A strategy for human factors/ergonomics: developing the discipline and profession

Abstract

Human factors/ergonomics (HFE) has great potential to contribute to the design of all kinds of systems with people (work systems, product/service systems), but faces challenges in the readiness of its market and in the supply of high-quality applications. HFE has a unique combination of three fundamental characteristics: (1) it takes a systems approach (2) it is design driven and (3) it focuses on two closely related outcomes: performance and well-being. In order to contribute to future system design, HFE must demonstrate its value more successfully to the main stakeholders of system design. HFE already has a strong value proposition (mainly well-being) and interactivity with the stakeholder group of ‘system actors’ (employees and product/service users). However, the value proposition (mainly performance) and relationships with the stakeholder groups of ‘system experts’ (experts fromtechnical and social sciences involved in system design), and ‘system decision makers’ (managers and other decision makers involved in system design, purchase, implementation and use), who have a strong power to influence system design, need to be developed. Therefore, the first main strategic direction is to strengthen the demand for high-quality HFE by increasing awareness among powerful stakeholders of the value of high-quality HFE by communicating with stakeholders, by building partnerships and by educating stakeholders. The second main strategic direction is to strengthen the application of high-quality HFE by promoting the education of HFE specialists, by ensuring high-quality standards of HFE applications and HFE specialists, and by promoting HFE research excellence at universities and other organisations. This strategy requires cooperation between the HFE community at large, consisting of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), local (national and regional) HFE societies, and HFE specialists. We propose a joint world-wide HFE development plan, in which the IEA takes a leadership role.

Practitioner Summary: Human factors/ergonomics (HFE) has much to offer by addressing major business and societal challenges regarding work and product/service systems. HFE potential, however, is underexploited. This paper presents a strategy for the HFE community to strengthen demand and application of high-quality HFE, emphasising its key elements: systems approach, design driven, and performance and well-being goals.

Keywords:

• human factors/ergonomics discipline
• human factors/ergonomics profession
• future of ergonomics
• work systems
• product/service systems
• performance

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank many human factors/ergonomics specialists who have provided their personal input to the work of the committee and/or who commented on earlier versions of this paper: F. Javier Llaneza Alvarez, ArcelorMittal, Spain; Alexey Anokhin, National Research Nuclear University ‘MEPhI', Russia; Tomas Berns, Ergolab AB, Sweden; Verna Blewett, University of South Australia, Australia; Guy André Boy, Florida Institute of Technology, USA; Bob Bridger, INM, UK; Ole Broberg, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark; Alexander Burov, Institute of Gifted Child, Ukraine; David C. Caple, David Caple & Associates, Australia; Alan Chan, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Wen-Ruey Chang, Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, USA; Pierre-Henri Dejean, University of Technology of Compiègne, France; Mica Endsley, SA Technologies, USA; Patricia Ferrara, Technoserve Inc., Mozambique; Margo Fraser, Association of Canadian Ergonomists, Canada; Yushi Fujita, Research Department, Japan; Somnath Gangopadhyay, University of Calcutta, India; Sylva Gilbertova, SAZ, Czech Republic; Matthias Göbel, Rhodes University, South Africa; José Orlando Gomes, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Richard Goossens, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands; Alan Hedge, Cornell University, USA; Martin Helander, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Magne Helland, Buskerud University College, Norway; Veerle Hermans, IDEWE and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium; François Hubault, Université Paris 1, France; Sheue-Ling Hwang, National Tsing-Hua University, Taiwan; Andrew S. Imada, A. S. Imada & Associates, USA; Christina Jonsson, Swedish Work Environment Authority, Sweden; Halimahtun Khalid, Damai Sciences Sdn Bhd, Malaysia; Jung-Yong Kim, Hanyang University, South Korea; Karsten Kluth, University of Siegen, Germany; Kazutaka Kogi, Institute for Science of Labour, Japan; Ernst Koningsveld, TNO, The Netherlands; Rabiya Lallani, Human Factors North Inc., Canada; Johan Molenbroek, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands; Karen Lange Morales, National University of Colombia, Colombia; John Lee, University of Wisconsin, USA; Jean-Luc Malo, Vincent Ergonomie, Canada; Nicolas Marmaras, National Technical University of Athens, Greece; Svend Erik Mathiassen, University of Gävle, Sweden; Dave Moore, SCION Research, New Zealand; Dimitris Nathanael, National Technical University of Athens, Greece; Patrick Neumann, Ryerson University, Canada; Ian Noy, Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, USA; Clas-Hakan Nygard, Tampere University, Finland; Enrico Occhipinti, University of Milan, Italy; Ahmet F. Őzok, Istanbul Kültür University, Turkey; Gunther Paul, University of South Australia, Australia; Ruud Pikaar, Ergos Engineering & Ergonomics, Netherlands; Anna Ptackova, Skoda, Czech Republic; David Rempel, University of California, USA; Luz Mercedes Saenz, University Pontificia Bolivariana, Colombia; Martha Helena Saravia, Pontifical University Javeriana, Colombia; Christopher Schlick, Aachen University, Germany; Schu Schutte, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, South Africa; Patricia Scott, Rhodes University, South Africa; Paul Settels, ING, the Netherlands; Barbara Silverstein, SHARP - Washington State Department of Labor & Industries, USA; Marcelo Soares, Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil; Cláudia Stamato, PUC-Rio - Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Carol Stuart-Buttle, Stuart-Buttle Ergonomics, USA; Andrew Thatcher, University of Witwaterstrand, South Africa; Andrew Todd, Rhodes University, South Africa; Takashi Toriizuka, Nihon University, Japan; John Walter, Technoserve Inc., Mozambique; Eric Min-Yang Wang, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan; Christine Waring, Latrobe Regional Hospital, Australia; Klaus J. Zink, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany; Moustafa Zouinar, Orange labs – France telecom, France; Gert Zülch, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany.

 Furthermore, input was received from a group of 17 PhD candidates and professors of the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (CNAM), Paris, France. Roger Haslam (editor of Ergonomics) and three anonymous reviewers are thanked for their comments. Financial support for this project was provided by the International Ergonomics Association (IEA).

Notes

1. In the present paper, we consider ‘ergonomics' and ‘human factors' to be synonymous, and we adopt the IEA definition of the discipline (IEA 2000): ‘Ergonomics (or human factors) is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of the interactions among humans and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theoretical principles, data and methods to design in order to optimise human well-being and overall system performance.’ To identify the discipline throughout this paper, we have selected the name ‘human factors/ergonomics' (HFE). By accepting this definition, we also accept the view that HFE is a scientific discipline and not only a (multidisciplinary) approach to problem solving. We also accept that this definition reflects a more positivist rather than a more constructivist view on the discipline.

2. The committee consists of Jan Dul (Chair, Netherlands), Ralph Bruder (Germany), Peter Buckle (UK), Pascale Carayon (USA), Pierre Falzon (France), William S. Marras (USA), John R. Wilson (UK), and Bas van der Doelen (Secretary, Netherlands).

3. HFE focuses primarily on two types of systems: work systems (with workers in private or public organisations) and products (consumer or business goods or services). Traditionally ‘work' is a central issue in HFE, as indicated by the etymology of the word ergonomics (ergo = work). However, HFE is concerned with all kinds of activities that go beyond (paid) work and includes activities carried out by a range of users, e.g. customers, citizens, patients, etc. with different characteristics (e.g. age), in a range of domestic, leisure, sport, transport and other environments. When we use the words ‘work system' it includes other living systems.

4. Other contributors are the effort taken by the human independently of the environment, as well as contributions from other components of the system.

5. In this paper, we do not use the term ‘optimisation' in its mathematical meaning of finding a best available value for a given objective function. Instead, optimisation refers to finding design solutions to maximise both well-being and performance, which may require making trade-offs between both objectives.

6. By high-quality HFE we mean that the three core elements of HFE: systems approach, design driven and performance and well-being outcomes, are taken into consideration when defining problems and formulating solutions. Without these key elements, the HFE approach is limited. High-quality HFE includes approaches with a focus on specific aspects of people (e.g. physical), on specific aspects of the environment (e.g. technical), on specific outcomes (e.g. well-being), or with limited links to design, as long as limitations of the specific approach and how to tackle these are addressed (‘contextualisation'). This can be done, for example, by collaborating with other specialists, planning broader approaches at later stages, or acknowledging the limitations of problem definitions and solutions. Specific approaches may occur e.g. when the HFE specialist can have only a limited role in the design process, or when there are practical or other restrictions for a broader scope (e.g. only simple solutions are feasible), for instance, in economically developing countries (Kogi 2007). As a strategic direction, high-quality HFE approaches are preferred over limited approaches as the combination of core elements of HFE is a unique value proposition for all stakeholders.