An important step in the overall human factors process is to identify work tasks which might result in Musculoskeletal Disorder (MSD) risks. This assignment is about developing your understanding of the principles of assessment for these types of activities using human factors analytical tools. You need to identify a manual handling task that involves lifting, in either a workplace or other setting. You are required to conduct a hierarchical task analysis and then to assess the task being carried out using two different assessment tools. You must use the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation and another suitable tool. You are then to present your findings, provide recommendations for work task improvements or redesign, in a poster format. The scientific poster is to be suitable for display at a conference or workplace to inform readers of the physical ergonomic task you have assessed.

(1) Your poster needs to contain the following:

• Describes the context of the workplace or other setting i.e. where does this task take place?
• Identifies the type of workers or people who might be affected
• Describes the actual task being performed (choose one task only)
• Identifies the level of MSD risk
• Discusses the potential consequences as a physical injury this might have
• Recommend task improvements which might be made to reduce the MSD risk.
• Reference list: contains scholarly articles in Harvard Referencing Style

(2) Your Poster needs to achieve the following:

• Is informative: The poster provides a summary of analysis undertaken, highlights the significance of the problem and offers recommendations.
• Is easy to grasp: Utilises human factors design principles to enhance swift comprehension of the message portrayed (e.g. colour, placement, imagery, etc.)

Further details will be on Moodle.

The poster will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Identifies context of workplace and/or other setting and people involved (10%)
• Describes the actual task being assessed (10%)
• Describes the MSD risk or issues and potential effects (15%)
• Assesses the MSD risk score using two human factors analytical tools (20%)
• Recommends changes to the task, based on assessment findings, for MSD improvements to the workplace or other setting (15%)
• Presentation, visuals, poster layout (20%)
• Referencing, grammar (10%)

This task requires four (4) posts: one (1) original article post, and three (3) meaningful reply posts.

Original post (start a new discussion topic. To identify you, in the subject area type: Your name and article citation (e.g. Elise Crawford - Smith (2017))

In Moodle, post a contribution about a research journal article you have found which relates to one of the four discussion groups which are headed:

• The Discipline of Human Factors and Ergonomics;
• Physical Ergonomics;
• Cognitive Ergonomics;
• Organisational Ergonomics.

Your post should briefly inform the other students about the journal article, in the following ways:

1. The aim of the study/ article
2. The research method used
3. What the research was about
4. What the findings were
5. Include the reference to the article in Harvard Referencing style
6. Attach the journal article

You should keep your post to less than 150 words and you should not cite a journal article which someone else has already done. This exercise is intended to give all students a brief overview of some of the research being conducted in the Human Factors/Ergonomics area and serve as a good starting point for the other assessments you will do. An example of this type of post will be given in Moodle.

Reply posts (reply to original posts from different students. To identify you, in the subject area type: Your name and the other student's name (e.g. Elise Crawford - reply to Jim Jones)

You are also required to post three (3) general discussion replies to other students (in the other discussion forums) from which you have not done your journal article post. The end result is that you will have made a contribution to each of the four discussion group areas as listed above. The contributions MUST pertain to the subject matter and ADD to the discussion of the human factors and ergonomics content of this unit. A meaningful contribution is one that extends the discussion. It may include: a discussion on the methodology used, a personal example, and/or a contribution from another author (different research article) that adds to the research under discussion. It is expected that you would have read the article in order to add to the discussion.

The key assessment criteria used will be that you have posted one summary of a journal article and also engaged in research knowledge by posting three replies to other students (4 posts in all, across four areas of study). You will also be assessed on your 'genuine participation' and demonstration of your knowledge and/or understanding to the research subject matters covered within the Moodle learning environment.

1 Original post (40%)

3 Reply posts (60%)

Please refer to the PROJECT DETAILS document in Moodle. This documentation will provide further details about the project and guidance to help the team operate effectively. Each team has three submissions, namely:

• A Team Project Plan or Contract
• A Team Redesign Concept Proposal
• An Individual Reflective Journal and Essay (submitted separately)

(a) Team project plan or contract (non graded)

Working in teams and learning from colleagues are very powerful ways to learn. For the team to work well, you will need to manage the team activities. The purpose of the Team Project Plan or Contract is to get agreement from the team about how the team plans to operate. These team rules (processes) should be largely decided before the team decides what needs to be done (product).

The Project Plan or Contract should contain:

• The names of all team members and preferred contact details (and any applicable constraints)
• A tentative schedule that shows initial activities to be done and who will do each activity (not this will change as the project progresses, but it is important to start with a plan)
• A strategy for resolving team related issues

(b) Redesign Concept Proposal (60%)

The Redesign Project is a collaborative, team-based design exercise based on Human Factors principles. Your job, as a team, is to find something that you can red-design to make it work better for humans based on what you learnt about Human Factors principles. It can be a simple issue, like no handles on an item that is difficult to carry, or a problem experienced when using a self-service payment kiosk. You are free to come up with an idea or product and a few suggestions will also be provided on Moodle. The team is to prepare and submit one Redesign Concept Proposal.

The Redesign Concept Proposal should include:

• Title page
• Executive Summary - one page summary of the whole proposal
• The Problem definition - the product that you chose, statement of the problem to solve, and associated success criteria
• Analysis of the problem - using human factors analytical tools where appropriate to assess the item, the end user requirements and functionality required, as well as any technical specifications and mindfulness of the lifecycle of the product (e.g. Environmental implications)
• A discussion on the significance of the problem and plausible concept solutions
• Concept chosen - design specifications, materials, costing, user instruction (if applicable), sketches/photos/diagrams
• Justification for design decisions made - should improve functionality and end user satisfaction.
• Evidence of drawing on current and appropriate literature or models to justify human factors design decisions
• References - CQU Harvard referencing style
• Appendices - all analyses

(c) Reflective Journal (40%)

Two things are required:

1. Each student should submit their own reflective journal. The journal should show your learning journey throughout the term in regards to the discipline of human factors and how this might relate to your project.
2. Each student should write a short essay (500 words): Describe your thoughts about the strengths and challenges associated with teamwork and offer ideas about how to improve the way teams function. This should be your final journal entry.

This project has four main objectives:

1. To develop teamwork skills that will build confidence and make you a more effective team member in projects in which you will be involved,
2. To develop a redesign of a product that will meet the problem definition that is sound from a technical human factors perspective,
3. To provide an opportunity to develop practical skills in using human factors analytical tools, and
4. To develop reflective learning.

The redesign project proposal will be assessed according to how well the proposal meets the following criteria (60%):

• Integrates principles of anthropometric variation of the human body
• Integrates principles of work capacity and limitations
• Integrates principles of perception and information processing
• Analyses the intended environment of use
• Analyses the potential task associated with the system
• Develops a redesign that meets the problem definition
• Develops a redesign, sound from a human factors perspective and appropriate from a technical perspective
• Format is consistent with a professional design proposal (i.e. structure, written expression, referencing)

The reflective journal will be assess according to how well it meets the following criteria (40%):

• Consideration of how the physical, cognitive, organisational and environmental ergonomics can influence end user interactions with (i.e. use of) products, systems, and processes.
• Consideration of how tools, methods and principles of human factors contribute to improved use, function and satisfaction.
• Consideration of lessons learnt, the strengths and challenges experienced during this teamwork activity and ways to improve team functioning in the future.

A team grade will be assigned to the Redesign Concept Proposal and an individual grade to the Journal (including the essay). Additionally, where applicable, the Journal will be used to moderate the individual allocation of the marks for the proposal, up or down one letter grade depending on the individual's demonstrated understanding of the proposal submitted.