This special issue of Ergonomics includes selected plenary addresses presented at IEA 2003 – the Fifteenth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association and the Seventh Joint Conference of the Ergonomics Society of Korea and Japan Ergonomics Society. The Congress was held in Seoul, Korea during 24 – 29 August. It was hosted by the Ergonomics Society of Korea.
The theme ‘Ergonomics in the digital age’ was chosen by the Organizing Committee to emphasize the potential for ergonomics to be at the forefront in contributing to improving the quality of life. The Congress drew participants from a substantial number of countries representing all continents. It provided an opportunity and a forum for ergonomics academicians, students, researchers and practitioners, as well as representatives from related disciplines, to gather and exchange information, knowledge and ideas.
The Congress programme included a number of plenary addresses. In selecting and inviting potential plenary speakers, an effort was made to identify eminent ergonomists who represented a broad cross section of the subject matter of the discipline. The ten papers in this issue reflect some of the breadth of the overall set of plenary addresses.
The IEA presidential address of Waldemar Karwowski, sets the scene for this special issue, as it did for the Congress. It outlines a comprehensive theoretical background for the future of ergonomics, with the concept of compatibility at its centre.
William Marras's paper concerns future research in understanding and controlling work-related low back disorders (LBDs). He points out that, over the years, knowledge of LBD causation has progressed well in traditional disciplines such as biomechanics, psychology, psychophysics, psychosocial, physiology, genetics, organizational psychology and rehabilitation. He notes, however, that work in each discipline has been exclusive of other disciplines and, as a result, the body of knowledge has progressed along research ‘silos’ where in-depth knowledge along various research tracks is defined by the boundaries of the discipline. He argues that instead of observing LBDs through the myopic lens of each discipline, there is a need to view LBD causality as a system. Further, recent work to understand the interaction between these traditional disciplines has demonstrated that many findings along these ‘silos’ are interrelated and can be explained in terms of changes in the biomechanical loading at the tissue level. He concludes that efforts to understand these interactions represent the next level of understanding causality of LBDs.
Donald Chaffin's paper advocates the need to improve current digital human models (DHMs) so that they can be more effective tools in ergonomics analysis and design. Existing DHMs are generally employed early in the product development process when attempting to improve the physical design of such systems as vehicle interiors and manufacturing workplaces. Chaffin emphasizes the need to develop future DHMs that include valid posture and motion prediction modes for a variety of populations. He argues that existing posture and motion models must be modified to take into account real motion data, so as to assure validity for simulating complex dynamic tasks. He speculates that if such prediction models are developed and used, they can be combined with psychophysical and biomechanical models to provide a powerful ergonomics design tool.
A paper by Min Chung, Inseok Lee and Dohyung Kee presents a technique for quantitative postural load assessment based on perceived discomfort for whole body manual tasks. They point out that in most manufacturing industries in Korea, workers have to repetitively assume inappropriate work postures, possibly several hundred times per day. They carried out a series of psychophysical laboratory experiments to evaluate the postural load at various joints. They then developed a postural load assessment system based on a macro-postural classification scheme that was constructed on the basis of perceived discomfort for various joint motions. Postural stress levels for the postures at individual joints were also defined by a ratio scale relative to a standing neutral posture. Results of experiments simulating automobile assembly tasks showed shoulder and low back postures to be the dominating factors in determining whole body postural stresses.
The paper by Leon Straker and Clare Pollock addresses issues in optimizing the interaction of children with information and communication technologies. The paper outlines significant changes in the lives of children in industrially advanced countries that result from increased interaction with these technologies. Potential opportunities and threats to cognitive, social, physical and visual development are reviewed, and the importance of optimizing interactions is emphasized. The authors argue that changes in children's use of technology creates both opportunities and threats for ergonomists, to be noted if the ergonomics profession is to be relevant and useful. The paper ends with a route to development and implementing guidelines regarding children's use of information and communication technologies.
The paper by Michael Wogalter explores ways in which new and emerging technologies promise to revolutionize risk communications. He employs a warning process model as a context for discussing how advances in technology can contribute to various components of the risk communication process. Examples are introduced to illustrate how technology can improve such factors as information accessibility and cognitive support. Design considerations such as interactivity, dynamic modification and personalization are discussed as applications of technology that can enhance warning effectiveness.
A paper by Klaus Zink addresses occupational health and safety as an important ergonomics topic. He notes that in many countries this topic is addressed in worker protection laws or rules. He further notes that while addressing such matters is often a legal necessity, such efforts are often viewed by management in terms of costs. He suggests that to change this image, a more positive management-oriented approach would be useful. He further recommends and explores corporate health management as a module of an integrated management system as a means of fulfilling this goal. Factors that promote and hinder the introduction of such a system are explored.
Kwan Lee's paper is concerned with how to sell ergonomics to management. He describes how and why ergonomics should be promoted in total quality management (TQM). Ergonomics and TQM activities are compared, and an approach is proposed for applying ergonomics in TQM using ergonomics circles. An eight-step approach is presented. A study employing the approach in Korea is described. He reports that applying ergonomics using ergonomics circles as quality circles in TQM was effective for improving workplaces and led to increased productivity, cost savings and improved safety.
Enhancing the Impact of Ergonomics Interventions is the title of the paper by Ernst Koningsveld, Jan Dul, Gu van Rhuyn and Peter Vink. The goal of this paper is to provide recommendations regarding ergonomics efforts in project design and evaluation. Twelve research and/or consultancy projects that included ergonomics interventions in various settings in The Netherlands were analysed to identify factors important to success. The projects included both participatory and non-participatory cases. Eight factors were identified that were important for successful project design and effectiveness. They further suggest that the impact of ergonomists will be increased if they anticipate what is important for their client, indicate effects in terms that are familiar to their client and develop skills in assessing costs and benefits.
A paper by Kawakami and Kogi reports on some of the essential roles that ergonomics has played in activities of the International Labour Organization (ILO). In particular, it describes ILO efforts to address occupational safety and health issues in industrially developing countries. The ergonomics support has focused on practical day-to-day needs at the grass-root workplace and strengthening local initiatives for improving safety and health. Action tools, such as ergonomics checklists, good example photos from local settings, group discussions and low-cost improvement guides, are examples of ways in which workers and employers have been assisted in identifying feasible solutions using locally available resources. They conclude that such efforts are essential in reducing occupational risks at various stages of industrial development.
In conclusion, it is the authors' view that the papers contained in this special issue represented significant contributions when presented as part of the programme of the Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association in Seoul, Korea. It is the authors' further belief that their appearance in this special issue of Ergonomics enables them to become a valuable part of the permanent record of the discipline.
Finally, the contributions of Eui S. Jung and Sung H. Han to the scientific programme in general and to the organization of the plenary sessions are acknowledged. Their efforts were critical to the success of the Congress.