Comparing the Implementation of Two Dust Control Technologies from a Sociotechnical Systems Perspective

Abstract

A sociotechnical system (STS) creates a framework that allows an examination of how social and technical factors affect organizational outcomes within a specific environmental context. STS has been rigorously studied with a primary research focus addressing worker-technology interactions. Although these interactions are important, the social processes and interactions that occur whenever any technical or environmental change is introduced into the system have been undervalued. If social processes are better understood, mining organizations could efficiently prepare and stabilize for such changes. With this goal in mind, we sought to extend STS theory through applying principles of meta-design to analyze the results of two case study interventions. Specifically, we studied the impact of an unregulated dust control technology (the Helmet-CAM) and a regulated dust control technology (the Continuous Personal Dust Monitor) on factors within an STS including employees' knowledge of, communication about, and use of technology to mitigate respirable dust sources. The results are presented in a way that first, addresses the overarching principles of meta-design STS including organizational participation, flexibility, and communication and second, examines how technology implementation processes differ when the organization is complying with a formal, higher-level requirement. Results show that a prominent focus on the social factors within an STS framework could help reduce unpredictability on the technical side and may improve communication within the system to help reduce adoption time, especially if and when accompanying a new, formal work process.

Keywords: Communication; Dust monitoring technology; Organizational interventions; Respirable dust; Socio-technical system.

Fig. 1

Factors and relationships within STS including the environmental, social, and technical systems, which feed into organizational outcomes (adapted from Kull and colleagues [20])

Fig. 2

Helmet-CAM with video camera lens located on worker’s shoulder (left) and helmet (right) and the 10-mm cyclone attached to the backpack shoulder harness

Fig. 3

EVADE 2.0 screenshot showing the software project editor window (top left) the job task being completed by the worker (top right), the worker’s five highest exposure peaks while wearing the video exposure monitoring device (bottom left), and a line graph representing the worker’s exposure while completing the task (bottom right)

Fig. 4

PDM 3700 dust monitor (left) and information screens available (right). The screen view shown in the top right photo in Fig. 4 provides the average respirable dust concentration for the previous 30 min of sampling, in addition to the average cumulative concentration from the beginning of the sampling shift. The screen shown in the middle right photo identifies the PEL for the sampling shift (input by the user) and the percent of this limit that has been reached to this point of sampling. The last screen photo shows a bar graph of average dust concentrations for each 30-min period of sampling throughout the shift with the values of the highest and lowest measured mass concentrations also displayed

Fig. 5

Workers’ levels of proactivity on the job pre and post Helmet-CAM intervention

Fig. 6

Workers’ levels of proactivity on the job pre and post CPDM intervention

Fig. 7

Proposed meta-design STS framework for mine organizations