Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
원전 종사자의 직무 스트레스 평가 및 관리 기법 개발
2012년 11월 1일
이용희a, 이용희b, 장통일
계측제어·인간공학 연구부
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
2
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Literature Review
Self-reports of psychosocial work conditions for measuring job stress (Frese and
Zapf, 1988; Kasl, 1978, 1987, 1998; Karasek, 1979; ….)
Stress can contribute to WMSDs (CUPE, 2003)
Multi-factorial to stress and complicated in terms of prevention and treatment
(National research Council and the Institute of Medicine, 2001; Deveraux et al.,
2002)
job stress(Person-environment fit) and accident prediction (Sherry, 1991, Reason
1997, Hartley & Hassani, 1994)
Job stress - 241,800 cases in 2000, 67% of all occupational disease in USA
The total cost of job stress is over 45~54 billion dollars per year including 15~20
billion dollars, compensation cost in USA (BLS, 2001)
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
3
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Problem Statement
1. Job stress increases and becomes a major problem
Computerized system - Complexity of an individual role
2. Unclear etiology of job stress
3. Validation?
psychosocial work conditions for job stress evaluation ?
job stress - physical, psychosocial, environmental and general
factors (Macro Ergonomics Approach)
4. Multi Risk Factors – High Dimensionality
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
4
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Research Background
External pressure
Optimal Pressure
( Yerkes and Dodson, 1908 )
Performance Psychological strain
Person-environment fit
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
P<E P=E P>E
( Caplan, 1998 )
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
5
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
job stress evaluation methods
JCQ – Job Contents Questionnaire
(Karaseck, 1985)
GJSQ – Generic Job Stress Questionnaire, NIOSH
(Hurrel and Murphy, 1998)
NIOSH has developed “NIOSH Generic Job Stress Questionnaire” which is
based on the over 25-year efforts to examine the relationship between
working conditions and health consequences
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원 6
NuPIC 2011 Modification of Risk Factors to Job Stress
Physical factors
lack of adjustable rests1), simpler repetitive tasks1)4), proper work surface4), using vibrators4), treatment with heavy things4), needs to put force4),
uncomfortable posture3)4)
Psychosocial factors
Increased need for job vigilance1)3), increased stringent performance standards1)2)3)4), increased job repetition1)2), increased job regimentation1),
increased job boredom1), increased rigid work procedures with high production standards1)2)3), decreased work challenge1)2)3), increased
dehumanisation of job activity1)2)3)4), little identification with and satisfaction from the end products of worker’s job activity1), insufficient number
and length of rest breaks1)3), increased job monotony1), decreased job autonomy1)2)3)4), decreased job security1), decreased career development1)3),
decreased peer cohesion and staff support1)2)3)4), increased strained management/employee relations1)2)3), increased job future uncertainty1)2)3)4),
decreased participation in job decisions1)2)3)4), decreased job/task control by worker1)2)3)4), increased work pace1)2)3)4), increased work
pressure1)2)3)4), increased supervision1), increased role ambiguity1), increased anxiety of computers replacing operator’s role/job, decreased self-
esteem1), evaluation of occupation2)3)4), amount of much tasks2)3)4), not enough time for tasks2)3)4), requirement or demand forcibly from others2)3)4),
knowledge and technology for tasks2)3), needs of creative ability2)3), needs of high technology2)3), various tasks2)4), opportunity of ability
development2)3), a higher officer’s concern about followers’ welfare2)3)4), a higher officer’s concern about followers’ talk2)3)4), a higher officer’s help
for followers’ task2)3)4), a higher officer’s leadership2)3)4), capable colleagues at their fields2), colleagues’ concern2)3), colleagues’ kindness2)3),
colleagues’ friendly help2)3)4), responsibility for colleagues or followers3)4), changed relevant facts with tasks often3)4), fairness of personnel affair
such as duty appraisement, promotion, positioning etc. 3)4), appropriateness of position compared with education and career3)4), job falling short of
expectation3)4), appropriateness of payment reflecting to an effort and achievement3)4), interest of present tasks3)4), uncomfortable dining together3),
task indication without consistency3)4), the atmosphere of the office with vertical authority3), disadvantage from sexual difference3)
Environmental factors
Nonadjustable work surface height1), storage inappropriate to task1), lack of adjustable and self-controlled task lighting1), lack of easily
reconfigurable interior layout, keyboard height and position nonadjustable1), nonadjustable or lack of document holder1), improper work chair that
lacks swivel, tilt, height adjustment, adjustable backrest, removable armrests, and rolling casters1), nonadjustable shelving1), insufficient size of
work surface and/or lack of additional work surfaces1), lack of natural soft glare-free indirect light1)4), improper seal design (low, soft, <45cm) 1),
improper ventilation with currents of air that blow directly on employee1)4), improper humidity levels (<50% >60%)1)4), improper temp. levels
(<68F or in winter and <73F >81F in summer) 1)4), improper design of keyboard layout shape of key1), improper layout of desk and of terminal1),
lack of, or improper foot support1), improper heal up from under work surface1), improper surface temperature for external contact surfaces1), too
close of proximity to others creates feelings of crowding1)4), improper enclosures that don’t ensure acoustical control of noise disturbances1)4), lack
of enclosure for complex tasks1), increased alienation and isolation from others1), nonadjustable HVAC1), lack of adjustable and self-controlled
task lighting1), lack of easily reconfigurable interior layout1), cleanliness3)4), smoothness of the resources such as the personnel, space, equipment,
instrument, training etc. 3)4), exposure to dangerous materials4)
1) O’Neill 2) Karasek 3) NIOSH 4) IJSQ
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
7
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Research Motivation
1. Job stress evaluation methods in terms of factor classification
- general, psychosocial, physical and environmental factors
=> Needs of an analysis methodology dealing high dimensionality
2. Multi factors - Effective survey analysis methodology
- Data mining Analysis (DA)
- Response Surface Methodology (RSM)
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
8
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
An overview of the proposed Procedure
CBFS
RSM
Physical factors x1
INPUT
OUTPUT
Psychosocial factors x2
Environmental factors x3
Job satisfaction
y
• Subset evaluation
• Find significant factors
• Reduce dimensionality
• Integrating DM result
into response surface
methodology (RSM)
•Analysis of variance
• Statistical inferences
Data mining
procedure
Statistical analysis
procedure
BFS
• Relationship between
input factors and
its associated response
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
9
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Data Mining methods
(Association Rule Discovery, Market Basket
Analysis)
(Case-Based Reasoning)
(Cluster Analysis) (Decision Tree)
(Artificial Neural Network)
(Genetic Algorithm)
Data Mining
OLAP (On-Line Analytic Processing) Classification
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원 10
NuPIC 2011
Data sets
Data sets after factor reduction
Entropy
Information gain
Symmetrical uncertainty
factor-response
x1 x2 … xn-1 xn
response
factor-factor
x1 x2
xn-1 xn….
Evaluation of subset
OPEN
CLOSE
EVS ( ) EVS (BEST )?
Improvement?
start
BEST← start state
= arg max EVS (subset)
next of in OPEN or CLOSE?
Yes
End
Return BEST
NoYes
No
Stop criteria
remove
add
y
An Overview of Correlation Based Feature Selection; (CBFS) method
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
11
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Response Surface Methodology (RSM)
Response Surface Methodology, hereafter abbreviated RSM, is
a collection of mathematical and statistical techniques that
are useful for the modeling and analysis of problems in which
a response of interest is influenced by several variables and
the objective is to optimize (either minimize or maximize) this
response.
The second-order fitted response function
where
xAxaxxTTy 0
ˆˆ
kkkk
k
k
kkˆˆˆ
ˆˆˆ
ˆˆˆ
,
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
,
x
x
x
22
22
22
21
22212
11211
2
1
2
1
Aax
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원 12
NuPIC 2011
Case Study 1
200 workers
Producing marine switchboards(45%), control console(35%), and
thrusters(20%)
Process – assembly(85%), welding and painting
The result of Pearson’s correlation analysis by the each survey
questionnaire and job satisfaction
Type of questionnaire
Pearson’s coefficient p-value
JCQ 0.217 0.344
GJSQ 0.648** 0.001
IJSQ 0.583** 0.006
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
13
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Survey Method (IJSQ)
General Factors (34 items)
General characteristics : age, weight, size…
Medical conditions : serious illnesses, accidents, depression…
Personal habits : smoking, sports, hobbies…
Work history : salary, a period of work, employment configuration…
Psychosocial factors (50 items)
Job demand (7) : stringent performance standards…
Job control (7) : job autonomy…
Social support (8) : supervisor’s concern…
An organization (5) : task indication without consistency…
Organization culture (5) : uncomfortable dining together…
Appropriate compensation (5) : appropriateness of position…
Job instability (5) : possibility to lose a job
Physical factors (7 items)
Adjustable rests
simpler repetitive tasks, using vibrators…
Environmental factors (13 items)
Recreation facilities
Public traffic with easy
Insufficient parking lots
Air condition…
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
14
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Data Mining Results using Weka
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
15
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Data mining results
Selected
Evaluator
The response
attribute Job Satisfaction
Merit of best
subset 0.85
Selected attributes
Physical
factors Improper work surface ( x7 )
Psychosocial factors
Decreased superior support (x1)
Decreased peer cohesion (x3)
Increased job future uncertainty (x4)
Not up to the expectation of occupation (x6)
Environmental factors
Danger of accident (x2)
Insufficient workers, space facilities and
equipments for tasks (x5)
Search
method
Search
method Best First
Search Direction Forward
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
16
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Response Surface Methodology (RSM)
R2 = 89.1%
x1, x2, x3, x5, x6 , and x7 are significantly affected
x1*x5, x3*x4, and, x3*x5 are also significant
x1: decreased superior support
x2: danger of accident
x3: decreased peer cohesion
x4: increased job future uncertainty
x5: insufficient workers, space facilities and equipments for tasks
x6: not up to the expectation of occupation
x7: improper work surface, respectively
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
17
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
The second-order fitted response function
AxxaxxTTy 1851.2ˆ
0434.00321.00154.00083.00040.00045.00016.0
0321.00216.00404.00018.00069.00398.00347.0
0154.00404.00141.00154.00686.00091.00662.0
0083.00018.00154.00403.00893.00350.00268.0
0040.00069.00686.00893.00585.00049.00407.0
0045.00398.00091.00350.00049.00335.00038.0
0016.00347.00662.00268.00407.00038.00228.0
and,
0917.0
1542.0
1576.0
0086.0
2529.0
1099.0
1170.0
,
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Aax
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Where,
In terms of model fitness, the response model is adequate to utilize a
response function since it has 89.1% R-sq
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
18
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Correlation analysis between significant factors and each factors
Insufficient workers,…
Superior leadership
Peer cohesion Danger of accident
Improper work surface
Expectation of occupation
Future uncertainty
Q9 0.530 G 0.506 Q18 0.622 Q8 0.540
a 0.602
Q2 0.570
Q34 0.537
Q29 0.505 Q35 0.455 Q19 0.558 Q13 0.619
Q11 0.500
Q11 0.471
Q35 0.458
Q40 0.543 Q40 0.513
Q22 0.441
m4 0.634
Q13 0.534 Q23 0.537
En1
(12)
0.481
M1
(13)
0.518
En1
(8)
0.730 En1
(13)
0.661
En1
(5)
0.457
* Insufficient workers, space facilities, equipments for tasks Q9: a sufficient rest
Q29: smoothly work corporation with other departments
Q40: uncomfortable dinner engagement
En1: Noise
* Lack of superior leadership G: Concern about a follower’s well-being
Q35: appropriate salary
Q40: uncomfortable dinner engagement
M1: improper work posture
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
19
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
CBFS
RSM, CA
System factors x1
INPUT
OUTPUT
Psychosocial factors x2
Environmental factors x3
Organizational Culture
y
• Subset evaluation
• Find significant factors
• Reduce dimensionality
• Integrating DM result
into response surface
methodology (RSM)
• Correlation Analysis
• Statistical inferences
Data mining
procedure
Statistical analysis
procedure
BFS
• Relationship between
input factors and
its associated response
Significant Factors
Redundancy Factors
Surrogate
An overview of the Robust Organizational Culture System
원자력발전소의 DGOMS와 작업 요구 특성 분석에 따른 업무량 평가
20
계측제어•인간공학연구부, KAERI
한국원자력연구원
NuPIC 2012
Conclusions and Discussion
Advanced methodology of job stress analysis
Found significant factors reducing dimensionality using DM
RSM was conducted to provide statistical relationships among stress factors from
DM
Surrogate variable based on job stress analysis
Approached enhanced job stress evaluation and management
Establishment of Robust Safety-Quality Evaluation and Control Platform
Robust Safety Culture Management
Robust Organizational Culture Management