**4. Case study**

In order to contextualize the proposed HSE management model, it is necessary to apply the various mechanisms embedded in that model in a real scenario. Thus, resourcing to a case study strategy will not only allow linking theoretical aspects to real life issues but also facilitate the understanding of the model outreach. A construction site in a city in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, was sorted out in this particular case, for better illustrating the application of the HSE management model being described herein. Starting from a general plan outlined in **Table 1**, each step will be now described in their most relevant aspects.

#### **4.1. Analysis phase**

air pollution, preventive actions related to chimneys are necessary to be considered in maintenance plans. Likewise, occupational health issues will vary immensely, depending on the presence of certain risk factors, prevalent climate and atmosphere, geographical and geological conditions and other aspects. Using EDT methodology, the team involved in a consulting project in charge of carrying out an analysis for setting up a new HSE program in a construction site, decided to start with a brainstorm activity with all key actors in a construction site. The resulting master plan for the program establishment and project implementation was

**Analysis phase** - Observational analysis–during this step the consulting project team performs workstation

and activity analysis to assess program guidelines and best practices opportunities





people involved in the various construction site processes need to be informed about and qualified to deal with risks hazards and to adhere to best practices related to health safety


In order to contextualize the proposed HSE management model, it is necessary to apply the various mechanisms embedded in that model in a real scenario. Thus, resourcing to a case study strategy will not only allow linking theoretical aspects to real life issues but also facilitate the understanding of the model outreach. A construction site in a city in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, was sorted out in this particular case, for better illustrating the application of the HSE management model being described herein. Starting from a general plan outlined in **Table 1**,

each step will be now described in their most relevant aspects.

defined according to an operational sequence based on **Table 3**.

(managers, engineers and workers)

impacts, health and safety hazards

and environmental issues

**Table 3.** Construction site HSE management system model.

**Validation phase** - Project validation–the analysis report needs to be verified and validated by all stakeholders, in search of errors and misinterpretations

is set for that and other implementation actions

**Implementation phase** - Capacitation training sessions–as part of the HSE management system, workers and other

results

**4. Case study**

66 Occupational Health

An essential tool for the alignment of different perceptions and to establish, by consensus or inferences, guidelines for an appropriate diagnostic of a work process is the brainstorming tool. It is a group creativity technique that tries to lock up on conclusions for a specific problem by gathering ideas spontaneously, as they are verbalized by its members. It was extremely useful for the definition of the various analysis instruments, methods and techniques that were eventually implemented to carry out the work process analysis in the construction site. The methodology for the analysis phase follows this sequence:


In order to stay focused on the main aspects of the analytical phase, a detailed explanation of all the different steps of the entire methodology could be counterproductive and cause some misconceptions. Therefore, only essential operational actions will be detailed, in other words, further description is concentrated only on those actions that were performed by the HSE analysis team in the course of the field work, prior to diagnostics itself.

#### *4.1.1. Observational analysis*

In order to better illustrate the context in which the observational analysis is carried out, an excerpt of the HSE appreciation report is needed. The selected operation consists of a concrete pouring process, for building foundation.

#### **Foundation concrete : works**

#### **Workstation:** bricklayers and helpers

**Situation:** The activity consists the pouring of concrete into wooden forms that were previously built and laid in each appropriate frame mold (**Figure 3**). The concrete is pumped up into the forms by a flexible pipe that connects to a special concrete truck, which has a rotating mixing barrel to maintain concrete's chemical characteristics and pumping equipment (**Figure 4**). It may be performed under any climatic and atmospheric condition, except in case of heavy, persistent rain.

**Figure 3.** Foundation pouring.

**Figure 4.** Vibration of concrete mix.

**Visible impacts:** Awkward postures of workers, unsafe and unstable surfaces used as base for the activity, evidence of poor planning of activities and lack of operational and safety training, harsh environmental conditions without proper protection, no incentives for hydration, soil contamination, and improper solid waste disposal.

**Checklist application:** According to the HSE checklist, the activity stands in 53% of adequacy, which is considered acceptable by HSE standards. However, there are several small interventions that may raise current levels to a "good" mark, which will be listed in the following section.

**Improvement opportunities:** (a) adding collective protection equipment (CPE) in the workplace, (b) specific training designed to fit the nature of each task, (c) adding schedule pauses for certain activities, (d) potable water available next to the operations, (e) improving signage and notes in conspicuous places, (f) allocate appropriate areas for solid waste disposal, avoiding soil contamination, and (g) ladders and scaffoldings should be used as standard equipment.

**Environmental aspects:** During preparation and pouring of concrete at least 5% of material was lost (**Figure 5**), either by poor connection between hose joints, spills from truck equipment or by lack of care of workers as pumping is carried out. A lot of the concrete mix flows over the wooden forms or under them straight to the ground (**Figure 6**). In this particular case, not only the mix cannot be re inserted into the frames but also part of mix percolates through the soil.

**Figure 5.** Concrete waste.

*4.1.1. Observational analysis*

68 Occupational Health

**Foundation concrete : works**

**Figure 4.** Vibration of concrete mix.

**Figure 3.** Foundation pouring.

pouring process, for building foundation.

**Workstation:** bricklayers and helpers

In order to better illustrate the context in which the observational analysis is carried out, an excerpt of the HSE appreciation report is needed. The selected operation consists of a concrete

**Situation:** The activity consists the pouring of concrete into wooden forms that were previously built and laid in each appropriate frame mold (**Figure 3**). The concrete is pumped up into the forms by a flexible pipe that connects to a special concrete truck, which has a rotating mixing barrel to maintain concrete's chemical characteristics and pumping equipment (**Figure 4**). It may be performed under any climatic and atmospheric condition, except in case of heavy, persistent rain.

**Visible impacts:** Awkward postures of workers, unsafe and unstable surfaces used as base for the activity, evidence of poor planning of activities and lack of operational and safety

**Figure 6.** Wood waste.

After hardening, the left overs could be reused as aggregates. However, the chosen destination for discharge in our context was a rented dumpster.

**Regulatory and legal framework: (a) Environmental–**according to environmental regulations (CONAMA 307 Resolution, Art. 3rd) concrete and wood are class A materials, which mean they should be fully recycled. Therefore, it is not legal to discharge them as trash. If they are not used in the site, they must be taken to special facilities for future reuse; **(b) health**–in terms of occupational health, this work activity does not comply to several aspects of labor regulations, especially offending Articles in NR 15 (safety risks), NR 17 (ergonomics) and NR 24 (cleaning and conservation. Occupational hygiene standards are also disrespected, especially those related to temperature and weather exposure; **(c) safety**–there are some issues with regard to PPE and Collective Protective Equipment (CPE) during operations, as established by NR 6, NR 7 and NR 9, as well as Brazilian Technical Standards (ABNT/ISO).

#### *4.1.2. OIT check list*

According to the check list, which is a quite simple excel spreadsheet that runs in a tablet device, the particular activity shown in here stands in 53% of adequacy. This is considered acceptable by HSE standards. The filling of the check list is pretty much a straightforward operation. The analysts basically use their fingers to a scroll down list with two possibilities: yes and no/not applicable. The annotations in red are "manually" registered by the analysts and contain important notes for diagnostics and the establishment of "HSE Program Improvement Opportunities," which is incorporated in the resulting Program's Best Practices Banner (**Figure 7**).

**Figure 7.** Tube underpinnings concrete pouring checklist.

#### *4.1.3. Tallying and validation of data*

After hardening, the left overs could be reused as aggregates. However, the chosen destina-

**Regulatory and legal framework: (a) Environmental–**according to environmental regulations (CONAMA 307 Resolution, Art. 3rd) concrete and wood are class A materials, which mean they should be fully recycled. Therefore, it is not legal to discharge them as trash. If they are not used in the site, they must be taken to special facilities for future reuse; **(b) health**–in terms of occupational health, this work activity does not comply to several aspects of labor regulations, especially offending Articles in NR 15 (safety risks), NR 17 (ergonomics) and NR 24 (cleaning and conservation. Occupational hygiene standards are also disrespected, especially those related to temperature and weather exposure; **(c) safety**–there are some issues with regard to PPE and Collective Protective Equipment (CPE) during operations, as established by NR 6, NR 7 and NR 9, as well as Brazilian Technical Standards (ABNT/ISO).

According to the check list, which is a quite simple excel spreadsheet that runs in a tablet device, the particular activity shown in here stands in 53% of adequacy. This is considered acceptable by HSE standards. The filling of the check list is pretty much a straightforward operation. The analysts basically use their fingers to a scroll down list with two possibilities: yes and no/not applicable. The annotations in red are "manually" registered by the analysts and contain important notes for diagnostics and the establishment of "HSE Program Improvement Opportunities,"

which is incorporated in the resulting Program's Best Practices Banner (**Figure 7**).

**Figure 7.** Tube underpinnings concrete pouring checklist.

tion for discharge in our context was a rented dumpster.

*4.1.2. OIT check list*

70 Occupational Health

The assessment of HSE conditions report (A-HSE report) is the final product of the analytical process. It is submitted to the scrutiny of all participants in the process during the validation phase that follows. The data submitted are organized according to relevance and synthetized in tables and diagrams, a selection of which is presented as follows. Some data come from images; therefore, they were not translated into English.

(a) Severity table for each analyzed work activity: It presents the full list of work processes according to the degree of adequacy in terms of HSE standards (**Table 4**). The lowest levels are color coded in red, moderate levels in orange and the highest ones in yellow.


**Table 4.** Occupational severity levels.

(b) SIC diagram: SIC stands for sum of critical indices (**Table 5**). It is elaborated using an excel spreadsheet with embedded logic formulas and simple macros. It produces a clear picture of the overall work system and allows prioritizing of an eventual HSE action plan according to the risks and severity aspects and impacts present in each activity, following gravity, trend and urgency of action. Its color coding allows instant visualization for


**Table 5.** Sum of critical index for one particular workstation.

sorting out those work activities that require urgent or immediate action (red and purple, respectively). The percentage result indicates solely the severity level, therefore, it is possible for an operation (or workstation) to have high adequacy to HSE standards but require special attention, just like in the example provided as follows.

(c) Final overall portrait of the work system (RFO): As the name indicates, it is a final picture of the entire operation, as assessed by the analysis team. As in every HSE management system context, the picture is a representation of a current situation and it may be modified by several work environment circumstances and, of course, improved by appropriate HSE actions (**Figure 8**).

**Figure 8.** Overall severity levels for the work environment.

#### **4.2. Validation phase**

A final and validated A-HSE report version, along with the HSE best practices banner is a combined final product of the validation process. They are both now ready to be implemented, along with its subsequent HSE program guidelines, which become part of a broader HSE management system or policy. The HSE program will be consolidated during the implementation phase that follows.

#### **4.3. Implementation phase**

Possibly, the best illustration of what Ergonomic Design Thinking can produce to the work systems is the final result generated in the process of application of our proposed HSE management system model. The PROSMS (HSE program) best practices banner is a quite symbolic representation of a collective interaction of people and disciplines to contribute towards a better, safe and sound work environment (**Figure 9**). It is "launched" in an event that combines training and social gathering. The banner is displayed in a conspicuous place inside the construction site, usually the lunchroom.

sorting out those work activities that require urgent or immediate action (red and purple, respectively). The percentage result indicates solely the severity level, therefore, it is possible for an operation (or workstation) to have high adequacy to HSE standards but

(c) Final overall portrait of the work system (RFO): As the name indicates, it is a final picture of the entire operation, as assessed by the analysis team. As in every HSE management system context, the picture is a representation of a current situation and it may be modified by several work environment circumstances and, of course, improved by appropri-

A final and validated A-HSE report version, along with the HSE best practices banner is a combined final product of the validation process. They are both now ready to be implemented, along with its subsequent HSE program guidelines, which become part of a broader HSE management system or policy. The HSE program will be consolidated during the imple-

Possibly, the best illustration of what Ergonomic Design Thinking can produce to the work systems is the final result generated in the process of application of our proposed HSE management system model. The PROSMS (HSE program) best practices banner is a quite symbolic representation of a collective interaction of people and disciplines to contribute towards a better, safe and sound work environment (**Figure 9**). It is "launched" in an event that combines training and social gathering. The banner is displayed in a conspicuous place

require special attention, just like in the example provided as follows.

ate HSE actions (**Figure 8**).

72 Occupational Health

**4.2. Validation phase**

mentation phase that follows.

inside the construction site, usually the lunchroom.

**Figure 8.** Overall severity levels for the work environment.

**4.3. Implementation phase**

**Figure 9.** HSE best practices banner.

