1 Design Research Centre, Colour and Imaging Institute, University of Derby, .... and ADECT (for the automotive industry), have been developed to encourage ...
Ergonomics: it’s never too soon to start Andrée Woodcock1 and Margaret Galer Flyte2 Design Research Centre, Colour and Imaging Institute, University of Derby, 2 Ergonomics and Design Group, Department of Human Sciences, Loughborough University, U.K. 1
Abstract The field of product design is highly competitive, with increasing pressure placed on designers to develop products which meet user requirements and achieve competitive advantage. It has long been appreciated that engineers and designers do not use ergonomics information as effectively and efficiently as they might, to the detriment of the final product. A number of ways have been proposed to increase the use of ergonomics information in concept design such as developing design support tools or increasing the accessibility of ergonomics texts. Another approach is to increase ergonomics input in the curriculum at all levels of education (i.e. primary, secondary and tertiary). By doing this future designers and engineers will have a predisposition towards user centred issues. This paper considers the relationship of ergonomics to design, reviews integration of ergonomics in the product design process and looks at current ergonomics education in schools and universities. 1.0 Introduction The term ‘ergonomics’ or ‘human factors’ refers to "designing for human use" [1]. Ergonomics focuses on human beings and their interaction with products, equipment, facilities, procedures and environments and how the design of artefacts might influence them. It seeks to produce objects people use and the environments in which they use them that better match the capabilities, limitations, and needs of people. “Every design project concerns the construct of an object which will interact with people in one way or another, and an understanding of this relationship is vital to the project’s success”, [2]. Ergonomics requires the systematic application to the design of information about human capabilities, limitations, characteristics, behaviour and motivation and information about anticipated usage. This information, when applied early in the design process can serve as a basis for developing the design brief into a concept design and can be used to structure product investigation and the evaluation of the final artefact. As we move into the global market of the next century, with discerning consumers expecting products to excite and delight them, the success of British Design will require the development of tools and techniques to support designers in their understanding and application of user issues to their designs. “Knowledge of
human factors will become increasingly important in the make up of these future design teams” [3] where the user must be of central concern. For this reason, potential designers should be trained to take a user centred approach from the start of the design process. The following section provides a review of why this is important and identifies issues which have prevented the application of ergonomics in product and engineering design, before considering current and future solutions. 2.0 Ergonomics and Design To be most effective, ergonomics should be incorporated early in the design life cycle. This has been shown to reduce problems of usage, and to increase the acceptance and functionality of the finished product [4]. When changes to the design are made later in the development cycle they are reactive and preventative [5] rather than proactive i.e. attempts to correct inadequate and inappropriate features; they are more likely to be superficial; they become more costly [6] as interdependencies increase (such as time, retooling and emotional commitment to a particular design). As part of their training, would-be designers receive some lectures in ergonomics [7]. However, once they become practitioners, ergonomics and user requirements might not be considered with the same degree of rigour and importance. This is because ergonomics becomes one of a host of factors considered during design rather than a guiding principle. Practising designers rely on their own experience [8], rules of thumb, the ability of users to adapt themselves or the artefact to alleviate problems brought about by poor design, and the prominence of appearance and styling in influencing purchase. Ergonomics is still not fully integrated into product design and engineering environments. Reasons cited for this can be grouped into four broad headings [9]: Presentation problems: ergonomics information is difficult to find; the method of presentation (formal language, text and tables) is not always compatible with the designers requirements. Corporate structure: neglect of ergonomics in the product brief [10]; the flow of information around the organisation - information about users might be collected by Marketing Department does not necessarily pass to the Design Department. Education: In design (and engineering design in particular), the user is frequently seen as an aside to mainstream activity - an unwanted entity, frequently of the wrong shape, who obtrudes on the artefact. Designers are still content to design around themselves and their own experiences, [8]. They still believe that appearance and styling influence purchase to a greater extent than ergonomics [11], also “the design engineer is the ‘gatekeeper’ for developmental inputs: his attitude toward behavioural factors determines in a large part whether or not they will be incorporated into the design.” [12]. The nature of ergonomics: research findings and techniques cannot always be applied, without adjustment, to particular design problems which might arise during system development.
A knowledge that products might be failing in the market place because of poor ergonomics has provided an incentive for understanding its use in design. Fortunately, this has resulted in increased employment for ergonomists in some industries. In cases where this is not the case other means of increasing the use of ergonomics in current and future design practice must be developed. We will now look at attempts which are being made (mainly on the part of ergonomists) to address these problems. Development of tools and techniques to support the design practitioner. These include the development of web pages [9] and databases containing ergonomics information which are presented in a manner compatible with designers requirements [13]; the use of CAD packages and virtual reality to ensure the faster delivery of ergonomics solutions e.g. to improve interior ergonomics of automobiles. Process support tools such as HUFIT (for the information technology industry) and ADECT (for the automotive industry), have been developed to encourage and support the systematic discussion of user, task and environmental issues relevant to all potential product users, by members of the design team, at the concept stages of design [11]. Organisational issues. These require the commitment of organisations to make structural changes; proposing human factors studies which will have an impact on design; the use of localised experts and usability champions [14] within departments to foster user centred design and tackle ergonomics issues as and when they arrive; and the development of an atmosphere of collaboration, [15] where ideas can be freely discussed. Educational Issues: ‘There are barriers of language and philosophy to be overcome between ergonomists and non ergonomists before ergonomic considerations can feature predominantly in design projects’, [16]. Besides acting as a scientist the ergonomist should play a role as a specialised designer and understand the whole process which s/he is supporting. [17] highlighted changes which were required in human factors education at a tertiary level; •
ergonomics courses should be offered to all business and technology (and engineering) students with a focus on enabling them to conduct their own human factors investigations,
•
postgraduate level modules (or vocational courses) in ergonomics should be available to those destined for senior management as it is graduates at this level who will be making key decision.
•
joint degree courses so that ergonomics can be applied to the problems faced by a sector of the workplace, speak the same language as the professionals, and help them in meeting company targets.
•
training researchers and future teachers is seen as a means of guaranteeing the status of ergonomics amongst other sciences and humanities and the manner in which it is applied by practitioners, [18].
All these solutions will undoubtedly help to encourage and foster environments in which ergonomics can be used more effectively, especially during the crucial early design stages. However, if designers and engineers are only introduced to ergonomics late in their education, it will always remain just another factor which has to be considered. [19] commented that designers’ knowledge controls the generation of ideas, and these should be based on past experience. If design is based on knowledge, then the locus of integration of ergonomics with engineering should be in the designer’s head. Tertiary education can train the potential designer and engineer in the use and application of ergonomics techniques, but primary and secondary education can provide a foundation for this. 3.0 Developing a predisposition for user centred design With the recent introduction of Design and Technology in the National Curriculum, a place is being found for ergonomics in both primary and secondary education, in relation to investigation and evaluation stages in particular. For example, in terms of evaluation: ‘pupils should be taught to evaluate their design ideas as these develop, bearing in mind the users and the purpose for which the product is intended, and indicate ways of improving their ideas, [20]. and in relation to making skills: ‘pupils should be taught to evaluate their products, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and carrying out appropriate tests e.g. on strength, user reaction, function. [20]. [21] points out that young children start school already able to design and make, through their everyday interactions with the world. Part of this ability is a concern for users in their designs. This might be relatively simplistic, e.g. making sure that the LEGO ‘person’ fits into the house, that the layout of an emergency hospital is satisfactory for both patient and doctor. As [22] observed at Key Stage 1,children handle user issues “more than at any other Key Stage. They easily empathise with the users of their designs.” They are indeed ‘natural born ergonomists’. However, with the progression from primary to secondary school there is a marked change in the way in which user issues are tackled, with users being far more important at Key Stage 2 than Key Stage 3. In supporting Design and Technology (or Design and Make) much attention has been placed on modelling the design activity adopted by young children e.g. [23]. These models do not always map on to the observed behaviour of novice problem solvers who have additional problems in actualising their design ideas in any concrete form. Models of the design process do not map very well on to the behaviour of experienced designers either. A structured understanding of the design process is necessary for educators and resource developers to understand, support and progress the activities in which children are engaged. This is important if ergonomics and user centred design are to be adequately supported throughout the Key Stages.
The National Curriculum does stress the need for user centred design. However, the swing away from the consideration of user centred issues in the later Key Stages might point to an emphasis on planning, modelling and making, and the need to develop skills associated with these, at the expense of ergonomics and evaluation. There is also evidence to suggest that children (11-14 year olds) need more support for their work, as they complain of the artificiality of teacher set tasks, that the products they make are rarely useful, frequently not finished and in many cases ‘lost’ [24]. Crucial to supporting the use of ergonomics in the later Key Stages is the need to develop resource material to support teachers, who might not have any knowledge of the design process or ‘designerly thinking’, and be unsure of the best way of channelling creative design. Such support material could, for instance be in the form of: •
design projects; rather than the rote reproduction of preconceived forms for the sake of technique, students could be encouraged to deconstruct the problem, starting with a consideration of ergonomic problems which could lead to the development of different design solutions, which can then be evaluated and compared with the original solutions e.g. [25]. Design projects available from Internet sites have the additional bonus of allowing children to correspond with others who might have worked on similar projects,
•
the development of curriculum material on ergonomics which matches the needs, requirements and interests of its readers e.g. [2],
•
the application of ergonomics tools and techniques (e.g. focus groups, interviews, anthropometric measurements) which take into account the knowledge and skills which need to be acquired at each Key Stage.
4.0 Conclusions This paper has considered some of the ways in which practising designers and engineers can be encouraged to use ergonomics, and the ways in which ergonomics courses can be designed to link ergonomics more closely with the needs of industry. It is encouraging to see that user centred design is considered in the National Curriculum as part of Design and Technology. If we can instil the notion of user centred design from early childhood, designers and engineers will continue this approach throughout their careers. In order to develop this area further, we would advocate: 1.Explicit mention of user issues, especially during concept, investigation and evaluation stages. 2. Observation of children’s understanding and application of user requirements in their everyday activities as well as design projects per se. 3. Development of curriculum material to support teachers. 4. Reversal of the shift in emphasis away from the user in secondary education. Given that Design and Technology as a curriculum subject is still very much in its infancy and that there is a need to increase the usage of ergonomics in design and
engineering, future work should be instigated into studying and fostering the use of ergonomics and user centred design by children throughout their primary and secondary education. If this strategy is adopted there will be an increase in understanding of the needs of different users and a predisposition to adopt user centred design which will lead to more usable and successful products. References 1 Sanders M. S. & McCormick E. J., (1992), Human Factors in Engineering and Design, 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill Inc. New York. 2 Garner, S. (1991), Human Factors, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 3 Fulton, J. (1990), “Design in Primary Education: the Name of the Game”, in Issues in Design Education, (Ed.) D. Thistlewood, Longman, U.K., 8189. 4 Lim, K. Y., Long, J. B. and N. Silcock (1992),“Integrating human factors with the Jackson System Development method: an illustrated overview,” Ergonomics, 35 (10), 1135-1161. 5 Simpson, G. C. and Mason, S. (1983), “Design aids for designers; an effective role for ergonomics”, Applied Ergonomics, 14, 3, 177 - 183. 6 Grudin, J., Erhlich, S. F., Shriner, R. (1987), “Positioning human factors in the user interface development chain”, CHI and GI, ACM Press, New York, 125 - 131. 7 Woodcock, A. and Galer Flyte, M. D. (1997),”Development of computer based tools to support the use of ergonomics in design practice”, Digital Creativity, 8, vol 3 & 4, 113 – 120. 8 Pheasant, S. (1986), Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics and Design, Taylor & Francis, London, Washington DC. 9 Woodcock, A. and Galer Flyte, M. (1998b), “Supporting the integration of ergonomics in an engineering design environment,” Proceedings of the ‘Tools and Methods in Concurrent Engineering’98’ Conference, 152 – 166. 10 Meister, D. and Farr, D. E. (1967), “The utilisation of human factors information by designers,” Human Factors, February, 71- 87 11 Woodcock, A. and Galer Flyte, M. D. (1998a), “Supporting Ergonomics in Automotive Design”, International Journal of Vehicle Design, 19, 4, 504522. 12 Meister, D. (1982), “Human factors problems and solutions,” Applied Ergonomics, 13,3,219-223. 13 Lincoln, J. E. and Boff, K. R. (1988), “Making behavioural data useful for system design applications: Development of the engineering data compendium,” Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, 32nd Annual Meeting, 1021-1025. 14 Mrazek, D. and Rafeld, M. (1992),”Integrating Human factors on a Large Scale: Product usability Champions,” CHI’92, ACM, May 3-7, 565- 570. 15 Haslegrave, C. M. and Holmes, K. (1994), “Integrating ergonomics and engineering,” Applied Ergonomics, 25, 4, 211-220.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Brown, S. C. (1985), “Design ergonomics; art, science or technology,” in I. D. Brown (ed.) Ergonomics, International’85 (Taylor and Francis; London), 337-339. Shapiro, R. G. (1995), “How can Human Factors education meet industry needs”, Ergonomics in Design, p32. Kuorinka, I. (1997), “Ergonomics in the future: the next leg,” Proceedings of International Ergonomics Association Conference '97, Tampere, Finland, June 1997, vol. 4, 19-21. Stauffer, L.A., Ullman, D. G. and Dietterich, T. G. (1987),”Protocol analysis of mechanical engineering design”, ICED’87, 74 – 85. Department for Education (DfE) (1995), Design and Technology in the National Curriculum, London: HMSO. Baynes, K. (1992), Children Designing, Loughborough University of Technology, Loughborough. Kimbell, R., Stables, K. and Green, R. (1996), Understanding Practice in Design and Technology, Open University Press, Philadelphia. Johnsey, R. (1995),”The Design Process - Does it Exist?” International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 5, 199-217. Murphy, P., Hennessy, S., McCormick, R. and Davidson, M. (1996), “Problem solving in design and technology – how to foster it,” Primary Science Review, 42, 24- 27. Hudson, T. (1990), “Creative Technology”, in Issues in Design Education, (Ed.) D. Thistlewood, Longman, U.K., 100 – 109.
