Costebenefit analysis of a socio-technical intervention in a Brazilian footwear company L.B.de M. Guimarães a, * , J.L.D. Ribeiro b, 1 , J.S. Renner c, 2 a Graduate Program in Industrial Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Osvaldo Aranha, 99, 5  andar, Porto Alegre, RS 90035-190, Brazil b Department of Industrial Engineering and Transportation, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Osvaldo Aranha, 99, 5  andar, Porto Alegre, RS 90035-190, Brazil c Health Sciences Institute, Feevale University Center, RS 239, 2755 Vila Nova, Novo Hamburgo, RS 93352-000, Brazil article info Article history: Received 26 July 2011 Accepted 13 January 2012 Keywords: Costebenefit analysis Work organization Socio-technical system Participative ergonomics Shoes manufacturing abstract This article presents a costsebenefits analysis of a macroergonomic intervention in a Brazilian footwear company. Comparing results of a pilot line (composed by 100 multiskilled workers organized in teams) with eight traditional lines (still working in a one human being/one task model) the intervention showed to be worth pursuing since achieved gains were higher than intervention costs: there was a reduction in human resource costs (80% reduction in industrial accidents, 100% reduction in work-related musculo- skeletal disorders or WMSD, medical consultations and turnover, and a 45.65% reduction in absenteeism) and production improvement (productivity increased in 3% and production waste decrease to less than 1%). The net intervention value of the intervention was around U$ 430,000 with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 7.2. Moreover, employees who worked in the pilot line understood that their quality of work life improved, compensating the anxiety brought up by the radical changes implemented. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomics Society. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Market competition and fast technological change made performance a prerequisite for survival of any organization. To cope with this, companies look for maximizing gains and minimizing waste of resources, a process often known as rationalization. Back in the late 1950s, the socio-technical approach (Emery, 1959; Berggren, 1992; Clegg, 2000) and later in the 1980s macro- ergonomics (Hendrick, 1986; Hendrick and Kleiner, 2001) empha- sized the need for bridging the gap between both workers and organizations wellbeing by designing systems that attend the requirements of both, using the knowledge of managerial and non- managerial staff. However, a recent review (Westgaard and Winkel, 2011) shows how ergonomics, under a microapproach (i.e., micro- ergonomics), have been focusing on the impact of rationalization on the individual worker wellbeing without balancing performance in the organizational context. Most ergonomic interventions are designed to reduce relevant risk factors impacting the individual worker, and the literature typically ignores the potential health consequences of measures to improve competitiveness and productivity (Westgaard and Winkel, 2011). A shift for a more macroapproach should be expected from ergonomics interventions because they “may have a better chance of success by focusing on insights that help balancing production performance and worker wellbeing, thereby moving towards more sustainable production systems” (Westgaard and Winkel, 2011). Besides, ergonomics should explicitly demonstrate the advantages of the intervention, by addressing its costs and benefits (Hendrick, 1996). This article outlines a case study in the Brazilian shoes industry, which aimed to improving both worker wellbeing and system performance by the development, prototyping, implementation and validation of a more sustainable production system. The article commences by outlining the Brazilian shoes industry, then describes briefly the company and usual working conditions in the industry, and then discusses the macroergonomic intervention. The results of the intervention are then presented, and the costebenefit of a 3.5 years research are calculated. The longitudinal study compared the costs and benefits of the traditional model with the socio-technical one, implemented as a pilot line composed by 100 workers. 2. Rationale and previous work Although ergonomic interventions have the goal to optimize human wellbeing and overall system performance (IEA, 2011), * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ55 51 3308 3948; fax: þ55 51 3308 4007. . E-mail addresses: liabmg@gmail.com, lia@producao.ufrgs.br (L.B.de M. Guimarães), ribeiro@ufrgs.br (J.L.D. Ribeiro), jacinta@feevale.br (J.S. Renner). 1 Tel: þ55 51 33084005; fax: þ55 51 33084007. 2 Tel: þ55 51 35868800. Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Applied Ergonomics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apergo 0003-6870/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomics Society. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2012.01.003 Applied Ergonomics 43 (2012) 948e957