Designing workload analysis questionnaire

to evaluate needs of employees

Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 1931, 030027 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024086
Published Online: 09 February 2018

Rahmaniyah Dwi Astuti, and Muhammad Abdu Haq Navi

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Design of an automatic production monitoring system on job shop manufacturing

AIP Conference Proceedings 1931, 030021 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024080

The development of daily monitoring tool in a service part manufacturing company

AIP Conference Proceedings 1931, 030025 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024084

Analysis of total productive maintenance (TPM) implementation using overall equipment

effectiveness (OEE) and six big losses: A case study
AIP Conference Proceedings 1931, 030026 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024085

AIP Conference Proceedings 1931, 030027 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024086 1931, 030027

© 2018 Author(s).
 Designing Workload Analysis Questionnaire To Evaluate
Needs of Employees
Rahmaniyah Dwi Astuti1 and Muhammad Abdu Haq Navi1, a)
1
Work System Design and Ergonomic Laboratory, Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Sebelas
Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding author: haqnavi6@gmail.com

Abstract. Incompatibility between workload with work capacity is one of main problem to make optimal result. In case at
the office, there are constraints to determine workload because of non-repetitive works. Employees do work based on the
targets set in a working period. At the end of the period is usually performed an evaluation of employees performance to
evaluate needs of employees. The aims of this study to design a workload questionnaire tools to evaluate the efficiency
level of position as indicator to determine needs of employees based on the Indonesian State Employment Agency
Regulation on workload analysis. This research is applied to State-Owned Enterprise PT. X by determining 3 positions as
a pilot project. Position A is held by 2 employees, position B is held by 7 employees, and position C is held by 6 employees.
From the calculation result, position A has an efficiency level of 1,33 or “very good”, position B has an efficiency level of
0.71 or “enough”, and position C has an efficiency level of 1.03 or “very good”. The application of this tools giving
suggestion the needs of employees of position A is 3 people, position B is 5 people, and position C is 6 people. The
difference between the number of employees and the calculation result is then analyzed by interviewing the employees to
get more data about personal perception. It can be concluded that this workload evaluation tools can be used as an
alternative solution to evaluate needs of employees in office.

INTRODUCTION
Performance of employees is major concern for all business organizations [1]. High performance work system is
a distinguishing factor of leading organizations. Currently, many companies are trying to make high performance
work system by maximizing the intensity of job assignments, meanwhile the work capacity is less adjusted to the
resources. Workload refers to the intensity of job assignments. It is a source of mental stress for employees [2]. Too
Heavy or too low workload can affect an employee’s physical and mental health, performance, or productivity [3].
Certainly a mismatch between workloads charged by the organization with work capacity is highly anticipated [4].
Office work represents a complex physyical work environment, with interactions among the various dimensions
of the workstation, speed of data entry, and job content [5]. Unlike repetitive and static work in production floor
[6], the content of non-repetitive works or project keep employees did activities that are not routine. Sometimes
employees do work in front of the computer, a few moments later the Employees do meeting activities, and some time
doing work activities outside the office such as visiting branch offices and corporate partners. Employees do work
based on the targets set in a working period. At the end of the working period, Human Resource is usually performed
an employee’s performance evaluation. In some companies, performance evaluation usually done yearly. Human
Resource from each company has its own tools in doing performance evaluation. Through performance evaluation
can be known whether targets have been achieved and what should be done by the organization next. Performance
evaluation is most frequently carried out for administration or development intentions [7]. For administration
purposes, performance evaluation is performed to make decision on rotation, promotion, demotion, decruitment or
recruitment. Development intention of performance evaluation is oriented to the improvement of the work
performance of employees, as well as to the enhancement of their abilities on the ground of the adequate training
program and advising employees regarding behavior in the work environment [8].

The 3rd International Conference on Industrial, Mechanical, Electrical, and Chemical Engineering
AIP Conf. Proc. 1931, 030027-1–030027-8; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5024086
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1623-9/$30.00

030027-1
 In the previous study, the calculation needs of employees using Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation
on workload analysis is applied on government institution. Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation on
workload analysis is a guideline created by Indonesian Government to calculate the needs of employees by using
workload as the main indicator. The use of workload analysis is widely applied to government institution because of
the workload calculation is intended for non-repetitive type of work such as office work. First stage of workload
analysis is determining the position to be measured, then collect the data needed. From the data collected, then
calculate the workload of the position. The workload of the position is indicator to determine efficiency level of
position and then proposed needs of employees [9]. This workload analysis tools is very dependent on the
information from the employees. So the process of gathering the data is very important stage.
Based on the statement, it is necessary to make precision and effective tools to gather the data. The aims of this
study is designing workload analysis questionnaire to make it easier for Human Resource analyst to collect and
processing the data [10]. This study is implemented to State-Owned Enterprise PT. X by determining 3 positions as a
pilot project. The selection of 3 positions as pilot project is based on job characteristics that represent the office work
that do work based on the targets set in a working period. This study is expected to create a workload questionnaire
tools and can be used as an alternative solution to evaluate needs of employees in office.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research was preceded by several stages. The first stage is data collection and processing. Data collection
includes interviews to obtain needs of design tools that are required. The data is used as a so urce for designing the
questionnaire. At the stage of data processing conducted by designing the workload analysis questionnaire. The design
of the questionnaire be planned correctly through several stages. There were initial consideration, format of content,
format of layout, pretest (pilot), revision, and final questionnaire.
Design tools considered data processing items based on the Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation on
workload analysis includes determining the average completion time, the determination of effective working time, the
calculation of the efficiency level of work, and the stage of determining the needs of employees. The final
questionnaire design directly tested to 3 positions as pilot project. The data result then checked to validate the data
based on Key Performance Indicator.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Preparation of Design Concept

Based on face-to-face interviews in the form expectations of Human Resource division generated needs of design
tools that are required as follows:
TABLE 1. Needs of Design Tools

No. Needs Design Tools

1 Tools workload analysis in Design tools that are suitable for

accordance with the characteristics of the
work.
2 Easy-to-understand tools.
3 A workload analysis tool that can
be used by a limited number of HR
staff and limited project time.
non-repetitive job types and
based on targets
Design tools with clear and
concise description
Design tools that are concise and
easy for data retrieval and
processing.

From the identification needs chooosed the design tools of workload analysis questionnaire based on the
Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulations on workload analysis with improvements in the process of data
retrieval and processing. A questionnaire is used in case resources are limited, as a questionnaire can be quite
inexpensive to design and administer and time is an important resource which a questionnaire consumes to its

030027-2
maximum extent as questionnaires can be useful confirmation tools when corroborated with other studies that have
resources to pursue other data collection strategies. [11]
Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation on workload analysis is a guideline created by Indonesian
Government by using workload as the main indicator to calculate needs of employees. The use of workload analysis
is widely applied to government institution because of the workload calculation is intended for non- repetitive type
of work such as office work. There are several calculations required in the Indonesian State Employment Agency
Regulation on Workload Analysis, including the calculation of the average completion time (1), the calculation of the
efficiency level of work (2), and the calculation needs of employees (3).

Total Working Time = Average Completion Time x Load (1)

∑
Efficiency Level of Positions = (2)
∑

∑
Needs of Employees = (3)

Design of Questionnaire
Design of the questionnaire planned through several stages consists of initial consideration, format of content,
format of layout, pretest (pilot), revision, and final questionnaire. Design of questionnaire is created based on the
Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation on workload analysis. The questionnaire consists of three parts,
that is employee’s identity section, open-ended question section, and employee’s workload section. In the first section
of the questionnaire showed in figure 1 consists of name of employees, the name of position, unit / division, and job
description. Second section showed in figure 2 consists of open-ended question about Key Performance Indicator. In
third section showed in figure 3 consists of job assignment, work result, average working time, effective working time,
and work volume or load. The analyst then validate one by one the job assignment based on the job description.

FIGURE 1. First Section

030027-3
 FIGURE 2. Second Section
Open-ended question in second section asks about key performance indicator. It is expected that employees can
reach the target of the KPI which has been set at the beginning of the period. Knowledge about KPI is very important
to know by employees. KPI itself is also used as a performance indicator validation tool by Human Resource division.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) allows gathering knowledge and exploring the best way to achieve organization
goals. Many researchers have provided different ideas for determining KPI's either manually, and semi-automatic, or
automatic which is applied in different fields. Indicators or key performance indicators (KPIs) in business environment
are mostly quantitative information, which illustrates structures and processes of a company. In todays’s world KPIs
are essential for planning and controlling through consolidating information, creating transparency and thereby
supporting decision making of the management. In this study the three positions as pilot project have reached the
target of KPI which has been set at the beginning of the working period [12].

FIGURE 3. Third Section

The third section showed in figure 3 is a workload measurement form that workers receive. Based on form will
get details of work during a period of working time. Respondents are required to fill in all job details ranging from
daily work to special jobs that may only be done yearly. Explanation of third section is as follows :

030027-4
a) Job Assignment
Job Assignment is the explanation of all office duties which is the main effort of the stakeholders in processing the
work material into the work result. Job assignment data is one of the most important data in the workload analysis
process. The stakeholder has a responsibility to write down all the details of the task that has been done during one
year of work.
b) Work Result
Work Result is a product that must be generated by the position holders. In this case the work result data can be
in the form of activities, files, or others result of projects.
c) Average Working Time
Average Working Time is the measured data using the unit of time to complete a job assignment. In this research,
the task completion time is determined in minutes.
d) Effective Working Time
Effective Working Time is the time data needed by the positions to do the job assignment, whether done in units of
time daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly.
e) Load
Load is the volume of work on each task description.
f) Additional Information
Additional Information contains additional data or information that needs to be written to reinforce the input data.

Implementation Of Questionnaire

Performance indicator data and job description are used as validation of the data filled by respondent. In addition, the
data is useful for evaluation of the suitability between workload and the work capacity of employees. The data of
position C is as follows :

FIGURE 4. Job Description and Performance Indicator of Position C

Effective Working Time is the time data needed by the positions to do the job assignment. Each company has
its own rules in setting work time for workers. The effective working time of company PT. X is as follows :

TABLE 2. Effective Working Time

Allowance 30%

Work Days/ Week 5

d
Work Hour/ Days 8 hours

Effective Working Time/ Days 5,6 hours or 336 minutes

030027-5
 TABLE 3. Effective Working Time of 5 Dayss Work

Per Days 1 x 336 minutes 336 minutes

Per Week 5 x 336 minutes 1.680 minutes

Per Month 20 x 336 minutes 6.720 minutes

Per Year 240 x 336 minutes 80.640 minutes

Effective
Additional
No Job Assignment Work Result Average Working Time Working Load
Information
Time
Arranging
5 dayss
Guidelines for
1 guide book (60 minute x 8 x 5 2400 Yearly 1 considering
business process
management and dayss) minutes focus
System of work
Preparing organizational
2 procedure for business document (60 minute x 8 x 4 1920 Yearly 1 4 dayss
process preparation and dayss) minues
supporting documents
Developing
3 document (60 minute x 8 x 4 1920 Yearly 1 4 dayss
organizational procedure
days) minutes
mapping and compilation
of system procedure
Arranging organizational
4 document (60 minute x 8 x 4 1920 Yearly 1 4 dayss
procedure control
document days) minutes

Preparing organizational
5 procedure document (60 minutes x 8 x 4 1920 Yearly 1 4 dayss
implementation reviews days) minutes
Arranging supporting
6 document (60 minutes x 8 x 3 1440 Yearly 1 3 dayss
documents
days) minutes

Arrannging procedures
7 document (60 minutes x 8 x 3 1440 Yearly 1 3 dayss
of system control
days) minutes
Arranging system
8 document (60 minutes x 8 x 3 1440 Yearly 1 3 dayss
procedure of policy
days) minutes

9 Arranging policy document (60 minutes x 8 x 3 1440 Yearly 1 3 dayss

reviews of system days) minutes
d
Mapping of 5 dayss on
10 activi (60 minutes x 8 x 5 2400 Yearly 1
system procedure weekdayss
ty days) minutes
Reviewing system (60 minutes x 8 x 5 480000
11 activi minutes Yearly 34 meeting
procedure with OC & days x 34)
ty
OE

Legalization of division 480 minutes Yearly

12 activity (60 minutes x 8) 1 1 days
with OC & OE

13 Publish to sharebox activi (60 minutes x 8) 480 Yearly 1 1 days

ty minutes
FIGURE 5. Workload Questionnaire Result of Position C

030027-6
 TABLE 4. Effective Working Time of 5 Dayss Work
Average Effective
No Job Assignment Work Result Workload
Working Time Working Time
Arranging Guidelines for
1 business process management guide book 2400 minutes 80640 minutes 0.029761905
and system of work
Preparing organizational
2 procedure for business document 1920 minutes 80640 minutes 0.023809524
process preparation and

Developing organizational
3 document 1920 minutes 80640 minutes 0.023809524
procedure mapping and
compilation of system
procedure
Arranging organizational
4 document 1920 minutes 80640 minutes 0.023809524
procedure control document

Preparing organizationl
5 document 1920 minutes 80640 minutes 0.023809524
procedure implementation
reviews

Arranging supporting
6 document 1440 minutes 80640 minutes 0.017857143
documents
Arrannging procedures of
7 document 1440 minutes 80640 minutes 0.017857143
system control
8 Arranging procedures of policy document 1440 minutes 80640 minutes 0.017857143
control
9 Arranging reviews of system document 1440 minutes 80640 minutes 0.017857143
procedure
Mapping of system procedure
10 activity 2400 minutes 80640 minutes 0.029761905
Reviewing system procedure
11 activity 480000 minutes 80640 minutes 5.952380952
with OC & OE
Legalization of division with
12 activity 480 minutes 80640 minutes 0.005952381
OC & OE
13 Publish to sharebox activity 480 minutes 80640 minutes 0.005952381
Total Working
499.200 minutes Total Workload 6,19047619
Time

TABLE 5. Standard Efficiency Level of Position

Standard Level of Criteria Point

Efficiency
SLE ≥ 1 Very Good A

SLE = 0,90 – 0,99 Good B

SLE = 0,70 – 0,89 Enough C
SLE = 0,50 – 0,69 Medium D
SLE < 0,50 Bad E

Total initial worker then calculated to determine efficiency level of the position (2) :

∑
Efficiency Level of Positions = ……..(2)
∑

030027-7
 = 499.200
6 x 80.640
= 1,03174

TABLE 6. Recapitulation of Employees Needed

Position Number of Initial Number of Employees
Employees Needed
A 2 3
B 7 5
C 6 6

From the standard level of efficiency, position C is chategorized “very good’. It means that position C is working
efficiently. Based on the result of data processing, obtained Total Working Time of positions C is 499.200 minutes
with Total Workload is 6,19047619. Total Workload is converted to number of employees needed to be 6 employees.
The existence of similarity between initial number of employees and number of employees needed shows that
workload of position C compatible with the work capacity. While the intial number of position A is 2 and number of
employees needed is 3 but the efficiency level of posisiton A is 1,33 or “very good”. It means the workload bigger
than the work capacity but still can handled the target with extra effort. Position B has an efficiency level of 0.71 or
“enough” while the intial number of position is 7 and number of employees needed is 5. It shows that the work capacity
is bigger than workload.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Based on the standard level of efficiency, position C is chategorized “very good’ While the intial number of
position A is 2 and number of employees needed is 3, the efficiency level of posisiton A is 1,33 or “very good”.
Position B has an efficiency level of 0.71 or “enough”.
Indonesian State Employment Agency Regulation on workload analysis is a guideline created by Indonesian
Government to calculate needs of employees by using workload as the main indicator. This paper contributes
improvements in the form of design tools. By designing the Workload Analysis Questionnaire improve the process of
data retrieval and processing. The point of this research is also show that workload analysis questionnaire can be
implemented to related industries as performance evaluation tools with characteristic work of non-repetitive and based
on target.

REFERENCES
1. Robbins, S. P. New Delhi : Prentice Hall of India. (1999)
2. Syed, S. H. et al. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, v. 3, p. 256-267. (2011).
3. Tien, H.C. et al. American Journal of Applied Sciences, v. 7, p.692-697 (2010).
4. Siva, D.V. et al. Life Sciences and Medicine Research, v. 2010 : LSMR-19 (2010).
5. Matos, M. & Pedro, M.A. Procedia Manufacturing, v. 3, p.4689-4694 (2015)
6. Karowski, W. International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors, Second Edition. Boca Raton :
CRC Press Inc, (2006).
7. Cleveland, J.N., Murphy, K.R., & Williams, R.E. Journal of Applied Psychology, no. 74, p. 130 – 135(1989).
8. Treven, S. Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, v.6, p.177-189 (2001).
9. General Guidance of Indonesian Employment Agency Regulation on Workload Analysis, no. 19, July 2011.
10. Burgess, T.F. (2001). A General Introduction to the Design of Questionnaires for Survey Research.
Retrieved February, 28, 2007, from University of Leeds:http://www.leeds.ac.uk/iss/documentation/top/top2.pdf
11. Roopa, S. & Rani, M.S. The Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society, v. 46, p. 273-277 (2012).
12. Badawy, M. et al. Future Computing and Informatics Journal, v. 1, p. 47-52 (2016).

030027-8