Q.1. Define the effect of noise on working environment.
Ans. Noise: -
Noise is generally regarded as a destructor and therefore as interfering with efficiency. In an experiment to determine the effects of noise, Vernon and Warner had a group of subjects to arithmetic problems and also read material in a book on psychology during alternating periods of noise and quiet. It was found that noise had no appreciable effect on the speed or accuracy of doing arithmetic problems, but that there was a slight increase in the expenditure of energy as measured by oxygen consumption. The factor primarily determining whether noise is a destructor is its character - whether it is steady or intermittent, when the noise is steady, the persona adapts himself to it, but when it is intermittent, he must make a greater effort to maintain efficiency.
Park and Payne found that average performance was not affected by intense noise. Also important in their study was the fact that they only found this effect for a boring, easy task. With a task of high difficulty they observed no noise effect at all. Culbert and Posner examined the degree to which individuals can successfully adapt noise. They found that after a period of several weeks individuals even adapted to a noise as intense as jet aircraft. However, no performance change was observed due to the adaptation to the noise.
The effect of noise on a job is apparently determined by whether the noise is a necessary accompaniment to the job or not. For example, a typist becomes used to the clatter of the machine because it is a necessary accompaniment to her work, whereas a person working next to her finds this noise an interference. Office workers in close proximity to machines in a factory are disturbed by the noisy machinery to a greater extent than the workers operating the machines.
Some years ago, Morgan conducted an experiment (1916) to discover how a person reacts to irrelevant noises. This experiment indicated that at first such noise generally retarded the speed of work, but that this was often followed by an increase in speed. The resulting speed was frequently greater than that achieved prior to the introduction of the irrelevant noises, because the subjects made an extra effort to overcome the effect of the noises. In Morgan’s experiment the subjects exerted greater pressure on the keys and evidenced an increase in articulatory reactions. Morgan found that although noise does not necessarily interfere with efficiency as measured by production, it result in inefficiency as measured by energy cost. The only additional evidence indicates that quiet as well as noise can constitute a distraction; thus the quite that follows the cessation of noise acts as a distracting influence. This was confirmed both by the objective data and by the introspective reports of the subjects. In other words, an employee who has adjusted himself to a noisy work situation may be distracted by a sudden silence.
This does not mean that bigger and better noises should be sought. The evidence indicates that, although production is not curtailed by noise, more energy is expended in the form of increased effort. Also, although quiet working conditions are desirable, it does not follow that silence is necessarily golden.
Noise of extreme intensity not only can be irritating but also can lead to actual physical pain and permanent ear damage. Generally, noise levels above 100 decibels (db) should be so considered, and employees should be protected from such noise by ear plugs or ear muffs.
Sleight and Tiffin (1948) reviewed the literature on industrial noise and point out that the complete condemnation of noise in industry may be unwarranted and that the harmful effects of noise have been overemphasized. It does appear, however, that hearing is impaired by industrial noise and that those subjected to the loudest noises are most affected. This would mean that although very noisy work conditions may be detrimental to hearing, ordinary work conditions are not deafening. It also appears that acoustical treatment to lower noise has more of an effect on attitude than on lowering noise.
Berrien (1940) also did a careful review on the effects of noise in work and finds that the popular literature abounds with emotional outbursts on the deleterious effects of noise, but the scientific literature rarely supports such views. Apparently, adaptation takes place - but seldom completely. Under high noise levels, hearing defects are frequently produced after long exposure. Still precisely unanswered, however, is the question of what levels at what exposure durations result in physical damage.
In short, The “common sense” assumption that what is annoying is harmful and that noise is annoying and therefore harmful should be factually and experimentally determined and not emotionally proved. Noise may lead to production curtailment and deafness in some situations but surely not in all. Noise abatement campaigns should makes less noise and stick to the point of being against noise because it is noisy.
Q.2. What changes should be incorporated to improve the work environment. (AKTU. 2010 -11)
Ans. Work Environment: -
Start with the environment: inspect your building and evaluate the temperature, lighting and music to make sure they provide comfort and a good environment to which to work. Next, inspect the work area. Is it clean and maintained? How is it furnished and decorated? The equipment and furnishings should be ergonomic in design to provide support and comfort for the worker. It may seem next to impossible to find time to relieve stress at work, but a few well-spent minutes at regularly scheduled breaks can dramatically increase your productivity, work enjoyment and overall health. Some companies offer a ‘quiet room’ where employees are allowed to remove themselves from their work area and take time to relax and refocus. Many quiet rooms are furnished with mood lighting, quiet music or sounds of nature playing to help the employee to relax. Comfortable floor pads or massage recliners are nice amenities that encourage a brief period of meditation or quiet time. Some companies provide a walking path for their staff and workers to get outside and benefit from a calm work out in nature. Picnic and break areas, and walking areas with flowers and shrubs are wonderful benefits for enjoyment. Maintenance can be minimal to the employer. More elaborate areas include running water flowing into a pond. Benches placed along the paths allow those interested to sit and enjoy. Not every business has the resources or space to provide these distinctive break enhancement options. But every business can offer two simple methods that will remove stress and improve the productivity of every person when they take their breaks.
