No. 544 October 2015
The ErgonomistThe Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors
IMPROVING COLLABORATION BETWEEN ENGINEERS AND ERGONOMISTS
THE IMPORTANCE OF ATTITUDES FOR ENSURING SAFETY COMPLIANCE
Conquering stage frighta virtual audience for musicians
2 The Ergonomist October 2015
Contents
www.ergonomics.org.uk
Features04 Improving collaboration between engineers and
ergonomistsJudy Village
08 The importance of attitudes for ensuring security complianceAshley Knight & Ann Bicknell
12 Conquering stage fright: a virtual audience for musiciansTeresa Castle-Green
Also in this issue03 From the President
06 Journal overview
08 Feature
10 Early Careers Network
14 Events
18 Obituary
19 Institute news
20 Membership update
22 Recruitment
23 Ergonomics Everywhere
EditorialCelebrating Success
While it’s necessary to acknowledge the very
real and ongoing diffi culties that human factors
specialists have in ensuring they have genuine
infl uence in the organisations in which they
work, it’s also very important to highlight and
celebrate the impressive successes many of our
colleagues have had in varying fi elds.
It was announced on the 22nd of September
that Frøy Bjørneseth and her colleagues at Rolls
Royce won the 2015 Ergonomics Design Award
for their design of a ship’s bridge. The very high
standard of the shortlisted entries this year
indicates that ergonomics is truly making its
presence felt in design.
In our fi rst article, Judy Village describes the
perseverance, ingenuity and understanding
that allowed her and her colleagues to truly
integrate ergonomics into the manufacturing
design process at BlackBerry Ltd. The paper that
she and her colleagues wrote describing their
methods won the Liberty Mutual Award 2015,
an award that each year honours the paper from
the journal Ergonomics that best contributes to
the advancement of the practice of ergonomics.
In our cover article, Teresa Castle-Green
describes an innovative and unusual approach to
helping performers overcome their stage fright.
Ashley Knight and Ann Bicknell describe the
way in which attitudes and norms infl uence
intentions to comply and how using this
knowledge to work with employees can help to
reduce security breaches.
And Chad Lilley writes this month about
creating a positive culture, a coaching process
that supports human factors by examining and
improving the culture of organisations.
If you have any ideas for feature articles on
research or practice, news items, details of
relevant events or suggestions for new content
for The Ergonomist, please contact us.
Email Tina: [email protected]
Email Frances: [email protected]
12
Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors
New phone numbers for the InstituteMembership: 07736 893348
Events: 07736 893347
General enquiries: 07736 893350
For more details, visit www.ergonomics.org.uk/contact.
@ciehf
October 2015 The Ergonomist 3
From the PresidentErgonomics in the kitchen
One of my favourite hobbies is cooking. Working in a kitchen environment brings together many diff erent elements of ergonomics and human
factors. Last year we invested in a new kitchen for our house. Normally, when planning building works and alterations to the house, I have lots of ideas and am quite decisive. Not this time. I found the responsibility of designing a kitchen incredibly traumatic. I think this was partly because it was a reasonably expensive change to make to the house, but I also think I was very aware that professional pride was at stake. Imagine the shame when my ergonomist friends visited the house and spotted a glaring ineffi ciency in my design!Fortunately, eventually, I think we came up with a pretty good design. I was surprised however that there was very little explicit guidance from our very patient kitchen designer about ergonomics issues. Th e notion of the ‘triangle’ between the three most frequently used parts of the kitchen – the fridge, hob and sink – is well known, but apart from that, there was very little guidance. And when ergonomics issues were raised, they weren’t called that, they were just ‘good design’.So maybe at the CIEHF we should think about some resources to help people when they are thinking about ergonomics in purchases or designs they make. What makes a good backpack? What features should I consider when choosing a car? How do I tell if the
interface on my home entertainment system is well designed? Is the pushchair I’ve purchased easy to fold up and down?So here is a starter for ten: some ergonomic matters to think about when you are designing a kitchen. Physical: What’s the distance between points where you will have to carry heavy items, such as saucepans of vegetables from the hob to the sink?Cognitive: How well can you see diff erent parts of the kitchen from diff erent locations, to maintain your situation awareness? Do you understand the displays from the cooker well, and will there be people in your home who use the cooker and might benefi t from a simpler to use display? (Th e children were not impressed when I threatened to put a Powerpoint together on ‘how to use the oven’.)Organisational/Social: How many people use your kitchen at once? Is there space for separate areas for diff erent people to work in? Do you use your kitchen as a social space?I’d be really interested to hear from members about resources they have found useful when making big decisions about home design, and whether there is an appetite for developing resources from the CIEHF to support these decisions. Th ese resources would not only raise the profi le of our work, they might also prevent people from making those costly purchasing mistakes that I’m sure we’ve all made!
0804
@scsharples
4 The Ergonomist October 2015
Feature
Improving collaboration between
engineers and ergonomists
Judy Village
Ergonomists know that the earlier they can infl uence the design of systems, the more eff ective they can be in not only preventing adverse eff ects on workers, but also in enhancing system quality and performance. However, what is less well known is how ergonomists should navigate the design process, the company’s strategic goals, and the actors in the organisation to accomplish this early integration of human factors.Our three year action research collaboration with engineers and ergonomists in the new product realisation site at BlackBerry Ltd was designed to improve this understanding by attempting to integrate human factors into their assembly design process while at the same time refl ecting on and researching what tools and methods would facilitate this.At the beginning of the collaboration we found that the assembly design process had key performance indicators in terms of quality, delivery and cost but none related to human factors. Ergonomists in the organisation were responding to injury incidents but recommendations did not carry over to subsequent assembly designs, and ergonomists were unsure how to provide human factors information or design assistance to engineers.Th e researchers undertook numerous initiatives in attempts to learn where human factors could fi t within the design process. We interviewed engineers and made a map of the design process and decision gates to better understand where human factors might fi t. We interviewed engineers about injury, performance and quality metrics in the organisation and discussed possible human factors metrics. We participated in failure mode eff ects analysis (FMEA) meetings for early identifi cation of potential quality problems prior to design of the assembly process. And we conducted a cognitive mapping exercise with seven senior directors to link strategic goals to human factors. We learned that the main goal was to improve product quality and that directors believed workers had a key role in improving quality. We
used this knowledge to help frame and align human factors with the language and goals of the directors.Aft er more than a year of collaboration we found we had made very little progress toward our goal of integrating human factors into the design process. We realised that the ergonomists needed to learn more about the engineering design process, the engineering language, design tools, and the human factors links to product quality. Th e engineers were not aware of the ergonomists in the organisation, or how they could best use their expertise. Ergonomists had to make themselves more visible to engineers by participating in design meetings, and participating on the shop fl oor. Ergonomists also had to link human factors to the assembly goals of improved quality as stated by one senior director: “We need human factors incorporated with our deliverables.” As ergonomists participated with increasing numbers of engineers and directors, they discussed how awkward worker postures, high assembly forces, poor visual access to an assembly task, or lack of worker feedback about assembly connections could negatively aff ect assembly quality. Th ey were, in eff ect, aligning human factors knowledge with the strategic goals and language of the design engineers. Ergonomists got the attention of engineers and senior directors when they showed the integration of human factors was a means to help them achieve their design and business goals, rather than an additional burden. By participating alongside engineers in the design of a new assembly line, researchers and ergonomists realised that they needed a way to proactively help detect human factors concerns in early design stages, prior to parts and fi xtures being designed. Researchers were unaware of ergonomic tools that could assist with early identifi cation of concerns, so we began to adapt engineering design tools already used in the organisation to include human factors information. Th e FMEA was adapted with a new scoring system that indicated risk of injury
ABOUT THE
AUTHOR
Judy is Adjunct
Professor in
the School of
Population and
Public Health,
University of
British Columbia.
She conducted
this study for her
PhD in Industrial
Engineering
at Ryerson
University in
collaboration
with BlackBerry
Ltd.
She was recently
awarded the
Liberty Mutual
Award for her
paper published
in Ergonomics,
based on this
study, that
most advanced
the fi eld of
ergonomics in
2014:
J Village, C
Searcy, F Salustri
& W P Neumann
(2015). Design
for human
factors (DfHF): a
grounded theory
for integrating
human factors
into production
design processes.
Ergonomics, 58
(9), pp1529-
1546.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 5
or error on the part of the operator, alongside each potential quality defect. By participating in FMEA meetings, ergonomists could help design solutions to avoid human factors concerns while working only from drawings of parts, and potential assembly steps. Th e researchers also created a human factors design for assembly scorecard to compare early assembly tasks that had both potential engineering concerns and human factors concerns for operators. When the 22-item scorecard was demonstrated on a new assembly line, it successfully highlighted problem tasks and allowed ergonomists to engage proactively with engineers to fi nd solutions through alternative parts, tooling or fi xture design.Th e adapted tools successfully quantifi ed human factors issues and allowed comparison between tasks for benchmarking and target-setting. Th e senior director of engineering was so impressed with the utility of the adapted tools that they quickly became adopted as controlled engineering documents and made key performance indicators that engineers were held accountable for alongside defect cost, scrap and yield. Th e director was quoted as saying: “If you have something that can improve assembly quality, we can implement it fast.”Positioning human factors as a means to improve assembly quality by aligning it with the strategic goals of the organisation was a tipping point for the collaboration. Ergonomists became part of the design team, and were invited to all meetings with key sign-off at each stage of the assembly process. Appropriate adapted tools led to human factors being adopted in the design process and ensured sustainability of human factors in subsequent product builds.We have published the process for adapting engineering design tools to include human factors and the results of the action research collaboration process. We also published a theory based on the three-year collaboration that describes for this case study the process by which human factors came to be incorporated in the design process. Key steps in the process are: › Ergonomists needed to learn the engineering
design process, language and tools in the organisation.
› Ergonomists needed to strategically align human factors to the design and business goals in the organisation such that human factors becomes a means to improve business performance.
› Ergonomists needed to actively participate on the design team and on the shop fl oor demonstrating how human factors can help improve business performance.
› Ergonomists adapted engineering design tools used by the organisation to include human factors metrics and demonstrated the tools and metrics to senior management.
› Successful adapted tools and metrics then led to adoption in the design process by senior management so integrating human factors into the production design process.
When ergonomists learn about the strategic goals and how management view human factors links to strategic goals, they can begin to align and tailor information to help improve business performance. Ergonomists can then adapt engineering design tools to help quantify human factors issues, and more importantly to be part of developing solutions to prevent issues prior to design of parts, processes, fi xtures and tooling. When demonstrated to engineers and senior management, human factors will be more likely to be integrated into the design process.
Th rough ongoing refl ection among researchers and participants in this collaboration, we learned that the lack of human factors in the design process was not because engineers lacked interest in designing for humans, but rather that relevant information had not been provided to engineers in a way that they could readily use in their design process. By gaining an inside view of the design process in this organisation, and re-framing the problem as not being the engineers’ lack of knowledge, but perhaps the ergonomists lack of knowledge of how best to provide information, we were able to gain insights that led to the successful integration of human factors.We challenge ergonomists to continuously improve their practice by adopting a refl ective stance in their human factors work. Th is occurs when practitioners actively think about what they are doing and question the framing of the problem they are trying to solve, their tacit understandings of practice, their strategies and theories implicit in behaviour, and their feelings for a situation that has led to action.
6 The Ergonomist October 2015
Journal overview The Institute’s membership package includes instant access to
seven online journals. Simply go to ergonomics.org.uk, log in to
‘MyIEHF’ and click on ‘My journals’ to see the full list.
Each month we will list highlights and papers from a selection
of the titles.
Prioritising goals over safety linked with
high-risk driving
This study, carried out by researchers in China, explored
the decision-making and behavioural patterns of drivers.
Specifi cally, the participants were encouraged to get more
reward (shorter completion time) and avoid penalties
(less violations and crashes) during a Go/No Go simulated
driving task. The study found that it became challenging for
participants to balance the confl ict goals and make decisions.
In line with previous studies the propensity to make Go
decisions indicated a driver’s likelihood to take risks. During
the simulator task, high-risk drivers gave more priority to the
motivated goal than to safety concerns. These drivers took less
time to complete the task, but had more violations and crashes.
They also demonstrated more violations in their driving history
in the real world. The results suggest that risky decision-making
refl ects the intended risk-taking of drivers derived from a
deliberate plan, rather than other forms of risky driving caused
by low task capacities or furious aff ective responses. It was
suggested by the researchers that high-risk drivers might also
be involved in other risky activities, not limited to on-road
situations only.
Yutao Baa, Wei Zhang, Gavriel Salvendy, Andy S K Cheng &
Petya Ventsislavova (2015). Assessments of risky driving: A Go/
No-Go simulator driving task to evaluate risky decision-making
and associated behavioral patterns. Applied Ergonomics, 52,
pp265-274.
Study suggests that personalisation is
central to gambling site success
This study empirically tested s a stimulus–organism–response
(S-O-R) structural model that proposes that an online casino’s
atmospheric cues and functional qualities infl uence individuals’
aff ective and cognitive responses, which in turn impact
consumer behavioural intentions. Using self-reported data from
a primarily US-based sample, researchers from California and
Nevada analysed elements of the online gambling site stimulus
included high and low task-relevant cues, fi nancial trust and
gambling value.
The major conclusion from this research is an empirical
verifi cation that online gambling site atmospherics have an
impact on the internal responses of the gambler, which in
turn aff ect gamblers’ behavioural intentions. Specifi cally,
the fi ndings show that the four gambling e-servicescape
dimensions infl uenced respondents’ attitudes towards the
online gambling site. All four dimensions had an impact when
considering the moderating eff ects of demographics and
atmospheric responsiveness.
Of the four signifi cant stimuli components, the researchers
found that fi nancial trust and gambling value had the strongest
infl uence on gamblers’ attitudes towards the online site.
The fi nding that low task-relevant cues have a signifi cant
impact on organismic satisfaction and behaviour is of interest.
The low task-relevant cues in a virtual atmosphere are similar
to the ambience and interior décor of a physical environment,
both of which were found to be signifi cant stimuli in prior
studies of casino servicescapes. Well-designed low task-
relevant cues such as high-quality graphics and pleasant
sounds show the gambler that the online site is of a higher
class than other sites, and may implicitly suggest that gamblers
have made the right choice in gambling site. In addition, low
task-relevant cues may contribute to the perceived ease-of-use
and perceived usefulness of the gambling technology, which
drive intention to use the product.
According to the researchers, this study show that a well-
designed online gambling site is not necessarily one that uses
the most up-to-date technology or has the sharpest graphics.
They believe that the best gambling interface is much more
likely to be one that recognises consumer diff erences and off ers
personalisation options to individuals.
Brett Abarbanel, Bo Bernhard, A K Singh & Anthony Lucas
(2015). Impact of virtual atmospherics and functional qualities
on the online gambler’s experience. Behaviour and Information
Technology, 33 (10), pp1005-1021
Recall of injuries is patchy depending on the
age of injured person
In this study, researchers investigated the extent and nature
of recall bias in Sudan Household Health Survey (SHHS 2010)
injury data. The extent of incomplete recall was measured by
comparing the total reported injuries over 12 months with the
annualised number of injuries in the four weeks preceding the
survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate
the association of socio-demographic variables, injury
attributes and interviewee characteristics with diff erential
recall.
The evidence of memory decay was prominent, and diff erential
recall biased the data, with children aged 1-4 years seemingly
under-represented in data with a 12-month recall period.
The type of care received was also associated with diff erential
Research
October 2015 The Ergonomist 7
recall of injury events. These relations were independent of
the interviewee characteristics of which age independently
infl uenced the time-based injury reporting pattern.
The fi ndings confi rm the existence of diff erential recall of
injuries that occurred in the 12 months preceding the survey,
by the age of injured person, type of care received and main
respondent’s age. The researchers advise that this fi nding
should be taken into consideration when interpreting survey
results that involve comparisons between children and older
people, and when using the data at the level of healthcare
received whether as a proxy to injury severity or as an indicator
of healthcare utilisation.
Safa Abdalla, Nahid Abdelgadir, Saeid Shahraz & Kavi Bhallad
(2015). Respondents’ recall of injury events: an investigation
of recall bias in cross-sectional injury data from the Sudan
Household Health Survey 2010. International Journal of Injury
Control and Safety Promotion, 22 (3), pp215-223.
Age has an eff ect on the perceived usability
of smartphones
The eff ects of age in usability testing were examined in an
experiment carried out by researchers in Switzerland. Sixty
users from two age groups, one with a mean age of 23.0
years, the other with a mean age of 58.1 years, operated
two technical devices, a keyboard-based smartphone and a
touchscreen-based smartphone. Task completion time and task
completion rate were measured, along with several subjective
measures such as perceived usability, aff ect and workload. The
results showed better performance scores for younger adults
than older adults for task completion time.
For older adult users there was a mismatch between usability
ratings and task completion time but not between usability
ratings and task completion rate. An interesting fi nding was
also the dissociation between usability ratings and objective
performance, which emerged for older adult users during
touchscreen operation. It showed that older adults gave the
touchscreen a better usability rating than was justifi ed from
their performance. This fi nding appears to be contradictory at
fi rst sight, say the researchers, but may be explained by low
user expectations with regard to new technical devices such
as touchscreens. Age-related diff erences in the importance of
speed and accuracy in task completion point to the need to
consider more strongly the factor user age in usability research
and practice.
Andreas Sonderegger, Sven Schmutz,& Juergen Sauer (2015). The
infl uence of age in usability testing. Applied Ergonomics (52)
pp291-300.
Selected papers
Applied Ergonomics Volume 52 contd & 53 part A, 2015
› Variable Message Signs for road tunnel evacuations
› Age-related diff erences in balance control during stair descent
› Feedback and cognitive function during sleep deprivation
› Aircraft passenger comfort experience: underlying factors
› The science behind codes and standards for safe walkways
› Using the Rapid Offi ce Strain Assessment (ROSA)
› Concentration on performance with P300-based BCI systems
› Reliability, performance and trust in adaptable automation
› Pressure distribution while sitting in offi ce chairs
› Eff ects of overhead work confi guration on muscle activity
› Eff ects of EVA gloves on grip strength and fatigue
› Climatic and psychosocial risks of heat illness incidents
› Evaluation of load carriage systems used by police offi cers
› Vertical ground reaction force assessment in fi eld situations
› Ergonomic evaluation of drywall installation
› The eff ect of rest break schedule on acute low back pain
Behaviour and Information TechnologyVolume 34, Issue 10, 2015
› Multi-touch tabletop technology to facilitate collaboration
› Aff ective forecasting of the value of a telemedicine service
› Defi ning UX goals to guide the design of industrial systems
› Usability and intentions to use electronic textbooks
› Determinants of online safety behaviour
International Journal of Injury Control and
Safety PromotionVolume 22, Issue 3, 2015
› Distracted driving: prevalence, problems and prevention
› A standardised mortuary-based injury surveillance system
› Pedestrian injuries in the United Arab Emirates
› Measurement of a drowning incidence rate
› Epidemiology of injuries in metropolitan Tehran, Iran
› Progress in preventing injuries: analysis of policies in Europe
› Child drowning prevention in the Philippines
› Comparison of unintentional injury patterns in 1978 and 2008
› Paediatric trauma in the USA: hospital resource use
› Risk assessment of maintenance operations
Journal of Sports Sciences
Volume 33, Issue 15, 2015
› Front crawl swimming: role of the entry-and-stretch phase
› Eff ects of cold water immersion on recovery from sprinting
› Repeated sprint ability in young basketball players
› Predictors of adherence to contemporary dance training
› The validity an iPhone app for measuring jump performance
› How should ‘hot’ players in basketball be defended?
› The impact of making-weight on performance in jockeys
› Eff ects of a short-term fatigue protocol on punt-kicking
› Reliability of data from skin markers after heel impacts
› Diff erences between back kicks and jumping back kicks
› Elbow joint kinematics and wrist speed in cricket fast bowling
8 The Ergonomist October 2015
Feature
The importance of attitudes for
ensuring security compliance
Ashley Knight & Ann Bicknell
One of the big issues facing organisations today is how to keep their commercially sensitive information and customer data secure. Last year, 90% of large organisations suff ered an information security (IS) breach, with 75% of large organisations experiencing a breach directly as a result of their employees’ actions. Th is is a problem for organisations because if information is lost, leaked online or falls into the wrong hands, it can damage an organisation’s reputation, can make them vulnerable to legal and regulatory problems and can result in signifi cant cost and revenue implications.To tackle this issue, many organisations have introduced information security policies (ISPs) which describe how information should be dealt with, employees’ information security responsibilities and the consequences of security policy violations. However, despite having policies in place, employees do not always comply with them.Much existing research has tried to examine the factors that infl uence whether or not employees comply with ISPs. However, measuring compliance behaviour is ethically sensitive because the identifi cation of poor behaviours could result in disciplinary action or individuals losing their jobs. Most research has therefore tended to focus on the factors that infl uence compliance intentions, since intention is viewed as a predictor of actual behaviour. A popular theory that has been used to explain ISP compliance intention is the theory of planned behaviour. Th is theory suggests that intention to perform behaviour is infl uenced by attitudes, group norms and feelings of being able to perform the action. While some research supports this theory and suggests these factors infl uence ISP compliance intention, other research does not. In addition, a key factor that has been shown to infl uence compliance intentions in similar domains, such as safety, is leadership. However, leadership has received relatively little attention to date as a factor that could potentially infl uence compliance intentions in the security domain.
To understand more about the factors that infl uence ISP compliance, a series of semi-structured interviews was carried out. Th is more qualitative form of data was taken in order to gain greater insight and potentially provide some clarity over how and why diff erent factors infl uence compliance. Th e interview questions covered topics relating to the infl uence of leadership, attitudes, norms and feelings of control on ISP compliance intentions. However, the semi-structured nature of the interview also allowed new insights to emerge. All of the interviewees were employed within a large UK organisation and had experience of dealing with sensitive information as part of their daily role. In total, nine individuals of varying levels of seniority took part. Th e interviews were transcribed and then analysed using thematic analysis to highlight any themes in the data.
Attitudes
One of the key fi ndings was that attitudes towards security had a strong infl uence over whether or not participants complied with the ISP, with more positive security attitudes leading to greater compliance intentions. Th e formation of these attitudes appeared to be shaped by numerous factors including: the perceived importance of security; the burden or diffi culty of complying; the likelihood of receiving rewards or sanctions; and their general awareness of the ISP.Many participants felt that security was important because of the type of sensitive work they did and because their organisation had placed a strong emphasis on it. Th is perception of importance led to positive attitudes towards compliance and highlights the need for organisations to make sure that security is central to the business. However, if the security processes were perceived as too onerous, participants reported less positive compliance attitudes. Th is resistance to performing diffi cult or time-consuming security procedures could be overcome, however, if participants believed that they would be punished for not complying, or if they felt that they would receive positive
ABOUT THE
AUTHORS
Ashley Knight is
an MSc student
at the University
of Leicester. Dr
Ann Bicknell
is a Chartered
Psychologist
who is a Tutor
Practitioner at
the University
of Leicester and
development
consultant for
Ashorne Hill
Management
College.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 9
rewards, for complying.
Ability to comply
If participants felt that it was within their ability to comply, they tended to report stronger compliance intentions. Th is ability to comply was shaped by how diffi cult the IS processes were perceived to be. Many IS processes were seen as time-consuming or as a hindrance to primary work duties. However, if support was available, through easy-to-follow processes or assistance from others, intention to comply was increased.Participants also reported feeling more able to comply if the practices were dealt with regularly, but less able to comply if they did not have suffi cient policy knowledge. For example, some aspects of the policy were seen as insuffi ciently detailed, leading to feelings of uncertainty about what was expected of them. Th is suggests suffi cient ISP awareness is important for ensuring individuals feel able to comply.
Norms
Participants reported that the norms amongst their peers and colleagues had a strong infl uence on their ISP compliance intentions. Th ey reported oft en following group norms as a result of a desire to be part of the team, even if this meant disregarding the procedures set out in the ISP. However, if participants felt that failing to follow the process would likely lead to a serious incident, negative norms tended to be rejected, suggesting that a balance is struck between the severity of the breach and the need to be part of the team.
Leadership
Many participants reported that leadership indirectly infl uenced their compliance intentions by helping to shape attitudes, norms, ability to comply and their awareness of the ISP. Leadership appeared to infl uence these factors via three mechanisms: acting as a role-model; communicating about security; and providing appropriate resources to support and facilitate security.By acting as a role-model and displaying appropriate behaviours, leaders were able to act as a point of reference and remind employees of security’s importance. However, participants stated that they were only infl uenced by their leaders if they were visible in the organisation and if they respected them. Furthermore, if leaders communicated enthusiastically about
security, this was viewed as a sign of their commitment to security. Th is communication appeared to help convince employees of security’s importance. Despite this, more experienced participants reported being less infl uenced by management communications than newer employees, possibly because their attitudes had already been formed.Th is highlights the importance of instilling security practices into employees in the early stages of their career. Managers also helped employees feel more able to comply if they provided support with security processes and ensured their employees had the necessary resources to comply. Th is perceived ability to comply, in turn led to more positive compliance intentions and highlights leadership’s role as a facilitator of security.Th e majority of the fi ndings identifi ed in this research support the existing literature that suggests attitudes, norms and feelings of control infl uence ISP compliance intentions. However, this study also provides rich insights into how and why these factors might infl uence compliance intentions and highlights numerous practical recommendations for improving compliance intentions. Th ese fi ndings outline the importance of the way the ISP is communicated and presented and suggest that it needs to be clear and detailed. Furthermore, they highlight the need to make security central to the organisation, to make it something that is communicated about regularly and to ensure that the potential for sanctions or rewards is understood by all.A further key fi nding is that leadership and local relationships can play an important role in shaping ISP compliance intentions. Th is suggests that the development of appropriate leadership styles and team cultures should be considered in order to improve compliance intentions. Since relatively little research exists in this area, this confers valuable insights for a topic that will only grow in signifi cance for many organisations. Future research should continue to focus on how the attitudes and behaviours of the team and the leader can be critical in shaping compliance intentions and the organisation’s security culture in meaningful ways that minimise the risks of an IS breach.
10 The Ergonomist October 2015
Trust me, I am Virtual RealityVirtual Reality (VR), that is an immersive environment where
people can interact, has always been seen as a fantasy
technology, one of the tools possible only in fi lms, along with
fl ying cars and time machines. Indeed, a technology that
permits people to be in another world, where they can feel,
hear and touch an object is a system that was hard to believe
until few years ago. Fortunately, VR’s fate has seen a diff erent
path from fl ying cars and time machines, and we can, today,
experience this technology.
VR is currently employed in fi elds such as psychology for phobia
treatments, medicine for pain reduction, training for pilots
and in industries such as automotive. The reason why VR is so
widely implemented is that it permits the users to be in a world
that would be diffi cult to replicate in real life.
For example, in the case of pilot training, the possibility
to carry out the fi rst phases of training in a virtual plane
eliminates the danger, cost and the time of using a real
plane. In the case of phobia treatments, VR can show a
threatening object, that the patient can touch and hear, with
the advantage of having a fake, and less stressful, experience.
This is a huge advance in terms of technology and innovation
and can potentially assist users and workers while helping
businesses save money and time.
However, as is the case for all new technologies, there are
some issues when implementing a new system in a work
practice. Among the problems that could appear, I focused my
research on the issue of trust. In the correct implementation
of a system, one of the most important preconditions is that
the actual users are willing to rely on it. We can think of VR as a
co-worker: if you don’t trust your colleague, working with them
would result in a diffi cult and sometimes counter-productive
situation. Exactly the same thing can happen with technology.
Despite the fact that trust in a person and in a system are
equally important in jobs now, the process of relying on a
person or on a technology is diff erent. When relying on another
person, the response of that person is part of the decision to
trust (that is, do they trust me back?), but this is not true for
technologies, since a system cannot respond back in the same
way.
This lack of response means that there has to be another type of
theory related to trust in technology, diff erent from the one of
trust in people. Therefore, I decided to develop a framework to
investigate what characteristics a system must have to in order
to be trustworthy and improve the eff ectiveness of the users
who are using it.
My framework hypothesis is that to make a VR system
trustworthy it has to be usable, accepted and as similar as
possible to the real world.
As can be deduced from this description, my research is not
about inventing a new system. I am trying to improve an
already existing technology, trying to solve an extremely
important issue such as trust, in order to help the correct
implementation of VR, leading to a more productive and
successful work practice. Indeed, a system is useless if this
system is not built following human needs and the right
processes. As Craig Federighi, Apple’s Vice President of software
engineering recently said: “New is easy, right is hard”.
Davide Salanitri
Davide Salanitri has a Masters in psychology from the University
of Padua, Italy and is currently a PhD student at The University
of Nottingham for the project: “Trust in Virtual Reality”. He
would like to acknowledge Jaguar Land Rover for co-funding the
research work on which this piece is based.
The PhD Blogby Steph Eaves
This month has been all about the writing
up of my thesis. I had a short assessment
meeting with my internal assessor, Professor Sue Hignett which
allowed me to successfully pass through into my fourth and
fi nal ‘writing up’ year of my PhD. We have provisionally agreed
that my hand in date will be early December and my viva will
be arranged for some time in early January!
During this time, a whole new cohort of students arrived at
Loughborough University. In addition to completing my PhD I
am also a sub-warden for Elvyn Richards Hall of Residence. This
means that I live in Hall with the students, both new freshers
and returning second and third years.
Along with two other PhD students, I am responsible for the
wellbeing of the students. I help with pastoral issues, fi rst aid,
fi re alarms and the general running of the Hall.
So along with writing up, it’s been fantastic to welcome
hundreds of new students into the bubble that is
Loughborough University!
I have one chapter left to write, and then my thesis will be in its
draft format. It’s hard to believe how quickly this time has come
around, it seems like only yesterday that I was walking around
the Design School on my induction on the fi rst day of my PhD
studies, listening to the advice from other students.
I wish I had listened and had written more over the past years.
Although I feel pleased that I did write some things, I would
urge new PhD students to write down everything you think of!
Your future self will thank you for it – I promise!
Early Careers Network
October 2015 The Ergonomist 11
The impact of students at the IEA CongressAustralians call Melbourne the city of four-seasons-in-one-day.
Yet as ergonomists from around the world converged in our
city, a week of uncharacteristically sunny weather emerged
too. From the offi ng, the tone was set for the IEA 2015 19th
Triennial Congress in August. Our six days were dense with
learning and socialising, as many delegates were reunited with
familiar friends and colleagues.
An energy of enthusiasm greeted us right from the welcome
drinks. The opening of the congress included an Indigenous
Elder welcoming us to their country and the delegation being
taught the correct pronunciation of “g’day”. For students,
the congress held particular promise of new and important
connections.
We began the week with social events specifi cally for students
(including a student lunch and dinner). Here, we mingled with
peers from Australia, New Zealand, North America, France,
Germany, Ukraine, Sweden, Japan, Malaysia, Croatia, Columbia
and Denmark.
Students also shared their work in a range of presentations.
This included a student-lead study exploring the experiences
of student engagement in IEA federated societies. The Three
Minute Thesis (3MT) competition was also a highlight on
the IEA student calendar. Nine of us battled it out to share
our thesis in just three minutes. Topics ranged from work/
life balance, to better back health, and consideration of wrist
angles.
The excitement of meeting new people and travelling abroad
may be reason enough for students to attend an IEA congress.
However, from personal experience, it seems a stronger
underlying purpose exists for our presence at such events. In
fact, my whole ergonomics journey began at an international
congress.
I spent the fi rst 18 months of my undergraduate training
fearing I had made a mistake. Speech Pathology and I did not
seem to fi t. Despite this, I won a university student prize to
attend Speech Pathology’s equivalent of the IEA congress. Here,
a 15 minute presentation on the third day of the congress was
to alter my academic and career trajectory for the better.
A researcher called Erki Vilkman spoke about Vocal Ergonomics.
As I listened to him explain what human factors was (in the
context of voice), I began to realise exactly what I wanted to do.
This ergonomics thing sounded amazing and I wanted in. I have
attended many conferences since then including the CIEHF’s
2015 conference in Daventry. Each time, I seem to gain clarity
on what I want to pursue and why it should matter to others.
Conferences have a way of anchoring the goals and ideas of
students into what could be the future of our profession, which
can be career defi ning. It is also evident in our profession
that not all students are ‘35 and under’. Most of us come with
another occupation or training background. Conferences
provide a safe space for students to explore how their non-
human factors qualifi cations fi t with ergonomics. They also
provide spaces for established ergonomists to see the new
connections ergonomics and human factors is making.
So other than allowing students to ‘fi nd their tribe’, what
are the benefi ts for our profession in supporting student
conference attendance? Many occupations tout that students
are the future of their profession. I would argue that this
is keenly true in the global ergonomics and human factors
community. While often resource poor, students are typically
far more time rich than established ergonomists.
At international events, such as the IEA congress, we are also
ambassadors. We showcase the strengths of our institutions,
along with the strengths of our societies. These links benefi t
the discipline far more broadly than just helping out students.
If my peers at the IEA congress are the yard stick, students are
also enthusiastic to embrace current and future initiatives of
the profession. This was highlighted by the student initiated
meetings with IEA executive members where future global
engagement of students and early career ergonomists were
discussed. From these meetings, a preliminary report was
tabled to the IEA executive, including how students and early
career ergonomists (ECE) can directly enrich our profession:
Specifi cally, it is envisaged that students/ECE will assist in
the fi delity of supporting engagement at local and global
levels of the ergonomics profession. This will allow the direct
enrichment and future sustainability of federated societies,
and the IEA as a whole. Further, through engagement with
this demographic of IEA members, opportunities for outreach
to support communities can be cultivated. The enhanced
engagement with these members can also strengthen the
advancement of research and links of ergonomics with other
disciplines.
Attendance at international events fosters more than just
networking opportunities for CIEHF student members. It also
provides us opportunities to have a global presence. When this
is coupled with CIEHF’s ethos of supporting student and early
career ergonomists, being part of our tribe is an exciting place
to be.
Katie Buckley
12 The Ergonomist October 2015
Feature
Conquering stage fright: a virtual
audience for musicians
Teresa Castle-Green
Music performance anxiety can have debilitating consequences for performers, aff ecting their confi dence levels and preventing them from delivering performances to the normal standards of which they are capable. As a performer in an acoustic duo myself, I have experienced stage fright fi rst hand, from nausea before performances to physical shaking on stage. It is something that I have learned to live with and am gradually getting over with increased experience. Th is is not an unfamiliar story within music circles; a large number of musicians struggle with stage fright throughout their careers. Surveys have found as many as 70% of musicians report experiencing anxiety that has impacted performances. Musical performance requires complex cognitive and sensorimotor skills, which can be greatly aff ected by the body’s fear responses. Shaking, sweating and feeling nauseous is not conducive to delivering a fl awless performance. Many musicians learn to manage their anxiety as they gain experience of performing on stage, but for others it can continue to be a problem throughout their entire lives. Th ere are numerous reports of amateur, student and professional musicians turning to self-medication of alcohol and drugs. Beta-blockers are oft en prescribed and others turn to cognitive behavioural therapy or hypnosis to overcome anxiety levels enough to enable them to continue performing music on stage. In some cases the fear of performing is so strong that it prevents budding musicians from even attempting to get up on stage to do what they love. Seeing and experiencing this problem fi rst hand led to my desire to focus my research on the use of technology within this domain.
Exposure therapy
A review of music performance anxiety literature revealed a number of potential causal factors. Th ese include situational variables, such as the presence of an audience, performer competence levels, trait anxiety and the complexity of the material being played. Th e most positive results in terms of treatment
research have been shown in relation to cognitive and behaviour therapies including the use of exposure therapy. In related fi elds virtual reality has been demonstrated as a useful tool in exposure therapy off ering therapists access to situations and contexts that would otherwise be unachievable. Th is led to the question of whether a virtual audience would be a useful tool in exposure therapy for stage fright. Research into the fear of public speaking has used virtual audiences and has shown promising results. Participants have reported increased anxiety levels and lower perceived performance ratings as a result of negative audience reactions. Other research found positive results from the use of a virtual audience for graded exposure on saxophone players within the educational context. Th is limited amount of related research led to the question: would these results be refl ected in the context of musicians performing at a virtual music festival?
The Virtual Music Festival
Before the virtual audience design could get underway I needed to expand on my own knowledge and gain a deeper understanding of performers’ experiences of stage fright. Interviews with experienced performers uncovered a number of potential causal factors relating to audience approval and performer confi dence levels. A literature review of audience behaviour expanded on this to ensure that a strong element of realism was captured within the design of the audience. I discovered that large crowds and audiences are surprisingly organised, with social norms being adhered to, right down to the length of the applause.Th e Virtual Music Festival was designed and developed to be delivered through a head-mounted display to allow musicians to play on a virtual stage in front of a computer-generated audience. A festival ambience was created with people milling around near the bar tent and people walking along a road in the distance. Campsites, burger vans, large shop tents, security guards and large speaker systems were
ABOUT THE
AUTHOR
Teresa Castle-
Green is a
psychology
graduate
who has just
completed an
MSc in Human-
Computer
Interaction at
the University of
Nottingham and
is now pursuing a
career in HC I.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 13
also included to add to the realism of the setting. I created three diff erent audience conditions delivering approval feedback through audience movement to provide a positive, neutral and negative experience to performers. At the start of each condition there were 40 people located in front of the stage, waiting in anticipation for the music to start. Once the music started they gave some initial applause and then began to dance and move as though watching the music.During the neutral condition the audience size remained the same throughout. Th e positive feedback condition saw the audience size increase by a further 30 people, to 70 and the negative condition saw 30 people leave reducing the audience size to just 10. Th e movement of the people to and from the stage area was completed gradually within a three minute time period to ensure that the full condition was experienced before the end of an average length song.Audience applause was also used as visual and audio feedback. Research into political speeches has shown that ‘normal’ applause to show appreciation at the start and during speeches lasts for eight seconds. It is thought that anything longer than that is very appreciative and anything shorter is lukewarm in its appreciation level. I used this research to set the length of the initial applause for each condition. Th e neutral had eight seconds, the positive had ten and the negative had only six. I managed to fi nd 11 musicians from local open mic nights and street buskers who were willing to play an instrument and sing to my virtual audience. Each musician performed six songs in total, three that they knew well and three that they had recently learnt or had not performed live before, all whilst wired up to a virtual reality system. Th e performers’ guitar and microphone were plugged in to a mixing desk allowing it to be combined with the audio from the application on the computer. Noise cancelling earphones were used to cut out any background noise so the musicians could only hear themselves and their audience. Aft er performing each song they completed a questionnaire containing measures for state anxiety, a rating of how well they thought the performance went from 0-100 and copresence questions to evaluate the perceived interaction between the performer and the audience. A wrist-based heart-rate monitor was also used to obtain average readings for each condition.
Promising fi ndings
Th e results were promising with key fi ndings showing emotional responses to audience reactions as well as self-ratings of performance corresponding with audience feedback. Th e musicians reported experiencing higher levels of anxiety when the audience walked away from them and lower levels when more people were joining the audience. Th ey also appeared to use the reaction of the audience when rating how well they thought their performance had gone. Performance ratings were lowest in the negative audience condition and highest in the positive. Th e performers reported the experience as nerve racking but enjoyable. Some reported playing guitar whilst wearing a head-mounted display as challenging, but most faired quite well. Post-evaluation interviews indicated that some musicians had experienced feelings of ‘encouragement’ from the audience when it was increasing in size or feeling ‘upset’ when people walked away. Th is could be seen as a logical response on the face of it until considering that the participants were fully aware that it was computer-generated and not a real audience. Most of the participants reported that they chose to believe in the audience and indicated feelings of copresence as they talked about responding to the audience increasing and the audience responding to them when they were ‘bad’. A surprising result was that the use of anxiety management techniques during performances was also identifi ed. Some of the musicians spoke to the audience to introduce songs and to thank them for applause, seemingly to relax into the performance and to try to relate to the audience. Others showed signs of self-serving bias where they chose to take the positive reactions from the audience as due to their performance and negative reactions as pre-programmed or related to the audience’s musical preferences. Stage fright is a pressing issue for a large number of amateur, student and professional musicians. Th e use of a virtual audience within exposure therapy could increase the scope of treatment and allow exposure to situations that would not be accessible in real life.It would be interesting to expand on this research with a larger sample size, diff erent audience settings and collaboration between musicians, to gain a deeper understanding of the full potential that virtual audiences could have within this context.
14 The Ergonomist October 2015
Events
North East Regional Group meetingA time to get together to celebrate Chartership while doing
the hard work of planning for the future will take place at ABB
consulting offi ces, Billingham, Teeside on 22nd October 2015,
18:30-20:00.
There will be a presentation from CIEHF CE Steve Barraclough,
followed by a round table discussion to examine what people
want from the North East Regional Group and what we should
be planning for next year.
Anyone who wants to stay on can enjoy a curry and further
discussion. For more information see http://bit.ly/1Ld76M5.
Worker Health Protection
25-29 October 2015, Abu Dhabi
This is the second year of the BOHS Worker Health Protection
Conference in the Middle East. Last year’s inaugural conference,
was a great success with over 100 senior delegates from
across the region representing industry and government in
attendance. This year there is a packed two-day scientifi c
programme, professional development courses and
an exhibition that showcases the latest innovations in
occupational health and hygiene.
With an esteemed panel of high-profi le international
speakers, WHPC 2015 off ers a stimulating line-up of panel
discussions, presentations and Q&A. The sessions will address
the key themes which are relevant to today’s workforce in
the region. It will provide a multi-disciplinary perspective,
and in addition to occupational hygiene, will encompass key
aspects of occupational medicine and nursing, wellbeing and
environmental health.
For more information, visit www.whpc-me.com/2/home.aspx.
Predicting the Fatal Flaws – Can we do things
diff erently in aviation safety?
26-27 November 2015, Crawley
A conference presented by The Royal Aeronautical Society
Human Factors Group, the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics
and Human Factors, and NATS – National Air Traffi c Services.
The conference looks at threat trends including confl ict zone
overfl ight, changing pilot/controller and other teamwork
interactions, the eff ect of new organisational economic
pressures, and at the benefi ts and limitations of structured
responses from SMS to safety audit tools, Safety II and
Resilience Engineering. 10% discount for CIEHF members.
For more details, visit http://bit.ly/1OGUauV.
CIEHF
Regional
Group events
are open to
everyone, not
just CIEHF
members.
Human Factors in
Aviation Safety9-10 November 2015, East Midlands Airport
www.hf-aviation.org.uk Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors
At our upcoming aviation safety event, we consider the
question: Could the safety of the aviation industry be
compromised by advances in technology?
Aviation has the enviable reputation as one of very few large-
scale ‘ultra-safe’ industries. But the need for more fl ights at
lower fares and higher demands in the defence sector have
led a greater reliance on technology, particularly automation,
which places pressure on both the pilots and the systems in
which they work.
Experts from BAE Systems, Eurocontrol, EasyJet and NATS,
along with researchers and academics will discuss how human
factors contributes to ensuring that the aviation industry
maintains safety and reliability in the face of technological
change. The conference will give you a rare opportunity to gain
insight into the research, practice, innovation and technology
that drives this industry. The event is open to and values the
contribution of people from all sectors.
Key Sessions
› ‘Removing the error, from pilot error’ byDonough Wilson,
Coventry University Technocentre
› ‘Resilience Engineering as a Perspective in Understanding
Accident Causation’ by Shawn Pruchniki, Ohio State University
› ‘Putting the Science Back into CRM: Promoting Distributed
Cognition on the Flight Deck’ by Don Harris, Coventry
University
It’s the fi rst time we have run this event, but interest has been
very high due to the calibre of the speakers and the practical,
applicable nature of many of the talks. Book now to be part
of this important discussion and to advance your career by
learning from the best.
Places are available to CIEHF members for just £96.75 for one
day or £149.25 for both days with a 25% discount on standard
rates. For further information and to book please visit the event
website. All prices exclude VAT.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 15
This event promises to be a very valuable opportunity for anyone who has
an interest in human factors in high-hazard industries.
Presenter John Lovegrove, who will speak about human factors practice at
this event writes:
As often publicised, the nuclear industry is feared by the British public
because of the association with the harm caused by exposure to nuclear
radiation. The impact of events such as those at Chernobyl and Fukushima
has been to focus the minds of all those connected to the nuclear industry
to concentrate on achieving the goal of protecting both the general public
and individual workers from exposure by following four principles:
› Adequate shielding for the hazard
› Reduced exposure time to the hazard
› Increase in the distance between people and the hazard
› Containment of the hazard
These four principles are at the heart of all approaches used across the
nuclear industry. That’s where the similarities end. Each sector within
the nuclear industry has a varied history that has contributed to the
diff erences in organisational design, job design and performance
requirements that exist today. Whenever you fi rst start at the
organisation, you have to learn how to fi t in. What are the design
processes, what is the scope of your role and the expectations of the
stakeholders? It’s quite common to fi nd out that the organisation has
created their own in-house human factors standards to match the
expectations of the stakeholders.
In many cases there is an underlying tick box culture, and we are involved
to keep the regulators happy, not because of what we bring to the table.
So, what do we off er? The organisations have become large complex
organisations that are constructed of a mixture of contractors and in-
house staff . They are complex systems, they have recognised that they
need help and their pleas for help were left unanswered for years. This
created a void which has been fi lled by management consultants, lean
consultants, and human performance consultants.
Ergonomists can also help with issues eff ecting the running of these
organisations. We have a wealth of experience, knowledge and
techniques that will identify interventions that will improve and
strengthen the long term prospects for an organisation. The role of
an ergonomist or human factors specialist is to understand how the
organisation functions and to deliver successful ergonomic interventions
that improve the health and wellbeing of all concerned by ensuring that
they can achieve their work goals.
The use of participatory ergonomics has been extremely useful in
focusing all of the stakeholders on how work is actually done, it
strengthens the bond between engineers, designers, safety case authors
and the operators by encouraging them to work together to overcome the
emergent issues associated with their work.
At the Human Factors Integration in the Nuclear Industry event, talks
throughout the day will provide an insight into how human factors is
practised and to refl ect on how we work within the diff erent nuclear
organisations.
Ideas from other industries also enrich the expertise that already resides
in the nuclear industry. We hope to broaden the focus from trying to raise
the credibility of human factors within an organisation to boosting the
credibility of human factors and ergonomics across the entire nuclear
industry.
For more information on the event, including the full programme and
booking options, visit the website at www.hf-nuclear.org.uk.
As a CIEHF member you get 25% off our standard delegate rates. Student
Members get 40% off .
If you have any queries please contact James Walton, Marketing & Events
Manager on 07736 893347 or email [email protected].
Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors
www.hf-nuclear.org.uk
Human Factors Integration inthe Nuclear Industry9th November 2015East Midlands Airport, UK
16 The Ergonomist October 2015
Opinion
Creating a positive cultureChad Lilley is a behavioural safety specialist and owner and Lead
Coach of Chad Lilley International. Here he describes how his
coaching practice developed.
Creating a Positive Culture™ has evolved over a 14 year process.
It all started when I was a construction manager working
in Dublin on a $1.4 billion biopharma project. Up until this
point I never really believed that senior management really
meant safety was number one. Maybe through their actions
or through my years of experience, I just thought it was
something they had to say when what they really meant was
to get the job done as quickly as possible to the best of your
ability and let’s hope no one gets hurt along the way.
This project was diff erent: they seemed to put more of an eff ort
into safety, even better still, a few times in the early days there
were decisions made that proved to me that they did think
safety came fi rst. This experience, along with my curiosity,
plus having some great managers, started my journey into
achieving something more.
After this project I went on to be the project manager for
the Lend Lease group, heading up their behavioural change
programme covering the Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA)
region. This project led to two and a half years of great
successes, some very frustrating challenges and acceleration in
my development. I worked day in day out with the consultants
that were advising us and, in places, we really made a
diff erence. However, my biggest growth in regards to my
thinking and my personal growth came with the frustrating
conversations I was having with our consultants. After a
while of asking what we do next and only ever receiving the
frustrating answer of “What would you like to do next?” I
decided I wasn’t getting very far, so I enrolled into a training
programme for Neuro-Linguistic Programming to fi gure out
a better, more streamlined way of getting my message across
and more importantly, making it sustainable.
In 2007 I left Lend Lease and started working with several
diff erent companies, once again delivering behavioural safety,
however, I started doing things diff erently. I started to focus on
what I wanted to achieve, instead of working away from what I
wanted to avoid. Looking back I realise that this was the major
shift, the thing that made the biggest diff erence. Most people
I know have heard of SMART goals. The S stands for specifi c,
and yet so much in safety, even with all the good intentions is
non-specifi c or very clear on what needs to be avoided, working
away from goals instead of moving towards goals. The results
I achieved with this shift made a big impact to me personally
and as a business, after this shift, the results changed in a
massive way.
I worked on the principle of “If you want to get a diff erent result
then without question, you have to do something diff erent”.
This in itself sounds very simple and most people get this at
an intellectual level but even so they tend to carry on doing
the same thing again expecting a diff erent result, essentially
banging their heads against a brick wall. I also took on the
thought that “Life is very simple, we don’t believe it can be
so simple so we complicate things!” and thirdly, “If you want
better answers you have to start by asking better questions!”
These three principles led to very clear thinking on a direction
forward, it moved things from, “how do I stop someone from
getting hurt?” to, “how do I inspire someone to be all they can
be?”, “how do I create a positive culture in the workplace?” We
are working safely over 90% of the time, but we focus on the
mistakes. How can we deal with the 10% and focus on the 90%
- how do we take what we are already doing well and make it
even better? Taking this approach people started to become
more open about what could be done, people were happier to
share their knowledge, their thoughts and their perceptions.
We started looking at our teams and in conjunction with
human needs psychology, we examined our strengths and
weaknesses, not to fi nd a weakness and tell someone that they
needed to work harder in this area, but to fi nd their weaknesses
that could be complemented by someone else’s strengths
and vice versa. It was an understanding that someone has a
weakness in an area due to the fact they aren’t interested in
that bit, so why make them work harder on what they don’t
enjoy when someone else in the team has that as a strength?
Another major factor was to explore why people like change -
so long as it is someone else that changes. There is a whole raft
of things here, however, some of the key aspects boiled down
to fear, the fear of looking bad. People don’t like others seeing
their weaknesses. This is where the team dynamics really kicked
in and we started to see results. We started to celebrate our
mistakes. Creating an environment where people no longer
look for who is at fault and instead look for what can be learned
from this improves the team dynamics greatly.
To make all of the above possible, we had to adopt a new look
at training. In our commercially-driven world, we tend to look
for short term gains instead of long term sustainable change,
it’s just the way we have been conditioned. It has created a
world where today most training is carried out for certifi cates
instead of for competency. We had to get people to understand
the need for coaching. We can deliver a training session that
would really provoke thinking and inspire change, however
to make it stick and be sustainable, it would need on-going
coaching as people just have a tendency to get caught up in
their day to day activities. Or, to put it another way, it would be
unrealistic to put someone in a gym for two days and expect
them to come out fi t - they have only been introduced to how
the machines work. Our training is the same, after two days we
have introduced you to what is possible and we can coach you
to make it happen.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 17
Most behavioural programmes over the last 30 years have
recorded a maximum of 30% reduction, but I had started
to get feedback on my work that not only were the safety
records improving, and in some places up to a 70% reduction
in accidents also, programmes were starting to be met ahead
of schedule, re-work had been reduced, sick days had been
reduced and morale had been improved, and in some cases,
people had recorded an improvement in their relationships at
home.
I guess, this is where I changed the title to ‘Creating a Positive
Culture™’ as I fi rmly believe now that my work is no longer
just about behavioural safety, it is more about operational
excellence delivered through a coaching and mentoring process
in order to establish change, sustainable change that can and
does work in any environment.
When we move from making people the problem to them
being the solution, when we develop positive and meaningful
accident investigations instead of the fi ve whys, ‘who is to
blame’ mentality, when we start looking at good effi cient
leading indicators where we can make a profound infl uence on
people.
When we start getting into building good solid relationships
where people feel safe to show their vulnerabilities and get
over the fear of looking bad then we can make a massive
diff erence anywhere we work or interact with others. When
we start working and looking out for each other and wanting
the best for each other, where we celebrate others success and
learn from it, then we really can create a positive culture.
Chad Lilley
Chad will speak at the CIEHF’s Human
Factors Integration in the Nuclear Industry
event on November 9th. See www.
hf-nuclear.org.uk. For more information
about Chad Lilley International, visit www.
chadlilleyint.com.
Standing up in courtThe scientifi c and technical knowledge of ergonomists and
human factors specialists can be invaluable in the courtroom
making their expertise very sought after by legal teams.
Claire Dickinson from the Offi ce of Rail & Road (ORR) and John
Lovegrove of Canary Designs each presented and refl ected on
their experiences of being called upon as an expert witness in
court.
This was the fi rst joint event between the CIEHF North West
& North Wales Regional Group and the Safety & Reliability
Society (SaRS) and was hosted by AREVA RMC in Warrington on
Thursday 1st of October. The focus of this event was the role of
the expert witness in court. Emma Ridsdale (Regional Group
Lead) welcomed a turnout of 13 ergonomists, human factors
practitioners, safety consultants and engineers to the event.
Both John and Claire articulately described the often
challenging and unpredictable situations they found
themselves in during their involvement in the courtroom,
and emphasised the necessity of meticulous preparation
and professional integrity throughout the whole process.
The importance of individual resilience and the capability to
think on your feet was made very apparent throughout John
and Claire’s accounts as they described the sometimes erratic
and volatile characteristics of the courtroom and how they
overcame them.
John and Claire wrapped up their accounts by refl ecting on the
lessons they had learned from their experiences in the expert
witness role. Both went on to describe the positive infl uence
which these lessons have had on their work lives and how these
lessons transfer over to professional practice.
The fascinating subject matter throughout both presentations
stimulated an array of questions from the audience and opened
up a lively discussion about John and Claire’s experiences which
were invaluable in explaining the role of the expert witness and
the lessons which can be drawn from standing up in court.
Overall, the evening was a great success, as highlighted by one
attendee: “A hugely interesting and deeply personal insight into
what it is to be an expert witness - the ultimate test of one’s
credibility”. Ruairi Kennedy, Principal Consultant (Rail Safety),
CRA Risk Analysis.
Both the CIEHF and SaRS are very keen to join forces and deliver
more joint events in the future.
Matthew Holman
DIVERSIONS...Telling it like it is
A signpost in Cornwall.
Th anks to Mark Halliday for this contribution.
18 The Ergonomist October 2015
OBITUARY
Joan Ward
1919-2015
Joan joined the Department
of Ergonomics and
Cybernetics in 1961 as a
Research Assistant in the
then College of Advanced
Technology in Loughborough, shortly after the Department
opened in September 1960. Prior to this Joan spent her life in
South Africa. She graduated with a fi rst class honours degree
in English and Psychology at Rhodes University in 1941
and shortly afterwards became a journalist. Subsequently,
probably due to these two experiences coupled with
her outstanding intellect, she maintained her interest in
producing concise, clear, informative and direct reports
and papers for the general public and her fellow scientists
throughout her long and distinguished career.
In the decade before her arrival in the UK, Joan’s career took
an entirely new direction. She became knowledgeable in
anthropometry and work physiology working in a team led
by Professor Cyril Wyndham at the Transvaal and Orange
Free State Chamber of Mines in Johannesburg. It was mainly
concerned with studying the eff ects of heat stress on mine
workers and how these eff ects might be alleviated.
Other work involved detailed studies of the Kalahari Bushmen
which required living with them and sleeping by the fi re at
night in the Kalahari Desert. On one occasion she woke in the
middle of the night to see a leopard in the tree under which
she was sleeping. Fortunately, without Joan being told, the
leopard had been put in the tree by the Bushmen for the skin
to dry out after the meat had been taken to eat. The skin,
of course, was later to be used for clothing. These unique
experiences were subsequently recounted by Joan in a very
popular series of lectures.
Joan found the practice of apartheid which operated during
her lifetime in South Africa totally unacceptable and this was
the reason for her emigrating to Britain in 1961. At that time
Joan was the mother of three children, Lindsay, Sally and
Hugh, and also a single parent. To move to Loughborough
with an unknown long-term future was a particularly diffi cult
and courageous decision.
Joan rapidly became established in the Department
of Ergonomics and Cybernetics. Throughout the 1960s
she became well known for her pioneering work in the
application of anthropometry to the design of equipment,
especially in homes, offi ces, factories and schools. One
example is her research on suitable sizes for stairs for the
elderly, sponsored by the then Building Research Station. One
piece of research in which she was involved had unexpected
consequences. The research was on “Some Ergonomic Aspects
of Household Jugs” and was published in Ergonomics 1965,
Volume 8, Issue 4, pp455-465. The idea behind the research
was to show how ergonomics could be applied to a simple
consumer product using subjects handling the jugs and
having anthropometric, psychological and physiological as
well as physical measurements taken, and interrelationships
(if any) between the measurements established. The paper
caught the eye of staff in the Consumers’ Association, who up
to that time had only carried out physical tests on products
to establish which could be recommended. The Association
thought that ergonomics had something to off er. As a result
Joan, together with Stuart Kirk, were retained as consultants
and this led to the formation in 1970 of the Institute for
Consumer Ergonomics, generously funded in the fi rst instance
by the Consumers’ Association. Without the support of Joan,
the Institute would not have come into being, nor would
it have been as successful as it was without her advice,
guidance and scientifi c contribution. This was recognised
by the then Ergonomics Society in 1975 when the Institute
was awarded the Sir Frederic Bartlett Medal, the primary
award of the Society, and Joan as the Assistant Director was a
named recipient. She was also recognised for her substantial
contributions to ergonomics by the conferment of the
Ergonomics Society Special Award (now the William Floyd
Award) in 1993.
After the College of Advanced Technology became
Loughborough University in 1966, Joan was appointed
Lecturer in the Department of Ergonomics and Cybernetics
in 1967 and subsequently Senior Lecturer. She was highly
successful in her relationships with students to whom she
gave wise counsel on their many technical and personal
problems, especially when senior tutor to the MSc course in
ergonomics. Her counsel was always direct and realistic but
sympathetic and supportive.
In addition to the successful prosecution of her research,
teaching and administrative duties in the Department of
Ergonomics and Cybernetics (subsequently renamed the
Department of Human Sciences), which continued until her
retirement early in the 1980s, Joan was a highly respected
member of the Ergonomics Society, occupying at diff erent
times the roles of Treasurer and Registrar. In due course, she
was awarded the Society’s highest distinction of Honorary
Fellow. As a sideline in her younger years she was the
women’s squash champion of South Africa.
It was a privilege to have known such a capable, diligent,
modest, friendly and generous woman, a view universally
shared by her many colleagues, students and friends.
Peter Stone & Stuart Kirk
Obituary
October 2015 The Ergonomist 19
Member Profi leJo Davies
Jo is a Human Factors Consultant with
Ergonomic Systems Engineering Ltd (www.
ese-assoc.demon.co.uk) and a Fellow of the CIEHF.
What sparked your interest in ergonomics and human
factors and how did your career develop?
I would say that my entry into ergonomics and human factors
is fairly unconventional. I had a few false starts, but I fi nally
settled down into a job that I found challenging at EASAMS
where I was working in a team of engineers carrying out fl ight
trials for the development of the radar system on the Tornado
GR1. I was given the task to investigate problems I had found
with the radar display and I began by creating an accurate
simulation of the display. I was breaking fresh ground as
there simply weren’t rapid prototyping facilities in 1978 and
I was integrating my small desk top machine with a graphics
terminal to achieve the results.
I really wanted to progress my career but lacked the
qualifi cations. The company sponsored me to do an Open
University degree which I started in 1979. I tailored the degree
to include science, technology, psychology, human factors and
system failures and other systems courses. I also embarked
upon an HNC in Computer Science. By this time I had moved
to the Human Factors Group working on the development of
the displays for the Tornado Air Defence Variant. I spent 7 years
conducting display assessments with pilots as a sub contract
to British Aerospace at Warton, Lancashire. I have always
emphasised the importance for human factors engineers to
appreciate the environment that the kit is being used in and in
August 1988 was the fi rst female civilian to fl y in the back seat
of the Tornado F3.
In 1990 I decided to move to BAe in Kingston and joined
the Cockpit Group which I took over as manager in 1992.
The opportunities for collaborative research with the other
Military Aircraft Division sites and key industrial and academia
partners were vast. We tackled a host of advanced pilot vehicle
interface developments, formalised Human Factors Integration
processes, methods and tools and supported the company’s
aircraft development projects.
In 1992 I was privileged to become the UK industry
representative on the NATO AGARD Aeromedical Panel where
I engaged with international world experts in human factors
research. I received their Excellence Award in 2001 for the
contribution that I made.
In 1999 I decided to become an independent consultant and
joined George Ward and Adrian Furniss at ESE associates Ltd.
One of the business strands that we developed was training
courses in human factors and systems engineering.
What advice do you have for aspiring ergonomists?
It really helps if you can be multi-disciplinary and talk to
others in their language. Also remember that you are never
alone - it is a broad discipline with many areas of specialism
and clearly it’s important to know what you know. But it’s also
important to know what you don’t know, know that it matters
and know someone who has the right experience to answer the
important questions.
What has been your greatest achievement in
ergonomics and human factors?
I have had some amazing opportunities in particular during my
NATO tasks when I co-chaired a working group with Dr Sandra
Hart exploring and producing the Designers Guide to Human
Performance Modelling. But probably one of my greatest
achievements in terms of the global accolades received were
the accident/incident reconstructions that I produced for the
CAA as airline training videos (www.caa.co.uk/humanfactors).
What issue concerning the discipline or profession
interests you currently?
It’s about public perception. I am currently working with
Stephen Pheasant Memorial Fund trustees to try and promote
a better understanding of why consideration of human
factors and ergonomics is so important and should not be
marginalised. Ideally we would like to attract the interest of
BBC4 and it’s challenging to come up with a contemporary and
original approach. We need to have more public presence in the
media and we need to recognise that ergonomics and human
factors does not stand alone, it needs to be well integrated with
other disciplines.
You run the Southern Regional Group. How did you get
involved in that and what benefi ts do you think the
group gives to the people who attend?
I fi rst went to a Regional Group meeting in 1982 when I joined
the then Ergonomics Society as a student member. When I
was based at BAe Farnborough Ted Lovesey and I decided to
work together to resurrect the local group. Meetings were well
attended and comprised presentations and discussions on
various topics. After I left BAe a formal steering group was set
up initially chaired by Richard Tait at QinetiQ. As we didn’t have
meeting rooms to use we visited the many large industrial or
academic organisations that had a strong human factors focus,
such as QinetiQ, IBM, AAIB, RNLI, NATS and AWE.
The benefi t to the group members is the insight into diff erent
practices and diff erent sectors and also the provision of an
excellent forum for networking. We plan to continue in this
fashion, so if anyone in the Southern Regional Group area hs
any ideas or are willing to host a meeting I would love to hear
from you. Visit our web page at www.ergonomics.org.uk/
regional-groups/southern-regional-group for more details.
Institute news
20 The Ergonomist October 2015
Membership updateThe Institute welcomes those listed below who have recently
been accepted as new members, and congratulates those who
have upgraded.
FellowsLinda Bellamy from the Netherlands. Managing Director at
White Queen BV.
Clare Pollard from Oxfordshire. Employed at AREVA RMC Ltd.
Registered MembersRyan Meeks from Avon. “I’m a Senior
Human Factors Engineer at Frazer-Nash
Consultancy Ltd in Bristol, specialising in
Human Factors Integration and human
sciences research primarily in defence and
security. I have worked on a wide range
of projects including research on insider threat attacks, HFI
for unmanned systems, and assessments of workload within
the operations rooms of naval ships. I graduated from the BSc
Ergonomics (Human Factors Design) course at Loughborough
University in 2011, with an industrial placement year at QinetiQ
in Farnborough.”
Neil Clark from Lothian. CEO at IHF Ltd.
Graduate MembersGareth Bundock from Wiltshire.
Chantal Trudel from Quebec, Canada.
Jake Collins from Warwickshire. Employed as a Comfort
Engineer at Lear Corporation.
Student MembersKirsty Mackay from Aberdeenshire.
Bill Gough from Birmingham.
Christopher Herbert from Bloomington, Indiana, USA.
Mark Eze from London.
Jim McPartlin from Northumberland. Employed at the MOD.
Christian Miguel Strubel from Switzerland.
Edel Straum from Liverpool.
Associate MembersDonna Carter from Australia. Employed as a Health and Safety
Advisor at Rio Tinto Weipa.
Keith Irving from North Yorkshire. Employed as a Flight Safety
Manager at Jet2.com.
Rachel Boville from Yorkshire. Employed at Jet2.com.
Nick Toff from Cambridgeshire.
Vanessa Ginn from Surrey.
Andrew Lilley from Norway. Employed at Human Factors
Solutions.
Dave Mahal from Avon. Employed at AACE Ltd.
Colin Knight from Leicestershire.
Mike Shannon from Kent. Employed at Human Performance
and Leadership Ltd.
Learning from IncidentsThe aim of a forthcoming special issue of Safety Science is to
provide researchers and practitioners with an opportunity to
present and discuss contemporary, forecasted and required
paradigm shifts to Learn from Incidents.
The ability to learn from incidents is essential for safety in
all organisations, industries, regulatory bodies and policy
makers. Safety Science has a long history of innovations in
theory, methodology, science and application. For example,
accident causation models that fi rst emerged in the early 1900s
have since evolved to consider entire systems and emergent
properties.
Similarly, methodologies have moved from focusing on tasks to
entire systems and the constraints shaping behaviour. However
Learning from Incidents is yet to embrace theories and methods
from the learning sciences. A new repertoire of theories,
methods and instruments evolved from interdisciplinary
perspectives is needed to Learn from Incidents eff ectively.
We welcome submissions from all disciplines, including, but
not restricted to Adult and Organisational Learning, Computer
Science, Engineering, Sociology, Industrial Psychology, Human
Factors Engineering.
The deadline for receipt of papers is 1st February 2016, with
a projected publication date of mid 2017. All papers will be
subjected to the standard peer-review procedures of the
journal. Potential authors are requested to submit their paper
for consideration to the guest editors prior to electronic
submission so that they can ensure its scope and quality is
suitable for the special issue.
Guidelines for authors can be found on the Safety Science web
page at www.journals.elsevier.com/safety-science/.
For more information and to submit a paper, email any of
the guest editors: Professor Neville Stanton, University of
Southampton, [email protected]; Dr Anoush Margaryan,
Glasgow Caledonian University, [email protected];
Professor Allison Littlejohn, Open University, Allison.littlejohn@
open.ac.uk.
October 2015 The Ergonomist 21
The papers are in, now it’s time to book!
The call for papers for EHF2016 has now closed and we are very
pleased to say we have had a larger number of submissions
than in recent years. Thank you to everyone who has submitted
papers, posters and workshop proposals. As usual, the standard
is extremely high and our reviewers have a tough task ahead of
them selecting the best papers and proposals.
There have been a number of submissions in aviation,
manufacturing, healthcare, rail and practitioner considerations
so these look likely to be major themes for this event.
We have also received a number of workshop submissions on
a variety of topics so we will be reviewing these with a view to
formulating a strong set of interactive sessions for you.
Look out for the provisional programme around the middle of
November when we will also start to take bookings. Save the
dates of 19th to 21st of April 2016 on your calendar now.
With workshops, symposia, talks and networking
opportunities, these three days could be the most valuable
you will spend in 2016 developing your knowledge and your
connections. Find a friend, a collaborator, a mentor or even
a new job among the best and brightest in ergonomics and
human factors. Learn something, have some fun and go home
knowing you were there at the forefront, participating in the
biggest ergonomics and human factors conference in the UK.
Last year’s conference attracted over 220 delegates, not
including the people who came solely to hear our invited
speakers. EHF2016 will feature talks from top surgeon and non-
executive director of the new patient investigation service, Lord
Ara Darzi, director of user experience at Google, Dr Elizabeth
Churchill and Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT,
Nancy Leveson. The Broadbent Lecture will be delivered by
CIEHF members Steve Shorrock and Claire Williams.
And there will be the chance to enjoy the fun at our popular
quiz night and to relax at our annual dinner and awards
ceremony. The venue itself has a golf course, pool, gym and spa
facilities to help you wind down.
To ensure all our members can benefi t from the great career
opportunities that the conference aff ords, we have kept the
price as low as we can at only £95 for a single day’s attendance
and £399.50 for three days’ attendance with accommodation if
you book our early bird rates. Prices exclude VAT.
Go to www.ehf2016.org.uk/prices-and-booking for further
information.
19-21 April 2016, Daventry
Ergonomics &Human Factors 2016
Ship’s bridge design wins Ergonomics Design AwardAfter much deliberation by a distinguished line up of judges
over the four high quality shortlisted entries, the CIEHF’s
Ergonomics Design Award was won by Principal Engineer -
Human Factors and Control Centres Frøy Bjørneseth’s team at
Rolls-Royce Marine AS, based in Norway, for their innovative
Unifi ed Ship’s Bridge design.
The other three shortlisted entrants were all highly
commended: SEND, a patient data display by Lauren Morgan
of Oxford University; Express Banking Services design by
Ergonomie based in Australia; Intercity Express Train design by
DCA Design.
The judging was run in parallel with the CIEHF’s fi rst
Ergonomics In Design Seminar on 22nd September 2015 at the
Design Council in London, during the London Design Festival
week. The seminar focused on two workshops, ‘Designing
for changing demographics’ and ‘Measuring improvement
in new designs’ which were led by Robin Ellis of RED Design
Ergonomics Ltd and Dan Jenkins of DCA Design.
The entrants gave presentations to the six judges and 32
seminar delegates. The judges were John Wood of CCD Design
& Ergonomics and sponsor of the Award, Mat Hunter of the
Design Council, Jasper Holmes of RICA, Chris Ramsden of
the Chartered Society of Designers, Martin Bontoft of Team
Consulting and TomStewart of System Concepts.
The delegates enthusiastically engaged in the workshops and
the mix of experience and backgrounds amongst them led to
some interesting interaction and discussion. Early feedback on
the day was that many found it a useful and rewarding time
and they would attend further CIEHF workshops in the future.
Thanks to all the judges and workshop facilitators for their time
and eff ort in making the day a success. We will be studying the
detailed feedback we received with a view to running a similar
event next year.
For more information on the Rolls Royce ship’s bridge
design, see http://bit.ly/1OeY4i3. For more details about the
Ergonomics Design Award and Ergonomics In Design Seminar,
visit www.ergonomicsdesignaward.org.uk.
22 The Ergonomist October 2015
Recruitment
All of us working in ergonomics and human factors will know of
someone who stands out. Someone who perhaps doesn’t shout about
their achievements but whose knowledge, expertise and skill is obvious
to anyone who works with them. Someone who truly advances the
discipline, and whose insight and understanding is an inspiration to
others.
Honour that stand-out person and give them a great gift by nominating
them for one of our annual awards. Among them are:
The Sir Frederic Bartlett Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/
sir-frederic-bartlett-award) is for any individual who has made signifi cant
contributions to original fundamental, applied or methodological
research, development and application of knowledge and scholarship in
ergonomics/human factors.
The William Floyd Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/
william-fl oyd-award) is given to any individual or group who has made
outstanding and innovative contributions to ergonomics and human
factors.
The President’s Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/presidents-
award) is for any group, institution or organisation which has made
signifi cant contributions to research and development, and application of
knowledge generally in the fi eld of ergonomics and human factors.
Nominations close on the 31st October so don’t let time slip away, follow
the links now and nominate a person who deserves recognition for their
achievements.
Go to www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards now.
Celebrating excellence in ergonomics and human factors
Advertise withus
Reach all CIEHF members every
month.
Reach anyone worldwide with
a subscription to this magazine
through Kindle, iPhone and
Android Apps.
Reach students starting out
in their careers to seasoned
professionals running their
own businesses.
If you would like to advertise here, visit
www.ergonomics.org.uk/advertising
for full details of ad sizes and rates, and how to book.
Usability & Accessibility Specialistwww.ncr.com/careers
A permanent position is available in NCR’s Consumer Experience Design group based in Dundee, UK, working alongside other usability and design professionals.
Candidates with a background in ergonomics, human factors or human computer interaction are welcome. Those with a passion for making technology accessible to all will be preferred. The main focus will
applications.
Job details and application forms are at http://www.ncr.com/careers Search for job number 678158 or worldwide career opportunities located in Dundee.
Closing date 10th November
October 2015 The Ergonomist 23
‘The Ergonomist’The magazine of the CIEHF
Publisher: The Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors
ISSN: 0268-5639 (print)ISSN: 2059-2221 (online)
Editors: Tina Worthy, [email protected], 07736
893350 & Frances Brown, [email protected].
Printed issue by: Premier Print Group, London. Printed on matt art paper, manufactured from recycled fi bre.
Advertisement Rates (ex VAT, dimensions HxWmm)
Quarter page (127 x 88) £475
Half page horizontal (127 x 180) £795
Half page vertical (257 x 88) £795
Full page (257 x 180) £1325
Discounts: Institute members and Registered Consultancies
are off ered a discount of 25% on the rates above.
Format: Copy should be supplied as a high resolution PDF
emailed to Tina Worthy. Copy can also be emailed as a Word
document by prior request.
Inserts: Inserts, in the form of a PDF, will be made available
to all members via our web portal on the day the issue is
published. Contact us for further details.
Deadlines: Adverts and inserts should be booked by the
20th of the month preceding publication. Copy deadline is
normally 25th of the month preceding publication.
Booking: Please call 07736 893351 or email advertising@
ergonomics.org.uk.
Online listing: All recruitment adverts published in
The Ergonomist are listed on the CIEHF website at www.
ergonomics.org.uk/jobs.
Opinions expressed in The Ergonomist are not necessarily those of the
Institute. Whilst every care is taken to provide accurate information, neither
the editors, staff , Council nor the Institute undertakes any liability for errors
or omissions. The mention of a service or product or inclusion of an advert
does not imply endorsement by the Institute.
Ergonomics EverywhereOur upcoming CIEHF event on 9th November focusing on the
challenges of the nuclear sector could arguably not come at a
better time. See page 15 of this issue for more event details.
On the civil side, the UK government has just agreed to
underwrite the investment from China required to support
the colossal development of Hinkley Point C on the north
Somerset coast. Two-thirds of the estimated £24bn cost of
building the power station is now covered by government
guarantees, even though EDF has agreed a ‘strike’ price – what
it will be paid for its electricity – that will make it the most
expensive power in the world, while earning the company,
when fully on stream, an estimated annual profi t of £5bn.
Hinkley C is costly because it is very large and pretty complex.
Fertile ground for ergonomists and human factors specialists,
you might think. For more than a decade, EDF, the state-
owned French energy giant, has been building two similar
reactors, one in France and one in Finland, both of which are
running late and neither of which has yet generated a watt of
electricity. EDF won the Hinkley contract partly because of our
Treasury obsession with not spending public money, but it has
struggled to raise the private fi nance.
We all probably agree that we should aim to decarbonise
the supply of power wherever we can, but even so, this
looks an expensive option. One windy day last July, 80% of
electricity generated in Germany came from renewables. We
know the wind doesn’t blow every day, so there is certainly
a role for nuclear. A good example of where great design
and innovative, safe operating practice which can both be
infl uenced by ergonomists could bring huge benefi ts to make
nuclear generation investments more and more meet the
hurdle rate.
On the military side, recent work by specialists to ensure that
nuclear deals such as that concluded recently in Iran remain
watertight and policeable shows that great innovation is
being brought to bear to uncover illicit potential production of
equipment able to turn peaceful civil use nuclear activity to a
military dimension. Previously, monitoring work focused on
availability, logistics and assembly of the physical hardware.
Manufacture of centrifuges was the prime example, when
assembled able to produce weapons-grade material. Bits of
the kit for centrifuges were in few hands, but recent violators
got smart, growing skills to manufacture kit of their own,
rendering this form of surveillance outmoded.
Now, specialists track patterns of activity exhibited by known
or suspected defectors, those able to bring their expertise
to bear to build centrifuges, by analysing phone traffi c,
emails, travel habits, consumption patterns and the like in an
attempt to uncover not the convergence of hardware, but the
bringing together of human expertise capable of producing
the hardware. Another set of skills that could no doubt
be informed, improved and augmented by human factors
specialists. The nuclear sector continues to evolve and provide
solid opportunities for good minds.
Steve Barraclough
CIEHF Chief Executive
With such a huge variety of options, how do you decide where to go next in
your career?
Whether you’re trying to fi nd your fi rst job, or looking to change the direction of your
career, it can be hard to decide where your skills and interests might best fi t into the many
industries in which human factors is applied.
The CIEHF Ergonomics Careers Day gives you a valuable opportunity to meet with people
who work in aviation, manufacturing, academia, design and healthcare among others
to get a fl avour for how your career might progress and to get important, personalised
information on what you can do to put yourself ahead of the competition in the hunt for
jobs.
At the Ergonomics Careers Day, you can:
› Meet potential employers
› Learn how ergonomics can make a real diff erence in all sectors
› Learn how to make the transition from student to professional
› Hear from those who have taken your route to a career in ergonomics
› Meet and chat to students on other courses
You can meet with representatives from companies large and small who are actively
recruiting to understand what they are looking for in job candidates. You may even fi nd
the perfect job for you!
Learn about an ergonomics and human factors career in:
› Aviation from NATS
› HCI from AMEC Foster Wheeler
› Nuclear from Cavendish Nuclear
› User Experience from DCA Design
› Defence from BAE Systems
› Manufacturing from Cranfi eld University
› Healthcare from Loughborough University
› Consultancy from ERM
Also rail, oil & gas and academia
Ergonomics Careers Day11 November 2015, Northampton
www.ergonomics-careers.org.uk
Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors
Don’t sit and dream about your career. Why not take this
opportunity and get out there and meet the people who
can make it happen? Book now at www.ergonomics-
careers.org.uk/booking.
Jobs Fair We have a number of exhibitors at our Jobs Fair who
are looking for people like you who are professional,
enthusiastic and willing to take on an exciting career in
their sector.