Strength In The Workplace: Quantitative Research Paper

Strength in the Workplace
Feasibility Term Paper
EC315 Quantitative Research Methods
John Rodriguez

Cognitive abilities are associated with success in many jobs in the workplace. Reasoning and abstract thinking are highly sought after skills by many employers today. There are still although, many jobs that require a considerable amount of strength to lift, position, and perform considerable other tasks in daily routines. Jobs such as construction, manufacturing, and restaurants require workers to use tools, carry heavy objects, or demand continuous movement performing job tasks. Although many jobs now require workers to take cognitive tests the problem arises on how to select the ideal candidates
for physically demanding jobs. To solve the problem a quick and early test to measure the physical ability of a candidate could be administered. This study will measure the correlation of job performance (dependent variable) and can it be measured by grip strength (GRIP) and arm (ARM) strength. The most important of these variables being arm strength. Identifying how much a candidate can lift and move with in completing physically demanding job task.
1. Purpose Statement
The purpose of this project is to determine if strength performance can demonstrate best candidates for select jobs determining if work performance would be higher and therefore lead to a higher retention, production, and quantity or work duties.
The dependent variable is defined as Job performance (JOB) which will take into account (GRIP) and (ARM) strength defined by the Jackson Evaluation System (JES) which is a muscle strength measurement system that can be used to measure numerous muscle groups in the human anatomy. For this test grip and arm strength were measured by participants exerting as much force as possible for a period of 2 seconds.
JOB=GRIP+ARM
2. Definition of Variables
Job performance are the work related activities expected of an employee and how well the activities were executed. Based on the position job performance tends to be based on factors, including quality and quantity of work, timeliness and efficiency.
Arm strength can be associated with a number of activities that can be done daily on certain jobs. From lifting and turning a wrench continuously to carrying equipment from area to area, arm strength comes into play numerous times a day. Ergonomics is the study of the relationship between people and their work environments (TrainingOnline, 2013) and arm strength plays heavily into many work environments and the tools that are used every day in those jobs.
Grip strength involves 35 muscles of movement of the forearm and hand. According to German Sports Scientist Jurgen Weinick “the characteristic structure of the hand is related to its function as a grasping tool. The fingers and thumb act as a versatile pair of pliers”. Grip strength can be attributed to many physical job functions that would be impossible to do without proper strength of grip.
The relationship between JOB and the independent variables turn out to be a positive one. As the consistency of strength between grip and arm raises, it should increase the ability of work performance in jobs where physical measures are key in job performance such as construction, maintenance, manufacturing, or any job that require continuous or repetitive lifting or movement.
3.
Data Description A. Strength Measures Two measure of strength were gathered from each participant to include grip and arm strength. The Jackson Evaluation System (JES) was configured to measure strength in muscle groups throughout the human body. For this particular study grip and arm strength were measured. The participant was asked to exert as much force as they could for a period of 2 seconds. The equipment measured maximum force in (lbs.) by isometric strength measures. Each test was completed twice by each individual and then averaged for the strength measures (Grip and Arm). B. Job Performance Measures For job performance team leaders for each of the 30 participants were asked to rate (Ratings) how well employees perform physical aspects of their jobs using a 50 point scale. The higher the numbers indicate better performance to the physical demanding aspects of the job. Two work simulations were performed with the participant exerting force on a simulated wrench by gripping and pulling. The scores on each of the simulations (Sims) were standardized and summed together to form a single
measure.

Descriptive
To examine the relationship between strength and job performance we will look into some basic statistics between the variables. Measure for central tendency including mean and median will be used to determine the location of the distribution of scores. Dispersion such as range (MIN, MAX), standard deviation and variance will show the dispersion of how the scores are.

N
MEAN
MEDIAN
STDEV
MIN
MAX
Variance
Grip
30
109.1167
108.25
16.6136
78
153
276.0118
Arm
30
77.58333
81
23.67345
25
132
560.4325
Ratings
30
29.4
26.5
13.86785
10
50
192.3172
Sims
30
-0.11867
0.145
1.66725
-3.88
5.17
2.779722

N
Grip
Arm
Sims
Ratings
1
82
39
-3.88
10
2
128.5
88
0.91
20
3
118
70.5
0.91
15
4
104.5
69.5
-0.94
50
5
122.5
66.5
-2.17
30
6
88
25
-2.05
45
7
105
63.5
-1.3
32
8
127
104.5
0.26
10
9
120.5
86
0.13
15
10
103
85.5
0.71
20
11
115.5
36
-1.08
22
12
78
69.5
-1.67
48
13
94.5
88.5
0.72
38
14
99
62
-0.61
11
15
115
96.5
-1.11
18
16
122
90.5
0.16
28
17
91.5
71
-0.79
45
18
117.5
61.5
0.5
47
19
99
80
0.49
20
20
121.5
106.5
2.3
13
21
99.5
44
-2.34
47
22
89
77
0.51
50
23
92.5
85
-0.42
41
24
124.5
106
0.79
25
25
130.5
104.5
1.83
30
26
103
52.5
-0.8
21
27
103
89.5
-1.21
50
28
153
132
5.17
18
29
111.5
95
0.8
22
30
114.5
82
0.62
41

For the grip test we see that the 30 participants exerted an average of 109.12 pounds of force. Half of the participants exerted less than 108.25 pounds of force while the other half scored greater than 108.25. Standard deviation of 16.61. The lowest score was 78 while the highest score was 153 lbs.
Using the median of 26.5 for job performance ratings. The 30 participants were given a number and divided into 2 catagories. For anything below the median a score of 0 was assigned to the participant. For above the median score of 26.5 a score of 1 was given.

Works Cited
TrainingOnline, 2013; Ergonomics and the Workplace: Retrieved November 1, 2013 from http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/225/ergonomics-workplace Weinick J. Functional Anatomy in Sports. Pp 81. St Louis, Mo 1990