Green ergonomics: definition and scope

This paper demonstrates that the goals of ergonomics (i.e. effectiveness, efficiency, health, safety and usability) are closely aligned with the goals of design for environmental sustainability. In this paper, the term ‘green ergonomics’ is conceptualised to specifically describe ergonomics interventions with a pro-nature emphasis. Green ergonomics is focused on the bi-directional connections between human systems and nature. This involves looking at (1) how ergonomics design and evaluation might be used to conserve, preserve, and restore nature and (2) how ecosystem services might be harnessed to facilitate the improved wellbeing and effectiveness of human systems. The paper proposes the scope of green ergonomics based on these bi-directional relationships in the areas of the design of low resource systems and products, the design of green jobs, and the design for behaviour change. Suggestions for further work in the green ergonomics domain are also made.

Practitioner Summary: Given the enormous environmental challenges facing modern industrial society, this paper encourages ergonomics science to embrace a pro-nature understanding of work design and research. This paper sets out the role for green ergonomics based on an appreciation of the human–nature connections that have been integrated with our understanding of ergonomics science and practice.     

Fitting methods to paradigms: are ergonomics methods fit for systems thinking?

Abstract

The issues being tackled within ergonomics problem spaces are shifting. Although existing paradigms appear relevant for modern day systems, it is worth questioning whether our methods are. This paper asks whether the complexities of systems thinking, a currently ubiquitous ergonomics paradigm, are outpacing the capabilities of our methodological toolkit. This is achieved through examining the contemporary ergonomics problem space and the extent to which ergonomics methods can meet the challenges posed. Specifically, five key areas within the ergonomics paradigm of systems thinking are focused on: normal performance as a cause of accidents, accident prediction, system migration, systems concepts and ergonomics in design. The methods available for pursuing each line of inquiry are discussed, along with their ability to respond to key requirements. In doing so, a series of new methodological requirements and capabilities are identified. It is argued that further methodological development is required to provide researchers and practitioners with appropriate tools to explore both contemporary and future problems.

Practitioner Summary: Ergonomics methods are the cornerstone of our discipline. This paper examines whether our current methodological toolkit is fit for purpose given the changing nature of ergonomics problems. The findings provide key research and practice requirements for methodological development.     

Translating concepts of complexity to the field of ergonomics

Since 1958 more than 80 journal papers from the mainstream ergonomics literature have used either the words ‘complex’ or ‘complexity’ in their titles. Of those, more than 90% have been published in only the past 20 years. This observation communicates something interesting about the way in which contemporary ergonomics problems are being understood. The study of complexity itself derives from non-linear mathematics but many of its core concepts have found analogies in numerous non-mathematical domains. Set against this cross-disciplinary background, the current paper aims to provide a similar initial mapping to the field of ergonomics. In it, the ergonomics problem space, complexity metrics and powerful concepts such as emergence raise complexity to the status of an important contingency factor in achieving a match between ergonomics problems and ergonomics methods. The concept of relative predictive efficiency is used to illustrate how this match could be achieved in practice. What is clear overall is that a major source of, and solution to, complexity are the humans in systems. Understanding complexity on its own terms offers the potential to leverage disproportionate effects from ergonomics interventions and to tighten up the often loose usage of the term in the titles of ergonomics papers.

Statement of Relevance: This paper reviews and discusses concepts from the study of complexity and maps them to ergonomics problems and methods. It concludes that humans are a major source of and solution to complexity in systems and that complexity is a powerful contingency factor, which should be considered to ensure that ergonomics approaches match the true nature of ergonomics problems.     

Ergonomics in Systems Design

The relationship between ergonomics and systems design is defined and its importance is stressed. The origins of systems ergonomics are described and it is suggested that the technology of ergonomics now depends primarily on the science of psychology with some importance still attached to anatomy but with physiology now of marginal relevance. The differences in approach and objectives between systems ergonomics and classical ergonomics are summarized and, although it is admitted that our expertise in these fields is not adequate for our practical responsibilities, it is concluded that the progress of science and technology in both engineering and human factors are now inter- and cross-dependent.     

Ergonomics in the past and the future: from a German perspective to an international one

Looking at the past there are more or less fragmented approaches in ergonomics as well as in management. Especially in Germany, the 'Lean Management wave' weakened ergonomics in industry. On the other hand, there is a growing demand for holistic concepts--and ergonomics can by definition be understood as holistic. Many of the newer approaches in management include ODAM or macro-ergonomics elements. In building up a stronger relationship between macro- and micro-ergonomics, the whole discipline could be promoted. This also requires the fulfillment of some preconditions like systematically gathering and presenting 'best practices', which show that ergonomics pays off.     

Many model thinking in systems ergonomics: a case study in road safety

In complexity science, the many models thinking philosophy argues for a multi-method approach to complex problems. This article investigates whether the use of multiple systems ergonomics methods to examine the same problem is useful, or whether using different approaches creates incompatible analyses. Five systems ergonomics analyses of road trauma are examined and their key insights extracted. The extent to which these insights are compatible with one another and can be integrated when attempting to reduce road trauma is assessed. The findings indicate that applying several systems ergonomics methods to the same problem is useful, as multiple insights are developed and deficiencies in one approach are countered by the others. Importantly, the case study demonstrates that the insights gained are compatible and support the development of holistic systems thinking-based interventions. In conclusion it is recommended that a many systems ergonomics model thinking approach be adopted by ergonomists working in complex problem spaces.

Practitioner Summary: Many model thinking uses multiple methods to understand complex problems. We explore whether this is beneficial in systems ergonomics. Five models of road trauma, developed using five systems ergonomics methods, are examined. The findings demonstrate that a many model systems ergonomics approach produces a diverse but complimentary set of insights.     

Putting mind and body back together: A human-systems approach to the integration of the physical and cognitive dimensions of task design and operations

As human factors and ergonomics professionals we should be considering the total context within which the person must operate when performing a task, providing a service, or using a product. We have traditionally thought of the person as having a cognitive system and a physical system and much of our scientific literature has been myopically focused on one or the other of these systems while, in general, totally ignoring the other. However, contemporary efforts have begun to recognize the rich interactions occurring between these systems that can have a profound influence on performance and dictate overall system output. In addition, modern efforts are beginning to appreciate the many interactions between the various elements of the environment that can influence the components of the human systems. The next level of sophistication in the practice of human factors and ergonomics must begin to consider the totality of the human-system behavior and performance and must consider systems design interactions which result from these collective effects. Only then will we be able to truly optimize systems for human use.     

Ergonomics in the past and the future: from a German perspective to an international one

Looking at the past there are more or less fragmented approaches in ergonomics as well as in management. Especially in Germany, the ‘Lean Management wave’ weakened ergonomics in industry. On the other hand, there is a growing demand for holistic concepts—and ergonomics can by definition be understood as holistic. Many of the newer approaches in management include ODAM or macroergonomics elements. In building up a stronger relationship between macro- and micro-ergonomics, the whole discipline could be promoted. This also requires the fulfilment of some preconditions like systematically gathering and presenting ‘best practices’, which show that ergonomics pays off.     

The role of latent and active failures in workplace slips, trips and falls: an information processing approach

The vast majority of the published workplace slips, trips and falls (STF) literature is exceedingly narrow in its focus and often ignores wider systems issues in workplace STF aetiology. There is little recognition within the published literature of the importance of latent failures or the upstream organisational and cultural contexts within which workplace STF occur. This is unfortunate, as a systems approach to workplace STF analysis, that is inclusive of latent design and work organisation factors that often shape worker behaviour patterns related to STF risk (e.g. rushing, risk taking), is fundamental to the development of effective prevention measures. The aims of this paper are to provide an understanding of workplace STF causation that is cognisant of the potential role of both active and latent failures in STF causation. The paper presents an ergonomics model for workplace STF analysis that highlights information processing in STF aetiology, the STF incident process and the interaction between latent and active failures in STF causation. The paper draws upon ergonomics research conducted in a range of occupational contexts to illustrate the key features of the model as it applies to workplace STF. Implications of the model for analysis and prevention of STF are discussed.     

Citation analysis and bibliometric research in the field of ergonomics

Given that journal impact factors now represent such a “hot” topic in the modern scientific world, it is essential that ergonomists remain fully cognizant of the citation‐based research that has been conducted in our field. This article reviews and examines bibliometric research in the ergonomics profession, ranging from seminal work on content analysis and citation indexing, to some of the latest research describing ergonomics journal lists and longitudinal impact factor trends. Overall, history has shown how citation‐based studies have become increasingly common in the ergonomics field during the past few decades, and, as we move through the 21st century, ergonomics journals continue to mature as a result. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

What do we mean by a ‘working posture’?

Abstract

No clear definition of ‘posture’ can be found in ergonomics literature. It may be regarded as the configuration of the body's head, trunk and limbs in space or as a ‘quasistatic biomechanical alignment’ (Rohmert and Mainzer 1986), depending on whether the particular context in which it is used is anatomical or biomechanical. The functional aspects of posture are highlighted by the definition of a ‘position adopted because it is appropriate for the task being performed’ (Corlett 1981). Yet, in any work situation, functional, geometric, and biomechanical aspects are as integral to the concept of posture as they are to the consequences for performance and comfort. A simple task posture model, describing the relationships between the various factors which influence working postures, is presented as an aid to workplace design, and two examples are given to show how the model can be applied to die demands of particular types of task. An analysis is also made of the factors involved in the exertion of force, including physiological, environmental, personal, and task factors, in order to give a better understanding of the influences of task and workplace on strength capability.     

Cognitive ergonomics: it's all in the mind

In this paper a distinction is made between classical ergonomics as dealing with the quality of working and cognitive ergonomics as dealing with the quality of work including the joint system products. It is argued that classical ergonomics can be seen as embracing a dualism, where the effects of work on the body are considered separately from the effects of work on the mind. This continues the mechanistic tradition of Western psychology. The aim of cognitive ergonomics is to describe (1) how work affects the mind, as well as (2) how the mind affects work. Work is all in the mind in the sense that the quality of work depends on the person's understanding of the situation (goals, means, constraints) and in the sense that the design of a worksystem depends on the designer's understanding, in particular the conceptualization of the people in the system. In cognitive ergonomics, the reliability of performance—and in particular the reliability of cognition—become central issues. The differences between classical and cognitive ergonomics are illustrated by considering two typical areas: risks at work and human-computer interaction. It is concluded that classical and cognitive ergonomics represent two complementary views of work that must be combined to meet the challenges of present day work environments.     

Ergonomics action research I: shifting from hypothesis testing to experiential learning

This paper presents the case for the need for ‘Action Research’ (AR) approaches to gain understanding of how ergonomics considerations can best be integrated into the design of new work systems. The AR researchers work collaboratively with other stakeholders to solve a real-world problem: gaining insight into the problem and factors influencing solution building from an embedded position in the development process. This experience is interpreted in terms of available theory and can support further theory development. This non-experimental approach can help provide practical new approaches for integrating ergonomics considerations into real work system design processes. The AR approach suffers from a lack of acceptance by conventionally trained scientists. This paper aims to help overcome this weakness by developing the underlying theory and rationale for using AR approaches in ergonomics research. We propose further development of hybrid approaches which incorporate other evaluation techniques to extend the knowledge gains from AR projects.

Practitioner Summary: Researchers should engage directly with organisations in ergonomics projects so that they can better understand the challenges and needs of practitioners who are trying to apply available scientific knowledge in their own unique context. Such ‘Action Research’ could help develop theory and approaches useful to improve mobilisation and application of ergonomics knowledge in organisations.     

Progress in systems ergonomics: a selective review

Abstract

The 1967 conference on the Human Operator in Complex Systems identified several developments required in systems ergonomics. Progress in four areas requiring development is reviewed, based on information from workshops and surveys of applications of systems ergonomics in military systems. It is concluded that there has been less progress than might have been hoped in the use of systems relevant criteria in systems ergonomics. Few applications have involved trade-offs between selection, training and equipment design. Task analysis techniques have not advanced, although their use may be changing. Although there appears to be general agreement on the major activities associated with systems ergonomics, the emphasis placed on those different activities may be changing as a result of technological developments. However, these technological developments are now providing opportunities for systems ergonomists to improve their tools and techniques.     

Ergonomics capability in product design and development: an organizational analysis

This paper suggests that the emergence and development of ergonomics capability in product design and development can be understood as a dynamic process of innovation, which is shaped by a combination of forces both internal and external to an organization. The comparative case study method was used to focus on six organizations (three pairs) operating from a manufacturing base in New Zealand. Data were collected from in-depth interviews, documents, archival sources and through observation. A framework for understanding the emergence and development of ergonomics capability in product design and development is presented. While ergonomics capability is a core concept in the model, four other major elements are identified. These are staffing routines, top management orientation, organizational configuration, and the external environment.     

The ergonomics of computer aided design within advanced manufacturing technology

Many manufacturing companies have now awakened to the significance of computer aided design (CAD), although the majority of them have only been able to purchase computerised draughting systems of which only a subset produce direct manufacturing data. Such companies are moving steadily towards the concept of computer integrated manufacture (CIM), and this demands CAD to address more than draughting. CAD architects are thus having to rethink the basic specification of such systems, although they typically suffer from an insufficient understanding of the design task and have consequently been working with inadequate specifications. It is at this fundamental level that ergonomics has much to offer, making its contribution by encouraging user-centred design. The discussion considers the relationships between CAD and: the design task; the organisation and people; creativity; and artificial intelligence. It finishes with a summary of the contribution of ergonomics.     

Quo vadis, neuroergonomics?

The current paper considers a new perspective in research and designing which ergonomics is facing at present. It is related to a spectacular progress in neuroscience. Implementing both the latest research results concerning the functioning of neural systems and new non-invasive techniques of brain examination in ergonomics constitutes a serious challenge and, simultaneously, offers unprecedented opportunities for the discipline. This paper posits that assuming a neuroergonomic perspective in ergonomic research and designing leads to a new quality. Knowledge concerning neural structures and mechanisms responsible for behavioural, cognitive and emotional activity will force out the knowledge based on psychological constructs from the field of ergonomics. We are questioning the perception of neuroergonomics as a discipline which resorts to psychological constructs. We are postulating rejecting such constructs in neuroergonomic field as too general in their formulation of certain regularities and failing to ensure satisfying accuracy of measurement.     

Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science,engineering, design,technology and management of human-compatible systems

This paper provides a theoretical perspective on human factors and ergonomics (HFE), defined as a unique and independent discipline that focuses on the nature of human-artefact interactions, viewed from the unified perspective of the science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Such systems include a variety of natural and artificial products, processes and living environments. The distinguishing features of the contemporary HFE discipline and profession are discussed and a concept of ergonomics literacy is proposed. An axiomatic approach to ergonomics design and a universal measure of system-human incompatibility are also introduced. It is concluded that the main focus of the HFE discipline in the 21st century will be the design and management of systems that satisfy human compatibility requirements.     

Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems

This paper provides a theoretical perspective on human factors and ergonomics (HFE), defined as a unique and independent discipline that focuses on the nature of human-artefact interactions, viewed from the unified perspective of the science, engineering, design, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Such systems include a variety of natural and artificial products, processes and living environments. The distinguishing features of the contemporary HFE discipline and profession are discussed and a concept of ergonomics literacy is proposed. An axiomatic approach to ergonomics design and a universal measure of system-human incompatibility are also introduced. It is concluded that the main focus of the HFE discipline in the 21st century will be the design and management of systems that satisfy human compatibility requirements.     

Virtual environments applications and applied ergonomics

The usability of virtual environments has attracted considerable efforts from ergonomists. Work has included studies of the side or after effects of participation in a virtual environment (VE) as well as the appropriateness of the Virtual Reality hardware and software interfaces and the understanding of factors which determine participant performance. Equally important for applied ergonomics is to understand how best to specify, build, implement and evaluate virtual environment solutions to everyday industrial, commercial, educational and medical problems. The potential value of ergonomics applied to virtual environments, and vice versa, are discussed. Two particular instances of VE development relevant to applied ergonomics are described - structured development and evaluation of industrial training and participatory redesign of workplaces. This paper is one of a number of contributions to a special issue on ergonomics in the study and use of virtual environments.