A preliminary Study on Organisational Ergonomics and Prevention of Hazards in

Garment Industry
*
K. Gomathi Dr. Rajini.G,

*Ph.D Research Scholar, School of Management Studies, Vels Institute of Science and
Technology & Advanced Studies, Pallavaram, Chennai.
** Professor & Head- MBA (Integrated), School of Management Studies, Vels Institute of
Science Technology and Advanced Studies, Vels University, Chennai, India.

Abstract
Ergonomics is a science concerned with the ‘fit’ between people and their work. It
puts people first, taking account of their capabilities and limitations. Ergonomics aims
to make sure that tasks, equipment, information and the environment suit each worker.
Background: This study focused on textile industry, where the workers seated for
prolonged periods, and repetitious motion of arms, wrists, hands and fingers, and
often the entire body. This may produce pain and eventual repetitive strain injuries.
Objectives:To analyse the organizational Ergonomics and its role on employee
Well-being. To study about the working environment, machines, task, prevention of
hazards at the workplace.Methods/Statistical analysis: Questionnaire was used to
collect data from 160 employees working in various garment industry at Thiruppur.
Multiple regression analysis was applied to measure the combined effects of
independent variables on the dependent variable using SPSS 21.0. Findings: The
studies found that Employee well-being depends significantly on Prevention of
Hazards and Organisational Ergonomics whereas the Working environment,
Machines, Task and Resilience have no significant dependency on Employee well-
being.

Keywords:Working Environment, Machines, Task, Prevention of hazards, Organisational

ergonomics, Resilience, Employee Well-being.

Introduction

According to International Ergonomics Association (IEA),Ergonomics (or human factors) is

the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of the interactions among humans
and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theoretical principles, data and
methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance.

Ergonomics defined as human factors, is concern and discovers information about human
behavior, limitation, abilities, and other characteristics to the design of machines ,tools,
systems, jobs, tasks, environments, and workplace for safe ,productive, comfortable, and
effective human use (chapanis, 1985; sanders and mccormick, 1987).

Within this discipline or profession, physical ergonomics is regarded as one of the domains of
specialization, beside organizational ergonomics and cognitive ergonomics.
According to Organizational Safety and Health Association (OSHA, 2018),Organizational
ergonomics is concerned with the optimization of socio-technical systems, including their
organizational structures, policies, and processes and alsoCommunication, Crew resource
management,Work design, Work systems, Design of working times, Teamwork, Participatory
design,Community ergonomics, Cooperative work, New work programs, Virtual
organizations, Telework, and quality management)

Review of Literature

Professionals who use ergonomics principles adapt work tasks to the physical and mental
capabilities of the workers. Implementing ergonomics principles in an occupational
environment can directly benefit the worker and the organisation by reducing physical and
mental strain, lowering the risk of occupational related injuries and illnesses and improving
work performance (Sanderrs and Mccormick, 1993).

Thunet al. (2011) showed that automotive manufacturing managers thought that physical and
organizational ergonomic intervention could reduce mistakes and would have cost-saving
effects. However, the evidence for system effects was not strong, and the managers’opinions
about ergonomics were more on its effectiveness in decreasing workloads and absenteeism,
and increasing health, safety, satisfaction, and motivation. Repetition and manipulation
aresignificant reasons for failure. The greatest gap is in empirical research investigating
separately the effects of different physical ergonomic workloads on errors. Errors are not only
due to the effects of physical ergonomic risk factors, whereas other job characteristics such as
organizational, cognitive, and psycho-social factors have a major impact on product quality
(Layer, Karwowski, &Furr, 2009).

W.Neumann (2010) The author said total of 45 empirical studies were found, addressing both
the human and system effects of OS (re)design. Of those studies providing clear directional
effects, 95% showed a convergence between human effects and system effects , 5% showed a
divergence of human and system effects. System effects included quality, productivity,
implementation performance of new technologies, and also more “intangible” effects in terms
of improved communication and co-operation. Human effects included employee health,
attitudes, physical workload, and “quality of working life”

An ergonomically design workplace was very important in making the human-machine-

environment interface as efficient, safe and comfortable, the effective application of
ergonomics in workplace design can accomplish a balance between worker characteristics
and task demands. This fill lead to improve worker productivity and to decrease health
problems of employees.According to (Tarcan et al. 2004), if the organisation provides a good
working environment and taking ergonomics consideration in designing workplace, it will
increase the employees loyalty level.(Gallagher and Callaghan, 2015) suggests the postural
movements play a role in decreasing eventual pain. Sit, Stand workstations are more common
to interact in a specific task. Job rotation, sequencing and decentralization aid to reduce pain
and comfort the employee. In (2018), verdicts the inferences of job rotation. More research
needs to be carried on to fully assess a variety of tasks to recommend the cognitive tasks.
These skill set acquired can help maintain the postural movements.The mechanical factors of
importance in illness and injury in industry are definitive design of machinery, defective
procedures, unguarded machinery, protruding and moving parts, falling heavy objects and
poor ergonomics. The health effects are such as cuts, wounds, loss of fingers, hands, bruises,
sprains, fractures and in extreme cases, death (Trajkovic, 2000). Another important health
problem the workers face in garment industries is strain on their eyes. As they are to work for
long time and need a keen concentration to their work, an extra pressure is created on their
eyes which also effect on the visual comfort (Ahmed and Raihan, 2014).

Berberoğlu and Tokuç, (2013) stated that Ergonomic hazards are common throughout the
garment industry. Obsolete machinery, inadequate seating and standing arrangements for
workers and the improper lifting/movement of heavy loads all lead to stresses and strains on
the body with a result that workers are often off sick or their productivity is drastically
reduced. Importantly, recent research suggests that an organisation’s capacity to build
resilience, and indeed to successfully manage crises and transitions, is largely contingent on
its ability to capitalise on, and skilfully integrate, core practices and procedures with
employee contributions (Lengnick-Hall, Beck, &Lengnick-Hall, 2011; Shin, Taylor, &Seo,
2012).
Brad Shuck, (2014) the author says Psychological Workplace climate was associated with
Personal accomplishment, depersonalization, emotional exhaustion, and psychological Well-
Being and whether employee engagement moderated these relations. (OyaErdil, 2011) In this
study the author used two main approaches; The Subjective approach(Subjective Well-
Being) and objective approach(Psychological Well-Being).

The Process of Developing the research Questionnaire

The Procedure of development of the questionnaire was based on the international literature,
respecting the stages of item selection, construction of domains, and psychometric properties
study
The first step was the development of the domains based on the theoretical area of
ergonomics. In the second step, the questionnaire items were selected. The techniques used to
select the items included literature research and interviews with a sample of the population. A
literature review searching for other measuring instruments related to the area of interest and
involving garment industry workers was also realized.
Data obtained from these two steps allowed the construction of the questionnaire items
considering the main factors present in garment industry employee’s work recognized as
ergonomic risk.
Research Methodology

The plan for the study is to carry out a data collection in Tiruppur through structured
questionnaire. The Sample size is 160 respondents. The questionnaire contained closed end
questions consisting of 106 items with five point Likert like scale with intensities varying
through Strongly Agree, Agree, Partially Agree, Disagree, Strongly Agree, and To a great
extent, To some extent, To little extent, To very Little extent, Not at all and Always, Very
Often, Sometimes,Rarely and Never.
Seven variables were generated namely Working environment (11 items) , Machines (6 items)
, Task (8 Items), Prevention of hazards (21 Items), Organisational Ergonomics (16 items),
Resilience(15 Items) and Employee Well-being (29 Items). The data were analysed with
SPSS 21.0 where Reliability, multiple Regression (Enter Method), were used in addition to
descriptive statistics.(Rajini and M. Krithika, 2016) .

Table-1 Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Based on
Standardized Items

.856 .853 106

Cronbach’s Alpha value is 0.856, for the total scale. The questionnaire is reliable and the
items internally consistent. The result is expressed Table-1

Multiple Regression

The regression was tested by using T-test and the coefficient was used to compare as well as
determine the percentage of variation that exist in the dependent variable. F –value was used
to know the significance of the F distribution.
H0 – Employee Well-being does not depend on Working Environment, Machines, and Task,
Prevention of Hazards, and Organisational ergonomics.

Table-2 Model Summary

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std.Error of the
Estimate
1 .835a .789 .164 10.16566

From the above Table provides inference that the ability of prediction for model was
articulated by R value 0.835 and R 2value 0.789 which shows 78.9% of variance exist in the
dependent variable is from the independent variables. F- value is 7.417 showing that there
exists a relationship between Working environment, Machines, Task, Prevention of hazards,
Organisational Ergonomics with Employee Well-being.

Table-3 ANOVAa
Model Sum of Df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 3832.618 5 766.524 7.417 .000b
1 Residual 16431.176 159 103.341
Total 20263.794 164
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Well being
b. Predictors: (Constant), Organisational Ergonomics, Task, Machines,
Prevention of hazards, Working Environment

Table-4 Co-efficient

Model Unstandardized Standardized T Sig.

Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 57.580 19.384 2.971 .003
Working Environment .377 .363 .091 1.040 .300
Machines -1.314 .617 -.189 -2.128 .035
1 Task .141 .298 .037 .472 .637
Prevention of hazards .502 .137 .313 3.674 .000
Organisational .514 .157 .246 3.270 .001
Ergonomics

From the above table it is inferred that the beta value is 0.514 for variable 1(Organizational
ergonomics) and 0.502 for variable 2 (Prevention of hazards) and 0.377 for variable 3
(Working environment) and 0.141 for variable 4 (Task) and -1.314 variable 5 (Machines).
There is a significant relationship between Prevention of hazards and Employee Well-being
(P value = .000). There is a significant relationship between Organisational Ergonomics and
Employee Well-being (P value = .001) which is <0.01. There is a significant relationship
between Machines and Employee Well-being (P value = .035) which is <0.05. There is no
significant relationship found working Environment and Employee Well-beingSince the P
value is >0.05 Which is .300. There is no significant relationship found Task and Employee
Well-BeingSince the P value is >0.05 Which is .637. Thereby the final regression equation is
derived by the incorporating the coefficients as follows :

Employee Well-being =57.580+.502 (Prevention of hazards) +.514 (Organisational

Ergonomics) +.377(Working Environment)+.141(Task)-1.314 (Machines)

Conclusion
Employee well-being plays a very important role in the organisation. From the study it is
found that there is a significant relationship between Prevention of hazards, Organisational
ergonomics, Machines and Employee well-being justifying that if the garment industry
machines, preventing of hazards and organisational ergonomics is comfortable for the
employees he/she is performance will increase. New trends in work result in new aspects of
organisational ergonomics. Flex work, working at distance, virtual meetings, control rooms
that are geographically remote from the controlled systems are examples of the complexity of
this topic.
Ergonomics is the study of the relationship between a person and their work
environment.Theobjective is to adapt the workplace for the worker in order to decrease the
risk of injury and improve the link between the worker and their environment. Awkward body
postures are a major ergonomic concern in the garment industry. Awkward postures take the
body away from a comfortable position, which reduces efficiency and increases the use of
energy. Another major concern are static postures. Static means to hold in place, so these are
postures where the body is held in one position for a long period of time.
Organizational ergonomics factors in the workplace results increased productivity, improved
health and safety of workers, lower workers compensation claims. Reduced physical injury,
recent development in the regulatory arena clearly show that understanding of ergonomics
and applying good ergonomics practices is key to successful management of human resources
many companies are realizing that making ergonomic changes before major problem occur
(proactive ergonomics) is more cost effective than simply responding to work-related
injuries(reactive ergonomics).

Conflict of interest – The author assures that there is no conflict of Interest between any
parties

Source of funding- Research Scholar Fellowship awarded by Vels Institute of Science ,Technology
and Advanced Studies (VISTAS ) for this research.

Ethical clearance-Proposal presented before VISTAS Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC)

and clearance obtained Vide letter No..VISTAS-SPS/IEC/VII/2018/07. IEC Registration
No:ECR/288/Indt/TN/2018 and File no: ECR/1644/VELS/Indt/TN, Issued by Government of
India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

References

1. Ahmed S,Raihan M.Z. Health status of the female workers in the garment sector of
Bangladesh. Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences.2014;
4(1):43-58.
2. Berberoğlu, U, Tokuç B. Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders at Two Textile
Factories in Edirne, Turkey. Balkan Medical Journal.2013;30(1): 23–27.

3. Brad Shuck, Thomas G. Reio Jr.Employee Engagement and Well-Being: A

Moderation Model and Implications for Practice.Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies. 2014; Vol. 21(1): 43–58.
4. Ernst Koningsveld, Michiel de Looze. Organisational Ergonomic.2018 Available
from: https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/Approaches_to_work_design.

5. Gallagher K.M, Callaghan J.P. Early static standing is associated with prolonged
standing induced low back pain. Hum. Mov. Sci.2015; 44 (1): 111–121.

6. International Ergonomics Association. What is Ergonomics. Retrieved 16 September

(2013).

7. Lengnick-Hall C. A, Beck T.E, Lengnick-Hall M.L. Developing a capacity for

organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human
Resource Management Review. 2011; 21(3): 243-255.

8. Michal Glinka, Sabrina Metzger, Daniel Viggiani, Jack Callaghan. The effect of task
type and perceived demands on postural movements during standing work. Applied
Ergonomics.2018; 69:146–152.

9. Neumann,W.P, DulJ.Human Factors: Spanning the gab between OM and

HRM.International Journal of Operations & Production Management.2010;30(9-
10):923-950.

10. OyaErdil, OznurGulenErtosun. The Relationship between Social Climate and

Loneliness in the Workplace and Effects on Employee Well- Being. Science Direct.
2011.

11. RajiniG, KrithikaM. Online Purchase: Risk Cognizance Influencing Intention. Indian
Journal of Science and Technology. 2016; Vol 9(32): DOI:
10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i32/98660.

12. Sanders M.S,MccormickE J. Human Factors in Engineering and Design. New York
City: McGraw Hill;1993.

13. Thun J.H, Lehr C.B, bierwirth M. Feel free to feel comfortable- an empirical analysis
of ergonomics in the german automotive industry. International journal of production
ergonomics.2011;133(2):551-561.

14. Trajkovic A. Work related risk factors for musculoskeletal companies in the spinning
industry in Lithuania. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2000; 56: 411-416.