نوآوری و توسعه در طراحی فاکتورهای انسانی
Abstract
1- Introduction
2- Innovation in ergonomics
3- Development and innovation
4- Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Abstract
The paper examines the characteristics of changes that are intentionally introduced by humans into their living environment. It shows that technical and organizational changes without taking into account human factors criteria – and thus also ergonomic criteria – are the source of many losses. Moreover, the paper contains a discussion of the sequence of actions that lead to relevant changes in the existing reality. It also illustrates innovative engineering applications in the field of ergonomics, known as ergonomic engineering and more extensively – “ergologic” engineering. The importance of heuristic techniques in supporting creative thinking, indispensable in ergonomic design is shown. A discussion of economic development, which is determined by actions of an innovative character, is also presented.
Introduction
The concept of change is intuitively obvious: it is the result of deliberate actions, carried out by a human (people) or natural forces provoked by people (the effects of air pollution, the consequences of hydroelectric power stations construction), or the effects of forces of nature (volcanic eruption, earthquake, tsunami, ocean tide, solar radiation). It is a mean to adapt to new conditions (Kubr, 2002) and may concern – and do concern – all aspects of reality, including those which determine the lives and welfare of people (Golembiewski, et al., 1976; Neylor, 1996). Referring to humans and technology, three clearly distinct periods in the social acceptance of technology as an engine of change can be distinguished in the last century. At first, it was a period of unbridled and uncritical optimism, due to ground-breaking achievements such as the splitting of the atom, landing men on the moon, automation and robotization of manufacturing processes. It seemed that science coupled with technology can achieve almost anything (Brown, 1982). Afterwards, the change started to be viewed as predictable and dangerous (Botes, 2009), or even as dispelling misconceptions due to disappointment resulting from the lack of breakthroughs in food production and energy, the fight against diseases, improvement of the quality of life on a global scale, awareness of the causes and results of environmental losses (Brown, 1982). Finally, it has become a period of cautious realism: the understanding that material, energy and intellectual resources at our disposal are limited and that the need for their rational management requires an increasing depth and breadth of knowledge and imagination and ethical evaluations (i.e. a sustainable development strategy) (Steurer, 2008; Waas et al. 2014; Radjiyev et al. 2015). From these considerations it may be concluded that a lack of change signifies stagnation and is not a good scenario for the future (Hirschberger & Shaham, 2012) and in turn changes made for the sake of change often bring more harm than good (Chuang, 2006). The introduction of changes must therefore be based on knowledge, experience and preceded by deep reflection – all the more since modern technology as the fulfilment of scientific concepts is becoming increasingly invasive in nature in relation to the determinants of human life and the environment, on which we are almost entirely dependent (Hall & Hord, 2006; Wyrwicka, 2011; Saravia-Pinilla et al. 2016).