AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF WORKER STRESS EMOTIONS WITHIN THE MALTESE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY PhD Monthly Report Student : Lawrence Farrugia Supervisor : Prof. Jonathan C. Borg Date: 30.04.2014
CONCURRENT ENGINEERING RESEARCH UNIT
Report Number
UNIVERSITY OF MALTA
EMPD – LF05/2014
PhD – April 2014
Table of Contents List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... 2 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4
2
Summary of Survey Questionnaire Results .................................................................... 5 2.1
Survey Questionnaire Section 1 .............................................................................. 5
2.1.1
Ranking of Operator Concerns ........................................................................ 5
2.1.1.1
Baxter Ltd ................................................................................................. 5
2.1.1.2
Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. .................................................................................... 6
2.1.1.3
Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta ................................................................. 7
2.1.1.4. WasteServ Ltd. .............................................................................................. 8 2.2
Survey Questionnaire Section 2 .............................................................................. 9
2.2.1
2.2.1.1
Baxter Ltd ................................................................................................. 9
2.2.1.2
Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. .................................................................................... 9
2.2.1.3
Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta ............................................................... 10
2.2.1.4
WasteServ Ltd ........................................................................................ 11
2.2.2
3.
Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Product/Object of Work .................. 12
2.2.2.1
Baxter Ltd ............................................................................................... 12
2.2.2.2
Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. .................................................................................. 13
2.2.2.3
Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta ............................................................... 13
2.2.2.4.
WasteServ Ltd. ....................................................................................... 14
2.2.3.
2.3
Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Task/Process ................................... 9
Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Work Environment ......................... 15
2.2.3.1.
Baxter Ltd. .............................................................................................. 15
2.2.3.2.
Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. .................................................................................. 15
2.2.3.3.
Methode Electronics Ltd. ........................................................................ 16
2.2.3.4.
WasteServ Ltd. ....................................................................................... 17
Survey Questionnaire Section 3 ............................................................................ 18
2.3.1
Baxter Ltd. ..................................................................................................... 18
2.3.2
Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. ......................................................................................... 19
2.3.3
Methode Electronics Ltd. ............................................................................... 20
2.3.4
WasteServ Ltd. .............................................................................................. 20
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 21
Page 1 of 23
PhD – April 2014
List of Figures Figure 1 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Baxter Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank. ................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank. ......................................................................................... 6 Figure 3 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Methode Electronics Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank. ........................................................................ 7 Figure 4 – The average rank scores of concerns as provided by WasteServ Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank. ......................................................................................... 8 Figure 5 – The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Baxter operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions .................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 6 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Carlo Gavazzi operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ............................................................................................................ 10 Figure 7- The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stressemotions by Methode Electronics operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions ............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 8 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Methode Electronics operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions ....................................................................................... 11 Figure 9 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stressemotions by Baxter Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions ............................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 10 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stressemotions by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions ................................................................................................................ 13 Figure 11 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stressemotions by Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ...................................................................................... 14 Figure 12 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stressemotions by WasteServ Ltd. Malta operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ............................................................................................................ 14 Figure 13 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Baxter Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ............................................................................................................... 15
Page 2 of 23
PhD – April 2014 Figure 14 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ...................................................................................... 16 Figure 15 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Methode Electronics Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ...................................................................................... 17 Figure 16 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stress-emotions by WasteServ Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions. ...................................................................................... 18 Figure 17 – The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Baxter Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence. ............................ 19 Figure 18 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence. ................ 19 Figure 19 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Methode Electronics Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence. ....... 20 Figure 20 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at WasteServ Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence. ..................... 21 Figure 21 - Hierarchy of Operator Concerns ....................................................................... 22
List of Tables Table 1 - The attributes of the process, product and work environment responsible for eliciting negative stress emotions. ................................................................................................... 23
Page 3 of 23
PhD – April 2014
1 Introduction One of the decisions taken during the early stages of the PhD research was that the research should embody a mixture of theoretical and empirical research. The theory consists of a wide body of research which is published in journals, conference proceedings and text books. Yet, another equally important aspect of the PhD is the empirical side of the research. To this extent, the scope of the weeks in April was to gather as much data as possible through semi-structured interviews in which the data was collected via a survey questionnaire. These semi-structured interviews saw the participation of 5 companies: Baxter Ltd, Carlo Gavazzi Ltd, Methode Electronics Malta Ltd. and WasteServ Malta Ltd. It should be noted that the survey questionnaires at Baxter Ltd were carried out in earlier in February. The participants of the survey questionnaire were human operators who interact in a direct manner with the product (or components thereof) together with tools and machines. The evaluation saw the participation of 60 interviewees. The questionnaire was divided into three sections. In the first section the interviewees were required to rank a list containing 8 statements according to the perceived importance. The objective of this section was to investigate if there is a particular pattern or hierarchy of concerns which his shared among different operators across a variety of manufacturing firms. The second section contained 3 questions, where in each question the individual was required to rate the extent to which particular attributes are considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. The questions considered attributes pertaining to the task/process, attributes pertaining to the product/object of work and attributes pertaining to the work environment. A 5 point Likert scale was used in the design of the survey questionnaire in order to gauge the effectiveness of each attribute in eliciting negative stress emotions. In this third section of the questionnaire, the individuals were required to assess the degree to which the experience of negative stress-emotions has an influence on their productivity and the quality of work produced (often measured in terms of the number of rejected/returned components). The objective of this question was to investigate if it is the case that operators consider their experience of elevated levels of stress-emotions to be responsible for lower productivity and/or lower work quality. This report shall outline the main findings of the survey questionnaire in each of the 4 companies. In the end the results pertaining to these companies will be discussed and the main conclusions pertaining to the entire study will be made.
Page 4 of 23
PhD – April 2014
2 Summary of Survey Questionnaire Results This section shall outline the results which were obtained from the survey questionnaires which were completed throughout the interview sessions.
2.1 Survey Questionnaire Section 1 2.1.1 Ranking of Operator Concerns In this section the interviewees were required to rank a list containing 8 statements representing a variety of concerns. The ranking was exclusive, that is two or more statements could not have the same rank. There were instances where the respondents had to express a clear preference between two or more statements which were consider to be of equal importance. The results depicted in this section are for the average rank scores, which is the weighted mean rank obtained by each statement. The average rank score is computed in such a way such that lower values indicate that the particular statement represents a very important concern. 2.1.1.1 Baxter Ltd The plot in Figure 1 summarizes the ranking of concerns by Baxter Ltd. employees.
Figure 1 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Baxter Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank.
In this case the health and safety of the worker was consistently ranked with an average score of 1.00. This indicates that all the interviewed operators considered their health and safety to be the most important concern. Ensuring that the work executed is of good quality and having the right tools and resources in order to execute the required tasks were the second and third highest ranked concerns by the operators. These concerns obtained an average rank score of 2.56 and 3.22 respectively. Page 5 of 23
PhD – April 2014
The data represented in Figure 1 indicates that while the primary concern of workers is their health and safety, the workers are also very concerned about executing tasks which meet the expected quality criteria, while at the same time having to right tools and resources which are necessary in order to execute such tasks. 2.1.1.2 Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. The chart in Figure 2 shows the ranking of operator concerns at Carlo Gavazzi Ltd.
Figure 2 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank.
In this case 93% of the operators who were interviewed pointed out that their health and safety was their primary concern. In addition to the health and safety, the quality of work produced (average rank score: 3.10), building strong positive relationships among co-workers (average rank score: 3.33) and having the right tools and resources (average rank score: 3.29) were also considered to be important concerns which obtained similar scores.
Page 6 of 23
PhD – April 2014 2.1.1.3 Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta The data collected from the operators at Methode Electronics limited is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 - The average rank scores of concerns as provided by Methode Electronics Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank.
With an average rank score of 2.38, the health and safety of the work environment was considered to be the most important concern. This concern was followed very closely by the concern regarding the quality of work which is produced with an average score of 2.92. Having the right tools to execute the required tasks (average rank score: 3.23) and the appearance/comfort of the work environment (average rank score: 3.38) were concerns which were ranked third and fourth respectively.
Page 7 of 23
PhD – April 2014 2.1.1.4. WasteServ Ltd. The responses of the interviewees at WasteServ Ltd. are illustrated in Figure 4.
Figure 4 – The average rank scores of concerns as provided by WasteServ Ltd operators. Lower scores imply a higher rank.
In this case the health and safety of the worker was consistently ranked with an average score of 1.00. This indicates that all the interviewed operators considered their health and safety to be the most important concern. Ensuring that the work executed is of good quality and having the right tools and resources in order to execute the required tasks were the second and third highest ranked concerns by the operators. These concerns obtained an average rank score of 2.56 and 3.22 respectively.
Page 8 of 23
PhD – April 2014
2.2 Survey Questionnaire Section 2 This section contained three questions, whereby in each question the interviewee was asked to rate the effectiveness of various factors pertaining to the task, product and environment in eliciting negative-stress emotions. 2.2.1 Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Task/Process This question presented the interviewees with a variety of factors pertaining to the task or process. In this question the interviewees were required to rank the degree/extent to which the factors presented are effective in eliciting negative stress-emotions. 2.2.1.1 Baxter Ltd The results obtained from the operators at Baxter Ltd. are illustrated in Figure 5. The results recorded indicate that the sensitivity and overall reliability of the tools/machines (average rank score: 4.67), the noises emanating from the process (average rank score: 4.44) and the overall complexity of the machine/tools being used from the process (average rank score: 4.33) have a high degree of influence in eliciting negative stress emotions.
Figure 5 – The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Baxter operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions
The ergonomics of the work stations (average rank score: 4.22), the illumination provided for the process (average rank score: 4.00) and the temperature attributed to the process (average rank score: 4.00) also have a high degree of influence in eliciting negative stress emotions. 2.2.1.2 Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. The results pertaining to the data collected from operators at Carlo Gavazzi is summarized in Figure 6. With an average score of 4.57, the noise emanating from the process was considered to be a factor which is very effective in eliciting negative stress-emotion by 76.2% of the participants. The smells/odours emanated from the machine (average rank score: 4.33),
Page 9 of 23
PhD – April 2014 was considered also to be very effective in eliciting negative stress emotions by 52% of the participants.
Figure 6 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Carlo Gavazzi operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
Other factors which obtained high average scores were the sensitivity and reliability of the tools/machines (average rank score: 4.29) and the inappropriate illumination which is provided for the process (average rank score: 4.24). 2.2.1.3 Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta The responses of the interviewees at Methode Electronics Ltd. are summarized in Figure 7. With an average rank score of 5.00, the sensitivity and reliability of the machines or tools together with the provision of appropriate illumination were two factors which were considered by 100% of the subjects to be very effective in the elicitation of negative stress emotions. The inadequate temperature (average rank score: 4.92) and the lack of tools and machines (average rank score: 4.85) were considered to be very effective in eliciting negative stress emotions by 92.3% and 84.6% of the participants respectively. The complexity of the machine/tool (average rank score: 2.85) and the smells emanating from the process (average rank score: 2.77) were considered to have a low degree of effectiveness in the elicitation of negative stress-emotions.
Page 10 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 7- The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Methode Electronics operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions
2.2.1.4 WasteServ Ltd The data collected through the survey questionnaires at WasteServ Ltd is illustrated in Figure 8. The results indicate that the inadequate temperature (average score 4.65) and the odours emanating from the process (average score 4.65) were considered to be very effective in eliciting negative emotions by 64.70% of the respondents.
Figure 8 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the task/process in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Methode Electronics operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions
Page 11 of 23
PhD – April 2014 In addition to these factors, inadequate illumination (average rank score: 4.53), the overall sensitivity and reliability of equipment (average rank score: 4.47) and the noises emanating from the process (average rank score: 4.47) are effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. 2.2.2 Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Product/Object of Work This question presented the interviewees with a variety of statements concerning attributes of the artefact on which tasks are executed. The artefact is typically a component or an assembly of components which are sold to the customer. Such attributes include: the colour combinations of the components, the tactile feeling of the components, the smell emanating from the components etc. 2.2.2.1 Baxter Ltd The responses concerning the extent to which product attributes elicit negative emotions from operators at Baxter Ltd. are illustrated in Figure 9.
Figure 9 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Baxter Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions
The responses obtained from the survey questionnaire indicate that complexity of the product on which work has to be performed (average rank score: 3.78) and the skills required to perform specific tasks (average rank score: 3.78) are considered by 66.66% of the interviewees to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. In addition, 66.66% of the respondents also consider the odour emanating from components (average rank score: 3.67) to effectively contribute in eliciting negative stress emotions. In addition the type of processes/machines/tools used, the sounds/noises emanated from the product and the accuracy required to perform an operation were considered to be equally effective in eliciting negative stress emotions, with an average rank score of 3.56 out of a maximum of 5.00. Page 12 of 23
PhD – April 2014 2.2.2.2 Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. The data collected from the respondents at Carlo Gavazzi Ltd, is illustrated in Figure 10.
Figure 10 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions
The complexity of the artefact on which work is performed (average rank score: 4.19) was considered to be effective in eliciting negative emotions by 76.19% of the interviewed subjects. Another attribute of the product which was considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions is the accuracy required to perform the required tasks (average rank score: 4.00). The skills demanded by the product in order to perform work on the product (average rank score 3.62), the colour combinations of the product (average rank score: 3.67) and the type of processes and machines used in performing work on the artefact (average rank score: 3.62), were also considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. 2.2.2.3 Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta The data collected the semi-structured interviews at Methode Electronics Ltd. is illustrated in Figure 11. Over 61% of the interviewees considered the type of process required by the artefact (average rank score: 4.38) to be effective in eliciting negative emotions. In addition, 61.50% of the interviewees considered the colour combination (average rank score: 4.00) to effectively contribute in the elicitation of negative emotions. The number of repeated operations (average rank score: 3.46) required to perform work on the artefact was also considered to be effective in eliciting negative emotions by 61.50% of the interviewed subjects.
Page 13 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 11 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stress-emotions by Methode Electronics Ltd. Malta operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
2.2.2.4. WasteServ Ltd. The responses provided by the operators at WasteServ Ltd. are summarized in Figure 12. With an average rank score of 4.29, the smell of the components (waste) was considered by 94.12% of the interviewed subjects to be the attribute which is most effective in eliciting negative stress emotions.
Figure 12 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to product in eliciting negative stress-emotions by WasteServ Ltd. Malta operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
Page 14 of 23
PhD – April 2014 In addition the number of repeated operations (average ranks score: 3.59) was also considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. Over 35% of the interviewed subjects considered the complexity required in disassembling/separating the product (average rank score: 3.35) to effectively contribute in eliciting negative stress emotions. 2.2.3. Stress-Emotion Factors pertaining to the Work Environment This question presented the interviewees with a list of attributes pertaining to the physical environment such as excessive ambient noises, unpleasant odours, inadequate ambient lighting and inappropriate ambient temperature among many others. In addition to the attributes concerning the properties of the physical work environment, this question included attributes pertaining to the organization itself, such as the lack of work delegation, time pressure and the lack of participation in decision making. 2.2.3.1. Baxter Ltd. The responses obtained from the operators at Baxter Ltd. are summarized in Figure 13. The responses indicate that the inadequate spatial layout of the factory (average rank score: 4.78) is considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions by 100% of the respondents. In addition the inadequate ambient temperature (average rank score: 4.67), the lack of appropriate light conditions (average rank score: 4.67) and the lack of participation in decision making (average rank score: 4.67), were all considered to be very effective in eliciting negative stress emotions by 77.77%, 66.66% and 66.66% of the participants respectively.
Figure 13 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stressemotions by Baxter Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
2.2.3.2. Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. The responses obtained from the interviewees at Carl Gavazzi Ltd. are summarized in Figure 14. The lack of work delegation (average rank score: 4.67) was considered to very effectively contribute in eliciting negative emotions by 66.66% of the participants. Another important attribute of the work environment was the lack of participation in decision (average rank score: 4.62) which was considered by 61.90% of the participants to be very effective in eliciting negative emotions. Another attribute of the work environment which was considered to be Page 15 of 23
PhD – April 2014 effective in eliciting negative emotions by 66.66% of the interviewed subjects is the inadequate ambient temperature. It is interesting to note that attributes pertaining to the organization and the physical work environment have nearly equal impact in eliciting negative stress emotions. This indicates that having a well-structured organization in which there is a sense of trust is as important as having a factory which is comfortable and aesthetically pleasing.
Figure 14 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stressemotions by Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
The ambiguity related to the task (average rank score: 4.52) and the lack of appropriate light conditions (average rank score: 4.57) were also considered to be attributes pertaining to the physical work environment which are effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. 2.2.3.3. Methode Electronics Ltd. The extent to which attributes pertaining to the work environment are considered to effectively contribute in eliciting negative stress emotions from operators at Methode Electronics Ltd. is illustrated in Figure 15. The inadequate spatial layout of the factory floor (average rank score: 4.85) was considered to be very effective in eliciting negative emotions by 61.50% of the participants. In addition, the lack of work delegation (average rank score: 4.77), the lack of participation in decision making (average rank score: 4.77) and the lack of opportunity to develop skills (average rank score: 4.77) were considered to be effective in eliciting negative emotions by 76.93%, 84.60 and 76.93% of the participants respectively.
Page 16 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 15 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stressemotions by Methode Electronics Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
Other attributes which were considered to be effective in eliciting negative stress emotions were the ambiguity related to the task due to lack of information and the lack of adequate lighting conditions which may be necessary in order to execute the expected tasks. 2.2.3.4. WasteServ Ltd. The questionnaire responses which were completed by WasteServ Ltd. workers are illustrated in Figure 16. The inadequate spatial layout of the factory (average rank score: 4.47) was considered by 70.58% of the respondents to be very effective in eliciting negative stress emotions. This is due to the fact that operators require ample space to separate waste which is made up of different materials. The lack of opportunities to develop skills through the provision of training (average rank score: 4.18) was an organizational factor that was considered to effectively contribute in eliciting negative stress emotions by 76.50% of the interviewed operators. In addition the operators pointed out attributes pertaining to the physical work environment of the factory such as inadequate ambient temperature (average rank score: 4.12), unpleasant odours (average score 4.06) and excessive ambient noises (average rank score: 4.00) to have a high degree of influence in eliciting negative stress emotions.
Page 17 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 16 - The effectiveness of factors pertaining to the work environment in eliciting negative stressemotions by WasteServ Ltd. operators. Higher average score implies high effectiveness in eliciting emotions.
2.3 Survey Questionnaire Section 3 In the final section of the survey questionnaire the respondents were asked to rate the extent to which the experience of negative stress emotions has an impact on their productivity and the quality of work which is executed. The results were surprising, due to the fact that in their responses most of the respondents did not exhibit any social desirability bias. This bias occurs when respondents answer the questions in such a manner that will be viewed as socially acceptable by others. In this particular scenario, in order to appear socially desirable, one would have expected the respondents to state that the elicitation of negative emotions does not influence their productivity and/or the quality of task which are executed. On the contrary the majority of the respondents admitted that the elicitation of negative emotions has a significant negative influence on their productivity and the quality of work that is executed. 2.3.1 Baxter Ltd. The responses of the operators at Baxter Ltd. are illustrated in Figure 17. These results indicate that according to the respondents’ judgement the elicitation of negative work-related stress emotions has a negative influence on the work productivity (average rank score: 4.00) and the quality of work produced (average rank score: 3.56). In essence this means that the elicitation of negative stress emotions results in less components being produced at a lower quality.
Page 18 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 17 – The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Baxter Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence.
2.3.2 Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. The responses of the operators at Carlo Gavazzi are illustrated in Figure 18.
Figure 18 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Carlo Gavazzi Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence.
Page 19 of 23
PhD – April 2014 The results obtained indicate that the experience of negative emotions was considered by 76.19% of the participants to have a significant impact on the productivity (average rank score: 4.62). In addition 61.90% of the participants considered the elicitation of negative stressemotions to have a significant negative influence on the quality of work which is produced (average rank score: 4.52). 2.3.3 Methode Electronics Ltd. The results obtained from the survey questionnaire which were completed by operators at Methode Electronics Ltd. are illustrated in Figure 19. The responses recorded from the interviewees indicate that the elicitation of negative stress emotions was considered to have a very significant influence on the productivity (average rank score: 4.54). In addition the elicitation of negative stress emotions was considered by 69.23% of the participants to have a significant influence on the quality of work that is executed (average rank score 3.92).
Figure 19 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at Methode Electronics Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence.
2.3.4 WasteServ Ltd. The recorded responses obtained from WasteServ Ltd. operators are illustrated in Figure 20. The recorded questionnaire responses indicate that the elicitation of negative stress emotions was considered by 82.35% of the respondents to have a significant impact on the quality of work which is produced (average rank score: 3.38). In addition 70.58% of the interviewees considered the elicitation of negative emotions to have a significant influence on the quality of work that is performed average rank score: 3.24).
Page 20 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 20 - The degree of influence of work related stress on work quality and productivity by operators at WasteServ Ltd. Higher values imply a high degree of influence.
3.
Conclusion
This report summarizes the results collected via a survey questionnaire which was completed throughout a semi-structured interview. The objective of this survey questionnaire was to understand: a. The main concerns of operators and the relative importance of each concern. To this extent the purpose of the survey questionnaire was to investigate if there is a common hierarchy of concerns which is shared among the operators. b. The extent to which various factors pertaining to the product, process and the work environment contribute in eliciting negative emotions. c. The influence which the experience of negative stress emotions has on the productivity and quality of work produced. Based on the results which were obtained, the following can be concluded i.
There is in fact a hierarchy of concerns which is shared among the majority of operators as illustrated in Figure 21.
Page 21 of 23
PhD – April 2014
Figure 21 - Hierarchy of Operator Concerns
At the very bottom of this hierarchy one can find the most basic (primary) and important concerns, such as the concern about the health and safety of the worker and the concern about having the right tools and resources necessary to execute the required work. Further up this hierarchy one can find concerns which are deemed to be of less importance, which may be called secondary concerns. These include the concerns related to the quality of the tasks which are executed and the comfort appearance and appeal of the work environment. At the very top of this hierarchy one may find the least relevant concerns which are called tertiary concerns. At this level one may find concerns related to minimizing the work overload and spending as much time as possible away from work. The notion of a hierarchy suggests that the concerns of operators are organized in a common structure. The structure consists of the most basic concerns at the bottom up to the less important concerns at the very top. This implies that the threat to a basic concern will elicit very strong negative emotions when compared to a threat to a less important concern further up the hierarchy. ii.
The attributes pertaining to the process, product and the environment which were considered to elicit significant negative emotions are illustrated in Table 1.
Page 22 of 23
PhD – April 2014 Table 1 - The attributes of the process, product and work environment responsible for eliciting negative stress emotions.
Sensitivity and reliability of the tools and other process related resources The Process The inadequate illumination which is provided for the process The noises emanating from the tools and machines used throughout the process. The odour of components The Product/Object The colour combination of different components of Work The complexity of the artefact The lack of participation in decision making, particularly when the decisions have an impact on the worker. The Work The inadequate spatial configuration of the factory floor. Environment The inadequate ambient temperature. The ambiguity related to the task at hand.
iii.
The interviewees consider the elicitation of negative stress emotions to have a high influence on the productivity and the quality of work which is produced.
Page 23 of 23