The article shows a procedure to determine the level of satisfaction with the working conditions of employees of productive and service organizations. The design of the Satisfaction Index with Working Conditions is based and the results of its application in a dairy factory are reported.
INTRODUCTION
The human factor is essential in any work system that you want to develop, that is why, an important place within the strategies that organizations establish is occupied by the Strategic Management of Human Resources, since the success or failure of any process that is put into operation depends on this, since all require Human Resources with greater competences, versatile and motivated. This is the great and inescapable challenge of our companies. (Páez, 1991). Quality, as a determining factor in the productivity of a company, is only achievable if there are optimal working conditions. Quality, as a result of the sum of qualities in all stages of the production and service processes, also assumes worker satisfaction as a key objective, as he is "customer" and direct user of the company's internal activities.
In addition, constant attention to working conditions to make them pleasant and comfortable is a premise that contributes to shaping the stage so that men can work, and they constitute one of the elements that influence job dissatisfaction. Therefore, the successful Management of Occupational Safety and Hygieneit is an imperative to improve productivity, quality and competitiveness (O'Brien, 1996; Montero, 1997). That is why it is necessary to carry out studies that contribute to preventing work accidents and occupational diseases, as well as the systematic improvement of working conditions, taking into account the levels of satisfaction that these policies generate in employees. Due to all of the above, it was decided to carry out a study to determine how to measure the level of employee satisfaction with the conditions in which they carry out their work, allowing the design of strategies to improve working conditions, helping to increase job satisfaction and work productivity.
Procedure used
In studies carried out on working conditions (López, 1994 and Álvarez, 1993), a classification of these conditions was established in five groups:
Security Conditions (Se):
- State of work surfaces (ST). Technical state of work media (MT). Fire protection (PCI). Protection against electrical hazards (RE). Operation of individual protection means (MPI). Presence of means Equipment Safety Technicians (MTS).
Hygienic Conditions (Hi)
- Microclimatic conditions (CM). Air pollution degree (AC). Noise levels (NR). Vibration levels (NV). Illumination levels (NI).
Ergonomic Conditions (Er)
- Facility offered by the design of the workplace for the collection of information (DI).Easiness offered by the design of the workplace to execute the control (DC). Distribution of equipment, furniture and spaces (CT). rest (RTD).
Aesthetic Conditions (En)
- Shape and color of working media (FCM). Color distribution (DIC). Cleaning of work equipment (LE). Use of music (UM).
Wellness Conditions (Bi)
- Medical services (SM). Sanitary facilities (IS). Supply of drinking water (SAP). Custodian of goods (CB). Rest place (LD). Food (A).
These conditions exist objectively in the jobs and work areas but are perceived by the workers based on their individual needs and the characteristics of the work they carry out. For this reason, when studying the satisfaction of workers with working conditions, their perception of them should be assessed, defining the Essential Dimensions associated with satisfaction with working conditions as follows:
- Safety Conditions: Degree to which the worker perceives that there are no risks in the work environment (possibility of damage), or if they exist, they are properly controlled. Hygienic Conditions: Degree in which it is perceived by the worker that the environmental conditions do not have any affect on health or even do not affect their concentration or their state of mind. Aesthetic Conditions: Degree to which the worker perceives an adequate, clean, harmonious, pleasant environment, with the correct use of decoration and colors, green areas and other aesthetic elements. Ergonomic Conditions: Degree to which the design of equipment, tools, seats, etc.; it adjusts according to the workers' own criteria, to their psychophysiological conditions. That is, there is no fatigue derived from these elements. Welfare Conditions: Degree to which the worker perceives that the organization is concerned with creating the necessary conditions for its correct development related to the human resources reward policy.
The diagnosis of these dimensions constitutes a powerful weapon as part of a methodology of change, which in the hands of a management guided by the search for constant solutions allows achieving an increase in labor productivity. The basic criterion is that if changes guided by the results of the values of some of the previous essential dimensions (the critics) are introduced, people will be satisfied with the conditions in which they carry out their work and with the work of the system Occupational Safety and Hygiene.
For the diagnosis, the use of management indicators is recommended (Rodríguez, 1991; Ramírez, 1996; Cortina, 1998), so the Satisfaction Index with working conditions (ISCT) was designed, being necessary to combine (weightedly)) the working conditions that make it up into a simple index, which is nothing more than the Potential for Satisfaction with Working Conditions (PSCT). This potential, as well as the ISCT, depend on the perception that workers have of the conditions in which they carry out their work and this perception, in turn, depends on the specific needs of each group of workers or each individual worker. That is why satisfaction in workers working in different conditions, for example, should not be measured in the same way; office workers, laboratories,workshops, etc.
Starting from this hypothesis for the determination of the expression of the PSCT the following method was developed (Noda, 1997):
1. Stratification of the populations of the companies studied:
- Workers direct to production and services.Indirect workers to production or services.Workers who work in offices.
2. Determination of the weight of the different working conditions for each stratum. For this, a mathematical modeling process was used, where the essential attributes were defined as:
- Safety Conditions (Se). Hygienic Conditions (Hi). Ergonomic Conditions (Er). Aesthetic Conditions (En). Wellness Conditions (Bi).
In order to determine the importance of each attribute, an instrument was first applied where each respondent must compare the attributes in pairs from a Fuller's triangle for paired comparisons, where in addition to marking the attribute that is considered most important, the expert is asked to evaluate their value according to a scale. The result obtained from the ranking, according to importance, for each stratum of working conditions was as follows:
Service companies:
- Direct workers: Hi, Se, Bi, Er, Es.Indirect workers: Hi, Se, Bi, Er, Es.Office workers: Bi, Er, Es, Hi, Se.
Production companies:
- Direct workers: Se, Hi, Er, Bi, Es.Indirect workers: Se, Hi, Er, Bi, Es.Office workers: Bi, Er, Hi, Es, Se.
Following the method of Hackman and Oldham (1980) for satisfaction with the nature and content of the task, also applied by López (1993) for other satisfactors, the following expressions are proposed for the PSCT and for the ISCT.
For direct or indirect workers:
PSCT = Se * Hi *
For office workers:
PSCT = Er * Bi *
These indices constitute an intermediate step in obtaining the final indicator, which is obtained using the following expression:
ISCT = (PSCT / PSCTmax) * 100, where:
PSCTmax = 125
Objective of the indicator: To show to what extent the workers are satisfied with the conditions in which they carry out their work and directly related to this, they express their degree of satisfaction with the tasks carried out within the framework of the SHO
Processing and decision-making system: For the diagnosis, an instrument in the form of a survey is used with 25 statements that correspond to the elements that make up each of the working conditions defined above, which can be evaluated with a range of values. from 5 to 1 (from Excellent 5 to very bad 1).
This survey is applied to workers in the area under study, averaging each of the questions, and then averaging each of the defined conditions and subsequently using the expressions indicated above.
A summary table should be drawn up showing all the values reached by each one given the conditions and the elements that comprise it, highlighting those that are critical (those with values less than 3.75). All this allows obtaining precisely where the problems causing the indicator's behavior are.
Reference levels: For the final indicator, 42.73% is considered acceptable, which is achieved by obtaining 3.75 in each SD, which represents 75% of the maximum value (5) that the worker can evaluate in the applied survey.
Results obtained
The indicator was applied in several companies, mainly in centers belonging to the food industry. Technologies with different degrees of development coexist in these companies, being factories of recent creation, with few years of founded, and others that date back more than forty (40) years of operation, already obsolete. Hence, on the one hand, there are highly dangerous risks, due to the levels of mechanization, and on the other, risks derived from the poor technical condition of the equipment and machinery. Among these companies, one of dairy products was selected to show the results of the determination of the satisfaction index with working conditions.
Characterization of the Human Resources of the selected company
The characterization of Human Resources was carried out based on five variables: sex, age, occupational category, level of education and seniority at the center. Carrying out a general analysis for all the personnel that make up the company under study, the following conclusions can be reached for each of the variables:
- There is an absolute predominance of the male sex (100%), mainly due to the characteristics of the work carried out. Prevalence of the young workforce, 64.3% of the workers are under 35 years of age and 82.1% are under 45 years of age, affirming that most of the workforce has potentials that can be exploited, which constitutes a strength for this organization. The workforce is made up of 83.30% of workers, 16.70% of the other categories, with workers being the most numerous, since the company belongs to the productive sphere. Low level of education, since approximately 50% have a level of primary and secondary education. In close relationship with the predominance of the young workforce in the organization, it was obtained that 73.40% have an experience in the center of less than 6 years
Indicator measurement
For the determination of the ISCT, it was necessary to process the survey in order to obtain the average score of each element (question) and thus obtain the value of each defined condition from the average value of all the elements that comprise it. The result of the ISCT was 28.52% as there was a PSCT of 35.65 in the organization (the expression indicated above for direct production workers was used for the calculation). This result is considered unfavorable since it is lower than the desired state of 42.73%.
To analyze the causes of this behavior, it is necessary to assess the results shown in Table 1. As can be seen in the organization under study, the working conditions that most affect employee satisfaction are safety (2.58) and ergonomics (2.93) much lower than the desired state (3.75). This can be corroborated with the information shown in Tables 2 and 3, where the specific elements that cause these conditions to be critical can be seen.
Table 1: Behavior of satisfaction with working conditions
Table 2: Behavior of satisfaction with security conditions
Table 3: Behavior of satisfaction with ergonomic conditions
As observed in the security conditions, there are serious deficiencies, perceived by the workers, since the following elements are critical:
- Poor condition of the work surfaces. Poor technical condition of the working media. There are no adequate fire protection means. The condition of the Equipment protection means is poor. The individual protection means are insufficient.
In ergonomic conditions the critical elements are:
- The design of the position does not offer ease for the collection of information. The design of the position does not offer ease to execute the control. There are no defined work and rest regimes.
In this way, it has been possible to know what the main deficiencies in working conditions are, according to the criteria of the employees, which allows drawing up action plans for the improvement of the elements that most affect their level of satisfaction with the workplace.. These plans basically covered the following actions:
- Preparation and updating of the risk inventory in all positions and areas. Signaling of risky areas and positions. Supply of Individual Protection Means. Improvement of the instruction and training system. Carrying out periodic safety inspections. Compliance with the maintenance plan. of resources for the elimination of risks of accidents and professional diseases.
For each of the tasks, the person responsible, date of compliance, participants and necessary resources were defined, establishing the priority levels based on the latter.
CONCLUSIONS
Working conditions are an element of great importance for the development of all processes where human resources intervene. Deficiencies in this regard may be the cause of the appearance of job dissatisfaction. Hence the importance of measuring the perception of employees regarding their working conditions. The Satisfaction Index with Working Conditions allows determining which are the main deficient elements on which to act to achieve improvements in the working environment. In the organization studied, a low level of satisfaction with working conditions was observed, caused by deficiencies in safety and ergonomic conditions.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Álvarez López, Luis Felipe; Pacheco Espejel, Arturo (1993). Guide for the installation of the Permanent Productivity Improvement Program in Cuban companies. IS TH. Cuba: IPN-UPIICSA. Mexico-Cuba. 15 p. Cortina Birlanga, (1998). Nottingham Health Profile: A measure of health-related quality of life in an occupational population. Medicine and Work Safety Magazine. I take XLV. Nr. 177. p. 21 - 32 López López, Vicente (1994). The essential dimensions of motivation. UPIICSA Magazine Technology, Science and Culture. Mexico. New Era Publisher. Year.2. Vol.1. Nr.3. p 24-35.Montero Martínez, Ricardo (1997). Reflections on the Management of Industrial Safety. Human Factors Newsletter. Nr. 15. Spain. p. 17-30 Noda Hernández, Marcia (1997). Methodological Procedure to measure Customer Satisfaction.(Thesis to choose the academic degree of Master in Mathematics and Informatics applied to the Administration). University of Holguín Oscar Lucero Moya. Holguin. 97 p. O'Brien, Dan (1996). Security program. What stage are you in? Manufacturing Magazine. Vol.3 Nr.16. p 74-76.Paez, Tomás; Gómez, Luis; Raydan, Enrique (1991). The new human resources management: Quality and productivity. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 127 p. Ramírez Cavassa, Cesar (1996). Industrial Security. A comprehensive approach. Ed. Limusa. Mexico. 506 P. Rodríguez, Francisco; Gómez Bravo, Luis (1991). Indicators of quality and productivity in the company. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 96 p.Security program. What stage are you in? Manufacturing Magazine. Vol.3 Nr.16. p 74-76.Paez, Tomás; Gómez, Luis; Raydan, Enrique (1991). The new human resources management: Quality and productivity. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 127 p. Ramírez Cavassa, Cesar (1996). Industrial Security. A comprehensive approach. Ed. Limusa. Mexico. 506 P. Rodríguez, Francisco; Gómez Bravo, Luis (1991). Indicators of quality and productivity in the company. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 96 p.Security program. What stage are you in? Manufacturing Magazine. Vol.3 Nr.16. p 74-76.Paez, Tomás; Gómez, Luis; Raydan, Enrique (1991). The new human resources management: Quality and productivity. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 127 p. Ramírez Cavassa, Cesar (1996). Industrial Security. A comprehensive approach. Ed. Limusa. Mexico. 506 P. Rodríguez, Francisco; Gómez Bravo, Luis (1991). Indicators of quality and productivity in the company. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 96 p.Francisco; Gómez Bravo, Luis (1991). Indicators of quality and productivity in the company. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 96 p.Francisco; Gómez Bravo, Luis (1991). Indicators of quality and productivity in the company. Venezuela. New Times Editorial. 96 p.
