Job rotation refers to the practice of assigning workers to different jobs throughout the day, most commonly moving from one job to another after breaks and lunch. Job rotation is often touted as a strategy to improve workforce flexibility and reduce injury rates. But does rotating workers between different tasks actually lower the risk of strain and sprain injuries, or does it simply spread the risk across a larger group of employees? In this article, we will explore both sides of the argument, examining when job rotation works and when it might be counterproductive.
Does job rotation expose more people to hazardous work?
Some research has suggested that job rotation simply spreads the risk around – instead of exposing one worker to a high risk task, you expose several workers to that task. Particularly where tasks require heavy force exertions, this can be true. A task that is so heavy that we’re concerned about performing it even a few times per shift, won’t be substantially improved through job rotation. Every worker who has to do the task will be at high risk. We do encounter these jobs, and we don’t promote rotation in these cases, even when the employer offers it as a potential remedy.
You might be able to hire and train one worker who has the strength to fit those two heavy components together; by assigning the job to that person, you might minimize how many injuries are associated with that task. Of course, any ergonomist will be quick to remind you that finding a worker to perform a task is the exact opposite of “fitting work to people” (as ergonomics is defined). So, while we understand that this approach kind of works, it’s not the way we encourage you to do business. (We want you to design jobs that everyone can do, rather than search for people with super-human strength to do the jobs.) And bear in mind that, if that selected worker does get injured, or takes vacation, or calls in sick, the replacement worker will be at high risk, and will not have been properly trained to do the job. Over the course of the year, will your injury rate truly be lower with this approach?
When does job rotation help?
Thankfully, most jobs are not so difficult that performing them once will cause an injury. Every analysis tool that we use accounts for the frequency or duration of the task. A task that is performed only a few times per shift can be much heavier than a task that is performed once per minute. Similarly, a task that is repeated for an hour can be a bit heavier than a task that is performed all day long. Exposure criteria have been included in ergonomics analysis tools for decades; the NIOSH lifting equation, way back in 1981, acknowledged that tasks that are limited to 1 hour or less can be heavier than tasks that are performed all day. Hand-Arm vibration tools also account for exposure. The assessment tool that we currently use most often, Work(s), requires us to measure the frequency and duration of the task, and we can assess cumulative demands when a worker is exposed to many different efforts during the day. In short, if we believe that performing a particular task more often would increase injury risk, then job rotation has the potential to mitigate risk, simply by limiting exposure.
For over 25 years, I worked with a client where virtually all jobs were awkward and repetitive, and a few jobs also required very forceful pulling. I truly believe that their injury rates would have been much, much higher, if they had not used job rotation so effectively. Our analysis tools showed that those forceful, repetitive, awkward tasks would have been intolerable for 8 hours. So, I’m a believer.
While job rotation doesn’t help as much when the jobs in the rotation pool are similar, even a small difference between jobs can improve overall demands. Rotating between “Left bracket secure” and “Right bracket secure” can still improve the “average” demands on the body. The trick is to identify differences and to sequence the tasks so muscles have a chance to recover. And even if job rotation doesn’t significantly reduce the risk of injury when the jobs are similar, there are other benefits.
What are the other reasons to optimize job rotation?
Absolutely! Here are some spin-off benefits. Rotation:
- Breaks the monotony of a repetitive job, which leads to better employee satisfaction and lower turnover.
- Ensures a ready supply of skilled workers, and supports succession planning of employees into leadership positions.
- Allows employees to feel a sense of pride in accomplishing a larger process.
- Gives employees the opportunity to engage with different co-workers throughout the day
- Encourages employees to check and correct quality issues, and to help each other if one person gets behind (improves quality and productivity).
- Encourages continuous improvement, by exposing employees to a broader part of the production process.
What is the downside of job rotation?
Using job rotation requires a considerable initial investment in training so employees can perform all tasks. During the training process, quality and productivity may be temporarily impaired. To offset this cost, implement rotation gradually, expanding each person’s responsibility from one job to two, and later to four.
Secondly, logistics can be complex, especially if jobs in one rotation are physically far apart. Additional costs are incurred if additional labour is required to cover a job while workers rotate. This is why many organizations only rotate during production breaks – workers leave one position at breaktime and return to work at a different position after break.
When a worker has a medical limitation that is relevant for only one position in the rotation, the management of that injury is complicated.
What are the keys to successful job rotation?
For successful job rotation:
- Ensure tasks are physically varied.
- Rotate frequently to prevent fatigue
- Involve employees in creating the rotation schedule.
Looking for support to implement or optimize a job rotation schedule? We can help! INFO@TaylordErgo.com.
Some further reading:
Adem, A., and M. Dağdeviren. (2020) A job rotation-scheduling model for blue-collar employees’ hand–arm vibration levels in manufacturing firms. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries Volume 31, Issue 2 p. 174-190
https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20878
Battini, D., Berti, N., Finco, S, Zennaro, I., and A. Das (2022) Towards industry 5.0: A multi-objective job rotation model for an inclusive workforce, International Journal of Production Economics, Volume 250, 2022,108619, ISSN 0925-5273,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108619.
Garg, A. and J. Kapellusch. (2016) The Cumulative Lifting Index (CULI) for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation: Quantifying Risk for Workers With Job Rotation Human Factors, 2016-08, Vol.58 (5), p.683-694
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815627405
Mehdizadeh, A., Vinel, A., Hu, Q., Schall, M. C., Gallagher, S., and R. Sesek. (2020). Job rotation and work-related musculoskeletal disorders: a fatigue-failure perspective. Ergonomics, 63(4), 461–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2020.1717644
Padula, R., Comper, M., Sparer, E., and J. Dennerlein. (2017) Job rotation designed to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and control risk in manufacturing industries: A systematic review, Applied Ergonomics, Volume 58, 2017, Pages 386-397.