Human Factors Engineering Steps. 

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... in the overall project realization period general overview of project organization (management, engineering contractors, con- sultants) Structuring HFE in the project • position and responsibility of HFE within the project organization • hours by HFE and/or made under full responsibility of HFE • % of the project investment influenced directly by ergonomics • type and extent of user participation Ergonomic topics; main topics elaborated within the project. • has the main emphasis been on: job design, workplace design, interaction design? For this item a list of topics could be prescribed; example of items: job, workplace, interaction, manual handling, graphics, anthro- pometrics. • number of different jobs involved • number of different workplaces involved? • procedural: role of other disciplines (archi- tect, engineering), responsibilities, management of user input, and so on. Project phases - Ergonomic engineering steps • project phases that included ergonomics (refer to figure 2) • ergonomic engineering steps (1 – 8) carried out (refer to figure 3), and to what extent. • techniques applied for each of the ergonomic engineering steps. Lessons learnt • projects’ motive to hire HFE • did HFE live up to the expectations • typical results, i.e. a summary of expected and unexpected outcomes of the HFE contribution to the project • cost/benefit: has it been worthwhile to include ergonomics. • lessons learnt on the level of the project. • lessons learnt regarding ergonomic methods and ...

Context 2

... such as human factors engineering (HFE), design for all, or participatory ergonomics. Here, ergonomics will be used as an overall term. Unsafe, unhealthy, uncomfortable or inefficient work situations can be avoided by taking into ac- count the limitations of human beings during design. Ergonomics contributes to the prevention of incon- veniences and, to a considerable degree, improves system performance in terms of an increased productivity: good ergonomics is good economics [13]. Dul and Neumann [1,2] assume that most ergonomics research and consultancy deals with the well-being goal of ergonomics, i.e. occupational safety and health. In many countries this will be closely linked to legislation. Hence, companies may experience ergonomics as extrinsic and therefore will not spon- taneously start ergonomic initiatives. Dul suggests to link ergonomics to business strategies and goals, such as: − reduce costs and increase productivity; − maximize the use of valuable, rare, and costly human resources; − design products for (easy) manufacturing; − integrate ergonomics into production engineering; − corporate communication; i.e. ergonomically designed products and/or the company's corporate social responsibility. After many years, working as a professional ergonomist, the author concludes that the value of ergonomics is beyond health and safety. Marketing ergonomics implies a focus on business performance and investment projects: the design, redesign, or exten- sion of production systems. It is then by definition that ergonomists are not the only profession involved. Projects are run by teams of engineers, managers, and in some cases human factors engineers. Ergonomists, i.e. registered professionals, partici- pating in projects need to know something about medical sciences, biomechanics, cognitive sciences, behavioral sciences, and industrial design. He/she also needs a background in one or several engineering sciences. Because this combination is almost im- possible to achieve, the professional ergonomist re- lies heavily on methodology, in particular for analyses, design and engineering, i.e. the process of systems design. According to de Looze and Pikaar [4], there is a gap between HF science and HF practice. For example, scientists develop reliable but time consuming task analysis methods, while industry (the project owner) expects quick answers. Another example concerns task allocation and job design: do the ergonomists really have efficient techniques to predict work load and to design jobs? It appears we still are on the level of debating terminology (task versus function allocation). The problem of acceptance by industry, and the is- sue of a gap between research and practice can be solved by showing achievements. Best practices have been developed in the field. Cost benefit balances are available. As a consequence there is a need to get access to case material, other than formal scientific publications, because in general, journals do not accept case studies. A systems ergonomics approach can be realized successfully in practice, provided ergonomists adapt to the company’s strategy and standard engineering procedures. One of the first and well documented projects, using this approach has been the Exxon FLEXICOKER Consolidated Central Control Room project [8, 10]. The project scope included job design, local work organization design, and an extensive user participation program. The schematic of figure 1 has been a scientific product of this industrial project. It emphasizes the integration of technical and organizational design, as suggested by Singletons Ergonomics in System Design [12]. The ergonomic phases, problem definition, situation analysis and task allocation, could successfully be related to major industrial engineering phases, i.e. Design Basis, Design Specification, and Detailed Engineering and construction (Pikaar [6]). The systems ergonomics approach has been the basis for many successful projects. However, the presentation can be improved: − Task allocation steps are difficult to substantiate because there is little guidance (theory) on this topic. Task allocation is difficult to explain to engineers and project managers. Usually, job design is not associated with ergonomics. − In practice, one will experience a difficulty to explain why so much time has to spend on a task analysis of an existing situation, while working on a "new" project. − Apparently, figure 1 stipulates that the largest part of the ergonomics work is done before the actual workplace design is even started. This is not in line with the general expectations. Though the systems ergonomics approach didn't change over several decades, the presentation did. One could say that the marketing of the ergonomic contributions to projects has changed. In order to illustrate this, figure 2 shows a generalized overview of project phases. Terminology may differ, depend- ing on culture, country, and type of industry or organization. Figure 3 gives a recent overview of the presentation of ergonomic engineering steps. Some changes made to the original schematic of figure 1 are: − The term engineering or Human Factors Engineering is now frequently used. − The general project phases and the ergonomic engineering steps are presented in two parallel flows. Related to each project phase, a typical ergonomic input or activity (step) is specified. In case the ergonomic input starts several project phases later then indicated in the schematics, still every ergonomic engineering step has to be taken, preferably catching up with the main project phasing, as fast as possible. − Phase 3 and 4, respectively Step 3 and 4, are a condensed version of the Allocation Phase; typical ergonomics terminology (such as allocation ) to be avoided in real projects. − In many cases, the ergonomics contribution ended before or after detailed design (now Phase 5/ step 5). This step has been expanded by guid- ing the realization steps construction, commissioning and evaluation. The feasibility step typically includes a review of project owners’ human factors assumptions. There may be assumptions regarding work load, level of automation, capabilities of operators, and so on. For the HFE it is important to be aware of such assumptions, and if needed, give feed-back on a general level. For example one could temper a too optimistic view on the number of operators needed. This step starts with a general description of the project and the purpose of the system to be designed. The outline of the design steps have to be negotiated with project management, including design con- straints. The aim of the situation analysis is to gain insight in existing and future tasks. A situation analysis includes activities such as: − collect formal documents, specifying the existing system; − analyze the existing situation by observations and interviews about work tasks, problems the users experience, and wishes they might have for the new situation; − gather relevant knowledge on the new system (the system to be designed). Ergonomists have many tools available for an analysis, as can be found in textbooks on methodology. A careful selection has to be made. Within a project, there is only a need for detailed knowledge on tasks and topics relevant to the project. For example, there is no need assess manual lifting situations in a logistics department, if a project concerns full mechanization of packaging. In theory, the functional design specification is about the allocation of system tasks. An allocation procedure includes a discussion on the level of automation, job requirements, and the design of a local work organization. Following, a program of functional design requirements has to be drafted, including amongst others: − the allocation of tasks to workplaces; − the lay out of a system; − shape and size of workstations (including equip- ment); − environmental requirements (noise reduction, lighting levels). On the basis of a set of functional design requirements, various design solutions can be developed. Choices have to be made, which implies weighing all aspects involved, including ergonomics. Basic deci- sions regarding the detailed engineering may be based on 3D-drawings, mock-up evaluations, or pro- totyping. During the construction phase the production system is being build. Typically, this will start with the production of workshop drawings and building-site drawings. For example, from an ergonomic point of view assistance in making workshop drawings for dedicated furniture, may be required. An example to illustrate the relevance of a HFE contribution can be found in dedicated operator consoles. During the earlier steps, a 3 meter wide console may have been developed with two supporting legs, one on either side. The workshop engineer decides that an additional leg will be needed and locates this leg exactly in the middle of the console. This happens to be the central work position of the operator, thus reducing his leg room. This type of “errors” can be avoided, if the HFE reviews the construction drawings. Once the system is finished, formal hand over (commissioning) of a working (and tested) system to the project owner will be organized. Typically, an ergonomist could be involved in the review of all workplace and interaction oriented parts of a system. Ideally, an evaluation of the running system, for example resulting in operational feed-back on design, engineering and management of the project should be organized. This is not common procedure in industry, The project owner does not hire the ergonomists after the project, to do an evaluation study. Pikaar reported 12 ergonomics projects [in 6, 7 and 9]. For all these projects the system ergonomics process steps as presented above, were used to structure the reports. Summarizing, the following items have been included in each case study report. The same approach and listing can also be found in the case book Enhancing ...