 Introduction (3 marks)

 Main idea (12 marks)

 Conclusion (3 marks)
 References (2 marks)

3. Word counts: 2,000-2,500

4. Font: Arial 11/ Times New Roman 12

5. Line spacing: 1.5

Explain FOUR main obstacles for applying ergonomic principles in the workplace and
suggest suitable methods to overcome the problems

a lack of time was frequently identified as a challenge to

implementing MSD prevention activities in the workplace. One
study indicated ergonomics team members felt their position on the
ergonomics team was secondary to their main responsibilities.
Another study suggested the onsite staff didn’t have time to be
properly trained on ergonomics, therefore dramatically limiting the
effectiveness of the program.The majority of respondents (78%-79%) agreed that
staffing and workload can affect the time available to use mechanical equipment. Of these,
failure to use assistive devices in patient handling occurs most often with ambulation.
nurses’ perceived staffing levels and workload, availability and accessibility of equipment,
and emergent patient needs as the leading time constraints contributing to the lack of
assistive device use in patient handling and mobility. When time is scarce, the most
convenient, but not necessarily the safest, method of patient handling will most often prevail
over team member safety (Noble & Sweeney, 2018)

(Yazdani & Wells, 2018)The communication between various stakeholders, both internal and external to an
organization, is a key component to the success of any MSD prevention program. The communication
challenge exists at not just the individual level, but also between departmental structures of
the organization. Silos and disparate responsibilities for musculoskeletal health activities will
prevent the right information getting to the right people at the right time. Define
and
communicate responsibilities to all members of the team to ensure
the success of your MSD prevention process
LACK OF NOWLEDGE  in order to maximize the impact of ergonomics training, the training should be
coupled with an ergonomic intervention to address workplace health concerns. Lack of knowledge and
training The literature suggests that many people are misinformed, or completely naive, with respect to MSD
hazards in the workplace. Workers are rarely aware of the relation between work and MSD and nearly
universally underestimate the risk of accidents at work. Beyond awareness, workers also lacked knowledge
of how the implementation of ergonomic interventions would be beneficial to the prevention of strains and
other MSDs.(Yazdani & Wells, 2018). In countries with developing economies, the
implementation of ergonomics interventions may be limited by a general
lack of knowledge of ergonomics, the assumption that ergonomics is a
luxury and not part of a comprehensive approach to workplace safety and
health, and a limited number of qualified ergonomists (Scott et al.,
2010; Guimarães et al., 2014). In developing countries such as India, office
ergonomics is largely disregarded. The health of the Indian workforce is
plagued by MSD symptoms due to poor workstation design, child labour
and the absence of labour-saving equipment for rural women engaged in
agricultural work . A study on the adoption of ergonomics innovations
among vegetable farmers in the United States divided the farmers into two
main groups: potential adopters of the innovations and those not interested
(Karsh et al., 2013). Similar to our study, Karsh et al. (2013) clearly
demonstrated how lack of information support among potential adopters
could be a barrier. Furthermore, farmers who were not interested in
adopting innovations developed a negative attitude because they had no
information support relating to the benefits and return on
investment following the adoption of innovations (Koma et al., 2018)

Lack of resources. REFUSE TO INVEST ON ENGINEERING CONTROL Lack of resources - one

of the most common challenges to the implementation of MSD prevention interventions. In many cases, the organization
in which the intervention was to be implemented encountered insufficient budgets to begin or maintain the program.
Having a lack of resources negatively impacts the effectiveness of implementing MSD prevention control measures. The
question to ask, though, is why don’t ergonomics and injury prevention activities get the resources they need? Several
studies indicated implementations lacked funding because the organization focused on the short-term price rather than
the long-term value.. Insufficient financial resources most often played a role
during the implementation of physical ergonomic measures (i.e., new
chairs). Re-engineering is often the recommended/needed solution and may require
significant capital expenditureThe cost of a baseline ergonomic assessment can reach a five
figure amount very quicklyExample:Production Line redesign costs in excess of $600KA
baseline assessment at one of our new facilities was in excess of $25K. No Health and Safety
professional (advocate role)No on-site engineering expertiseNo budget for health and safety
projectsReduced level of Ministry of Labour resourcesJHSC members do not have adequate
level of training or knowledgeTraining – Turnover/Expectations are often too
highErgonomics added to the list of responsibilities with no time allotted to use the acquired
trainingTrainees may not have the necessary technical capabilities

Management commitment. The factor 'management commitment' referred to whether the

management supported or did not support the implementation of the prioritised ergonomic
measure. Despite a (department) manager or its representative attending the working group
meeting and approving the implementation of the prioritised ergonomic measure, the
implementers still reported this factor as being important for implementat ion. Management
The
commitment was in most cases mentioned as a facilitator (Yazdani & Wells, 2018).
literature suggests that extensive support from top management is
required to maintain participant motivation and avoid the disconnect
of management’s role in the implementation process. Where
ergonomics is not viewed as a priority compared to other design
parameters or isn’t given the support it needs, it often causes
difficulties with employee buy-in to new prevention activities. The
people behind the process are what make it work (Yazdani & Wells,
2018). A recent literature review found that management commitment was the most
important facilitator towards successful implementation of a workplace health programme,
because management is able to ensure the availability of the required resources
Importance
 Reduces costs.
 Increases productivity.
 Improves quality.
 Improves employees’ engagement.
 Creates a better safety culture.

Principle
1. Work in neutral postures
2. Reduce excessive force
3. Keep everything in easy reach (comfort zone)
4. Work at proper height
5. Reduce excessive motions
6. Minimize fatigue and static load
7. Minimize pressure points
8. Provide clearance
9. Move, exercise and stretch
10. Maintain comfortable environment

Worker capabilities and limitations

Task demand:
duration of task.
peak and cumulative loading especially repetitive work.
length of working day.
Work postures:
overhead stretching.
stooping, forward- reaching.
kneeling or crouching.
asymmetrical activities.
Mental demands:
understanding of, and training in new technology.
work responsibilities.
work demands and job decision latitude.

(Rostykus, 2012)

Funding for training and engineering solutions is the largest and most common
challenge identified by more than 90 percent of companies. In some situations,
funding is not available when workplace changes are needed, and in many cases,
the issue is that people (engineers, ergonomics team members, etc.) do not know
the process for obtaining funding. The key lesson here is to understand and define
whether and how funding will be available for ergonomic improvements. If funding
is not available, the organization is not prepared for success.
The second-most-common challenge is failure to use or meet established
ergonomic design standards. These standards might include office furniture and
layout, limits to manual lifting, and geometry of the tools and workstations. If they
are provided but not used, the improvement process will continue to introduce
poor tool and workstation designs, which later require teams to put in time and
effort to assess and fix them reactively.

As EHS professionals, we must continue to leverage new research, technology,

methods, and business practices to help employers provide workstations and tasks
that are designed to reduce employee wear and tear. We've learned a lot during
the past 30 years, and we'll continue to learn more and improve the application of
ergonomics in the next 30.

(Sinkwitts, 2014)
With all the changes and complexities to consider, managing the
modern office workplace is indeed a challenge. At the center of the
challenge is the need for organizations to maintain stimulating and
healthy environments for their employees. As the physical office and
work tasks continue to evolve, we also must continue to evaluate the
office environment and adjust it accordingly to make sure employees
are willing and able to come to work every day. Increasing your
awareness of existing and potential ergonomic issues in the office,
knowing how to adjust the office workstation to fit the office worker,
using proper work practices and following a proven ergonomic
improvement process within your organization can improve overall
comfort and productivity at work. Improving ergonomics in the office
is not difficult, and provides great benefits: An increase in employee
comfort and productivity equals a lower risk for work-related injuries. 

(Scott, 2008)
However, due to the debilitating life style of many of the workers, the poor
state of working conditions, and the lack of overall organisation and
planning, they are locked into a negative spiral (Scott and Charteris, 2004).
Appropriate guidance in the field of ergonomics to improve productivity,
while reducing the physical and mental demands imposed on the workers,
would help these countries fulfil their potential to become more viable in
the world market. The principles on which ergonomics operates need to be
introduced with sensitivity to the indigenous work force and interventions
need to be modified where necessary to suit local conditions; they need to
be shown to be effective, and above all, made sustainable. Only then can we
ensure that the shackles of under-development will be thrown off and
global inequality will begin to be reduced. The challenge for many
ergonomists is to look beyond their own technologically advanced
environment, and to be more aware of the harsh realities of extensive areas
around the world and the needs of the majority of workers on a global scale.
We have an obligation to promote and apply ergonomics where it is most
needed viz. industrially developing countries.

Taking it further, once the initial problem has been sorted out, wherever
possible, it is beneficial to follow up with an in-house ergonomics workshop
involving a cross-section of employers and employees. The basic concepts
of ergonomics need to be covered, drawing on examples from within the
company to illustrate specific points. Thus, a symbiotic relationship
between the consulting ergonomics expert on one hand, and company
experts on the other, is established and an ergonomics ethos is built up
within the company. Having conducted several workshops in Southern
Africa, Scott and Shahnavaz (1997) found that it was not difficult to identify
individual workers who are both interested in, and have a feeling for
ergonomics. The involvement and commitment of these floor workers
needs to be encouraged and can ultimately lead to the establishment of an
“Ergonomics Facilitation Team” within the company (Scott, 2005). In IDCs,
where fully qualified ergonomists are few in number, it is necessary to
encourage company workers to promote ergonomics and to motivate the
participation of fellow workers. These facilitators from within the company
can provide “an auto-catalytic impetus for sustained improvement in
industry” (Scott, 2007).

(Martin et al., 2008)

Like many manufactured products, a huge proportion of medical devices
are developed by small companies who are unlikely to have the resources to
employ ergonomics consultancies or staff with specific ergonomics
expertise. This should not be a barrier to adopting ergonomics principles.
The role of the ergonomics community should be to provide resources and
knowledge that allow product developers, engineers, academics and
clinicians to make decisions on the best use of their resources for studying
user requirements during the development of their product. Even if these
resources are extremely limited it is preferable that a small, well-planned
and well-conducted study is performed rather than no attempt to capture
user requirements, which may be the realistic alternative. Developers are
more likely to adopt ergonomics principles if they believe that doing so will
benefit them in terms of either improved sales, a better quality product or a
more efficient development pathway: 

Involve employees at all levels Implement sustainable communication mechanisms (weekly

safety talks, ergonomics newsletters or bulletin boards)Include ergonomics in the mandate
of the JHSC, or implement a separate committeeInclude employees who perform the
jobs/tasks in related design-level risk assessments, and development of
JTA’s/JSA’s/PDA’sMarch 4th, 2008

21  What Can/Should We Do About It?

Ergonomic Sciences made a mandatory component of the Engineering and Industrial
Technology curriculums Need more Industrial Engineers/Technicians w/Ergonomic
specialization Existing ergonomic staff part of Engineering – not H&S functionMarch 4th,
2008

22  What Can/Should We Do About It?

Increase training (awareness and specific) in a workshop format, where effectiveness is
gauged to measure transfer of knowledge. Develop more user-friendly assessment tools –
users need to understand the limitations of these tools and what can/should be done with
the assessment results March 4th, 2008

23  What Can/Should We Do About It?

Key – implement design-level risk assessments on new or significantly modified equipment,
machinery or process installations. Pre-Start Review (PSR) may not adequately cover
ergonomic design. Risk Assessments are a component of a quality H&S Management
SystemMarch 4th, 2008

Create a culture of change in the facility (understand current culture, determine

mission/vision/values of desired culture, change employee behaviour) Improve employee
morale - design, promote, and implement positive interaction activities throughout the
entire employee population. Apply job rotation as a method of stimulation (ensure that it is
ergonomically appropriate). Provide training to complement and increase job knowledge.
March 4th, 2008

26  Summary Design-Level Risk Assessments

Ergo-educated Engineers/TechnologistsInvolve employeesTraining and
educationCommunicationCreate a culture of Change

Introduction

The study of individuals in their working environments is generally referred to as

ergonomics. According to (Center of Disease Control and Prevention,
2020) Anizar, Matondang, A. R., Ismail, R., & Nazaruddin. (2020). Management
Support in Enhancing Participatory Ergonomic Interventions in Palm Oil
Industry. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 851(1).
 https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/851/1/012016

Center of Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal

Disorders | NIOSH | CDC.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/default.html

Champoux, D., & Brun, J. P. (2003). Occupational health and safety management in
small size enterprises: an overview of the situation and avenues for intervention
and research. Safety Science, 41(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-
7535(02)00043-7

Falck, A. C., & Rosenqvist, M. (2012). What are the obstacles and needs of
proactive ergonomics measures at early product development stages? - An
interview study in five Swedish companies. International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 42(5), 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2012.05.002

Karsh, B. T., Newenhouse, A. C., & Chapman, L. J. (2013). Barriers to the adoption
of ergonomic innovations to control musculoskeletal disorders and improve
performance. Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 161–167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2012.06.007

Koma, B. S., Bergh, A.-M., & Costa-Black, K. M. (2018). Barriers to and facilitators
for implementing an office ergonomics programme in a South African research
organisation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.09.003

Martin, J. L., Norris, B. J., Murphy, E., & Crowe, J. A. (2008). Medical device
development: The challenge for ergonomics. In Applied Ergonomics (Vol. 39,
Issue 3, pp. 271–283). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2007.10.002

McLean, L., & Rickards, J. (1998). Ergonomics Codes of Practice: The Challenge of
Implementation in Canadian Workplaces. Journal of Forest Engineering, 9(1),
55–64.
https://www.academia.edu/17172350/Ergonomics_Codes_of_Practice_The_Ch
allenge_of_Implementation_in_Canadian_Workplaces

Noble, N. L., & Sweeney, N. L. (2018). Barriers to the Use of Assistive Devices in
Patient Handling. Workplace Health and Safety, 66(1), 41–48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2165079917697216

O’Neill, D. (2005). The promotion of ergonomics in industrially developing countries.

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(2), 163–168.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ERGON.2004.04.016

Olabode, S. O., Adesanya, A. R., & Barake, A. A. (2017). Ergonomics Awareness

and Employee Performance: An Exploratory Study. Economic and
Environmental Studies, 17(44), 813–829.
https://doi.org/10.25167/ees.2017.44.11

Rostykus, W. (2012). Five changing trends in managing workplace ergonomics.

Occupational Health & Safety (Waco, Tex.), 81(10).
https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2012/10/01/Five-Changing-Trends-in-Managing-
Workplace-Ergonomics.aspx
Scott, P. (2008). Global inequality, and the challenge for ergonomics to take a more
dynamic role to redress the situation. Applied Ergonomics, 39(4), 495–499.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.02.014

Sinkwitts, J. (2014). Five Steps To Improve Ergonomics in the Office. EHS Today,
7(1), 33–34. https://www.ehstoday.com/industrial-hygiene/article/21916061/five-
steps-to-improve-ergonomics-in-the-office

Yazdani, A., & Wells, R. (2018). Barriers for implementation of successful change to
prevent musculoskeletal disorders and how to systematically address them.
Applied Ergonomics, 73, 122–140.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2018.05.004

, occupational ergonomics is a study devoted to creating workplaces for both

employees and employers that are healthier, safer, more pleasant, and more
productive. The ergonomics concept makes sure that the workplace layout
enhances the consumer's ability strengths and works to reduce their effort  rather
than making them adapt. Working in accordance with the principles increases
employee engagement and fosters a secure workplace. Most significantly,
applying ergonomic concepts to everyday operations may help to avoid
Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDS). However, it is not simple to put effective and
sustainable concepts into practise in the workplace. Numerous challenges that
prevent the use of ergonomics principles can be addressed.

Conclusion

It is clear that some effort is needed before ergonomic principles are used.
The findings show how crucial it is to follow ergonomic principles while
establishing an organisation. Even if it might be challenging to adjust to the
principles, problems can be solved with better strategies. Of which, education
and training are regarded as crucial components of an effective ergonomic programme (Soubi
et al., 2013), as they may expose workers with concepts such risk identification, risk
reduction, occupational diseases, etc., which are crucial for the process of ergonomic
improvement. The employee's potential in terms of skills, capabilities, and knowledge to
carry out their assigned tasks may rise as a result. A effective ergonomic programme must
also include, in addition to training and educating, administration, employee involvement, the
implementation of solutions, and programme assessment. In particular, the
implementation must promote open communication between management and
employees, allowing management to deal with high-risk areas after employees
have detected them. Employees must get enough education to recognise hazards
(McLean & Rickards, 1998). In response, they will contribute to reducing the
administrative and financial load brought on by the prevalence and severity
of workplace injuries among employees.
Obstacles in Applying Ergonomic Principles in Workplace

Lack of Support

The term "management commitment" related to whether the management supported the
application of the ergonomic principles that were given priority. The problem of commitment
affects departments within an organisation as well as individuals at all levels. Despite the
command from top management in every workplace, it was middle management and
supervisors who, for the most part, had to cope with the practical problems when working. It
is hardly unexpected that getting their commitment is a constant battle given the pressures
they endured. A study among palm oil workers in Indonesia indicated that management
commitment and support does promote active participation from workers (Anizar et al.,
2020). Management support in this matter is management’s willingness to facilitate and to
allocate the time needed to review plans and get results. According to research, top
management must provide comprehensive assistance in order to keep employee motivation
high. Employee participation to new safety measures frequently struggles when ergonomics
is not emphasized above other criteria or is not provided the support they require. When in
fact, the employees that manage the process are what make it functional (Yazdani & Wells,
2018). Any WMSDs prevention program's effectiveness is largely dependent on the support
and communication of numerous stakeholders, both inside and outside of an organisation.

Lack of resources.

One of the most frequent obstacles to the application of ergonomic principles is a lack of
resources. In many instances, the organisation for which intervention was to be applied ran
into financial difficulties starting or throughout the operation. Lack of resources has a
detrimental influence on how well ergonomic principles are used. More than 90% of
businesses see funding for engineering and training solutions as their biggest and most
regular problem. When workplace improvements are required, financing may not always be
available, and typically, the problem is that experts (engineers, members of the ergonomics
team, etc.) are unaware of how to get funds. Olabode et al., (2017) shown that the
performance of employees has been negatively impacted by ergonomics flaws at the Ghana
National Petroleum Company (GNPC), including inadequate office lighting, the usage of
uncomfortable furniture, and a dangerous working environment. Moreover, some businesses
choose not to spend money on engineering controls because they are more concerned with
short-term costs than long-term benefits. Engineering control is commonly the suggested
approach and may involves huge capital investment. On the other hand, investing in
engineering control may be expensive, particularly for a newly developed company. The fact
that small businesses are unlikely to have the funding to hire ergonomics consultancies or
people with specialised ergonomics experience should not prevent them from implementing
ergonomics concepts. Even if there are very few resources available, it is better to do a
short, carefully planned, and well-executed research than to make no attempt at all, which
may be the more practical choice. If a company believes that implementing ergonomics
principles would increase sales, enhance job quality, or provide a more effective
development path, they are more inclined to do so.
Lack of Knowledge

Workers frequently underestimate the risk of workplace hazards and are hardly aware of the
link between working and WMSDs. Workers were not only unaware of ergonomic principles,
but also did not understand how applying them would help avoid strains and other MSDs
(Yazdani & Wells, 2018). The application of ergonomics principles may be discouraged in
nations with developing economies by a general lack of knowledge of ergonomics along with
the perception that ergonomics is an expensive affair and not a crucial component of a
comprehensive strategy for workplace safety and health, as well as a shortage of qualified
ergonomists. Workplace ergonomics are usually dismissed in underdeveloped nations like
India. Due to inappropriate workstation design, child labour, and a lack of technical
equipment for rural women working in agriculture, WMSDs symptoms affect the Indian
workforce's health (O’Neill, 2005). Vegetable planters in the United States were categorized
into two primary categories in a research on the adoption of ergonomics advances. Those
who may adopt the innovations and those who were not interested (Karsh et al., 2013). They
successfully depicted how potential adopters' lack of knowledge may be an obstacle.
Additionally, because they lacked knowledge on the advantages and returns on investment
associated with adopting innovations, farmers who were not interested in doing so made a
pessimistic outlook (Koma et al., 2018).

Lack of Time

Workers frequently favoured the old way because they were skeptical about how long it
would take to adopt a different tool. Since not enough time was given to this purpose in
addition to employees' other prioritised duties, it was determined that time was one of the
barriers to the establishment of successful ergonomic principles. 28% of businesses
surveyed in a study of 223 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) said that a lack of
time prevented ergonomic development (Champoux & Brun, 2003). The employees voiced
concern regarding the length of time needed to grasp a new method or tool, or the site
where it was tested. When a new tool or instrument was introduced, employees had to
change the way they worked. It was noted that the ergonomic interventions were rather time-
consuming, which caused delays in implementing the essential adjustments. In these
situations, workers preferred the old method of doing things compared to the new ones
(Yazdani & Wells, 2018). Around 80% of nurses, according to Noble & Sweeney, (2018)
stated that workload and staffing shortages can influence the amount of time available to
operate mechanical equipment. With regard to this, the most frequent failure to employ
assistive equipment in patient management involves ambulation. The major time constraints
preventing the use of assistive devices for patient handling and movement are nurses'
perceptions of the equipment's accessibility and availability, as well as urgent patient
demands. When there is a time pressure, the quickest patient management approach is not
always the safest—will typically receive priority.

Methods in Solving the Obstacles

The safety program's goal is to reduce injuries by elimination of their causes. The key to
attaining this goal is having an effective ergonomic programme. A effective ergonomic
programme in the workplace depends on a number of factors.

Management Commitment & Support

According to a recent study of the literature, management commitment is the key factor in
the application of the ergonomic principle since management can provide the availability of
the necessary tools. Participatory ergonomic principles must be consistently supported by
management at all levels, as well as by workers' involvement and authority involvement. The
management makes decisions on all areas of production and development activities in its
position as a policymaker. The importance of management support must be acknowledged
initially if an organization hopes to create a successful participatory ergonomic intervention
strategy. Work adjustment, workplace redesigning, and autonomy in working are a few
examples of the types of support management parties may provide so that workers can work
to the fullest potential and reduce health risks. Giving employees what they need will boost
their involvement, which will enhance their comfort and acceptance of the implementation of
ergonomics (Anizar et al., 2020).

Increase awareness
Managing a workplace is undoubtedly difficult with all the changes and complications to take
into account. The necessity for businesses to keep their employees in workplaces that are
engaging and healthy is at the root of the issue. To ensure that staff members are motivated
and capable of reporting to work each day, they must continuously assess the office
environment and make the necessary adjustments. Overall comfort and productivity at work
can be increased by raising awareness of current and potential ergonomic issues in the
workplace, learning how to customise the workstation to the individual worker, implementing
proper work procedures, and adhering to an established ergonomic improvement process
within the organisation (Sinkwitts, 2014). Although it may be challenging for the employees
to adjust to a new working environment and equipment, with awareness they will ultimately
understand its significance. Employing an ergonomist, counselling, and ongoing support are
some methods for raising awareness. A study of fisherman found that going to counselling
increased their understanding and further decreased their concerns about WMSDs (Sholihah
et al., 2016). This demonstrates that enhancing ergonomics at work has significant
advantages, including an improvement in worker comfort and productivity, which leads to a
decreased risk for work-related accidents.

Guidance
However, due to the lack of experiences, the poor state of working conditions, and the lack
of overall organisation and planning, workers are locked into a negative spiral. Appropriate
guidance in the field of ergonomics to improve productivity, while reducing the physical and
mental demands imposed on the workers, would help organizations fulfil their potential to
become more viable in the world market. The principles on which ergonomics operates need
to be introduced with sensitivity to the indigenous work force and interventions need to be
modified where necessary to suit local conditions where they need to be shown to be
effective, and above all, made sustainable. Only then can we ensure that the shackles of
under-development will be thrown off and global inequality will begin to be reduced. They
have an obligation to promote and apply ergonomics where it is most needed mainly in
industrially developing countries (Sinkwitts, 2014).

Ergonomic Workshop
Worker’s refusal to adapt to an ergonomic feature is because they claimed it to be time
consuming. When in fact, the reason some ergonomic approaches might take some time to
operate is for safety precautions. Workers should gain more insights on how the equipments
work by attending workshops and trainings. It is essential to conduct an internal ergonomics
workshop with a variety of employers and staff as a follow-up. It is needed to go through the
principles of ergonomics in using organisation examples to emphasize particular issues. As
a result, a symbiotic connection between the consultant ergonomics expert and the company
expertise is created, and an ergonomics principles is developed within the organization.
A workshop on ergonomics will offer instruction to improve and broaden working knowledge.
However, significant and ongoing training of new workers needs ergonomics awareness,
which is oftenly lacking. Therefore, in order to reach a wider audience, ergonomics
education shouldn't be only dependent on the funds and goodwill of organizations. Instead, it
should adopt a proactive ergonomics strategy and incorporate evaluation tools.
Ergonomics training should therefore not be entirely dependent on the resources and
goodwill of companies but a proactive ergonomics approach and assessment tools should
be included in all basic technology education to reach out to a greater extent (Falck &
Rosenqvist, 2012).

Resource
Implementing ergonomic principles may be affected by a lack of resources, but the most
significant objective is to choose the best course of action and follow it through to
completion. Jumping from one option to another is a mistake that many project managers do
that slows down the team and causes further complexity. Instead, they should to spend
money on machinery that will most likely cause WMSDs. The equipment in the workplace
should be sufficient to safeguard the health and safety of the employees; not every
organisation needs expensive, high-tech equipment. Many ergonomists find it difficult to see
beyond their own technologically advanced surroundings and to become more conscious of
the harsh reality of vast areas outside of the workplace and the demands of the majority of
employees worldwide. Therefore, receiving the expert guidance from an ergonomist will
increase productivity while minimizing the physical and mental demands placed on
employees. This will encourage companies to reach their full potential and become more
successful in the workplace. A proactive ergonomics method apparently requires production
experience and early participation of ergonomics approach. The ideas of ergonomics must
be brought to the conventional workforce with concern, and interventions must be revised as
needed to fit local settings, where they must be shown efficient and, most importantly, made
sustainable. The production experience and early involvement of ergonomics expertise
seem to be necessary for a proactive ergonomics approach. The principles on which
ergonomics operates need to be introduced with sensitivity to the traditional work force and
interventions need to be modified where necessary to suit local conditions where they need
to be shown to be effective, and above all, made sustainable.

References
Anizar, Matondang, A. R., Ismail, R., & Nazaruddin. (2020). Management Support in
Enhancing Participatory Ergonomic Interventions in Palm Oil Industry. IOP Conference
Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 851(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/851/1/012016
Center of Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal
Disorders | NIOSH | CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/default.html
Champoux, D., & Brun, J. P. (2003). Occupational health and safety management in small
size enterprises: an overview of the situation and avenues for intervention and
research. Safety Science, 41(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-
 7535(02)00043-7
Falck, A. C., & Rosenqvist, M. (2012). What are the obstacles and needs of proactive
ergonomics measures at early product development stages? - An interview study in five
Swedish companies. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 42(5), 406–415.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2012.05.002
Karsh, B. T., Newenhouse, A. C., & Chapman, L. J. (2013). Barriers to the adoption of
ergonomic innovations to control musculoskeletal disorders and improve performance.
Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2012.06.007
Koma, B. S., Bergh, A.-M., & Costa-Black, K. M. (2018). Barriers to and facilitators for
implementing an office ergonomics programme in a South African research
organisation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.09.003
Martin, J. L., Norris, B. J., Murphy, E., & Crowe, J. A. (2008). Medical device development:
The challenge for ergonomics. In Applied Ergonomics (Vol. 39, Issue 3, pp. 271–283).
Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2007.10.002
McLean, L., & Rickards, J. (1998). Ergonomics Codes of Practice: The Challenge of
Implementation in Canadian Workplaces. Journal of Forest Engineering, 9(1), 55–64.
https://www.academia.edu/17172350/Ergonomics_Codes_of_Practice_The_Challenge
_of_Implementation_in_Canadian_Workplaces
Noble, N. L., & Sweeney, N. L. (2018). Barriers to the Use of Assistive Devices in Patient
Handling. Workplace Health and Safety, 66(1), 41–48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2165079917697216
O’Neill, D. (2005). The promotion of ergonomics in industrially developing countries.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(2), 163–168.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ERGON.2004.04.016
Olabode, S. O., Adesanya, A. R., & Barake, A. A. (2017). Ergonomics Awareness and
Employee Performance: An Exploratory Study. Economic and Environmental Studies,
17(44), 813–829. https://doi.org/10.25167/ees.2017.44.11
Rostykus, W. (2012). Five changing trends in managing workplace ergonomics.
Occupational Health & Safety (Waco, Tex.), 81(10).
https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2012/10/01/Five-Changing-Trends-in-Managing-
Workplace-Ergonomics.aspx
Scott, P. (2008). Global inequality, and the challenge for ergonomics to take a more dynamic
role to redress the situation. Applied Ergonomics, 39(4), 495–499.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.02.014
Sinkwitts, J. (2014). Five Steps To Improve Ergonomics in the Office. EHS Today, 7(1), 33–
34. https://www.ehstoday.com/industrial-hygiene/article/21916061/five-steps-to-
improve-ergonomics-in-the-office
Yazdani, A., & Wells, R. (2018). Barriers for implementation of successful change to prevent
musculoskeletal disorders and how to systematically address them. Applied
Ergonomics, 73, 122–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2018.05.004

Anizar, Matondang, A. R., Ismail, R., & Nazaruddin. (2020). Management Support in
Enhancing Participatory Ergonomic Interventions in Palm Oil Industry. IOP Conference
Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 851(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/851/1/012016
Center of Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal
Disorders | NIOSH | CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/default.html
Champoux, D., & Brun, J. P. (2003). Occupational health and safety management in small
size enterprises: an overview of the situation and avenues for intervention and
research. Safety Science, 41(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-
7535(02)00043-7
Falck, A. C., & Rosenqvist, M. (2012). What are the obstacles and needs of proactive
ergonomics measures at early product development stages? - An interview study in five
 Swedish companies. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 42(5), 406–415.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2012.05.002
Karsh, B. T., Newenhouse, A. C., & Chapman, L. J. (2013). Barriers to the adoption of
ergonomic innovations to control musculoskeletal disorders and improve performance.
Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2012.06.007
Koma, B. S., Bergh, A.-M., & Costa-Black, K. M. (2018). Barriers to and facilitators for
implementing an office ergonomics programme in a South African research
organisation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.09.003
Martin, J. L., Norris, B. J., Murphy, E., & Crowe, J. A. (2008). Medical device development:
The challenge for ergonomics. In Applied Ergonomics (Vol. 39, Issue 3, pp. 271–283).
Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2007.10.002
McLean, L., & Rickards, J. (1998). Ergonomics Codes of Practice: The Challenge of
Implementation in Canadian Workplaces. Journal of Forest Engineering, 9(1), 55–64.
https://www.academia.edu/17172350/Ergonomics_Codes_of_Practice_The_Challenge
_of_Implementation_in_Canadian_Workplaces
Noble, N. L., & Sweeney, N. L. (2018). Barriers to the Use of Assistive Devices in Patient
Handling. Workplace Health and Safety, 66(1), 41–48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2165079917697216
O’Neill, D. (2005). The promotion of ergonomics in industrially developing countries.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(2), 163–168.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ERGON.2004.04.016
Olabode, S. O., Adesanya, A. R., & Barake, A. A. (2017). Ergonomics Awareness and
Employee Performance: An Exploratory Study. Economic and Environmental Studies,
17(44), 813–829. https://doi.org/10.25167/ees.2017.44.11
Rostykus, W. (2012). Five changing trends in managing workplace ergonomics.
Occupational Health & Safety (Waco, Tex.), 81(10).
https://ohsonline.com/Articles/2012/10/01/Five-Changing-Trends-in-Managing-
Workplace-Ergonomics.aspx
Scott, P. (2008). Global inequality, and the challenge for ergonomics to take a more dynamic
role to redress the situation. Applied Ergonomics, 39(4), 495–499.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.02.014
Sinkwitts, J. (2014). Five Steps To Improve Ergonomics in the Office. EHS Today, 7(1), 33–
34. https://www.ehstoday.com/industrial-hygiene/article/21916061/five-steps-to-
improve-ergonomics-in-the-office
Yazdani, A., & Wells, R. (2018). Barriers for implementation of successful change to prevent
musculoskeletal disorders and how to systematically address them. Applied
Ergonomics, 73, 122–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2018.05.004