An Ergonomic Ergonomics Evaluation

Welcome to Office ErgoSpeak, the new Situs blog of all things office ergonomics.

– an ergonomic ergonomics evaluation?

In building our new website, an interesting question came up again that is a great place to start our conversation: “When is it proper to use the term ergonomic versus the term ergonomics?”

The simple answer is:

Ergonomic (adjective) = as in preceding something that has the characteristics of something designed for human use to do work.  For example, the usage “ergonomic keyboard.”

Ergonomics (noun) = as in the field of study or pertaining to the science of how humans do work.  For example, the usage “ergonomics evaluation”.

An “ergonomic evaluation” would be an evaluation done in an ergonomic way, not necessarily about the field of ergonomics. In fact, how to do ergonomics evaluations ergonomically is one of the things I cover when I teach the Train the Evaluator class. I am a big fan of the 3-point stance, provided that the knees can handle it, to help protect the evaluator’s neck and back while measuring and adjusting chairs and keyboard trays. There are also the postural and psychological benefits of the worker not needing to crane their neck to look at the evaluator looming over them.

That said, I usually avoid using the adjective “ergonomic.” You might be surprised to hear this from a company specializing in office ergonomics. The problem with the word “ergonomic” is that it is so often misused and abused. When I started focusing on ergonomics twenty years ago, we still had to explain what ergonomics was. Now ergonomics related words are used ubiquitously to describe almost everything.

One of my favorite props at the start of a training class is to hold up a Microsoft Natural Ergonomic 4000 Keyboard, and ask the class, “Is this an ergonomic keyboard?” To this day I still get a delightfully mixed bag of responses. Some nod yes. Others voice of vehement no. The cagey ones aren’t sure, and yet others even produce the (I believe correct) answer of “depends”.

Why the great disparity of responses? Because to answer whether something is ergonomic, you must first know who is going to be using it, what task they are doing, and where they are doing it. The MSN4000 can be a very effective and cost efficient tool to address certain ergonomics risk factors, particularly for computer workers who find themselves rolling their shoulders forward, squeezing their thumbs together and bending their wrists sideways toward the pinkies to access a standard keyboard. These are the people who often answer with a most enthusiastic yes to the “is this ergonomic” question. However, what would happen if we then gave Naturals to everyone? Some more petite workers who do not exhibit the sideways wrist bend at a standard keyboard will instead on the MSN4000 need to abduct their arms (think flapping wings) to accommodate the wide keyboard. We have now created a problem where there was none. Further, since the arrow and number sections of the MSN4000 are more extended, workers will need to reach even more to the right if mousing right handed, creating reaching issues. And what if the worker needs to look at the keys to type? (There are still some hunt-and-peckers out there!) Having a big gap in the middle of the keyboard is going to drive them batty.

So, to determine if some device or modification will be ergonomic, you must always address all three of the WHO/WHAT/WHERE:

• The worker
• The task
• The work space

If all three are not addressed, then we can’t determine whether a particular product or solution will be ergonomic or not. And that’s ergonomics.

Chris Krebs

Situs Ergonomics