Ergonomics Contributions to Company Strategies

Managers usually associate ergonomics with occupational health and safety and related legislation, not with business performance. In many companies, these decision makers seem not to be positively motivated to apply ergonomics for reasons of improving health and safety. In order to strengthen the position of ergonomics and ergonomists in the business and management world, we discuss company strategies and business goals to which ergonomics could contribute. Conceptual models are presented and examples are given to illustrate: 1) the present situation in which ergonomics is not part of regular planning and control cycles in organizations to ensure business performance, and 2) the desired situation in which ergonomics is an integrated part of strategy formulation and implementation. In order to realize the desired situation, considerable changes must take place within the ergonomics research, education and practice community by moving from a health ergonomics paradigm to a business ergonomics paradigm, without losing the health and safety goals.corporate strategy;paradigm shift;system performance

An assessment system for rating scientific journals in the field of ergonomics and human factors

A method for selecting and rating scientific and professional journals representing the discipline of ergonomics and human factors is proposed. The method is based upon the journal list, impact factors and citations provided by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI), and the journal list published in the Ergonomics Abstracts. Three groups of journals were distinguished. The "ergonomics journals" focus exclusively on ergonomics or human factors. The "related journals" focus on other disciplines than ergonomics or human factors, but regularly publish ergonomics/human factors papers. The "basic journals" focus on other technical, medical or social sciences than ergonomics, but are important for the development of ergonomics/human factors. Journal quality was rated using a maximum of four categories: top quality (A-level), high quality (B-level), good quality (C-level)) and professional (P-level). The above methods were applied to develop journal ratings for the year 2003. A total of 24 'ergonomics journals', 58 'related journals' and 142 'basic journals' were classified.impact factor;rating;scientific journals

Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA): Logic and Methodology of “Necessary but Not Sufficient” Causality

Theoretical “necessary but not sufficient” statements are common in the organizational sciences. Traditional data analyses approaches (e.g., correlation or multiple regression) are not appropriate for testing or inducing such statements. This article proposes necessary condition analysis (NCA) as a general and straightforward methodology for identifying necessary conditions in data sets. The article presents the logic and methodology of necessary but not sufficient contributions of organizational determinants (e.g., events, characteristics, resources, efforts) to a desired outcome (e.g., good performance). A necessary determinant must be present for achieving an outcome, but its presence is not sufficient to obtain that outcome. Without the necessary condition, there is guaranteed failure, which cannot be compensated by other determinants of the outcome. This logic and its related methodology are fundamentally different from the traditional sufficiency-based logic and methodology. Practical recommendations and free software are offered to support researcher

Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) with R (version 3.2.0)

Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) is an approach and data analysis technique for identifying necessary conditions in datasets. It can complement traditional regression-based data analysis as well as methods like QCA (see [the NCA website](https://www.erim.nl/nca) for more information on NCA). This guide helps a novice user without knowledge of R or NCA to install the free R and NCA software on the user’s computer and to perform an NCA analysis within 15 minutes. The main instructions are: I. Install R II. Install NCA III. Load data IV. Run NCA. Details of the method can be found in: - Dul, J. (2016) Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA). Logic and Methodology of 'Necessary but not Sufficient' causality. *Organizational Research Methods* 19(1), 10-52. [Sage](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1094428115584005) - Dul, J. (2020), *Conducting Necessary Condition Analysis*, Sage Publications, ISBN: 9781526460141. [Sage](https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/conducting-necessary-condition-analysis-for-business-and-management-students/book262898) - Dul, J., van der Laan, E., & Kuik, R. (2020). A statistical significance test for Necessary Condition Analysis. *Organizational Research Methods*, 23(2), 385-395. [Sage](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1094428118795272

Necessary condition analysis: more value from data

Data is often surprisingly short on real answers for managers, particularly if a problem is multi-causal. Sometimes we can measure all the relevant factors in a complex system to the fourth decimal place and yet still have no clear sense of which factors matter

An assessment system for rating scientific journals in the field of ergonomics and human factors

A method for selecting and rating scientific and professional journals representing the discipline of ergonomics and human factors is proposed. The method is based upon the journal list, impact factors and citations provided by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI), and the journal list published in the Ergonomics Abstracts. Three groups of journals were distinguished. The "ergonomics journals" focus exclusively on ergonomics or human factors. The "related journals" focus on other disciplines than ergonomics or human factors, but regularly publish ergonomics/human factors papers. The "basic journals" focus on other technical, medical or social sciences than ergonomics, but are important for the development of ergonomics/human factors. Journal quality was rated using a maximum of four categories: top quality (A-level), high quality (B-level), good quality (C-level)) and professional (P-level). The above methods were applied to develop journal ratings for the year 2003. A total of 24 'ergonomics journals', 58 'related journals' and 142 'basic journals' were classified

Combining economic and social goals in the design of production systems by using ergonomics standards

In designing of production systems, economic and social goals can be combined, if ergonomics is integrated into the design process. More than 50 years of ergonomics research and practice have resulted in a large number of ergonomics standards for designing physical and organizational work environments. This paper gives an overview of the 174 international ISO and European CEN standards in this field, and discusses their applicability in design processes. The available standards include general recommendations for integrating ergonomics into the design process, as well as specific requirements for manual handling, mental load, task design, human-computer-interaction, noise, heat, body measurements, and other topics. The standards can be used in different phases of the design process: allocation of system functions between humans and machines, design of the work organization, work tasks and jobs, design of work environment, design of work equipment, hardware and software, and design of workspace and workstation. The paper is meant to inform engineers and managers involved in the design of production systems about the existence of a large number of ISO and CEN standards on ergonomics, which can be used to optimize human well-being and overall system performance.review;standard;standardization;ergonomics;CEN;ISO;human factors;production engineering;production planning

Theory-Building With Cases

Theory-building with cases is (a) formulating new propositions that emerge from the empirical evidence in a sample of cases and (b) testing them in the same sample. The main difference with most other forms of generating new propositions (such as analyzing the theoretical literature, brainstorming, etc.) is its empirical character. The main difference with other forms of discovering new propositions in empirical evidence (such as in ‘exploratory’ research) is that only those theoretical formulations are accepted as a result of the theory-building study that are confirmed in a test in the sample from which the proposition was built. It is possible that a proposition about a relationship between two variables emerges from an exploratory single case study (e.g., when both variables have extreme values in that case), but it is not possible to test that new proposition in the same study because this would require a comparison in a sample of cases. The term theory-building study (as distinct from an exploratory study) is used here only for studies in which a proper test of the new proposition has been conducted

Pattern matching

Pattern matching is comparing two patterns in order to determine whether they match (i.e., that they are the same) or do not match (i.e., that they differ). Pattern matching is the core procedure of theory-testing with cases. Testing consists of matching an “observed pattern” (a pattern of measured values) with an “expected pattern” (a hypothesis), and deciding whether these patterns match (resulting in a confirmation of the hypothesis) or do not match (resulting in a disconfirmation). Essential to pattern matching (as opposed to pattern recognition, which is a procedure by which theory is built) is that the expected pattern is precisely specified before the matching takes place

Work environments for employee creativity

Innovative organisations need creative employees who generate new ideas for product or process innovation. This paper presents a conceptual framework for the effect of personal, social-organisational and physical factors on employee creativity. Based on this framework an instrument to analyse the extent to which the work environment enhances creativity is developed. We apply this instrument to a sample of 409 employees and find support for the hypothesis that a creative work environment enhances creative performance. We illustrate how the instrument can be used in companies to select and implement improvements