From the conference Competence 50+ 2007 in Gothenburg, Sweden.

1. DFG SPP 1184 Kurt Landau Ralph Bruder Holger Rademacher Andrea Sinn-Behrendt Assistance System for Age-Differentiated Work Design and Employee Assignment

4. related to strain and injuries Approach related to workload and abilities Work-related subjective strain Tool I for ergonomic analysis Detection of workplace- related disorders Collection of subjective data Collection of objective data related to workload and abilities Tool II for ergonomic analysis bottlenecks design deficits data base age- differentiated work system and process design

8. Thank you for your attention!

9. Overview Phase I Literature analysis Test of the objectivity, reliability and validity of Tool I Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 Study 4 Demands and abilities database (age- and workplace-related bottlenecks) Which design measures are necessary for ensuring an adequate (i.e. regarding both performance and strain) assignment of the present employees? Data collection/analysis (in particular with Tool I) Development of Tool I (macro-level-assessment of demands and abilities)

10. Overview Phase II Age- and workplace-related bottlenecks Development of Tool II (micro-level age-differentiated assessment of demands) Detection of design deficits in work system clusters Definition of age-differentiated design rules (in terms of corrective ergonomics) Elimination of the design deficits Iterative development of Tool II and enlargement of the scope of application Documentation of changes and assessment from the point of view of ergonomics

12. Status quo Literature analysis Research Review Documentation Development/Validation of Tool I Development of module “Demands” Development of module “Abilities” Validation of module “Demands” Validation of module “Abilities” Data collection/analysis (in particular with Tool I) Sample 3 Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 4 Development/Validation of Tool II Use of Tool II Development Validation Sample III Sample IV First instructions* *in Landau/Weißert-Horn/ Rademacher et al. 2007 Cooperation/Data exchange with Institute of Ergonomics of the University Kassel

17. Body postures Action forces Tool I: Module “Demands“

18. Short cyclic workloads Tool I: Module “Demands“

19. Manual materials handling Specific workloads Tool I: Module “Demands“

20. Body postures Action forces Furthermore assessment regarding: Short cyclic operations and manual materials handling Tool I: Module “Abilities“ (example)

21. Instructions for age management Excerpt from checklist for spatial work(place) design Is the permitted time for reading tasks adapted to decreasing reading rate? Vision Are too small character sizes on displays/screens and paper avoided? Is the illuminance raised up to 200 % (depending on visual task)? Are there (if necessary) warning signals to enhance attention and recognition performance? Area of vision and lighting Is (if necessary) the corpulence of older workers taken into account by adequate spaces for movements? Are the age related changes in body dimensions with their effect on body flexibility taken into account? Body dimensions No Yes Checkpoint

22. Study 1 – car manufacturer (nach Landau et al. n.n.e.) N = 254 overweight adipose normal underweight

24. moderate, unfavourable and very unfavourable favourable and very favourable very favourable favourable ≤ 50 years > 50 years Node 7 Node 6 Node 5 Node 4 (n = 138) (n = 90) (n = 9) (n = 19) Decision tree of the partition analysis for the target variable „lumbar spine disorders“ (N = 256) Age contributes little to the explanation of lumbar spine disorders (nach Landau et al. n.n.e.) Study 1 – Predictors of the disorders Expert rating p < 0,001 Node 1 Expert rating p = 0,038 Node 2 Age p = 0,063 Node 3 disorders no disorders

25. Study 2 – Rehab-patients (according to Landau et al. 2007)

26. Study 2 vs. Study 1 (according to Landau et al. 2007)

27. (according to Landau et al. 2007) Study 2 – work-related capacities Industry group „assembly“ shows the best capacity assessments at nearly all materials handling-items

28. (according to Landau et al. 2007) Study 2 – work-related capacities Mostly U-shaped run in the industry group „assembly“ concerning body postures: decrease until the age group “46-51 years”, then increase

29. (according to Landau et al. 2007) Study 2 – work-related capacities Capacities of persons from the assembly area to perform specific body postures (frequency and endurance) Considerable differences between sitting respectively standing upright and bent

34. Current publication

38. Makro-/Meso- modelling (profile analysis and design) of workplace demands and employee abilities Phase 1 (2 years) Phase 2 (2 years) Phase 3 (2 years) Development of tools for ergonomic analysis Mikro- modelling (workplace design based on single operations) Application of the tools for ergonomic analysis in automotive industry Database to detect age- and workplace- related bottlenecks between demands and abilities Cause analysis as precondition for the deduction of workplace design measures Design deficits in single work system clusters Redesigns including critical monitoring by operating working parties Elimination of the design deficits Implementation of efficiency analyses and again exemplary application of the design tools Documentation of possible changes and assessment for ergonomic purposes In case of apparent diseases of employees catamnestic evaluation Catalogue of recommendations for action for age-differentiated design of work (in terms of conceptive ergonomics) cross-study oriented longitudinal study oriented Components for an in-company early warning system in terms of age management Overview of the DFG-project of the IAD Age-differentiated design rules for assembly work systems in automotive industry (in terms of corrective ergonomics)

41. Methodological bases Legal foundations Machinery Directive (2006/42/EG) Workloads/Abilities Method for analysis of manual materials handling: Leitmerkmalmethoden (LMM) National / international methods acknowledged IAD-methods Tool I for ergonomic analysis Framework Directive Health and safety at work (89/391/EWG) Methods used in work package 2 Workloads ISO-standards (e.g. ISO 11228-1) recommendatory EU-standards (e.g. EN 1005) mandatory

42. Validation of Tool I for ergonomic analysis National / international methods Methods for determination of force limits: Siemens / Burandt / REFA / VDI Methods for determination of load limits: (multiple) NIOSH-method, Burandt, REFA(-FAC) Methods for analysis of body postures: Ovako Working Posture Analysis System (OWAS) Methods for analysis of repetitive actions: Occupational Repetitive Actions (OCRA) Tool I for ergonomic analysis IAD-methods for analysis and assessment of physical workload Human Physical Performance Risk Assessment (HuPPRA) Automotive Assembly Worksheet (AAWS) IAD-Bewertung körperlicher Arbeit (IAD-BkA) New Production Worksheet (NPW)

45. related to strain / injuries Methodological bases IAD-HAS-Checklist (HAS = Hand-Arm-System) (Wakula et al. 2004) (Parts of the) Nordic Questionnaire (Kuorinka et al. 1987) related to workloads / abilities Work-related subjective strain Tool I for ergonomic analysis Body Part Discomfort Scale (Corlett / Bishop 1976) Detection of workplace- related disorders Data collection (subjective) Data collection (objective) Analysis of correlation / contingency / variance Cluster analysis / Factor analysis Data analysis Methods used in work package 3