Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 26 September 2001 14:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Michael Dunn Anyone have any information or advice regarding the increased stress resulting from poorly kept computer systems? Any suggestions on the quantification of the impact, reduction stratergies and ways of encouraging managers to take this sort of issue seriously? Appreciate any help on this matter, Michael Dunn
Admin  
#2 Posted : 26 September 2001 17:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jay Joshi Below is an extract from a COMPAG press release--I will e-mail more details. This was also covered by BBC last year When it comes to technology, Britain is a pot waiting to boil over. According to new research commissioned by Compaq, four out of five respondents have seen colleagues vent frustration at their IT systems, and more than half have personally felt stressed to the point that they want to fight back. The research, Rage Against the Machine, was conducted by MORI on behalf of Compaq, the UK’s largest PC manufacturer. The survey questioned more than 1,250 workers in the UK to ascertain their views on whether IT was an asset or a burden, and the implications of the frustration borne by IT. Of those who had their own PC at work, nearly half have felt frustrated or stressed by the amount of time it takes to solve IT problems. Two in five blame computer jargon for exacerbating the issue, while three quarters of respondents who suffer daily problems with their PCs say that their colleagues swear at their monitors out of frustration.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 26 September 2001 20:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Ridd I believe this to be a significant and growing problem. The MORI research is interesting but my experience is that those who voice their concerns are just the tip of the iceberg. The more we allow Companies/IT depts to grab all and any software application that is advertised as an efficiency improver, the more we will be contributing to possibly serious health consequencies. We know, and the Regulations and all the guidance tells us that DSE users need breaks from DSE work, but everyday we see some new application that requires us to sit in front of the screen for longer and to tie up servers and printers for longer, when we used to go off to another dept. to find the information. I know of some workers who stay late in the evening so that they can access networked databases without interuption because the number of people trying to access the system is lower then - but this isn't the way we should be working. People should not have to adpt to a poorly designed system; if they do ultimately there will be a price to pay, whether it be physical, psychological or simply in work quality terms. The DSE Regs. are clear, in the Assessment you should be asking 'users' if they have problems with the software they use - the sort of problems cited in the question are clearly those that should be recorded in the assessment. If management choose not to respond to the identified problems/risks then that is their right PROVIDED they can justify the decision on the grounds of reasonable practicability. However, as numbers of complainers increase it should not be possible for management to ignore the issue. Certainly, if someone has a 'breakdown' then any such un-addressed Assessment Record would prove invaluable in court (I am assisting in two such litigation claims at the moment). Workers now spend increasing amounts of wasted time in front of the screen while they wait for commands to be actioned. This in itself is a loss to the company; it also breaks the train of thought which compounds the sense of frustration. In fact I believe there is a creeping inefficiency developing in office based work as we increasingly rely on our desk-top fiend. Greater output is expected but reduced output is actually the result, the stress levels rise as do the overtime hours -all of this is guaranteed to lead to problems for some of the workers. Their problems then become problems for their colleagues as the work that they are now unable to do has to be done by others; and so there is a domino effect of people suffering stress or physical injury through trying to cope. Sorry to go on, and it's not much of an answer to the question; but I believe this is a smouldering issue that will catch out (and burn) many a company that doesn't NOW address, not only their computer system capacity and role, but also individual workloads and expectations - people are not designed to sit in front of a screen all day long!
Users browsing this topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.