Barriers in Implementing Ergonomics in UK Organizations: A Study

This report examines the reasons behind the low adoption rate of ergonomics in UK workplaces. It identifies barriers such as the perception of ergonomics as merely an occupational health and safety issue, lack of knowledge, and unrealistic expectations for short-term results. The research uses a mixed-methods approach, including semi-structured interviews with employees from three different organizations, and thematic analysis to analyze the collected data. Findings indicate that organizations often fail to recognize the long-term benefits of ergonomics, including improved productivity, quality, and profitability. The report also highlights the importance of participatory ergonomics and provides recommendations for successful implementation strategies. The study emphasizes the need for a holistic approach that integrates ergonomics with workplace health and safety policies to improve overall worker well-being and organizational performance. Desklib provides access to this report and other study tools for students.

Running head: BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Exploring Reason behind poor acceptance of Ergonomic Work Environment in Most of the
Organisations
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Executive Summary
The Purpose of this research is to examine the underlying reason behind the poor acceptance
rate of implementing the ergonomic procedure in UK workplaces. Another goal of this study
is to find appropriate recommendations for the further intervention plan of the ergonomic
work environment in business. Therefore, the objectives of this study are:
 To explore the current workplace environment and workforce management in the UK
 To identify the reasons or barriers behind not adopting the ergonomic work environment
in organisations
 To identify the cost of absenteeism and presenteeism because of not having a proper
ergonomic workplace in British organisations and economy
 To find an appropriate implementation procedure of ergonomic workplace environment
From the literature reviews many existing barriers have been found, which are also known to
the organisations, where there is still some hesitancies to implement ergonomics. According
to the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), the implementation procedure of
ergonomics in the work environment is a major problem in the loss in performance of
organisations in the UK. Around, 6.6 million working days lost due to work-related
musculoskeletal disorders in 2017/18, accounted for 469, 000 (35%) of injuries and illnesses
in the UK which is causing Human Recourse Management related expenditures of around
£1.8 billion per year(HSE, 2018). Hence, it can be said that there are still many things to
explore for further improvement of the organisational process. In the secondary study on
human resource management it can be clearly found that there are some barriers in the
implementation of ergonomic workforce management procedure, which should be identified
and critically analysed. Through this research, the examination of the underlying reason
behind the poor acceptance rate of implementing the ergonomic procedure in UK workplaces

2BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
can be found. Besides, this research can also help to develop implementable strategies
through providing various perceptions and recommendations.
The methodology of this research is highly based on a target sample and case study analysis.
For data collection, both primary and secondary data collection have been used. Primary data
have been collected through Semi-structured Interview of 6 respondents of 3 business
organisations. For this interview, systematic sampling was used for each of the 3
organisations. These 3 organisations are chosen from a different industry. For this research,
qualitative data analysis has been chosen as the data analysis method. More specifically, for
primary data analysis from interview data, the thematic analysis has been used. Choosing an
interview as a primary data collection process will also allow this exploratory research to
explore the unknown factors under workforce management and effectiveness. For the
interview design, the semi-structured interview has been used.
From the data analysis and discussion, it has been found that the organisations are failed to
realise that after dissemination of time in the planning for the entire ergonomics
implementation, high-quality ergonomics can be formed with proper productivity, quality,
and profitability. It has been found from the interview that in different conditions where
assessment is directed to the employees, ergonomics usually creates the impression that it
may not really be a good attempted to evaluate the usage of strategic on the basis of work
related needs of the workforce. It has been found that firms normally use feed forward and
criticism frameworks for dynamic arranging and control cycles, including workplace
improvement strategies, healthiness targets, performance assessments, rewards, and others.
According to most of the interviewees, the purpose of developing a strategy is to ensure that
executed and ongoing business results are to figure out the optimised implication process for
ergonomics. It has been found that participatory ergonomics or PE should be utilized for

3BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
advancement and usage of altered and potentially beneficial ergonomic measures, while
aiming at improved execution of officially arranged ergonomic measures.

4BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Table of Content
Chapter 1: Introduction:.............................................................................................................5
1.1 Poor work environment....................................................................................................5
1.2 Significance of Ergonomics.............................................................................................6
1.3 Problems...........................................................................................................................7
1.4 What do we know about the barriers to implementation?................................................8
Chapter 2: Literature Review.....................................................................................................9
2.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................9
2.2 Workplace environment.................................................................................................10
2.3 The significance of Ergonomics.....................................................................................11
2.4 Factors and barriers in implementing Ergonomics.........................................................13
2.6 Summary:.......................................................................................................................17
Chapter 3: Methodology..........................................................................................................18
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................18
3.2 Research Approach and justification..............................................................................19
3.3 Data collection process...................................................................................................19
3.4 Target Sample and justification......................................................................................22
3.5 Data analysis process and Justification..........................................................................22
3.6 Limitation of Methodology............................................................................................23
Chapter 4: Findings/Analysis and results.................................................................................24
4.1 Descriptions of 3 chosen organisations..........................................................................24

5BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
4.2 Thematic data analysis of interview responses..............................................................25
Chapter 6: Conclusion..............................................................................................................34
References:...............................................................................................................................38

6BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Chapter 1: Introduction:
1.1 Poor work environment
The offices are complex socio-technical systems. The world has admitted more open-
plan style offices, with space for discussion and collaboration. It has been argued by Bigelow
(2016), this causes distractions in concentration at the workplace. When the concentration is
broken, it causes poor performance, which impacts negatively on wellbeing and these
psychosocial factors ultimately may lead to ill health. Distractions from the working
environment and our need to concentrate on the task at hand compete for attention. Also
because of advance in technologies, many working process in every organisational activities
engages the workers in a long hours through using computers and some other primary work
tools. In a large group of organisations employees tend to sit for more than 9 hours a day
behind our desks, which could lead to many physical disorders (Healthy Workforce
Programme, 2017). The human body needs some alteration after staying a particular posture
from a prolonged period. At the same time, the prolonged working time is another highly
discussed issue in human resource management that reduces the workability of any worker.
In many industrialized countries today, Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are very common
type of occupational ill health. In its management of MSDs, WHO (1988) suggested that
organizations combine ergonomic improvements (e.g. rotation, redesign of workstations, or
the introduction of new tools and/or equipment) with compliance-modifying health
promotion activities.
Work environment regulates employee’s physical and mental condition in any
particular working process. Every employee has some needs and expectations from the work
environment that includes both the psychological and physiological concerns. Therefore, the
poor or incompatible work environment can influence the performance of the employee

7BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
significantly by altering the physical and emotional components of the surroundings.
According to environmental psychology (The study of the relationship between individuals
and their surroundings), poorly performing physical environments can increase staff turnover,
make the recruitment of top talent difficult, increase absenteeism and presenteeism and lastly
reduce company profits (Dul and Neumann 2009). Therefore, there is a sharp need for
maintaining a proper office ergonomics that helps to maintain a keen approach in the
development of the operational strength.
1.2 Significance of Ergonomics
As brought out by the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), Ergonomics refers
to the study and the concept of designing the workplace while keeping in minds the abilities
and limitation of the workers. The IEA defines physical ergonomics as “human anatomical,
anthropometric, physiological and biomechanical characteristics as they relate to physical
activity.” These include workplace layout and safety, such as how people sit, stand, move
while doing their work and lighting and heating of the workplace. During the working hours
people use to work on demands with close attention and concentration, while exerting their
energy as well as cognitive resources. During this time the employees have to compensate for
the distraction of any physical discomfort to complete their work comprehensively.
Therefore, as a result of this distress the employees have to experience various chronic
musculoskeletal disorder in a long run. From this concept, the field of ergonomics has
emerged where the field of ergonomics as well human factors is continuously growing and
changing by new technologies to improve the health condition of the employees while
allocating new task to them, in their regular working hours.

8BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Office ergonomics connects incredible significance to the very much planned
workspace, useful workstations, and general inside stylistic layout and it can be applied on a
micro as well as a macro-scale. The reason of implementing ergonomics is to do ergonomics
aligned with the moral imperative workplace design for providing the premises for the
employees to work with ease and efficiency. Through the implementation of ergonomics the
progress in knowledge and technology of any organisation can be reflected through and to
providing economic advantages for the owner as well as other stakeholders. A quality
ergonomics can be applied through utilising new designs while equally prioritising the
intervention in existing designs where the efficacy of the techniques should be judged before
implementation. There are certain circumstances, in which improvement of ergonomic can be
introduced while making them associated with the workplace health and safety policies,
which can holistically can enhance the productivity (Dul and Neumann 2009). On the other
hand, the easy to use equipments, furniture will be both safe and efficient for regular office
use in its operation. In general, through the advantages, ergonomics allows organisations ever
to strive for the holistic improvement of workers as well as system performance, health,
safety, comfort, and overall quality of life, like described in Otto and Scholl (2011). The
study has found the risks of Incorporating ergonomic into assembly line balancing.
1.3 Problems
In the 21st century, globalisation is a major concern of any business industry. With the
use of advanced telecommunication and digital networking, the workforce demand and
labour market have been expanded globally breaking the geographical boundaries. With these
changes, the needs of operational efficiency is also increasing to keep the competence level
of the organisational performance up to date. With the increasing workload the needs of
ergonomics are also increasing in the operational business environment, considering both
onshore and offshore business operations. Globally the employee engagement is declining

9BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
clearly as well as making significance enhancement in employee turnover rate (Scott,
2017).In this critical situation, a very limited number of business organisations have imposed
ergonomic workplace planning for the betterment of their performance and profitability.
With these regards, there must be certain barriers in the traditional ergonomic
workforce management procedure, which should be identified and critically analysed.
According to the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), the implementation procedure
of ergonomics in the work environment is a major problem in the loss in performance of
organisations in the UK.
1.4 What do we know about the barriers to implementation?
As per the problem of the current workforce environment, especially in UK
exploration of underlying reasons behind workplace dilemmas is essential. The major
purpose of this research is to find why do more firms not implement ergonomic work
environments. The major findings that we have currently regarding ergonomics in workplace
environment are:
 Most of the firms perceive ergonomics is an occupational health and safety related
legislation, where the overall organisational performance has become insignificant
 Lack of knowledge to implement the ergonomic strategies
 The firms expect the results in a short period for a long-term organisational strategy like
ergonomics, which reduces their interest.
From the current problems and barriers, it can be said that there are many things to
explore for further improvement of the organisational process. The aim of this research is to
examine the underlying reason behind the poor acceptance rate of implementing the
ergonomic procedure in UK workplaces. Another aim of this study is to find appropriate

10BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
recommendations for the further intervention plan of the ergonomic work environment in
business. Therefore, the objectives of this study are:
 To explore the current workplace environment and workforce management in the UK
 To identify the reasons or barriers behind not adopting the ergonomic work environment
in organisations
 To identify the cost of absenteeism and presenteeism because of not having a proper
ergonomic workplace in British organisations and economy
 To find an appropriate implementation procedure of ergonomic workplace environment
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
The literature review section will focus on the major points mentioned in introduction
sections namely the work environment, the significance of Ergonomic workforce strategy, the
factors and barriers of implementing the strategies and the factors that are still unknown
because of the lack of assessment and accessibility to the practical work environment. The
implementation of the ergonomic strategy and the potential benefit is the well-known topic in
human resource related researches. Ergonomics implies the concept of designing the
workplace while keeping in minds the abilities and limitation of the workers. The literatures
included for the review process are based on the global as well as a regional organisational
crisis in terms of human resource. Considering the absenteeism and presenteeism the study of
ergonomic work environment will include the relevant literature or secondary sources such as
books, research papers, published business reports, articles and case studies. This literature
review will explore the underlying factors behind the productive work environment under the
light of conventional and potential implementation process of ergonomic strategies in work

11BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
environment. The work environment is another major regulator at the same time a major
outcome of human resource management strategies like ergonomics. The barriers to
implementing ergonomics in any organisational environment will also be discussed in this
literature review. Some major factors such a financial contribution, employee satisfaction,
operational understanding, mutual obligations will also be considered while reviewing the
literature. Therefore, the purpose of this literature review is to examine the underlying reason
behind the poor acceptance rate of implementing the ergonomic procedure in UK level and
international level workplaces. Another aim of this study is to find appropriate
recommendations for the further intervention plan of the ergonomic work environment in
business.
2.2 Workplace environment
Workplace environment refers to the physical and non-physical environment of and
workforce. The physical environment includes the organisational infrastructure, lighting,
heating system, types of equipment, hazard control systems and other physical materials that
help to operate the organisational operation. The physical workplace environment is directly
related to the occupational health and safety issue, where the employers are bound to keep
their workplace safe and secure for their employees. Occupational hazard identification, risk
mitigation, reporting are some of the major parts of this system. Musculoskeletal disorders
(MSDs) is the most familiar form of occupational hazards and unhealthy work environment
in most of the industrialised nations. MSDs refers to a wide range of chronic health issues
that causes dysfunctions and pain in muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints, and nerves. These
health issues include several other medical complicacy such as tendon inflammations or
tenosy- novitis, nerve compression disorders or. carpal tunnel syndrome, as well as low back
pain, and other regional pain syndromes. Around, 6.6 million working days lost due to work-
related musculoskeletal disorders in 2017/18, accounted for 469, 000 (35%) of injuries and

12BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
illnesses in the UK which is causing Human Recourse Management related expenditures of
around £1.8 billion per year(HSE, 2018). The term ‘Presenteeism’ means the sub-optimal
performance of those still at work but with difficulty and reduced efficiency/productivity
(Johns, 2009). Work published in the UK estimates that lack of performance and productivity
because of the Presenteeism issue is arround 7.5 times greater than productivity loss because
of the absenteeism issue. (Building the case for wellness, 2008). So it is pretty important to
decrease the presenteeism cost in order to save operating cost and increase the health of the
businesses. At the same time, the prolonged working time is another highly discussed issue in
human resource management that reduces the workability of any worker. Any living
organism, especially the human body needs some alteration after staying a particular posture
from a prolonged period. A national level study on the UK has found that in 90 to 95 per cent
cases the prolonged seated working process creates several health issues such as cervical
Spondylitis, Sciatica, and others.
Three major types of ergonomic hazards can be found in a workplace namely, the
hazard related to the objects, hazards related to the working process and the hazards in the
psychological environment. These health issues impact the concentration level of the
employees as well, which consequently impacts the overall performance level. Lack of space
in the workplace can also reduce the performance of the employees. This situation is also
known as confined space, which often occurred in the mining industry, construction industry,
and similar operation.
2.3 The significance of Ergonomics
Before exploring the limitation of implementing the ergonomic workforce
management, the significance of this workforce management method should be discussed.
According to Whysall, Haslam and Haslam (2004), ergonomics design can help to formulate

13BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
the work environment that increases the operational, financial and ethical benefits
significantly in the long run. The significance of ergonomic is, it uplifts the overall
experience of the labour while making their organisational citizenship behaviour more
compatible for a particular industrial operation.
In terms of the internal and external operation of any enterprise, ergonomic workforce
strategy can provide the most sustainable growth of a business. The major benefit that can be
noticed by the management is a significant reduction of absenteeism, which implies the
greater rate workforce presence in a typical working day. As discussed earlier, Presenteeism
can be noticed in the prolonged working hours, inadequate work environment and other
cases. By providing a flexible and more encouraging work environment the ergonomic
structure can increase the effective engagement level of the employees, which can reflect
better quality of works. The quality of work is highly related to the brand image in any
industry. Therefore, with good quality work, an ergonomic workplace can provide more
market reputation and validity.
Ehrensberger-Dow and O'Brien (2015), argues that the ergonomic environment can
also influence the expectations of the employees from the employer. The study also claims
that the significance of ergonomics cannot only be measured by the health of the employees
and other occupational hazard related issues. On the other hand, the study deducted that the
methodological intervention of ergonomics can improve the sense of morality, legal
compliance and the work engagement of the employees. According to Whysall, Haslam and
Haslam (2004), employee perspective, the ergonomic workforce strategy can improve the
overall profitability in the long run. In this concern, the cost-benefit analysis cannot be very
effective to measure the relative fulfilment of these strategies with other conventional
methods because of its lengthy implementation and reflection process. Studies show that a
company can expect a noticeable improvement in the overall profitability, quality, and

14BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
productivity after 5 to 7 years of successful operation. Decision making, leadership and
management quality can improve the effectiveness of this strategy.
2.4 Factors and barriers in implementing Ergonomics
According to Aylward and Karnon (2015), Poor employer-employee obligation and
lack of contractual work culture is a major obstacle in implementing ergonomic work culture.
The study shows that 36% of SME or small to medium enterprises are still not abiding by the
ethical issues regarding employment contract and obligations. According to the International
Ergonomics Association (IEA), the implementation procedure of ergonomics in the work
environment is a major problem in the loss in performance of organisations in the UK.
Studies have also found that a significant amount of employees lack the awareness of long-
term effects and costs of workplace health issues considering MSDs while involving
ergonomics as a health and life span expansion tool, which has made the organisational
environment become a trapdoor of injuries and health hazards. As per Rothmore, Aylward
and Karnon (2015), there are some highly considerable factors that are creating a barrier in
adopting an ergonomic work environment in an organisation. The study claims that these
barriers can be segregated into three major segments namely, organisational barriers, working
group related barriers and ergonomic measures. The organisation barriers refer to the poor
management commitment, lack of resources and lack of collaborative work structure. The
employer commitment is an essential factor of workforce forming and stabilising. One of the
significant issues in this regard is the lack of proper agreement or supports the ergonomic
measures. Currently, most of the organisations are not aware of the proper significance and
operational procedure of ergonomic work environment, which results in lack of mentioned
points regarding the procedural and legal obligations to the ergonomic structure in the
employment contract. According to Driessen et al. (2010), many European organisations,
especially healthcare institutions face poor funding from various external potential resources.

15BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Lack of funding causes a financial deficiency, which eventually makes the organisation more
focused on short term benefits rather than long term benefits from ergonomic workforce
environment and operation. However, Dul and Neumann (2009), argues that along with the
financial deficiencies, the current labour market is not developed enough to accumulate
ergonomic structure in the workplace. Due to a lack of professional experience and academic
knowledge regarding ergonomics, the implementation of an effective ergonomic structure
becomes difficult for most of the organisations. As a result, reduced health issues such as
obesity, diabetes and others are not properly incorporated in the ergonomic practices in the
business organisations. Eventually, the workforces are becoming weak from both physically,
psychologically and even financial by spending too much money on various chronic diseases.
According to Van Eerd et al. (2016), it has been found that lack of understanding of
the implementation principles of Ergonomic work environment has been posing as one of the
biggest challenges that can be faced. It often causes a lack of interest in the imposition of the
Ergonomics work environment into action in the workplaces. The study has also noted the
factor that the entire implementation program had been perceived as a short-term beneficial
process in some industries and organisations, where people can be appointed to plan and
implement the entire system within the organisation. To show proper outcomes the
Ergonomic strategy requires a prolonged time (Whysall, Haslam and Haslam 2006). This has
been due to the reporting of the appointed people in finding no time out of their day to day
work to analyse the entire workplace and find out the proper ergonomics that needs to be
implemented within the organisation. The studies conducted among the firms, support that
misperception about the beneficial process of implementing ergonomic strategy restricts the
adaptability of this strategy, where the organisations are responsible industries that face the
most amount of interventions within the entire world. This is why the effective interventions
of the Ergonomics could not be possible recently. According to Yazdani and Wells (2018),

16BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
most of the organisations fail to realise that after dissemination of work load and timing in
order to implement planning for the entire ergonomics implementation can stimulate high-
quality performance can be ensured with proper productivity, quality and profitability. As
argued by Whysall, Haslam and Haslam (2004), it has been found that the management has
often considered the accomplishment of ergonomics to be one of the inconsequential things
to implement within the business. It is also supported that the understanding of ergonomics
has been extremely difficult for managing people of any organisation who are in the
executive posts. Therefore, the major barrier is the minimum understanding of ergonomics
and the negative realisation about the potential effects while conducting the cost-benefit
analysis for implementing ergonomics within the organisation. It also results in a minimum
level of support from the management executives under the circumstances of limited human
and financial resource.
Lack of employer obligation and lack of cooperative work culture are two other
obstacles in implementing ergonomic work culture. A large number of respondents indicated
that after repeated requesting and application the management considers the health related
issues of an employee. From the correlation studies has shown that the employee turnover is
highly related to the both physical and mental satisfaction that include the work hours, work
environment, job allocation system. It has been found that most of the companies are very
proactive to make their Human Resource operations legitimate instead of focusing on the
practical results on the health condition of employees because of their existing working
system. In the study Whysall, Haslam and Haslam (2006), opined that there are very few
organisations, which are really worried about the physiological and psychological wellbeing
of their employee. The author also added that the management use to provide an increased
amount of annual increment in payroll rather than providing a free space for the employees
where they can spend some healthy and recreational time with their peers. As a result, most

17BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
of these organisations cannot even conceptualise the framework of the ergonomic work
environment with proper tangibility (Whysall, Haslam and Haslam 2006).
2.5 Limitation and Unknown Issues
Every literature review has some limitations in terms of connectivity with the
dependent and independent variables of the research. This literature review also has some
limitations that restricted the review to be ideal. From the above literature review, it can be
said that the authors of the literature have effectively found out the barriers in the existing
work environment while comparing that the needs and expectations of the workforce. This
review has been explored those underlying factors behind the productive work environment
under the light of conventional and potential implementation process of ergonomic strategies
in human resource. However, the effect changes in work location or changes in personnel due
to the ergonomics implementation plan within the organisation have not been discussed
properly. The literature also pointed out that the reasons behind not implementing the
ergonomic workforce model in the organisation. However, why these psychological issues
and perceptions are still preserved in the core of every industry has not been discussed or
review. The inclusive researches in the literature conducted both primary and secondary
research methods to find out the challenges while the implementation of ergonomic
interventions. In addition to that, changes that the workers use to face on a regular basis, due
to the cultural differences were not discussed broadly. Another essential factor of this
literature review is that it focused more on small to medium. Therefore, the literature and
journals have effectively found the problems associated related to what barriers do firms
experience in implementing a proper ergonomics. Apart from that, the literature review did
not focus on a particularly recommended framework or on a proper plan in order to provide a
systematic solution to the problem. Besides the literature review also failed to measure the
differences in barriers and their impact on the infrastructure of any organisation.

18BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
2.6 Summary:
From the above literature review, it can be concluded that the implementation of the
ergonomic strategy and the potential benefit is the well-known topic in human resource
related researches. It has been found from the literature review that Considering the
absenteeism and presenteeism the study of ergonomic work environment will include the
relevant literature or secondary sources such as books, research papers, published business
reports, articles and case studies. From the above literature review, it can be said that the
authors of the literature have effectively found out the problems in the existing work
environment while comparing that the needs and expectations of the workforce.
It has been found from the literature, that the physical environment includes the
organisational infrastructure, objects, types of equipment, hazard control systems, and other
physical materials that help to operate the organisational operation. The studies also support
that ergonomics design can help to formulate the work environment that increases the
operational, financial and ethical benefits significantly in the long run. Apart from the
employee perspective, the ergonomic workforce strategy can improve the overall profitability
in the long run. It has been found that by decreasing the absenteeism the ergonomic
workforce strategy can increase the total capacity of workload handling, which is very
effective in parallel operations consisting logistics, sales, marketing, production,
procurement, accounts, and others.
From the significance of ergonomics, it has been found that Ergonomics refers to the
study and the concept of designing the workplace while keeping in minds the abilities and
limitation of the workers. The studies on current implementation and barrier of implementing
ergonomic, most of the organisations are not aware of the proper significance and operational

19BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
procedure of ergonomic work environment, which results in lack of mention about the
procedural and legal obligations to the ergonomic structure in the employment contract. This
is why the positive interventions of the Ergonomics could not be possible recently. The
organisations are failed to realise that after dissemination of time in the planning for the
entire ergonomics implementation, high-quality ergonomics can be formed with proper
productivity, quality, and profitability. From the industrial analysis, it has been found that the
major barrier is the minimum understanding of ergonomics and the negative realisation about
the potential effects while conducting the cost-benefit analysis for implementing ergonomics
within the organisation. The studies discussed the different types of issues which are
responsible for the complexities of the incorporation of ergonomics such as the lack of time,
lack of communication skill. The major hypothesis that has been emerged from the literature
review is lack of knowledge about ergonomics, lack of facility, poor management skill, lack
of interest in long term benefit are the major barriers in implementing the ergonomic
workforce management.
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Introduction
In this section, the research approach will be explained with justification, followed by
the explanation of data collection and data analysis process. The target audience will also be
mentioned in this section with proper justification. The tools, which have been used to collect
data through various strategies, will also be explained while discussing the ethical
consideration related to the research method. The purpose of this methodology section is to
discuss the procedure of executing different methods of data collection and analysis in order
to formulate an accurate and valid conclusion. The purpose of this methodology is to collect

20BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
the data from different resources to examine the underlying factors that are restricting the
organisations to adopt ergonomic workforce management.
3.2 Research Approach and justification
According to the situational analysis, the purpose of this research is to identify why
the organisations are not adopting ergonomic workforce management for human resource and
other related operations. Research approach defines the approach of data collection
techniques along with the approach for data presentation and meeting the objectives. The
research approach depends on the purpose and the design of the research (Rubin and Babbie
2016). Therefore, this research is based on the exploration of existing variables acting within
the social, psychological and organisational factors. Hence, this exploratory research needs an
approach that can collect the information from the involved personnel and the case studies of
various industries. The core research approach of this research is inductive where case study
method has been used to strengthen the situational analysis.
3.3 Data collection process
The data collection process implies the process of collecting data from the external
environment such as collecting people's opinions, conducting instrumental research,
reviewing literature and others. Data collection processes can be segregated into two different
types namely the primary data collection and the secondary data collection. The process of
Primary data collection refers to the process of collecting the data from real-time research on
a population or on some subjects (Eriksson and Kovalainen 2015). On the other hand, the
secondary data collection method implies the collection from various project reports, articles,
research papers, publications, books, and others. For this research, the exploration of all the
major factors behind the poor ergonomic implementation has to be examined through
collecting the data. As discussed earlier, the approach of this research is based on a target

21BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
sample and case study based. Therefore, both primary and secondary data have been
collected. Primary data have been collected through Semi-structured Interview of 6
respondents of 3 business organisations. From these case studies, it can be found that why
these organisations were not implemented the ergonomic system and how they made the
business profitable after proper implementation. However, the purpose of the semi-structured
interview is to find the reason behind not implementing the ergonomic work environment.
The reason behind choosing the interview process is it can allow the respondents to answer in
a more open-ended condition without depending too much on the selection of attributes
provided by the research. Choosing an interview as a primary data collection process will
also allow this exploratory research to explore the unknown factors under workforce
management and effectiveness. The interview process can be structured, semi-structured and
unstructured. The structured interview is an interview process similar to the survey. The
significance of utilising the semi-structured interview is it can guide the respondents about
the major factors on which they have to convey their perspectives and also leaves space for
the respondent to reply in their own words. The unstructured interview is more suitable for
longitudinal study, where only one participant is interviewed regarding a very broad
descriptive topic. The focus of this semi-structured interview will be to collect data on the
basis of the following points:
 What do they understand about Ergonomics
 Does their organisation use ergonomics techniques
 What Ergonomics tools and techniques are used in their organisation
 How do they promote ergonomics in their organisation
 What are the challenges faced by their company in terms of presenteeism and
absenteeism of the employee

22BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
 If they do not have a proper ergonomic environment, what are the barriers for
them to implement it
 How do they see their company in the long run in case they have a proper
ergonomic workplace
From the above mentioned factors that we already know from the literature review
some hypotheses can be formed, considering some independent variables, such as financial
condition, knowledge, operational strength and the dependent variable is to be unable to
implement ergonomics successfully. Therefore the following hypothesis can be formed:
 Most of the firms perceive ergonomics is an occupational health and safety related
legislation, where the overall organisational performance has become insignificant
 No agreement or commitment from management is implemented by prioritising the
ergonomic measure
 Lack of financial and human resource to implement the ergonomic strategies
 The firms expect the results in a short period for a long-term organisational strategy like
ergonomics, which reduces their interest.
This research involved the personnel in the data collection process by asking some
valuable questions about their organisational operation. These responses may be confidential
and required protection from unethical utilisation. Hence, ethical consideration is an essential
part of the data collection procedure that holds the validity and authenticity of the research
method and projected results. According to the data protection act and as City university
ethics the personal data of the respondents such as age, name, gender has not been exposed in

23BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
this research. Apart from that, the interview has been conducted after receiving the
acknowledgement from the target respondents, while presenting the purpose of this interview
to them. As per the terms and conditions, they could skip a question or even could quit the
interview process.
3.4 Target Sample and justification
Before conducting primary research, the selection of participants is essential. The
purpose of this primary data collection is to identify the reason behind the poor adaptation of
ergonomic from various organisational perspectives. Hence, 6 participants from 3
organisations have been chosen for the interview. Therefore 6 is the sampling size of this
interview, where from each of the 3 organisation 2 personnel were interviewed. Because of
the limited time to conduct the interview session and the lack of access to the management
personnel of large number of companies, the respondents were chosen from 3 companies.
Sampling style is a major part of any primary data collection method, which can be two types
namely the probability sampling and non-probability sampling. Probability sampling is a
method where respondents are selected randomly without any subdivisions or systematic
selection. On the other hand, non-probability sampling refers to the systematic sampling
under certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. For this interview, systematic sampling was
used for each of the 3 organisations. These 3 organisations are chosen from a different
industry. One company is from the retail industry, one company is from the construction
industry and another one is from a medicine manufacturing industry. The reason behind
choosing these organisations is they are completely different industries in the UK, which can
provide a diverse and more tangibles image of the overall organisational operation. To
comply with the data privacy regulation the name of the company and the name of the
respondents are not disclosed in this research. However, all the respondents are currently

24BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
working in a managerial position in their respective organisations and they are one of the
decision makers in this concern.
3.5 Data analysis process and Justification
The data analysis process is essential for any organisation, which defines the
credibility and authenticity of the research outcomes. The data analysis process is the second
essential part of any research after data collection. A case study represents a description of
the true administrative situation that involves making or solving a decision. It can happen as
described in fact, or portions are disguised because of privacy. This is a real situation. Most
case studies have been written so that the reader is taken over by the manager who must
decide to solve the problem. It is necessary to take a decision in virtually every case study,
although that decision may be to leave things as they are and do nothing.
The Case Method as a Learning Tool For this research, both the primary and
secondary data are mostly non-numeric and qualitative. Therefore, for this research,
qualitative data analysis has been chosen as the data analysis method. More specifically, for
primary data analysis from interview data, the thematic analysis will be used. The theme will
be chosen by coding the responses while prioritising the maximum repeated significant terms.
This analysis is also known as context analysis, which is commonly used in the social studies
and journalism. To analyse the interview results the context analysis will be used.
3.6 Limitation of Methodology
The limitation of methodology implies the results barriers of the current methodology
used for particular research, which restrict the research to obtain the optimum attainability.
Before analysis, the limitation of this research the purpose of this methodology has to be
considered. Considering the methodological approach of this research there are three major
points that are limiting the potentiality of this research such as lack of numeric measurement,

25BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
focusing on only three industries. With regards to the lack of quantitative data from large
sample of firms, it has to be understood that the purpose of this research needs a comparative
measurement of different factors. Therefore, the lack of numerical data collection and
analysis can reduce the feasibility. The significance of utilising the semi-structured interview
is it can guide the respondents about the major factors on which they have to convey their
perspectives. The participants are chosen from 3 industries namely retail, construction, and
finance. Therefore, it can cause biased results, because there are so many other industries
where the ergonomic is becoming a measure issue. Apart from that, the research has been
conducted by taking one firm from each industry. That firm may not be representative of the
situation within the entire industry.
Chapter 4: Findings/Analysis and results
In the following section, the findings from interview session have been analysed
thematically, where the themes have been chosen from the theme used in the literature review
and the themes emerged from the responses of the participants. However, before analysing
the interview responses the background of the companies from which the respondents have
been chosen are discussed.
4.1 Descriptions of 3 chosen organisations
MOAT Housing Association
Moat Housing Association is a construction, architectural organisation that provides
affordable residential buildings and homes in thriving communities mainly in South East
England. From previous fifty years, Moat Housing have delivered high quality construction
projects for affordable rent, retirement purpose and independent living. Moat Housing
Association is one of the 30 partners of Homes England's development. Moat has over 300
employees working in different brunches and departments. Moat provides approximately 500

26BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
new homes per year. Funded by various private finance and government grant Moat is a not-
for-profit organisation.
Organix Brands Ltd.
Founded in 1992 Organix Brands Ltd is one of the leading nutritious food
manufacturer and retailer. Organix Brands specialised on delicious, nutritious baby and
toddler food. Organix Brands provides parents support and advice regarding baby nutrition.
They are committed to working with nutritionists, organic farmers. The company is always
finding for new ideas to improve the quality o their food products through finding the best
organic ingredients for different foods to support the maturations for the baby and their
changing tastes. Currently the company has 200 employees working in different brunches and
departments. The majority of the 200 people employed on logistics and sales tasks, which
require heavy materials to operate and receive advertising information through mail, fax,
email, telephone information and recorded messages.
Farla Medical
Farla Medical is a medical supplier company spread across the UK. The aim of Farla
Medical is to manufacture and supply various types of medical products, while taking care of
the quick delivery with the highest hygiene standards as well as precision production.
Currently Farla Medical has 150 employees in their manufacturing, logistics, stores and
distribution department. The company has one of the largest medical storage system and
logistics channels in UK. Along with the, employees in logistics, manufacturing, distribution
and storage department, they has a considerable amount of employees for back office jobs,
such as accounting, project planning, legal advisors, contractual operators and others. The
company also operates workforce for external operations, such as marketing, sales, delivery
and others.

27BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
4.2 Thematic data analysis of interview responses
From the interview session of 6 managers several key points have been identified,
which are discussed below. It also worth mentioning that these points have been found
frequently in the responses of the interviewee. In the following section, these frequently
mentioned points will be examined thematically, while presenting some of the evidences
directly from the interview within the quotation mark.
Workplace environment
During the interview session the Managers of MOAT Housing Association have
stated that their office is currently facing some issues regarding employee’s health conditions.
From a group of employees a new structure for work timing has been requested repeatedly.
On the other hand, a formal auditing report suggested that the office does not have lighting to
execute the official works properly and the furniture equipments is not in good condition. As
a result the physical distress of the employees is increasing rapidly causing discomfort that
can cause upper limb disorders and other musculoskeletal issues. Managers of Organix
Brands Ltd reported during the interview that the majority of the 170 people employed on
this site do logistics and sales tasks, which require heavy materials to operate and receive
advertising information through mail, fax, email, telephone information and recorded
messages. The work is repetitive, on the other hand, and the employees frequently work to
close terms. The working condition and environment is causing working-related upper limb
disorders within the employees.
According to these managers, some of the managers were proposed a holistic
environmental improvement project, where work environment was assessed by an ergonomist
consultant, and a range of anticipated measures could be taken to improve the situation.
However, due to lack of interest of higher authority and the board members the situation is

28BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
currently getting worse. The managers of Farla Medical said that the staff at this facility
carried out several intensive tasks of hands and arms. These included attachments to suture
threads, inspection and packaging of suture products. The long time working hours is causing
high incidence of the upper limb discomfort and fatigue. However, currently a workout
program plan has been proposed to alleviate the stresses of various repeating tasks. In terms
of operator postures, forces and repetitiveness, the changes in engineering have also led to
improvements.
Significance of ergonomics:
Organix Brands Ltd managers said the company paid around £ 200,000 for human
factors-related wounds during a pre-intervention year. And 14.3 of every 100 employees
reported problems linked to human factors. The costs of these interventions are derived from
the exercise-related production downtime and the reconstruction process. This ergonomic
intervention has been set aside in the annual budget for approximately £ 60,000. After initial
reservations regarding the exercise regimes, the difference could be monitored. The managers
were also supported that as indicated in latest medical records, about 2.9 report problems are
linked to human factors every year , which can be significantly reduced compared to the
previous situation through the utilisation of ergonomics. They also supported the significance
of the ergonomics by stating annual compensation payments for health related compensation
claims have already significantly reduced, due to some simple modification of work
flexibility after 2004.
The managers of the MOAT Housing Association said that the estimated payback
period of ergonomic interventions is very satisfactory. A simple workplace assessment
addressing in particular, any improvements in injury prevention can cause the reductions in
operational timing to complete any task. The managers also stated that ergonomic work
environment can reduce personnel turnover and the associated indirect costs. For the periods

29BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
before and after the procedure, the cost of workforce handling and operation could be
different entirely. The major significant benefit can be found in the hours of production per
employee per year; the average salary costs per employee for the hour of production; the
costs associated with the loss of personnel and the recruitment of new employees; and the
calculated costs related to the recruitment and recruitment of temporary employees. Hence
the new personnel to cover disease and lower productivity in relation to poor equipment or
workplace injuries could bottleneck the performance level of existing employees. According
to the managers of Farla Medical Proper ergonomic intervention can reduced total site wage
cost £ 4,859 per annum while reducing the recruitment costs of £ 9,370 per annum. They also
estimated the other types of cost and stated “reduced loss of wounds of £ 55,374 per year,
would not be impossible”.
Resource as a barrier of implementing ergonomics
At the authoritative dimension, the factor 'resource' had two implications. In the
interview session most of the managers detailed that execution was hampered because of
inadequate money and variable assets. Deficiency of money and variable assets the change in
physical environment through of physical ergonomic measures becomes impossible.
Managers of MOAT Housing Association reported that due to lack of funds, the alteration of
old seats and placement of new seats has just been “a concept of HRM”. During the interview
one manager reflects on the monetary assets as: 'Our administration saved an execution
spending plan to actualize the new chairs, but it is listed in the secondary change management
objectives’. Other managers referenced that the absence of workforce also induced the
monetary disadvantage and subsequently the poor investment in workforce facilitation. usage.
Another manager stated: 'There are numerous down to earth factors which make it difficult
to accomplish something with this ergonomic measure. As of now the lack of investment in
facilitation and workplace modification is the major issue.’

30BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Inadequate facilitation and arrangement as a barrier:
As per numerous managers, 'arrangement' was encouraging the participation of one
implementer for collaborative structure who assumed a main job during the execution
procedure, without considering a leadership ownership that can be experienced as a
limitation. During the interview session, one manager stated: 'As I would like to think this is
on the grounds that the management doesn't discontinue before they meet their objective
while neglecting the facilitation of workplace. It is an extremely imperative factor for this
measure.' With uncommon accentuation towards the execution of individual ergonomic
measures, managers from different companies portrayed that 'arrangement' has been
hampered by the usage of poor financial planning as well as causing a considerable number
of turnover from their working premise. They stated that peoples were left in the working
premise because of the health issues due to the lack of organized ergonomic measures.
Nonetheless, with respect to physical ergonomic measures, most managers mentioned that at
the time of operation they found that the general favourable position of the organized
ergonomic measure was little contrasted while neglecting the needs of the workforce and the
circumstance. One of the managers said during the interview: 'We suspected that five
employees daily would be exchanged by utilizing this lifting gadget, but it was a wrong
measures. The lifting gadget costs some cash however that isn't the issue, the most vital point
is its preference in terms of utility and flexibility’. He also added, ‘I'm as yet not persuaded.'
As indicated by certain managers, the facilitator has to consider all the viewpoints from the
stakeholder of the business regarding the optimised organised ergonomic measure. In these
cases, minimal relative preferred standpoint was seen as a boundary.
A few managers stated that execution was hampered on the grounds that the
ergonomic measures were too hard to even think about implementing with the predicted
period of time. Most managers experienced simple executions as the major contributors: 'It

31BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
was an extremely straightforward assignment, and yes that was vital. A few things you
simply need to do rapidly and I believe that these rapid triumphs are very important.’ In this
interview a couple of managers revealed that the organized ergonomic measure was not truly
perfect at the office and execution was hampered. One of these managers stated: ' That was
another feeling of mine while handling some specialised issues. I gathered data on employee
motivation and empowerment, however screensaver with ergonomic advices was not good
for the placement of the Computers in the workplace, so it couldn't be executed.' In any case,
in this investigation a couple of managers revealed that the organized ergonomic measure
was not truly perfect at the office where the planning process has been already wrongly
executed. One of these managers stated: ' That was my feeling as a sensitive person the
screensaver with ergonomic advices for the employees will not seemed good on the PCs, so it
couldn't be implemented.'
Other barriers and communicational complexity during implementation
As expected from the interview session, there are some additional information
regarding the experiences of the managers and some evidence of effectiveness. In the
following section the experiences regarding the benefit after implementation of the
ergonomic human resource management has been discussed. However, 4 out of 6 managers
clearly stated about their experience regarding ergonomic workplace. The other two
interviewee were refuse to talk about their experience in their own business organisations.
Therefore, the following section includes the responses of 4 managers.
In this investigation, 'Complexity' was possibly seen as a hindrance when the
ergonomic measure seemed, by all accounts, to be unreasonably intricate for the labourers to
promptly comprehend and to utilize it. During the interview one of the managers of Medicine
manufacturing plant stated: ‘we would have actualized the trucks, labourers needed to pursue

32BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
extraordinary instructional courses on the most proficient method to utilize the installed
equipments for loading and unloading.' Many managers of various companies referenced that
similar situation they have faced during some phases of physical ergonomic planning, which
they organized and encountered during the implementation of physical changes. One of the
managers stated: 'Well, the designs to execute new seats were at that point completed, after
the operational congregation meeting was held. Before, the understanding of workforce needs
regarding their searing arrangement was very hard to understand.' Hence, complexity in
communication level is evident.
A further obstruction to accomplish change with employees, found from some of the
interviewees, was that the administration's negligence in integrated information exchange.
The managers stated that the administrations are ‘too busy to increase profit’ instead of
making them accusable to the ground level employees. Accordingly, two interviewees
depicted that they have started to recommend that employees lead 'pilot' programs, to
empower the employer-employee and higher management-ground level employee
relationships. To perceive the sensible vibe regarding the hindrances while actualizing any
change, beginning by focusing on the opinion of ground level employees could be very
helpful. This empowers employees to build up a business case that can be utilized to persuade
the board regarding the advantages of investing the fundamental assets for a long term
benefit. Just one of the six managers distinguished contact with senior administration as a
typical event. For this situation, a manager with 12 years experience stated that it was
common to determine their objectives as the components of their agreement for the
introduction to the initiation decided by their senior administration level. However, most of
the mangers stated that they send their recommendations ahead of time to be discussed with
senior administration during an information collection. Employees' inspirations to be
additionally featured as a key factor in deciding core activities for incorporating ergonomics.

33BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
One manager said: 'yet the day's end it relies upon the association, regardless of whether they
plan to do the changes, which they frequently have the goal (or not) directly from the earliest
starting point.'
The basic experience stated during the interview session was that 'we don't frequently
find the opportunity to development'. General understanding existed with respect to the
absence of proof to help consultancy approaches. Besides, numerous managers are suspicious
while questioning that whether their suggestions are properly completed in the way expected.
One interviewee proposed this 'is either in light of the fact that the managements are not
obviously saving the money for operational growth, the monitoring and controlling process
can reflects how much advantages the implemented plan can make.' As encountered by a
manager, who have more than 10 years experience: 'We once in a while assess, advantages
and disadvantages of making any changes. However, from one viewpoint employees usually
consider it to be an intensive methodology to ensure positive outcome and others simply
choose to run away from the new changes by showing their refusal continuously'. For the
most part however, absence of assessment is the cause of making the administrations'
decision weak. One of the Managers stated: 'We would love to accomplish more to assess
advantages of methodologies, yet as far as I can tell; organizations appear to be unengaged in
assessment.’ Therefore, in this cases managers clarified that they do find the opportunity to
see the results of their suggestions, in spite of the fact that there are some risks of making
ultimate failure while making ergonomic changes within the office premises. At the same
time, a considerable number of interviewees stated an inclination for finding long-term
benefit from the implementation of ergonomics while keeping up long-term associations with
ground level employees.
Strategies for implementation

34BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
The word 'Strategy' might be a valuable organisational point through which
associations may start to disguise ergonomics as a top administration need as well as
comprehensively imparted and absorbed in the association. According to the respondents
interfacing ergonomics to the organization's strategy may furnish business with an
increasingly 'positive' inspiration to apply ergonomics. It has been also supported that
exclusively ergonomics can be able to make open doors for sheltered and sound work, while
improving framework based work execution. Most of the managers consider strategy as the
blend of 'strategy ideas' for achieving business objectives and 'strategy execution'. It
demonstrates a disentangled connection between the defined strategy idea and its execution
practice with regards to the business results. A few desirable business results can be
recognised form the interview session. It has been found that firms normally use feed forward
and criticism frameworks for dynamic arranging and control cycles, including workplace
improvement strategies, healthiness targets, performance assessments, rewards, and others.
According to most of the interviewees, the purpose of the strategy is to ensure that executed
and ongoing business results are to figure out the optimised implication ergonomics.
According to the analysis, it can be sated that the propensity to offer employees a
scope of potential arrangements is attainable. It can be possible because of a blend of some
principle factors: proactive action plan, the multifaceted nature of ergonomics issues and,
managers' acknowledgment. Some managers also stated that even after a effective
implementation, some employees are probably not going to actualize the majority of the
improvement that are made. However, the significance of adopting the ergonomic strategy
can define the profitability holistically. As represented by one interviewee: 'Toward the day's
end, suggestions are just making advancement of ergonomic implementation policies more
feasible and effective, while prioritising the employees feedback that can make a significant
improvement in production, performance and profitability.' A presumption behind this being

35BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
if employees are not arranged towards the most ideal mediation, they will 'ideally accomplish
something as opposed to nothing. Financial benefit and workforce performance are the two
methodologies used to review prescribed changes.’ Clarifying the advantages and
disadvantages of every suggestion and organizing activity, most of the respondents defined
the strategies as a path to improve the probability of employment benefit. Perception of
expense may likewise be a key factor in association with the other proactive determinants
such as operational objectives that defines the value of implementing ergonomics for the
financial benefit and for the deduction of potential dangers within workforce. One of the
interviewee managers clearly stated: 'In my experience, the seriousness of the issue will in
general elevate acknowledgment to take care of business.' Therefore, the significance of
prioritization is highly connected to the intricacy of ergonomic issues. As stated by another
manager: 'Certainly most ergonomics issues are exceptionally intricate, I've discovered that
basically, organizations need conclusive answers—they need to comprehend what they can
do is attainable.'
Chapter 6: Conclusion
From the above analysis, it can be concluded that the implementation of the
ergonomic strategy and the potential benefit is the well-known topic in human resource
related researches. From the above findings, it can be said that the managers of the chosen
companies have effectively found out the problems in the existing work environment while
comparing that the needs and expectations of the workforce. It has been also supported that
ergonomics can exclusively be able to make wide opportunity for improved performance,
while executing a framework based workplace modification. Most of the managers consider
strategy as the blend of perception and ideas of execution. According to most of the
interviewees, the purpose of the ergonomic strategy is to ensure that end term and moderate
level business results will help to figure out the optimised ergonomics implementation

36BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
activity. It has been found that regardless of a director or its agent the perception of higher
administrative on ergonomic measures regulates the operations and decision making power of
the managers while making the implementation plan critical for execution. Arguably it can
be said, ergonomics should also be progressively utilised for the employees who have not yet
experienced issues, yet who are quick to take out potential dangers.
It has been found from the literature, that the physical environment includes the
organisational infrastructure, objects, types of equipment, hazard control systems, and other
physical materials that help to operate the organisational operation. The studies also support
that ergonomics design can help to formulate the work environment that increases the
operational, financial and ethical benefits significantly in the long run. As indicated by
certain managers, during the usage they stayed persuaded of the overall preferred standpoint
of the organized ergonomic measure. Nonetheless, with exceptional respect to physical
ergonomic measures, most managers announced that during the usage they found that the
general favourable position of the organized ergonomic measure was little contrasted with the
present circumstance. Apart from the employee perspective, the ergonomic workforce
strategy can improve the overall profitability in the long run. It has been found that by
decreasing the absenteeism the ergonomic workforce strategy can increase the total capacity
of workload handling, which is very effective in parallel operations consisting logistics, sales,
marketing, production, procurement, accounts, and others. Costs were calculated in a
majority of companies, including the amount of hours each employee is productive for each
year, by an estimate of four elements during the pre-and post-operation periods. In addition,
average wage cost per employee per productive time and costs of employee losses and the
recruitment of new employees are also considered, along with the calculated costs of
recovery and recruitment of temporary personnel to cover diseases and decreased
productivity related to poor equipment or job injury.

37BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
From analysis and discussion, it has been found that Ergonomics refers to the study
and the concept of designing the workplace while keeping in minds the abilities and
limitation of the workers. It has been found from the interview that in different conditions
where assessment is directed to the employees, ergonomics usually creates the impression
that it may not really be a good attempted to evaluate the usage of strategic on the basis of
work related needs of the workforce. The studies on current implementation and barrier of
implementing ergonomic, most of the organisations are not aware of the proper significance
and operational procedure of ergonomic work environment, which results in lack of mention
about the procedural and legal obligations to the ergonomic structure in the employment
contract. It can be concluded by all accounts, because of the interception of two principle
factors: immediate action and the multifaceted nature of ergonomics issues and managers'
acknowledgment, the employees are probably not going to actualize the majority of the
suggestions that are made. It has been also found that most of the potential benefits can be
generated because of ergonomic implementation are time efficiency, cost reduction,
production ability, and empowerment for further business improvement.
It has been found that firms normally use feed forward and criticism frameworks for
dynamic arranging and control cycles, including workplace improvement strategies,
healthiness targets, performance assessments, rewards, and others. According to most of the
interviewees, the purpose of the strategy is to ensure that executed and ongoing business
results are to figure out the optimised implication ergonomics. From the data analysis, it has
been also found that the positive interventions of the Ergonomics could not be possible
recently. The organisations are failed to realise that after dissemination of time in the
planning for the entire ergonomics implementation, high-quality ergonomics can be formed
with proper productivity, quality, and profitability. From the industrial analysis, it has been
found that the major barrier is the minimum understanding of ergonomics and the negative

38BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
realisation about the potential effects while conducting the cost-benefit analysis for
implementing ergonomics within the organisation. Perception of expense may is a factor that
causes hesitance to take action proactively with deterrent measures, neglecting the short term
monetary advantage to diminish potential dangers within the workforce before they have
emerged. From a case study, it is clearly found that after initial reservations concerning the
exercise regimes, employee feedback was very positive can provide significant physical
comfort. The studies discussed the different types of issues, which are responsible for the
complexities of the incorporation of ergonomics such as the lack of time, lack of
communication skill.
According to the recommendations, it can be said that PE or participatory ergonomics
can be utilized for both the advancement and usage of advanced ergonomic measures just as
to enhance the quality of execution within officially arranged ergonomic measures.
Moreover, the working place modification plan sometimes become critical for execution,
implying that a manager who is qualified for settle on choices at the office level and
workforce individuals who can assume a main job should take the modification procedure
seriously to make the ergonomics incorporated within the workplace. Peers participation can
significantly encourage the execution ergonomic incorporation. Henceforth, it is
recommended that management should engage the workforce to maintain the changed
policies and procedure. The consequences of several auditing and feedback collection can be
utilised to improve additionally the PE programs as a strategy for implementing ergonomics.
As a result of improved execution, Absenteeism and Presenteeism occurrence among
employees can be significantly decreased.

39BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS

40BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
References:
Arezes, P.M., Dinis-Carvalho, J. and Alves, A.C., 2015. Workplace ergonomics in lean
production environments: A literature review. Work, 52(1), pp.57-70.
Bryman, A., 2016. Social research methods. Oxford university press.
Cantley, L.F., Taiwo, O.A., Galusha, D., Barbour, R., Slade, M.D., Tessier-Sherman, B. and
Cullen, M.R., 2014. Effect of systematic ergonomic hazard identification and control
implementation on musculoskeletal disorder and injury risk. Scandinavian journal of work,
environment & health, 40(1), p.57.
Deros, B.M., Daruis, D.D.I. and Basir, I.M., 2015. A study on ergonomic awareness among
workers performing manual material handling activities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 195, pp.1666-1673.
Driessen, M.T., Groenewoud, K., Proper, K.I., Anema, J.R., Bongers, P.M. and van der Beek,
A.J., 2010. What are possible barriers and facilitators to implementation of a Participatory
Ergonomics programme?. Implementation Science, 5(1), p.64.
Driessen, M.T., Proper, K.I., van Tulder, M.W., Anema, J.R., Bongers, P.M. and van der
Beek, A.J., 2010. The effectiveness of physical and organisational ergonomic interventions
on low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review. Occupational and environmental
medicine, 67(4), pp.277-285.
Dul, J. and Neumann, W.P., 2009. Ergonomics contributions to company strategies. Applied
ergonomics, 40(4), pp.745-752.
Ehrensberger-Dow, M. and Heeb, A.H., 2016. Investigating the ergonomics of the
technologized translation workplace. Reembedding Translation Process Research, pp.69-88.

41BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Ehrensberger-Dow, M. and O'Brien, S., 2015. Ergonomics of the translation
workplace. Translation Spaces, 4(1), pp. 98–118.
Eriksson, P. and Kovalainen, A., 2015. Qualitative methods in business research: A practical
guide to social research. Sage.
Gaines, B.R. and Monk, A.F., 2015. Cognitive Ergonomics: Understanding, Learning, and
Designing Human-Computer Interaction. Academic Press.
Ganiyu, S.O., Olabode, J.A., Stanley, M.M. and Muhammad, I., 2015. Patterns of occurrence
of work-related musculoskeletal disorders and its correlation with ergonomic hazards among
health care professionals. Nigerian Journal of Experimental and Clinical Biosciences, 3(1),
p.18.
Gubrium, A.C., Hill, A.L. and Flicker, S., 2014. A situated practice of ethics for participatory
visual and digital methods in public health research and practice: A focus on digital
storytelling. American Journal of Public Health, 104(9), pp.1606-1614.
Healthy Workforce Programme. 2017. [online] Available at:
https://www.nhsemployers.org/-/media/Employers/Documents/Retain-and-improve/Health-
and-wellbeing/Webinar-slides-sickness-absence-MSK-221117.pdf?
la=en&hash=DC849F4A14FECD6FB628CC46FE5C9CF35F08C125 [Accessed 14 Nov.
2018].
Hse.gov.uk. 2017. Health and safety at work Summary statistics for Great Britain 2017.
[online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overall/hssh1617.pdf [Accessed 4
Nov. 2018].

42BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Hussein, S., Ismail, M. and Manthorpe, J., 2016. Changes in turnover and vacancy rates of
care workers in England from 2008 to 2010: panel analysis of national workforce
data. Health & social care in the community, 24(5), pp.547-556.
International Ergonomics Association., 2019. Definition and Domains of Ergonomics.
[online] Available at: https://www.iea.cc/whats/ [Accessed 18 Feb. 2019].
Jeon, S.H., Leem, J.H., Park, S.G., Heo, Y.S., Lee, B.J., Moon, S.H., Jung, D.Y. and Kim,
H.C., 2014. Association among working hours, occupational stress, and presenteeism among
wage workers: results from the second korean working conditions survey. Annals of
occupational and environmental medicine, 26(1), p.6.
Jose, G. and Mampilly, S.R., 2012. Satisfaction with HR practices and employee
engagement: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Economics and Behavioral
Studies, 4(7), pp.423-430.
Kuimet, K., Järvis, M. and Virovere, A., 2016. Integrating ergonomics principles and
workplace health protection and promotion to improve safety and health at work: Evidence
from Estonia. Agron. Res, 14(2), pp.460-474.
Martínez-Aires, M.D., Rubio Gámez, M.C. and Gibb, A., 2016. The impact of occupational
health and safety regulations on prevention through design in construction projects:
Perspectives from Spain and the United Kingdom. Work, 53(1), pp.181-191.
Morag, I. and Luria, G., 2013. A framework for performing workplace hazard and risk
analysis: a participative ergonomics approach. Ergonomics, 56(7), pp.1086-1100.
Neuman, W.L. and Robson, K., 2014. Basics of social research. Toronto: Pearson Canada.

43BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Padgett, D.K., 2016. Qualitative methods in social work research (Vol. 36). Sage
Publications.
Rasmussen, C.D.N., Lindberg, N.K., Ravn, M.H., Jørgensen, M.B., Søgaard, K. and
Holtermann, A., 2017. Processes, barriers and facilitators to implementation of a participatory
ergonomics program among eldercare workers. Applied ergonomics, 58, pp.491-499.
Rothmore, P., Aylward, P. and Karnon, J., 2015. The implementation of ergonomics advice
and the stage of change approach. Applied ergonomics, 51, pp.370-376.
Rubin, A. and Babbie, E.R., 2016. Empowerment series: Research methods for social work.
Cengage Learning.
Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research
methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley & Sons.
Van Eerd, D., King, T., Keown, K., Slack, T., Cole, D.C., Irvin, E., Amick III, B.C. and
Bigelow, P., 2016. Dissemination and use of a participatory ergonomics guide for
workplaces. Ergonomics, 59(6), pp.851-858.
Wallace, M. and Sheldon, N., 2015. Business research ethics: Participant observer
perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), pp.267-277.
Whysall, Z., Haslam, C. and Haslam, R., 2006. Implementing health and safety interventions
in the workplace: An exploratory study. International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 36(9), pp.809-818.
Whysall, Z.J., Haslam, R.A. and Haslam, C., 2004. Processes, barriers, and outcomes
described by ergonomics managments in preventing work-related musculoskeletal
disorders. Applied Ergonomics, 35(4), pp.343-351.

44BARRIERS IN IMPLEMENTING ERGONOMICS IN ORGANISATIONS
Yazdani, A. and Wells, R., 2018. Barriers for implementation of successful change to prevent
musculoskeletal disorders and how to systematically address them. Applied ergonomics, 73,
pp.122-140.
Otto, A. and Scholl, A., 2011. Incorporating ergonomic risks into assembly line
balancing. European Journal of Operational Research, 212(2), pp.277-286.