Monitor Study Summary Issue
All users have been provided with one 19” extended width monitor. The system provides the ability to view multiple documents at once (side by side) for comparison purposes, however this feature is not used very often because the screen size limits the display to only small fonts, the entire document is not visible all at once, and the dual display is too complicated to set-up. Additionally, the quality of the scan in many cases is not as clear as an original typed document (such as this document), requiring the font to be displayed larger than normal size in order for it to be legible. Tasks performed by our users require them to be constantly comparing documents. In order to compare documents, users usually switch back and forth between screens or print the documents. Our system does not provide the ability to simultaneously view a document while creating new forms, so users are required to switch back and forth. Currently, the our users are required to access several systems to obtain all of the necessary information, resulting in having several systems open simultaneously. Goal of Study
The goal of the monitor study was to determine if an increase in the amount of screen surface would provide significant benefits such as improved efficiency, reduced print volume, increased accuracy, and reduced physical stress. If the increased screen space provided significant benefit, then the second goal of the study was to determine the best set-up, one 24” monitor or dual 19” monitors. Logistics
The Monitor Study included two different classifications from two different departments. Each participant used a 24” monitor and dual 19” monitors each for one week, so the two set-ups could be compared and the most effective solution determined. Summary of Results
Both the dual 19” monitors and the single 24” monitor are superior to the current set-up of a single 19” monitor. Ten out of twelve testers recommended the dual monitors. However, ten of the twelve participants stated that the single 24” monitor had significant benefits over the single 19” monitor. The following is a summary of the findings for each monitor configuration. Dual Monitors
The dual monitors provided the following benefits: 1. Increased workflow, efficiency, and productivity – Classification A reported a savings of 30 minutes – 3 hours per day, with an average of 110 minutes per day. Four of the six Classification reported a savings of 1 to 2 hours per day, with an average of 90 minutes per day. Increased accuracy - Six of the twelve participants noted an increase of accuracy. 2. Decreased print volume - On average, participants noted a 44% reduction in the amount of printing required to perform their job functions. 3. Reduced body strain, stress, and fatigue - Nine of the twelve participants reported reduced body strain, tension and fatigue.
Two of the Classification B recommended the 24” monitor reported that they did not like using the dual monitors and did not experience any benefit from using them. Three participants recommended that the second monitor be 24” instead of 19” to benefit from the additional screen surface, as well as being able to magnify hard to read documents.
Increased Workflow, Efficiency, and Productivity
Ten of the twelve participants reported that the dual monitors significantly improved the workflow and increased efficiency and productivity. Classification A reported an average time savings of 110 minutes per day and the Classification B reported an average time savings of 90 minutes per day. Participants reported that dual monitors made it possible to more easily perform the following functions: * Multi-task * View multiple systems simultaneously * View multiple documents side by side * View documents while creating e-form * Complete electronic documents and reports while displaying required information enlarged on second screen
All twelve participants reported that they frequently viewed document s side by side with the dual monitors, compared to only three with the single 19” monitor. One Classification (A) reported doubling their production and output, another reported being able to conduct interviews at a faster rate, and a third reported being able to reduce their case work time from 90 to 45 minutes.
Increased Accuracy
Being able to view required information while completing forms, electronic documents and reports improved accuracy. Also, being able to view multiple systems simultaneously made it possible to view time sensitive information, while reviewing other documents.
Decreased Print Volume
Ten of the twelve participants reported a decrease in the amount of documents that needed to be printed, on average by 44%.
Reduced Body Strain, Stress and Fatigue
Nine of the twelve participants reported reduced body strain, tension and fatigue. Dual monitor accomplished this by: * Reducing the amount of toggling between documents and systems, * Enlarging document font by viewing each document on a 19” monitor versus displaying two documents on a single 19” monitor, * Reducing mouse movement , and * Simplifying the process by reducing the number of steps required to display documents side by side
One Classification A commented “…able to work longer periods of time with more being accomplished. It was less stressful and I was able to work longer without fatigue”. The only participants that did not report improvement was one person in Classification A and two in Classification B that recommended the 24” monitor. The two Classification B testers that recommended the 24” monitor reported that it was difficult to properly set-up the dual monitors resulting in an increase in neck and eye strain over the 24” for viewing a single document. Single 24” Monitor
Ten of the twelve participants stated that the 24” monitor provided significant benefits over the single 19” monitor. Participants reported that the main benefit of the 24” was being able to more easily read documents with larger font which resulted in a reduction of eye strain and fatigue and one person reported fewer headaches. Five of the twelve participants reported a reduction in the amount of documents that they printed by 5-75% and five participants reported a 5-20% increase in productivity. One of the participants that recommended the 24” over the dual monitors requested a 26” monitor due to eye sight problems. Most participants felt that the 24” monitor is still not large enough to view side by side documents on the same monitor. Needless printing of documents and switching between screens were still needed with the 24” monitor, but drastically reduced with dual monitors.
Recommendation
The project team is recommending that at a minimum, an additional 19” monitor be purchased and installed for both Classification A and B. Our new system has increased the processing time for these classifications and they would benefit the most from the additional screen surface and functionality. Also, it may be beneficial to provide dual monitors for other classifications. A 24” monitor for the second screen surface provides additional benefits, however it may be cost prohibitive since they are more than twice the price of a 19” monitor. Upon completion of the monitor study, several of the participants noted that they missed the 2nd monitor and it was particularly difficult to go back to one monitor. The results from the monitor study, supports one of the participant’s comment, “Installing the dual 19” monitors the sooner the better for increased efficiency and productivity in order to get the most out of the programs we are currently using” .