Can voluntary ergonomic programs help? Most industry experts agree—organizations that are proactive in stemming the tide of ergonomic injuries are more likely to cut absentee rates, workers compensation claims, and overall workplace injuries. But such programs are not for the fainthearted.

A voluntary comprehensive ergonomics program at the Library of Congress (LOC) has been in progress for the past decade, and has involved training costs for over 1400 workers, along with significant costs for retrofitting LOC facilities with modern ergonomic equipment and furniture.

While data collection on the results is ongoing, the LOC data suggests that employees have been cooperative and demonstrated reasonable expectations and respect for management’s attempt to improve their jobs.

In the marketplace, products claiming to be ergonomic abound; from chairs and workstations to keyboards, writing utensils and even lighting. But how can office managers, facility planners and corporate health professionals know if something really is truly ergonomic?

What is this science that is apparently here to stay? What makes one product more ergonomic than another? Office managers can be overwhelmed by the pressure of having to answer these questions, especially as they seek to solve real workplace issues for their employees.

Large corporate end users are likely to have their own certified professional ergonomist (CPE), safety engineer or industrial hygienist, but mid-sized companies and small businesses increasingly rely on the expertise of furniture dealers and professional organizations when it comes to selecting ergonomic products.

“Common sense is our best friend,” says Dr. Jerome Congleton, a certified professional ergonomist (CPE) with Texas A&M University’s School of Rural Public Health.

“I tell my clients to think about what makes sense, whether they’re evaluating a desk, sit/stand, keyboard tray, chair or whatever,” Congleton points out. “Look for features like soft, rounded edges and corners to prevent pressure points. Also, smooth materials with tactile feedback, and intuitive controls that a pictogram can explain. In terms of monitors and electronic products, make sure they are non-glare, and low in VOC emission, strength and durability that ensure a long safe and useful product life, flexible, adjustable.”

Mark Benden, CPE, says that whether selecting office seating, work surfaces, computer equipment and accessories or designing proprietary machinery, “the human factor is the key element of ergonomic intuition. Is the product comfortable after you’ve used it for several hours? Is it intuitive in the way it operates, or does it require instruction or even training in order to be used correctly?”

Benden points to one of his favorite examples, involving an “ergonomic” snow shovel. “It had a curved handle and a nice grip, and supposedly promoted a better posture for shoveling. But those who advocated its use missed the whole point that struggling with snow shoveling is a big issue for back strength and an aerobic capacity. Rather than upgrading to a new shovel with an ergonomic grip, a better ergonomic solution would be a self-propelled snow blower with electric start. And the best ergonomic solution,” he says smiling, “would be a heated driveway that melts the snow while you sleep!”

Benden also says that products or features intended to be ergonomic solutions for one problem, may actually cause more problems than they fix. “Take the ergonomic grips on a 5-gallon bucket,” Benden explains. “A 40-50 lb. pail (5gal) is better off being divided into a manageable 1 or 2-gallon size, or stepping up to a 55-gallons drum that is loaded by forklift or handtruck.”

Alan Hedge, Professor of Ergonomics at Cornell University, says, “To be ergonomic, a product must fit the user, be easy to use, improve comfort, improve performance, and improve health and safety.”

While ergonomics may be more than common sense alone, most CPEs echo the sentiment that common sense is a key ingredient of ergonomic design.

Martha Parker, CPE, in Houston, Texas, recommends a very simple test for determining a product’s ergonomic integrity.

“Ask yourself whether the product is going to fit a wide variety of employee shapes and sizes,” Parker shares. “Basically, an ergonomic product, whether it’s a desk, chair, keyboard, monitor, or accessory item, should be able to be utilized by workers ranging in size from the 5th percentile female [4’11” tall, 113 lbs.] to the 95th percentile male [6 ft. 2 in. tall, 246 lbs.].”

As the importance of ergonomics becomes ever more apparent and the size of the American workforce continues to change, the need for even more variety in seating has become evident. One ergonomic manufacturer has followed the changing trends in size (literally) of the American workforce and, along with their big and tall collection of chairs for users over 275 lbs or 6’3” tall, is currently completing the design for a chair that will even accommodate the 1st-4th percentile portion of the population. With the right solutions provider, there is an answer for most every ergonomic question.

In ergonomics, adjustability is a must. Chairs, workstations/desks, keyboard trays and monitor arms must all be extremely adjustable to accommodate the wide variety of worker shapes and sizes. And, in terms of adjustability, more is usually better.

Implementation

Ergonomics training requires different formats for different categories of employees. For all employees, and specifically employees who may work at high-risk jobs, it may require basic awareness training. For personnel who perform job analyses and problem-solving functions, proper instruction may require the organization to include specialized, intensive training.

According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH), “the effectiveness of training greatly depends on the way it is designed and delivered to the target audience.” NIOSH cites a 1988 OSHA publication (Training Requirements in OSHA Standards and Training Guidelines. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Publication No.2254), which offers a model that uses the following steps:

1. Determine if training is needed. If the evidence gathered from checking health records and results of the job analysis indicates a need to control ergonomic risk factors, then employees must be provided with the training necessary for them to gain the knowledge to implement control measures.

2. Identify training needs. As already mentioned, different categories of employees will require different kinds of ergonomics instruction.

3. Identify goals and objectives. The important point here is that the objectives of training must be defined in clear, directly observable, action-oriented terms.

4. Develop learning activities. Whatever the mode of training—live lectures, demonstrations, interactive-video programs, use of varied instructional aids—learning activities should be developed that will help employees demonstrate that they have acquired the desired knowledge or skill.

5. Conduct training. Training should take into account the language and education level of the employees involved. Trainees should be encouraged to ask questions that address their particular job concerns, and hands-on learning opportunities should be encouraged.

6. Evaluate training effectiveness. A common tool for training evaluations is the use of questions about whether they found the instruction interesting and useful to their jobs and if they would recommend it to others. More important, however, are measures of the knowledge gained or improvements in skills, as may be specified in the course objectives. Knowledge quizzes, performance tests, and behavioral observations can be used for this purpose.

One exercise recommended here is for the class to propose improvements in workplace conditions on the basis of information learned in class for presentation to management for their review. This relates to another level of evaluation, which is whether the training produces some overall change at the workplace. The latter measure is complicated by the fact that such results require time before they are evident and training may be one of several factors responsible for such results.

7. Improving the program. If the evaluations indicate that the objectives of the training were not achieved, a review of the elements of the training plan would be in order and revisions should be made to correct shortcomings. This information can be accessed on the NIOSH web site at: www.cdc.gov/niosh.

Following the steps outlined above can be instrumental in helping your organization develop the right kind of ergonomic training and development programs for your employees. It is important to remember to employ the help of a “Certified Professional Ergonomist,” which is typically an industrial engineer or industrial hygienist who has gone through a rigorous certification process under the auspices of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society (HFES). All of the professionals cited in this article are licensed CPEs.

Retraining & Retooling Is Worth It

While stocking up on ergonomic products and equipment, and putting your entire organization through a rigorous ergonomic training program is time-consuming and costly, it is well worth the investment. Reduced worker’s compensation claims and reduced absenteeism, as a result of fewer work-place injuries, are very tangible results. As a bonus, the resulting increase in workplace morale and employee loyalty, though sometimes hard to quantify, often pay long-term dividends in terms of higher retention rates and job satisfaction ratings.

Future-oriented managers and directors will do well to spend more time understanding ergonomics and its benefits.