video material can provide illustrative data for use in developing a

mutual view and for the justification of improvement needs.

67

References

Ahonen G, Parvinen L, Vainio H, Husman K, Ylikoski M, Parvinen A, Liira J, Puputti I & Parry S (2011) Arvopohjainen työkyvyn hallinta tehostaa työterveyshuoltoa. Suomen Lääkärilehti 11(66): 921–926.

Anthony R (1965) Planning and Control Systems: A framework for analysis. Cambridge, Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration.

Anttonen H, Pekkarinen A, Niskanen J (2009) Safety at Work in Cold Environments and Prevention of Cold Stress. Industrial Health 47(3): 254–261.

Anumba CJ, Siemieniuch CE & Sinclair MA (2000) Supply chain implications of concurrent engineering. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 30(7): 566–597.

Apostolopoulos Y, Sönmez S, Shattell MM, & Belzer M (2010) Worksite-induced morbidities among truck drivers in the United States. American Association of Occupational Health Nurses Journal 58(7): 285–296.

Aramo-Immonen H & Vanharanta H (2009) Project management: The task of holistic systems thinking. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries 19(6): 582–600.

Barnett-Page E & Thomas J (2009) Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology 9(59) doi:10.1186/1471–2288–9–59

Beevis D (2003) Ergonomics - Costs and Benefits Revisited. Applied Ergonomics 34(5): 491–496.

Beevis D & Slade IM (1970) Ergonomics - costs and benefits. Applied Ergonomics 1(2): 79–84.

Belzer MH (2002) Technological Innovation and the Trucking Industry: Information Revolution and the Effect on the Work Process. Journal of Labor Research 23(3): 375–395.

Bengtsson P & Johansson CR (2002) Significance of the dimensional view for visualizing relevant aspects of a production system in a co-operative planning process, Ergonomics 45(13): 910–921.

Bergquist K & Abeysekera J (1996) Quality Function Deployment (QFD) – A means for developing usable products. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 18(4): 269–275.

Bisantz AM & Drury CG (2005) Applications of archival and observational data. In: Wilson JR & Corlett EN (eds) Evaluation of human work. 3rd ed. Boca Raton FL, Taylor & Francis: 61–82.

Black WR (2010) Sustainable Transport: Problems and Solutions. New York NY, The Guilford Press.

Borg G (1998) Borg’s Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Champaign IL, Human Kinetics.

Brauer RL (2006) Safety and Health for Engineers. Hoboken NJ, John Wiley & Sons Inc.

68

Braver ER, Preusser CW, Preusser, DF, Baum HM, Beilock R & Ulmer RG (1992) Long hours and fatigue: A survey of tractor-trailer drivers. Journal of Public Health Policy 13(3): 341–366.

Bridger RS (2003) Introduction to Ergonomics. London, Taylor & Francis. Brown O Jr (2002) Macroergonomics Methods: Participation. In: Hendrick HW & Kleiner

BM (eds) Macroergonomics. Theory, Methods and Applications. New Jersey NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc: 25–44.

Cantor R (2008) Workplace safety in the supply chain: a review of the literature and call for research. The International Journal of Logistics Management 19(1): 65–83.

Capodaglio P, Capodaglio EM & Bazzini G (1997) A field methodology for ergonomic analysis in occupational manual materials handling. Applied Ergonomics 28(3): 203–208.

Carayon P (2006) Human factors of complex sociotechnical systems. Applied Ergonomics 37(4): 525–535.

Carayon P (2009) The Balance Theory and the Work System Model…Twenty Years later. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 25(5): 313–327.

Carayon P & Lim S-Y (2006) Psychosocial Work Factors. In: Marras WS & Karwowski W (eds) The occupational ergonomics handbook. Interventions, controls, and applications in occupational ergonomics London, Taylor & Francis: 5–1–5–9.

Carayon P, Schoofs Hundt A, Karsh B-T, Gurses AP, Alvarado CJ, Mith M & Flatley B (2006) Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model. Quality and Safety in Health Care 15(Suppl I): 150–i58.

Carayon P & Smith M (2000) Work organization and ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics 31(6): 649–662.

Carey EJ & Gallwey TJ (1998) The use of video techniques to analyse postural stress. In: Kumar S (ed) Advances in Occupational Ergonomics and Safety 2, Amsterdam, Ios Press Inc: 198–201.

CEN/TR 614–3 (2010) Safety of machinery. Part 3: Ergonomic principles for the design of mobile machinery. European Committee for Standardization.

Chandrasekar K (2011) Workplace Environment and its impact on organizational performance in public sector organizations. International Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business System International Systems 1(1).

Christopher M (2005) Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Creating Value-Adding Networks. Dorchester, Pearson Education Limited.

Clayton AMH & Radcliffe NJ (1996) Sustainability: A systems approach. Guildford, Earthscan Publications limited.

Coakes E & Coakes J (2009) A Meta-analysis of the Direction and State of Sociotechnical Research in a Range of Disciplines: For Practitioners and Academics. International journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development 1(1): 1–52.

Cohen AL, Gjessing CC, Fine LJ, Bernard BP & McGlothlin JD (1997) Elements Of Ergonomics Programs: A Primer Based On Workplace Evaluations Of Musculoskeletal Disorders. DHHS (NIOSH) Publications No. 97–117.

69

Cole DC, Theberge N, Dixon SM, Rivilis I, Neumann, WP & Wells, R (2009) Reflecting on a program of participatory ergonomics interventions: A multiple case study. Work 34(2): 161–178.

Confederation of Finnish Industries (2011) Työaikakatsaus. Työajat ja poissaolot EK:n jäsenyrityksissä 2010. Helsinki, Confederation of Finnish Industries. URI: http://www.ek.fi/ek/fi/tyomarkkinat_ym/tyoelama/tyoaika/Liitteet/Tyaikakatsaus-2010.pdf. Cited 2012/04/14.

Cooper D (1998) Improving Safety Culture: A Practical Guide. Chichester: John Wiley Sons Ltd.

Custódio AL & Oliveira RC (2006) Redesigning distribution operations: a case study on integrating inventory management and vehicle routes design. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 9(2): 169–187.

Darses F & Wolff M (2006) How do designers represent to themselves the users’ needs? Applied Ergonomics 37(6): 757–764.

Davies JC, Kemp GJ, Frostick SP, Dickinson CE & McElwaine J (2003) Manual handling injuries and long term disability. Safety Science 41(7): 611–625.

Dekker SWA, Hancock PA & Wilkin P (2013) Ergonomics and sustainability: towards an embrace of complexity and emergence. Ergonomics 56(3): 357–364.

De Langen PW & Chouly A (2009) Strategies of terminal operating companies in changing environments. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 12(6): 423–434.

Dempsey PG (2007) Effectiveness of ergonomics interventions to prevent musculoskeletal disorders: Beware of what you ask. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 37(2): 169–173.

Dempsey PG, McGorry RW & Maynard W (2005) A survey of tools and methods used by certified professional ergonomists. Applied Ergonomics 36(4): 489–503.

Dempsey PG, Wogalter MS & Hancock PA (2000) What's in a name? Using terms from definitions to examine the fundamental foundation of human factors and ergonomics science. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 1(1): 3–10.

Directive 2003/59/EC (2003) On the initial qualification and periodic training of drivers of certain road vehicles for the carriage of goods or passengers [online]. The European Parliament and of the Council. URI: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003L0059:EN:HTML Cited 2012/01/10.

Dixon SM, Theberge N & Cole DC (2009) Sustaining Management Commitment to Workplace Health Programs: The Case of Participatory Ergonomics. Relations industrielles/Industrial Relations 64(1): 50–74.

Docherty P, Kira M & Shani AB (2008) What the world needs now is sustainable work systems. In: Docherty P, Kira M & Shani AB (eds) Creating sustainable work systems. London: Routledge: 1–22.

Driessen MT, Proper KI, Anema JR, Knol DL, Bongers PM & van der Beek AJ (2011) The effectiveness of participatory ergonomics to prevent low-back and neck pain – results of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health 37(5): 383–393.

70

Driessen MT, Proper KI, van Tulder MW, Anema JR, Bongers PM & van der Beek AJ (2010) The effectiveness of physical and organisational ergonomic interventions on low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review. Occupational & Environmental Medicine 67(4): 277–285.

Dul J, Bruder R, Buckle P, Carayon P, Falzon P, Marras WS, Wilson JR, van der Doelen B. (2012) A strategy for human factors/ergonomics: developing the discipline and profession. Ergonomics 55(4): 377–395.

Dul J & Neumann PW (2009) Ergonomics contributions to company strategies. Applied Ergonomics 40(8): 745–752.

Dumas JS & Redish JC (1999) A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Exeter: Intellect Books.

Dyllick T & Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment 11(2): 130–141.

Dzissah S, Karwowski W & Yang Y-N (2000) Integration of Quality, Ergonomics, and Safety Management Systems. In: Karwowski W (ed) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human factors. London: Taylor & Francis: 1129–1135.

E-Fact 47 (2010) Health promotion in the road transport sector. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. URI: https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/e-facts/efact47. Cited 2013/01/10.

Eason K (2005) Ergonomics interventions in the implementation of new technological systems. In: Wilson JR & Corlett N (eds) Evaluation of Human Work. London: Taylor & Francis 919–932.

Eichendorf W (2012) Stakeholder interaction for safe products – achievements and challenges. Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on standardization, testing and certification in the field of occupational safety and health. Stakeholder interaction – the key to product safety. Helsinki.

Eklund J (1997) Ergonomics, quality and continuous improvement – conceptual and empirical relationships in an industrial context. Ergonomics 40(10): 982–1001.

Eklund J (2000) Development work for quality and ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics 31(6): 641–648.

EN ISO 6385 (2004) Ergonomic principles in the design of work systems. European Committee for Standardization.

EN 1005–1 (2010) Safety of machinery. Human physical performance. Part 1: Terms and definitions. International Committee for standardization.

EN 292–1 (1991) Safety of machinery. Basic concepts, general principles for design. Part 1: Basic terminology, methodology. European Committee for Standardization.

EN 292–2 (1991) Safety of machinery. Basic concepts, general principles for design. Part 2: Technical principles and specifications. European Committee for Standardization.

EN 614–1 (2006) Safety of machinery – Ergonomics design principles – Part 1: Terminology and general principles. European Committee for Standardization.

ESAW (2001) European statistics on accidents at work – methodology. European Commission. URI: http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Statistics/ESAW_Methodology.pdf. Cited 2012/02/01.

71

Eskildsen JK, Kristensen K & Juhl HJ (2004) Private versus public sector excellence. The TQM Magazine 16(1): 50 – 56.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2010a) OSH in figures: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the EU – Facts and figures. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2010b) A review of accidents and injuries to road transport drivers. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2011a) Delivering the message - Programmes, initiatives and opportunities to reach drivers and SMEs in the road transport sector. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2011b) Managing risks to drivers in road transport. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2012a) Review of workplace innovation and its relation with occupational safety and health. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (2012b) Worker participation practices: a review of EU-OSHA case studies. Literature review. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.

European Foundation for the improvement of Living and Working Conditions. (2004) EU road freight transport sector: Work and employment conditions. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (2008) Fact sheet: land transport. URI: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2008/149/en/1 /EF08149en.pdf. Cited 2013/01/03.

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (2011) Links between quality of work and performance. URI: http:// www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/20/en/1/EF1120EN.pdf. Cited 2013/01/03.

FAII (2011) Työtapaturmat ja ammattitaudit – Tilastovuodet 2001–2010. Helsinki, The Federation of Accident Insurance Institutions.

FAII (2012) Työtapaturmat – Tilastojulkaisu 2012. Helsinki, The Federation of Accident Insurance Institutions.

Fathallah FA, Grönqvist R & Cotnam JP (2000) Estimated slip potential on icy surfaces during various methods of exiting commercial tractors, trailers and trucks. Safety Science 36(2): 69–81.

Federation of Finnish Technology Industries (2011) Advancing Technology Finland! A review of the Finnish technology industries 2010/2011. Erweko Painotuote Oy.

Feng W, Crawley EF, de Weck O, Keller R & Robinson B (2010) Dependency structure matrix modelling for stakeholder value networks. Proceedings of the 12th International Dependency and Structure Modelling Conference, DSM'10, Cambridge.

Fernández-Muñiz B, Montes-Peón JM & Vázquez-Ordás CJ (2009) Relationship between occupational safety management and firm performance. Safety Science 47(7): 980–991

72

FIOH (2012) Kuljetusalan ergonomiaratkaisut. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health. URI:http://www.ttl.fi/fi/ratkaisupankki/Sivut/default.aspx?luokka=Ergonomia&aihealue=Kuljetusalan%20ergonomiaratkaisut. Cited 2012/11/22.

Foot M & Hook C (2005) Introducing Human Resource Management. Edinburgh Gate: Pearson Education Limited.

Forsman M (2008) Participatory ergonomics – supporting tools. In: Kujala J & Iskanius P (eds) Proceedings of the ICPQR conference. Oulu, Oulu University Press: 195–204.

Forsman M, Pousette A, Persson O, Kjellberg A, Christmansson M, Grundell LO, Soprani J & Bogårdh B (2003a) Comparisons of three different ways of using a subjective video analyse method – VIDAR – Results from three case studies. In: Rafnsdottir GL, Gunnarsdóttir H & Sveinsdóttir Þ (eds) Mind and Body in a Technological World: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Congress of the Nordic Ergonomics Society. Reykjavik: 136–140.

Forsman M, Pousette A, Persson O, Kjellberg A, Grundell LO, Soprani J, Bogardh B, Christmansson M & Kadefors R (2003b) An easy-to-use participative video-computer method for ergonomic evaluation of complex work. Proceedings of the XVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association; Ergonomics in the Digital Age. Seoul, Ergonomics Society of Korea: 592–595.

Forsman M, Stridqvist J & Persson O (2006a) A checklist extension of VIDAR – a participative video-based method for ergonomics evaluation. In: Koningsveld E (ed) Proceedings of the 16th World Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, Maastricht.

Forsman M, Stridqvist J, Persson O, Grundell L-O, Nyström A-K & Östman C (2006b) A video-based method for ergonomic evaluation – now with a checklist based on the Swedish ergonomic regulations. In: Saarela KL, Nygård C-H & Lusa S (eds) Promotion of Well-Being in Modern Society: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Congress of the Nordic Ergonomics Society. Tampere, Pk-Paino Oy: 136–140.

Gander PA, Marshall NS, Bolger W, Girling G (2005) An evaluation of driver training as a fatigue countermeasure. Transportation Research Part F 8(1):47–58

Gao C & Abeysekera J (2004) A systems perspective of slip and fall accidents on icy and snowy surfaces. Ergonomics 47(5): 573–598.

García Acosta G & Lange Morales K (2008) macroergonomic study of food sector company distribution centres. Applied Ergonomics 39(4):439–449.

Gunasekaran A, Patel C & Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 21(1): 71–87.

Hackman JR & Wageman R (1995) Total quality management empirical conceptual and practical issues. Administrative Science Quarterly 40(2): 309–342.

Haeflinger R (2012) Purchasing safe and suitable products – what is important from an OSH viewpoint. Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on standardization, testing and certification in the field of occupational safety and health. Stakeholder interaction – the key to product safety. Helsinki.

73

Hägg GM (2003) Corporate initiatives in ergonomics – an introduction. Applied Ergonomics 34(1): 3–15.

Haims MC & Carayon P (1998) Theory and practice for the implementation of ‘in-house’, continuous improvement participatory ergonomic programs. Applied Ergonomics 29(6): 461–472.

Haines HM & Wilson JR (1998) Development of a Framework for Participatory Ergonomics. Sudbury: HSE Books.

Haines H, Wilson JR, Vink P & Koningsveld E (2002) Validating a framework for participatory ergonomics (the PEF). Ergonomics 45(4): 3009–327.

Hakkarainen P, Ketola R & Nevala N (2011) Reliability and usability of the ergonomic workplace method for assessing working environments. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 12(4): 367–378.

Häkkinen K (1997) Principles of prevention: Materials Handling and internal traffic. In: ILO Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, Chapter f8 Safety Applications, 4th Edition. Geneva, International Labour Office: 77–81.

Hale A & Borys D (2013) Working to rule or working safely? Part 1: A state of the art review. Safety Science 55: 207–221.

Hanowski RJ (2000) The impact of local/short haul operations on driver fatigue. PhD thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Hanowski RJ, Vierwille WW & Dingus TA (2003) An on-road study to investigate fatigue in local/short haul trucking. Accident Analysis and Prevention 35(2): 153–160.

Hanowski RJ, Wierwille WW, Gellatly AW & Dingus TA (1999) Safety Concerns of Local/Short Haul Truck Drivers. Transportation Human Factors 1(4): 377–386.

Hanse JJ & Forsman M (2001) Identification and analysis of unsatisfactory psychosocial work situations: a participative approach employing video-computer interaction. Applied Ergonomics 32(1): 23–29.

Harms-Ringdahl L (2001) Safety analysis. Principles and practice in occupational safety. Boca Raton, CRC Press.

Haro E & Kleiner BM (2008) Macroergonomics as an organizing process for systems safety. Applied Ergonomics 39(4): 450–458.

Haslam R & Waterson P (2013) Ergonomics and Sustainability. Ergonomics 56(3): 343–347.

Hatch MJ & Cunliffe AL (2006) Organization Theory. Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Helander M (1995) A Guide to Ergonomics of Manufacturing. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Hendrick HW (2000) The technology of ergonomics. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 1(1): 22–33.

Hendrick H (2001) Good Ergonomics is Good Economics. Santa Monica CA, HFES Press. Hendrick HW (2002) An Overview of Macroergonomics. In: Hendrick HW & Kleiner,

BM (eds) Macroergonomics. Theory, Methods and Applications. New Jersey NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.: 1–24.

74

Hendrick H (2007a) A Historical Perspective and Overview of Macroergonomics. In: Carayon P (ed) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care and Patient Safety. Mahwah NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 41–60.

Hendrick HW (2007b) Macroergonomics: The Analysis and Design of Work Systems. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics 3(1): 44–78.

Hendrick HW (2008) Applying ergonomics to systems: Some documented “lessons learned”. Applied Ergonomics 29(4): 418–426.

Hendrick HW & Kleiner BM (2001) Macroergonomics - An Introduction to Work System Design. Santa Monica, CA, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Hevner AR & Chatterjee S (2010) Design Research in Information Systems, Integrated Series in Information Systems, Volume 22, Springer.

Hignett S, Wilson JR & Morris W (2005) Finding ergonomic solutions - participatory approaches. Occupational Medicine 55(3): 200–207.

Horberry T (2012) Better integration of human factors considerations within safety in design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 1–12, iFirst, DOI:10.1080/ 1463922X.2012.727108.

Hughes P & Ferrett E (2003) Introduction to health and safety at work. Oxford, Elsevier Butterworth-Heineman.

IEA (2012) International Ergonomics Association. What is Ergonomics. URI: http://iea.cc/01_what/What%20is%20Ergonomics.html. Cited 2012/08/06.

ILO (2005) International Labour Office. Promotional framework for occupational safety and health. Report IV(1) International Labour Conference, 93rd Session. Geneva, International Labour Office.

Imada AS (2002) A Macroergonomic Approach to Reducing Work-Related Injuries. In: Hendrick HW & Kleiner (eds) Macroergonomics – Theory, Methods, and Applications. New Jersey NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.: 151–171.

Imada A (2008) Achieving Sustainability through Macroergonomic Change Management and Participation. In: Zink KJ (ed) Corporate Sustainability as a Challenge for Comprehensive Management. Heidelberg, Physica-Verlag: 129–138.

Ireland RD & Hitt MA (2005) Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive 19(4): 63–77.

ISO Guide 73 (2009) Risk management – Vocabulary. International Organization for Standardization

ISO 28000 (2007) Specification for security management systems for the supply chain. International Organization for Standardization.

ISO 28002 (2011) Security management systems for the supply chain. Development of resilience in the supply chain. Requirements with guidance for use. International Organization for Standardization.

ISO 31000 (2009) Risk management – Principles and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.

Jackson SE, Schuler RS & Werner S (2011) Managing Human Resources. Mason OH, South-Western Cengage Learning.

75

Järvinen P (2004) On research methods. Tampere, Opinpajan kirja. Järvinen P (2006) Onko innovaatioiden suunnittelu tiedettä. Systeemityö 2: 25–27. Järvinen P (2007) Action Research is Similar to Design Science. Quality & Quantity 41(1):

37–54. Jensen L & Allen M (1996) Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Qualitative Health

Research 6(4): 553–560. Jordan PW, McClelland IL & Thomas B (1996) Introduction. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B,

Weerdmeester BA & McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry. London, Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Jung M-C, Haight JM & Freivalds A (2005) Pushing and pulling carts and two-wheeled hand trucks. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35(1): 79–89.

Kadefors R & Forsman M (2000) Ergonomics evaluation of complex work: A participative approach employing video-computer interaction, exemplified in a study of order picking. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 25(4): 435–445.

Kaila-Kangas L, Miranda H, Takala E-P, Leino-Arjas P, Karppinen J, Viikari-Juntura E, Luukkonen R & Heliövaara M (2011) The role of past and current strenuous physical work in the association between professional car driving and chronic low-back syndromes. A population-based study. Spine 36(11): E734–E740.

Kaplan RS & Norton DP (2001) The strategy-focused organization: how balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Boston, Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan RS & Norton DP (2004) Strategy Maps. Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Karhu O, Kansi P & Kuorinka I (1977) Correcting working postures in industry: A practical method for analysis. Applied Ergonomics 8(4): 199–201.

Kärmeniemi P, Olkkonen S, Sysi-Aho J & Yli-Outinen A (2007) Maantieliikenteen ammattikuljettajien työturvallisuus – katsaus ja kehittämismahdollisuuksia. Työ ja ihminen 21(4): 437–452.

Kärmeniemi P, Reiman A, Nyberg M, Lindström K, Nevala N & Väyrynen S (2012) Ammattikuljettajien työhyvinvointi – turvallinen ja ergonominen työpäivä. Opettajan opas. Koulutus- ja tiedotusmateriaali kuljettajien ammattipätevyyskoulutukseen. Tietoa työstä. Helsinki, Työterveyslaitos.

Karwowski W (2005) Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics 48(5): 436–463.

Karwowski W (2012) The Discipline of Human Factors and Ergonomics. In: Salvendy G (ed.) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. Hoboken NJ, John Wiley & Sons Inc.: 3–37.

Kasvio A & Kandolin I (2010) Työelämän muutos ja tulevaisuus. In: Kauppinen T, Hanhela R, Kandolin I, Karjalainen A, Kasvio A, Perkiö-Mäkelä M, Priha E, Toikkanen J & Viluksela M (eds) Työ ja terveys Suomessa. Sastamala, Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy: 9–42.

76

Kellogg KC, Orlikowski WJ & Yates JA (2006) Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations. Organization Science 17(1): 22–44.

Kelsey JL & Hardy RJ (1975) Driving of motor vehicles as a risk factor for acute herniated lumbar intervertebral disc. American Journal of Epidemiology 102(1): 63–73.

Keyserling WM, Monroe KA, Woolley CB & Ulin SS (1999) Ergonomic Considerations in Trucking Operations: AN evaluation of Hand Truck and Ramps. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 60(1): 22–31.

Kira M & van Eijnatten FM (2008) Sustained by work: Individual and social sustainability in work organisations. In: Docherty P, Kira M & Shani AB (eds) Creating sustainable work systems. London: Routledge: 233–246.

Kjellen U (2000) Prevention of Accidents through Experience Feedback. London, Taylor & Francis.

Kleiner BM (2006) Macroergonomics. In: Karwowski W (ed) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors. Boca Raton FL, CRC Press: 154–156.

Kleiner BM (2008) Macroergonomics: Work System Analysis and Design. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50(3): 461–467.

Kleiner BM & Hendrick HW (2008) Human Factors in Organizational Design and Management of Industrial Plants. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 4(1): 114–128.

Koningsveld EAP (2009) The Impact of Ergonomics. In: Schlick GM (ed) Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics: Visions, Concepts, Methods and Tools. Berlin, Springer-Verlag: 177–196.

Kraemer S, Carayon P & Sanquist TF (2009) Human and organizational factors in security screening and inspection systems: conceptual framework and key research needs. Cognition, Technology & Work 11(1): 29–41.

Kuiper JI, Burdorf A, Verbeek JHAM, Frings-Dresen MHW, van der Beek AJ & Viikari-Juntura ERA (1999) Epidemiological evidence on manual materials handling as a risk factor for back disorders: a systematic review. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 24(4): 389–404.

Kuorinka I (1997) Tools and means of implementing participatory ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 19(4): 267–270.

Lane J-E (2000) The Public Sector: Concepts, Models and Approaches. London: SAGE. Leblebici D (2012) Impact of workplace quality on employee's productivity: Case study of

a bank in Turkey. Journal of Business Economics & Finance 1(1): 38–49. Leino A & Mattila MK (2000) Safety, Ergonomics and Total Quality Management. In:

Karwowski W (ed) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human factors. Taylor & Francis: 1341–1343.

Liker JK (2004) The Toyota Way – 14 management principles form the world’s greatest manufacturer. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill.

Liker JK, Joseph BS & Ulin SS (1991) Participatory ergonomics in two US automotive plants. In: Noro K & Imada AS (eds) Participatory Ergonomics. London, Taylor & Francis: 97–139.

77

Liker JK, Nagamachi M & Lifshitz YR (1989) A comparative analysis of participatory ergonomics programs in US and Japan manufacturing plants. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 3(3) 185–199.

Luczak H (1998) Arbeitswissenschaft. Berlin, Springer. Mackenzie CF & Xiao Y (2003) Video techniques and data compared with observation in

emergency trauma care. Quality and Safety in Health Care 12(Suppl II): ii51–ii57. Målqvist I & Parmsund M (2008) Partnership for sustainable work environment

development. In: Svensson L & Nilsson B (eds) Partnership – As s Strategy for Social Innovation and Sustainable Change. Stockholm, Santerus Academic Press: 55–80.

March ST & Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4): 251–266.

Martimo K-P, Shiri R, Miranda H, Ketola R, Varonen H & Viikari-Juntura E (2010) Effectiveness of an ergonomic intervention on the productivity of workers with upper-extremity disorders - a randomized controlled trial. Scandinavian journal of Work Environment and Health 36(1): 25–33.

Mathiassen SE, Liv P & Wahlström J (2012) Cost-efficient observation of working postures from video recordings – more videos, more observers or more views per observer. Work 41(suppl 1):2302–2306.

May A, Carter C & Joyner S (2000) Virtual team working in the European automotive industry: User requirements and a case study approach. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 10(3): 273–289.

McClay RE (2008) Truck falls: examining the nature of the problem. Professional Safety 53(5): 26–35.

McFarland RA (1958). Health and Safety in Transportation. Public Health Reports 73(8): 663–680.

McGlothlin JD (1996) Ergonomic intervention for the soft drink beverage delivery industry. Publication No. 96–109, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Miilunpalo P & Olkkonen S (2013). Kuljetus ja varastointi. In: Kauppinen T, Mattila-Holappa P, Perkiö-Mäkelä M, Saalo A, Toikkanen J, Tuomivaara S, Uuksulainen S, Viluksela M & Virtanen S (eds) Työ ja terveys Suomessa 2012. Työterveyslaitos. Tampere, Tammerprint Oy: 191–196.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (2013) Työnantajan on selvitettävä työajoista johtuvat vaaratekijät. URI: http://www.stm.fi/tiedotteet/tiedote/-/view/1855204#fi. Cited 2013/05/03.

Minzberg H (1994) Rise and Fall of Strategic planning. New York NY, The Free Press. Moody L (2012) Human Factors and Lean in the ER: A Review of the Literature.

Proceedings of the Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care. Baltimore MD: 20–26.

Mumford E (2003) Redesigning Human Systems. Hershey PA, Information Science Publishing.

Nagamachi M (1995) Requisites and practices of participatory ergonomics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 15(5): 371–377.

78

Nenonen S (2013) Analysing factors related to slipping, stumbling, and falling accidents at work: Application of data mining methods to Finnish occupational accidents and diseases statistics database. Applied Ergonomics 44(2): 215–224.

Nicholson AS & David GC (1985) Slipping, tripping and falling accidents to delivery drivers. Ergonomics 28(7): 977–991.

Niemelä R, Rautio S, Hannula M & Reijula K (2002) Work Environment Effects on Labor Productivity: An Intervention Study in a Storage Building. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 42(4): 328–35.

NIOSH (2007) Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Material Handling. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. URI: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-131/pdfs/2007-131.pdf. Cited 2012/11/22.

Njå O & Fjelltun S (2010) Managers attitudes towards safety measures in the commercial road transport sector. Safety Science 48(8): 1073–1080.

Noro K & Imada AS (1991) Participatory Ergonomics. London, Taylor & Francis. Occupational Health Care Act 1983 (2001) Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Finlex.

URI: http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2001/en20011383.pdf. Cited 2013/01/10. Occupational Safety and Health Act 738 (2002) Ministry of Social Affairs and Health,

Finlex. URI: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/2002/en20020738.pdf. Cited 2013/01/10.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2006) Käsin tehtävät nostot ja siirrot työssä. Työsuojeluoppaita ja -ohjeita 23. Tampere, Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Oeij PRA & Wiezer NM (2002) New work organisation, working conditions and quality of work: Towards the flexible firm. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of European Communities.

OHSAS 18002 (2000) Occupational health and safety management systems. Guidelines for the implementation of OHSAS 18001. Helsinki, Finnish Standards Association SFS.

Oikarinen M (2011) Urkurin soittoasennon biomekaaninen analyysi. Videointi vartalon ja raajojen liikkeiden kuvaajana. PhD thesis. Sibelius Academy.

Okunribido OO, Magnusson M & Pope M (2006) Delivery drivers and lower-back pain: A study of the exposures to posture demands, manual materials handling and whole-body vibration. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 36(3): 265–273.

Olsen KB (2005) Video analysis (VIDAR) revealing physical and psychosocial loads can lead to change. In: Veiersted B, Fostervold KI & Gould KS (eds) Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Nordic Ergonomics Society: Ergonomics as a tool in future development and value creation. Oslo: 188–192.

Olson R, Hahn DI & Buckert A (2009) Predictors of severe trunk postures among short-haul truck drivers during non-driving tasks: an exploratory investigation involving video-assessment and driver behavioural self-monitoring. Ergonomics 52(6): 707–702.

Özcelik F (2010a) Mobile learning for lorry drivers. Programme & Abstracts: Towards Better Work and Well-being, International Conference. Helsinki, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health: 57.

79

Özcelik F (2010b) Mobile Learning für Berufskraftfahrer im Fernverkehr. No. 3042, Edition 11/2010, 2 pages. In: Aus der Arbeit des IAG., Dresden, Institut für Arbeit und Gesundheit der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung.

Paavola J, Vehviläinen A, Ojala L, Antikainen T & Iikkanen P (2012) Suomen ulkomaankaupan logistinen kilpailukyky ja kehittämistarpeet. Selvitysmiesryhmän loppuraportti. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 6/2012. URI: http://www.lvm.fi/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=1986562&name=DLFE-14202.pdf&title=Julkaisuja%206-2012. Cited 2012/08/13.

Parvinen LA, Windischhofer R & Gustafsson M (2010) Competitive advantage through value-based health care: The case of Metso Corporation. European Management Journal 28(3): 195–207.

Patton MQ (1987) Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Beverly Hills CA, SAGE Publications. Pehkonen I, Ketola R, Ranta R & Takala E-P (2009) A video-based observation method to

assess musculoskeletal load in kitchen work. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics 15(1): 75–88.

Pekkala J (2008) Jakelukuljettajan ohjaamon ulkopuolisen työn videoavusteinen ergonomia- käytettävyys- ja turvallisuusanalyysi MSc thesis. Univ. Oulu, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management.

Pekkala J, Reiman A & Väyrynen S (2010) Participatory risk assessment and accident statistics – A case study at transportation branch. In: Fostervold KI, Husby T & Olsen K (eds) Proceedings of the Nordic Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Conference. Stavanger, Norway.

Pekkarinen A (1994) Occupational accidents occurring in different physical environments with particular reference to indoor and outdoor work. PhD thesis. Univ. Oulu and Oulu Regional Institute of Occupational Health.

Perttula P (2010) Safety of a logistics chain: a case study. Logistics Research 2: 159–163. Perttula P (2011) Improving occupational safety in logistics – accident risks of heavy

vehicle drivers and material transfers at construction sites. PhD thesis. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.

Perttula P & Salminen S (2012) Workplace Accidents in Materials Transfer in Finland. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics 18(4): 3–10.

Porter M (1996) What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, November-December. Porter JM & Gyi DE (2002) The prevalence of musculoskeletal troubles among car drivers.

Occupational Medicine 52(1): 4–12. Pot FD & Koningsveld EAP (2009) Quality of working life and organizational

performance – two sides of the same coin? Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health 35(6): 421–428.

Putkonen A (2010) Macroergonomic approach applied to work system modelling in product development contexts. PhD thesis. Univ. Oulu, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management.

80

Pylkkönen M, Sallinen M, Forsman P, Holmström A, Hyvärinen HK, Mutanen P, Paruthi P, Puttonen S, Sihvola M, Sirola N, Viik J, Hublin C (2013) Sleepiness and stress among long-haul truck drivers. An educational intervention to promote safe and economic truck driving. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.

Rajala H-K (2011) Enhancing innovative activities and tools for the manufacturing industry: illustrative and participative trials within work system cases. PhD thesis. Univ. Oulu, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management.

Rajala H-K & Väyrynen S (2010) Constructing ‘‘core stories” for contributing practical safety actions in industrial units. Safety Science 48(10): 1393–401.

Rajala H-K, Väyrynen S & Karila T (2012) Argumentative and economic approaches for enhanced safety management: a log factory case study. International Wood Products Journal 3(2): 77–82.

Ramstad E (2009) Promoting performance and the quality of working life simultaneously. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 58(5): 423–436.

Reiman A, Pekkala J & Väyrynen S (2010) Short haul drivers’ work and different work environments outside the cab – New tool for two-way assessments. In: Bradley G (ed) Proceedings of the IADIS International conference ICT Society and Human Beings. Freiburg, Germany.

Reiman A & Putkonen A (2012) Ergonomics development needs in truck body design – From video analyses to solution proposals. International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics 1(1): 58–73.

Reiman A & Väyrynen S (2011) Review of Regional Workplace Development Cases: A Holistic Approach and Proposals for Evaluation and Management. International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development 3(1): 55–70.

Risikko T (2009) Safety, health and productivity of cold work. A management model, implementation and effects. PhD thesis. Univ. Oulu, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management.

Risikko T, Mäkinen TM, Påsche A, Toivonen L & Hassi J (2003) A model for managing cold-related health and safety risks at workplaces. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 62(2): 204–215.

Risikko T, Remes J & Hassi J (2008) Implementation of Cold Risk Management in Occupational Safety, Occupational Health and Quality Practices. Evaluation of a Development Process and Its Effects at the Finnish Maritime Administration. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics 14(4): 433–446.

Rislund C (2006) Ergonomi som verktyg. Fem fallstudier av uttryck för och användning av ergonomikunskap inom logistikverksamhet. PhD thesis. Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Product and Production Development.

Rivilis I, Cole DC, Frazer MB, Kerr MS, Wells RP & Ibrahim S (2006) Evaluation of a Participatory Ergonomic Intervention Aimed at Improving Musculoskeletal Health. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 49(10): 801–810.

Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J & Mahood Q (2008) Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Applied Ergonomics 39(3): 342–358.

81

Robb MJM & Mansfield NJ (2007) Self-reported musculoskeletal problems amongst professional truck drivers. Ergonomics 50(6): 814–827.

Roebuck B & Norton G (2002) Safety of roll containers. Research report 009. HSE Books. URI: http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr009.pdf. Cited 2013/01/11.

Roland H & Moriarty B (1983) System safety Engineering and Management. New York NY, John Wiley & Sons.

Roughton JE & Mercurio JJ (2002) Developing an Effective Safety Culture: A Leadership Approach. Woburn MA, Butterworth-Heinemann.

Saunders M, Lewis P & Thornhill A (2009) Research methods for business students. Edinburgh Gate, Pearson Education Limited.

Savory A & Butterfield J (1999) Holistic Management - A New Framework for Decision Making. Washington DC, Island Press.

Schendel D & Hofer CW (1979) Strategic management. A new view of business policy and planning. Boston MA, Little, Brown and Company.

Schiller PL, Bruun E, Kenworthy JL (2010) An Introduction to Sustainable Transportation: Policy, Planning and Implementation. UK: The Cromwell Press Group.

Schreyögg G & Sydow J (2010) Organizing for Fluidity? Dilemmas of New Organizational Forms. Organization Science 21(6): 1251–1262.

Shephard RJ (1974) Men at work. Applications of ergonomics to performance and design. Springfield IL, Charles C. Thomas.

Shibuya H, Cleal B & Kines P (2010) Hazard scenarios of truck drivers’ occupational accidents on and around trucks during loading and unloading. Accident Analysis and Prevention 42(1): 19–29.

Shibuya H, Cleal B & Mikkelsen KL (2008) Work Injuries Among Drivers in the Goods-Transport Branch in Denmark. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 51(5): 364–271.

Silverstein B & Clark R (2004) Interventions to reduce work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 14(1): 135–152.

Silverstein B, Spielholz P & Carcamo E (2006) Practical Interventions in Industry Using Participatory Approaches. In: Marras WS & Karwowski W (eds) The occupational ergonomics handbook. Interventions, controls, and applications in occupational ergonomics. London, Taylor & Francis: 3–1–3–21.

Sinay J (2000) Integration of Risk Management into Compex Management Systems. In: Karwowski W (ed) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human factors. London, Taylor & Francis: 1136–1138.

Sinclair MA (1991) Subjective assessment. In: Wilson JR & Corlett EN (eds) Evaluation of human work. A practical ergonomics methodology. London, Taylor & Francis: 58–88.

Sinclair MA (2007) Ergonomics issues in future systems. Ergonomics 50(12): 1957–86. Slappendel C (1992) The Emergence and Development of Ergonomics Capability: Case

Studies of Innovation in Product Design and Development. PhD thesis. Massey University.

82

Smith M & Carayon P (1995) New technology, automation, and work organisation: Stress problems and improved technology implementation strategies. The International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing 5(1): 99–116.

Smith M & Carayon P (2000) Balance theory of Job Design. In: Karwowski W (ed) International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human factors. London, Taylor & Francis: 1181–1184.

Smith M & Carayon-Sainfort P (1989) A balance theory of job design for stress reduction. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 4(1): 67–69.

Sockoll I, Kramer I & Bödeker W (2006) Effectiveness and economic benefits of workplace health promotion and prevention. Summary of the scientific evidence 2000 to 2006. IGA-Report 13a. URI: http://www.iga-info.de/fileadmin/Veroeffentlichungen /iga-Reporte_Projektberichte/igaReport_13e_effectiveness_workplace_prevention.pdf. Cited 2013/01/11.

Sparks K, Faragher B & Cooper CL (2001) Well-being and occupational health in the 21st century workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 74(4): 489–509.

Stanton N & Baber C (2003) On the cost-effectiveness of ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics 34(5): 407–411.

Straker L, Burgess-Limerick R, Pollock C & Egeskov R (2004) A randomized and controlled trial of a participative ergonomics intervention to reduce injuries associated with manual tasks: physical risk and legislative compliance. Ergonomics 47(2): 166–88.

Strauss A & Corbin J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks CA, SAGE Publications Inc.

Suri H (1999) The Process of Synthesising Qualitative Research: A Case Study. Issues of Rigour in Qualitative Research. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Association for Qualitative Research. Melbourne.

Swuste P (2008) “You Will Only See It, If You Understand It” or Occupational Risk Prevention From a Management Perspective. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 18(4): 438–453.

Takala E-P, Pehkonen I, Forsman M, Hansson G-Å, Mathiassen SE, Neumann WP, Sjøgaard G, Veiersted KB, Westgaard R & Winkel J (2010) Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work – a review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 36(1): 3–24.

Thompson J & Martin F (2010) Strategic management. Awareness & Choice. Hampshire, Cencage Learning EMEA.

TIRES (2012) Trucking Injury Reduction Emphasis. Keep Trucking Safe. Interactive truck cab and trailer exit force simulation URI: http://www.keeptruckingsafe.org/game.html. Cited 2012/11/22.

Trimpop R (2003) A new communication on human behaviour - How do “ideas propagators” work to achieve this task? Proceedings of an European Conference of Ministers of Transport: Safe and Sustainable Transport - A Matter of Quality Assurance. Paris, OECD Publications Service: 67–79.

83

Trist E (1981) The Evaluation of Sociotechnical Systems. Ontario Quality of Oerking Life Centre, Toronto, Ontario.

Troup JDG (1978) Driver's back pain and its prevention: A review of the postural, vibratory and muscular factors, together with the problem of transmitted road-shock. Applied Ergonomics 9(4): 207–214.

Van Aken JE (2004) Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological Rules. Journal of Management Studies 41(2): 219–246.

Van Aken JE & Romme AGL (2009) Reinventing the future: adding design science to the repertoire of organization and management studies. Organization Management Journal 6(1): 5–12.

Van de Ven AH (1986) Central Problems in the Management of Innovation. Management Science 32(5): 590–607.

Van Der Beek AJ & Frings-Dresen MH (1998) Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 55(5): 291–299.

Van Eerd D, Cole D, Irvin E, Mahood Q, Keown K, Theberge N, Village J, St. Vincent M & Cullen K (2010) Process and implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions: a systematic review. Ergonomics 53(10): 1153–1166.

Väyrynen S (1986) Metsäkoneiden kunnossapidon mekaaninen työturvallisuus, erityisesti sen liittyvyys luoksepäästävyyteen kunnossapitokohteisiin. Työterveyslaitoksen tutkimuksia 4 (lisänumero 1).

Väyrynen S (2010) Työjärjestelmään ja työvälineisiin liittyvät näkökohdat kuormittavuuden hallinnassa. In: Kantolahti T & Tikander T (eds) Puheenvuoroja työn kuormittavuudesta. Työhyvinvointifoorumi. Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriön selvityksiä 17: 59–67.

Väyrynen S, Hoikkala S, Ketola L & Latva-Ranta J (2008) Finnish Occupational Safety Card System: Special training intervention and its preliminary effects. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 4(1): 15–34.

Väyrynen S, Koivupalo M & Latva-Ranta J (2012) A 15-year development path of actions towards an integrated management system: description, evaluation and safety effects within the process industry network in Finland. International Journal of Strategic Engineering Asset Management 1(1): 3–32.

Väyrynen S & Saaranen P (2006) Video-assisted analysis of physical and psychosocial strain on nurses in a hospital-at-home – A pilot study utilizing the VIDAR method. In: Saarela KL, Nygård C-H & Lusa S (eds) Proceedings of the 38th Annual Congress of the Nordic Ergonomics Society: Promotion of Well-Being in Modern Society. Tampere, Pk-Paino Oy: 192–195.

Verschuren P & Hartog P (2005) Evaluation in design-oriented research. Quality & Quantity 39(6): 733–762.

Vink P, Imada AS & Zink KJ (2008) Defining stakeholder involvement in participatory design processes. Applied Ergonomics 39(4): 519–526.

84

Vink P, Koningsveld EAP & Molenbroek JF (2006) Positive outcomes of participatory ergonomics in terms of greater comfort and higher productivity. Applied Ergonomics 37(4): 537–546.

Vischner JC (2007) The effects of the physical environment on job performance: towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health 23(3): 175–184.

VnP 1409 (1993) Valtioneuvoston päätös käsin tehtävistä nostoista ja siirroista työssä. URI: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/1993/19931409. Cited 2012/11/22.

Walsh D & Downe S (2005) Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 50(2): 204–211.

Waters T, Genaidy A, Barriera Viruet H & Makola M (2008) The impact of operating heavy equipment vehicles on lower back disorders. Ergonomics 51(5): 602–636.

Weick KE (1984) Small Wins – Redefining the Scale of Social Problems. American Psychologist 39(1): 40–49.

Westgaard RH (2010) RCTs of ergonomic interventions. Occupational & Environmental Medicine 67(4): 217–218.

Westgaard RH & Winkel J (1997) Ergonomic intervention research for improved musculoskeletal health: A critical review. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 20(6): 463–500.

Westgaard RH & Winkel J (2011) Occupational musculoskeletal and mental health: Significance of rationalization and opportunities to create sustainable production systems - A systematic review. Applied Ergonomics 42(2): 261–296.

Wilkinson G & Dale BG (2001) Integrated management systems: a model based on a total quality approach. Management Service Quality 11(5): 318–330.

Wilkinson G & Dale BG (2007) Integrated management systems. In: Dale BG, van der Wiele T & van Iwaarden J (eds) Managing Quality. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing: 310–335.

Wilson JR (1991) Participation – A framework and a foundation for ergonomics. Journal of Occupational Psychology 64(19): 67–80.

Wilson J, Haines H & Morris W (2005) Participatory ergonomics. In: Wilson JR & Corlett N (eds) Evaluation of Human Work. London, Taylor & Francis: 933–962.

Womack JP & Jones DT (2003) Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your organisation. New York NY, Free Press.

Yeoh HT, Lockhart TE & Wu X (2013). Non-fatal occupational falls on the same level. Ergonomics 56(2): 153–165.

Yeow PHP & Nath Sen R (2003) Quality, productivity, occupational health and safety and cost effectiveness of ergonomic improvements in the test workstations of an electronic factory. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 32(3): 147–163.

Ylirisku S & Buur J (2007) Designing with Video: Focusing the User-Centred Design Process. London, Springer-Verlag.

Yoshimura M (2010) System Design Optimization for Product Manufacturing. London, Springer-Verlag.

85

Young MS, Birrell SA & Stanton NA (2011) Safe driving in a green world: A review of driver performance benchmarks and technologies to support ‘smart’ driving. Applied Ergonomics 42(4): 533–539.

Zink KJ (2000) Ergonomics in the past and the future: From a German perspective to an international one. Ergonomics 43(7): 920–930.

Zink KJ (2005) From industrial safety to corporate health management. Ergonomics 48(5): 534–546.

Zink KJ (2011) Stakeholder-oriented management concepts as challenge for macro-ergonomics - How can macro-ergonomics succesfully contribute to quality and sustainability? In: Lindfors J, Savolainen M & Väyrynen S (eds) Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Conference of the Nordic Ergonomics Society: Wellbeing and innovations through ergonomics. Oulu: 7–14.

Zink KJ & Fischer K (2013) Do we need sustainability as a new approach in human factors and ergonomics. Ergonomics 56(3): 348–356.

Zink KJ, Steimle U & Fischer K (2008) Human Factors, Business Excellence and Corporate Sustainability: Differing Perspectives, Joint Objectives. In: Zink KJ (ed) Corporate Sustainability as a Challenge for Comprehensive Management. Heidelberg, Physica-Verlag: 3–18.

87

Original publications

I Reiman A & Väyrynen S (2011) Review of Regional Workplace Development Cases: A Holistic Approach and Proposals for Evaluation and Management. International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development 3(1): 55–70.

II Reiman A, Pekkala J, Väyrynen S, Putkonen A, Abeysekera J & Forsman M (2013) Delivery Truck Drivers' and Stakeholders Video-assisted Analyses of Work Outside the Truck Cabs. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. In press.

III Reiman A, Pekkala J, Väyrynen S, Putkonen A & Forsman M (2013) Participatory Video-assisted Evaluation of Truck Drivers’ Work outside the Cab – Local Deliveries in two Transportation Companies. Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. In press.

IV Reiman A & Putkonen A (2012) Ergonomics development needs in truck body design – From video analyses to solution proposals. International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics l(1): 58–73.

The named Journals are the original sources of publication for the above

mentioned four articles. Reprinted with the permission from IGI Global (I),

Taylor & Francis (II), Central Institute for Labour Protection – Research Institute

(CIOB-PIB) (III), and Inderscience Publishers (IV).

Original publications are not included in the electronic version of the dissertation.


Book orders:Granum: Virtual book storehttp://granum.uta.fi/granum/

S E R I E S C T E C H N I C A

447. Sonkki, Marko (2013) Wideband and multi-element antennas for mobileapplications

448. Saarinen, Tuomas (2013) Temporal and spatial variation in the status of acidrivers and potential prevention methods of AS soil-related leaching in peatlandforestry

449. Pirinen, Rauno (2013) Towards regional development by Higher EducationInstitutions : an empirical study of a University of Applied Sciences

450. Mäkinen, Liisa (2013) Improvement of resource efficiency in deinked pulp mill

451. Guo, Yimo (2013) Image and video analysis by local descriptors and deformableimage registration

452. Pantisano, Francesco (2013) Cooperative interference and radio resourcemanagement in self-organizing small cell networks

453. Ojanperä, Tiia (2013) Cross-layer optimized video streaming in heterogeneouswireless networks

454. Pietikäinen, Martti (2013) Metalli- ja elektroniikkateollisuus Oulun eteläisenalueella : kehitys koulutuksen ja teknologian näkökulmasta

455. Pitkäaho, Satu (2013) Catalytic oxidation of chlorinated volatile organiccompounds, dichloromethane and perchloroethylene : new knowledge for theindustrial CVOC emission abatement

456. Morais de Lima, Carlos Héracles (2013) Opportunistic resource and networkmanagement in autonomous packet access systems

457. Nardelli, Pedro Henrique Juliano (2013) Analysis of the spatial throughput ininterference networks

458. Ferreira, Denzil (2013) AWARE: A mobile context instrumentation middlewareto collaboratively understand human behavior

459. Ruusunen, Mika (2013) Signal correlations in biomass combustion – aninformation theoretic analysis

460. Kotelba, Adrian (2013) Theory of rational decision-making and its applications toadaptive transmission

461. Lauri, Janne (2013) Doppler optical coherence tomography in determination ofsuspension viscosity

462. Kukkola, Jarmo (2013) Gas sensors based on nanostructured tungsten oxides

C463etukansi.fm Page 2 Thursday, September 26, 2013 12:49 PM

ABCDEFG

UNIVERSITY OF OULU P .O. B 00 F I -90014 UNIVERSITY OF OULU FINLAND


S E R I E S E D I T O R S

SCIENTIAE RERUM NATURALIUM

HUMANIORA

TECHNICA

MEDICA

SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM

SCRIPTA ACADEMICA

OECONOMICA

EDITOR IN CHIEF

PUBLICATIONS EDITOR

Professor Esa Hohtola

University Lecturer Santeri Palviainen

Postdoctoral research fellow Sanna Taskila


University Lecturer Hannu Heikkinen

Director Sinikka Eskelinen

Professor Jari Juga


Publications Editor Kirsti Nurkkala

ISBN 978-952-62-0218-1 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-0219-8 (PDF)ISSN 0355-3213 (Print)ISSN 1796-2226 (Online)


TECHNICA


TECHNICA

OULU 2013

C 463

Arto Reiman

HOLISTIC WORK SYSTEM DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT– A PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT APPROACHTO DELIVERY TRUCK DRIVERS’ WORK OUTSIDE THE CAB

UNIVERSITY OF OULU GRADUATE SCHOOL;UNIVERSITY OF OULU,FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

C 463

ACTA

Arto R

eiman

C463etukansi.fm Page 1 Thursday, September 26, 2013 12:49 PM

holistic work system design and management : — a...

Documents