Ergonomist 544-October 2015 Information Security Leadership

No. 544 October 2015

The ErgonomistThe Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors

IMPROVING COLLABORATION BETWEEN ENGINEERS AND ERGONOMISTS

THE IMPORTANCE OF ATTITUDES FOR ENSURING SAFETY COMPLIANCE

Conquering stage frighta virtual audience for musicians

2 The Ergonomist October 2015

Contents

www.ergonomics.org.uk

Features04 Improving collaboration between engineers and

ergonomistsJudy Village

08 The importance of attitudes for ensuring security complianceAshley Knight & Ann Bicknell

12 Conquering stage fright: a virtual audience for musiciansTeresa Castle-Green

Also in this issue03 From the President

06 Journal overview

08 Feature

10 Early Careers Network

14 Events

18 Obituary

19 Institute news

20 Membership update

22 Recruitment

23 Ergonomics Everywhere

EditorialCelebrating Success

While it’s necessary to acknowledge the very

real and ongoing diffi culties that human factors

specialists have in ensuring they have genuine

infl uence in the organisations in which they

work, it’s also very important to highlight and

celebrate the impressive successes many of our

colleagues have had in varying fi elds.

It was announced on the 22nd of September

that Frøy Bjørneseth and her colleagues at Rolls

Royce won the 2015 Ergonomics Design Award

for their design of a ship’s bridge. The very high

standard of the shortlisted entries this year

indicates that ergonomics is truly making its

presence felt in design.

In our fi rst article, Judy Village describes the

perseverance, ingenuity and understanding

that allowed her and her colleagues to truly

integrate ergonomics into the manufacturing

design process at BlackBerry Ltd. The paper that

she and her colleagues wrote describing their

methods won the Liberty Mutual Award 2015,

an award that each year honours the paper from

the journal Ergonomics that best contributes to

the advancement of the practice of ergonomics.

In our cover article, Teresa Castle-Green

describes an innovative and unusual approach to

helping performers overcome their stage fright.

Ashley Knight and Ann Bicknell describe the

way in which attitudes and norms infl uence

intentions to comply and how using this

knowledge to work with employees can help to

reduce security breaches.

And Chad Lilley writes this month about

creating a positive culture, a coaching process

that supports human factors by examining and

improving the culture of organisations.

If you have any ideas for feature articles on

research or practice, news items, details of

relevant events or suggestions for new content

for The Ergonomist, please contact us.

Email Tina: [email protected]

Email Frances: [email protected]

12

Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors

New phone numbers for the InstituteMembership: 07736 893348

Events: 07736 893347

General enquiries: 07736 893350

For more details, visit www.ergonomics.org.uk/contact.

@ciehf

October 2015 The Ergonomist 3

From the PresidentErgonomics in the kitchen

One of my favourite hobbies is cooking. Working in a kitchen environment brings together many diff erent elements of ergonomics and human

factors. Last year we invested in a new kitchen for our house. Normally, when planning building works and alterations to the house, I have lots of ideas and am quite decisive. Not this time. I found the responsibility of designing a kitchen incredibly traumatic. I think this was partly because it was a reasonably expensive change to make to the house, but I also think I was very aware that professional pride was at stake. Imagine the shame when my ergonomist friends visited the house and spotted a glaring ineffi ciency in my design!Fortunately, eventually, I think we came up with a pretty good design. I was surprised however that there was very little explicit guidance from our very patient kitchen designer about ergonomics issues. Th e notion of the ‘triangle’ between the three most frequently used parts of the kitchen – the fridge, hob and sink – is well known, but apart from that, there was very little guidance. And when ergonomics issues were raised, they weren’t called that, they were just ‘good design’.So maybe at the CIEHF we should think about some resources to help people when they are thinking about ergonomics in purchases or designs they make. What makes a good backpack? What features should I consider when choosing a car? How do I tell if the

interface on my home entertainment system is well designed? Is the pushchair I’ve purchased easy to fold up and down?So here is a starter for ten: some ergonomic matters to think about when you are designing a kitchen. Physical: What’s the distance between points where you will have to carry heavy items, such as saucepans of vegetables from the hob to the sink?Cognitive: How well can you see diff erent parts of the kitchen from diff erent locations, to maintain your situation awareness? Do you understand the displays from the cooker well, and will there be people in your home who use the cooker and might benefi t from a simpler to use display? (Th e children were not impressed when I threatened to put a Powerpoint together on ‘how to use the oven’.)Organisational/Social: How many people use your kitchen at once? Is there space for separate areas for diff erent people to work in? Do you use your kitchen as a social space?I’d be really interested to hear from members about resources they have found useful when making big decisions about home design, and whether there is an appetite for developing resources from the CIEHF to support these decisions. Th ese resources would not only raise the profi le of our work, they might also prevent people from making those costly purchasing mistakes that I’m sure we’ve all made!

0804

@scsharples


Feature

Improving collaboration between

engineers and ergonomists

Judy Village

Ergonomists know that the earlier they can infl uence the design of systems, the more eff ective they can be in not only preventing adverse eff ects on workers, but also in enhancing system quality and performance. However, what is less well known is how ergonomists should navigate the design process, the company’s strategic goals, and the actors in the organisation to accomplish this early integration of human factors.Our three year action research collaboration with engineers and ergonomists in the new product realisation site at BlackBerry Ltd was designed to improve this understanding by attempting to integrate human factors into their assembly design process while at the same time refl ecting on and researching what tools and methods would facilitate this.At the beginning of the collaboration we found that the assembly design process had key performance indicators in terms of quality, delivery and cost but none related to human factors. Ergonomists in the organisation were responding to injury incidents but recommendations did not carry over to subsequent assembly designs, and ergonomists were unsure how to provide human factors information or design assistance to engineers.Th e researchers undertook numerous initiatives in attempts to learn where human factors could fi t within the design process. We interviewed engineers and made a map of the design process and decision gates to better understand where human factors might fi t. We interviewed engineers about injury, performance and quality metrics in the organisation and discussed possible human factors metrics. We participated in failure mode eff ects analysis (FMEA) meetings for early identifi cation of potential quality problems prior to design of the assembly process. And we conducted a cognitive mapping exercise with seven senior directors to link strategic goals to human factors. We learned that the main goal was to improve product quality and that directors believed workers had a key role in improving quality. We

used this knowledge to help frame and align human factors with the language and goals of the directors.Aft er more than a year of collaboration we found we had made very little progress toward our goal of integrating human factors into the design process. We realised that the ergonomists needed to learn more about the engineering design process, the engineering language, design tools, and the human factors links to product quality. Th e engineers were not aware of the ergonomists in the organisation, or how they could best use their expertise. Ergonomists had to make themselves more visible to engineers by participating in design meetings, and participating on the shop fl oor. Ergonomists also had to link human factors to the assembly goals of improved quality as stated by one senior director: “We need human factors incorporated with our deliverables.” As ergonomists participated with increasing numbers of engineers and directors, they discussed how awkward worker postures, high assembly forces, poor visual access to an assembly task, or lack of worker feedback about assembly connections could negatively aff ect assembly quality. Th ey were, in eff ect, aligning human factors knowledge with the strategic goals and language of the design engineers. Ergonomists got the attention of engineers and senior directors when they showed the integration of human factors was a means to help them achieve their design and business goals, rather than an additional burden. By participating alongside engineers in the design of a new assembly line, researchers and ergonomists realised that they needed a way to proactively help detect human factors concerns in early design stages, prior to parts and fi xtures being designed. Researchers were unaware of ergonomic tools that could assist with early identifi cation of concerns, so we began to adapt engineering design tools already used in the organisation to include human factors information. Th e FMEA was adapted with a new scoring system that indicated risk of injury

ABOUT THE

AUTHOR

Judy is Adjunct

Professor in

the School of

Population and

Public Health,

University of

British Columbia.

She conducted

this study for her

PhD in Industrial

Engineering

at Ryerson

University in

collaboration

with BlackBerry

Ltd.

She was recently

awarded the

Liberty Mutual

Award for her

paper published

in Ergonomics,

based on this

study, that

most advanced

the fi eld of

ergonomics in

2014:

J Village, C

Searcy, F Salustri

& W P Neumann

(2015). Design

for human

factors (DfHF): a

grounded theory

for integrating

human factors

into production

design processes.

Ergonomics, 58

(9), pp1529-

1546.


or error on the part of the operator, alongside each potential quality defect. By participating in FMEA meetings, ergonomists could help design solutions to avoid human factors concerns while working only from drawings of parts, and potential assembly steps. Th e researchers also created a human factors design for assembly scorecard to compare early assembly tasks that had both potential engineering concerns and human factors concerns for operators. When the 22-item scorecard was demonstrated on a new assembly line, it successfully highlighted problem tasks and allowed ergonomists to engage proactively with engineers to fi nd solutions through alternative parts, tooling or fi xture design.Th e adapted tools successfully quantifi ed human factors issues and allowed comparison between tasks for benchmarking and target-setting. Th e senior director of engineering was so impressed with the utility of the adapted tools that they quickly became adopted as controlled engineering documents and made key performance indicators that engineers were held accountable for alongside defect cost, scrap and yield. Th e director was quoted as saying: “If you have something that can improve assembly quality, we can implement it fast.”Positioning human factors as a means to improve assembly quality by aligning it with the strategic goals of the organisation was a tipping point for the collaboration. Ergonomists became part of the design team, and were invited to all meetings with key sign-off at each stage of the assembly process. Appropriate adapted tools led to human factors being adopted in the design process and ensured sustainability of human factors in subsequent product builds.We have published the process for adapting engineering design tools to include human factors and the results of the action research collaboration process. We also published a theory based on the three-year collaboration that describes for this case study the process by which human factors came to be incorporated in the design process. Key steps in the process are: › Ergonomists needed to learn the engineering

design process, language and tools in the organisation.

› Ergonomists needed to strategically align human factors to the design and business goals in the organisation such that human factors becomes a means to improve business performance.

› Ergonomists needed to actively participate on the design team and on the shop fl oor demonstrating how human factors can help improve business performance.

› Ergonomists adapted engineering design tools used by the organisation to include human factors metrics and demonstrated the tools and metrics to senior management.

› Successful adapted tools and metrics then led to adoption in the design process by senior management so integrating human factors into the production design process.

When ergonomists learn about the strategic goals and how management view human factors links to strategic goals, they can begin to align and tailor information to help improve business performance. Ergonomists can then adapt engineering design tools to help quantify human factors issues, and more importantly to be part of developing solutions to prevent issues prior to design of parts, processes, fi xtures and tooling. When demonstrated to engineers and senior management, human factors will be more likely to be integrated into the design process.

Th rough ongoing refl ection among researchers and participants in this collaboration, we learned that the lack of human factors in the design process was not because engineers lacked interest in designing for humans, but rather that relevant information had not been provided to engineers in a way that they could readily use in their design process. By gaining an inside view of the design process in this organisation, and re-framing the problem as not being the engineers’ lack of knowledge, but perhaps the ergonomists lack of knowledge of how best to provide information, we were able to gain insights that led to the successful integration of human factors.We challenge ergonomists to continuously improve their practice by adopting a refl ective stance in their human factors work. Th is occurs when practitioners actively think about what they are doing and question the framing of the problem they are trying to solve, their tacit understandings of practice, their strategies and theories implicit in behaviour, and their feelings for a situation that has led to action.


Journal overview The Institute’s membership package includes instant access to

seven online journals. Simply go to ergonomics.org.uk, log in to

‘MyIEHF’ and click on ‘My journals’ to see the full list.

Each month we will list highlights and papers from a selection

of the titles.

Prioritising goals over safety linked with

high-risk driving

This study, carried out by researchers in China, explored

the decision-making and behavioural patterns of drivers.

Specifi cally, the participants were encouraged to get more

reward (shorter completion time) and avoid penalties

(less violations and crashes) during a Go/No Go simulated

driving task. The study found that it became challenging for

participants to balance the confl ict goals and make decisions.

In line with previous studies the propensity to make Go

decisions indicated a driver’s likelihood to take risks. During

the simulator task, high-risk drivers gave more priority to the

motivated goal than to safety concerns. These drivers took less

time to complete the task, but had more violations and crashes.

They also demonstrated more violations in their driving history

in the real world. The results suggest that risky decision-making

refl ects the intended risk-taking of drivers derived from a

deliberate plan, rather than other forms of risky driving caused

by low task capacities or furious aff ective responses. It was

suggested by the researchers that high-risk drivers might also

be involved in other risky activities, not limited to on-road

situations only.

Yutao Baa, Wei Zhang, Gavriel Salvendy, Andy S K Cheng &

Petya Ventsislavova (2015). Assessments of risky driving: A Go/

No-Go simulator driving task to evaluate risky decision-making

and associated behavioral patterns. Applied Ergonomics, 52,

pp265-274.

Study suggests that personalisation is

central to gambling site success

This study empirically tested s a stimulus–organism–response

(S-O-R) structural model that proposes that an online casino’s

atmospheric cues and functional qualities infl uence individuals’

aff ective and cognitive responses, which in turn impact

consumer behavioural intentions. Using self-reported data from

a primarily US-based sample, researchers from California and

Nevada analysed elements of the online gambling site stimulus

included high and low task-relevant cues, fi nancial trust and

gambling value.

The major conclusion from this research is an empirical

verifi cation that online gambling site atmospherics have an

impact on the internal responses of the gambler, which in

turn aff ect gamblers’ behavioural intentions. Specifi cally,

the fi ndings show that the four gambling e-servicescape

dimensions infl uenced respondents’ attitudes towards the

online gambling site. All four dimensions had an impact when

considering the moderating eff ects of demographics and

atmospheric responsiveness.

Of the four signifi cant stimuli components, the researchers

found that fi nancial trust and gambling value had the strongest

infl uence on gamblers’ attitudes towards the online site.

The fi nding that low task-relevant cues have a signifi cant

impact on organismic satisfaction and behaviour is of interest.

The low task-relevant cues in a virtual atmosphere are similar

to the ambience and interior décor of a physical environment,

both of which were found to be signifi cant stimuli in prior

studies of casino servicescapes. Well-designed low task-

relevant cues such as high-quality graphics and pleasant

sounds show the gambler that the online site is of a higher

class than other sites, and may implicitly suggest that gamblers

have made the right choice in gambling site. In addition, low

task-relevant cues may contribute to the perceived ease-of-use

and perceived usefulness of the gambling technology, which

drive intention to use the product.

According to the researchers, this study show that a well-

designed online gambling site is not necessarily one that uses

the most up-to-date technology or has the sharpest graphics.

They believe that the best gambling interface is much more

likely to be one that recognises consumer diff erences and off ers

personalisation options to individuals.

Brett Abarbanel, Bo Bernhard, A K Singh & Anthony Lucas

(2015). Impact of virtual atmospherics and functional qualities

on the online gambler’s experience. Behaviour and Information

Technology, 33 (10), pp1005-1021

Recall of injuries is patchy depending on the

age of injured person

In this study, researchers investigated the extent and nature

of recall bias in Sudan Household Health Survey (SHHS 2010)

injury data. The extent of incomplete recall was measured by

comparing the total reported injuries over 12 months with the

annualised number of injuries in the four weeks preceding the

survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate

the association of socio-demographic variables, injury

attributes and interviewee characteristics with diff erential

recall.

The evidence of memory decay was prominent, and diff erential

recall biased the data, with children aged 1-4 years seemingly

under-represented in data with a 12-month recall period.

The type of care received was also associated with diff erential

Research


recall of injury events. These relations were independent of

the interviewee characteristics of which age independently

infl uenced the time-based injury reporting pattern.

The fi ndings confi rm the existence of diff erential recall of

injuries that occurred in the 12 months preceding the survey,

by the age of injured person, type of care received and main

respondent’s age. The researchers advise that this fi nding

should be taken into consideration when interpreting survey

results that involve comparisons between children and older

people, and when using the data at the level of healthcare

received whether as a proxy to injury severity or as an indicator

of healthcare utilisation.

Safa Abdalla, Nahid Abdelgadir, Saeid Shahraz & Kavi Bhallad

(2015). Respondents’ recall of injury events: an investigation

of recall bias in cross-sectional injury data from the Sudan

Household Health Survey 2010. International Journal of Injury

Control and Safety Promotion, 22 (3), pp215-223.

Age has an eff ect on the perceived usability

of smartphones

The eff ects of age in usability testing were examined in an

experiment carried out by researchers in Switzerland. Sixty

users from two age groups, one with a mean age of 23.0

years, the other with a mean age of 58.1 years, operated

two technical devices, a keyboard-based smartphone and a

touchscreen-based smartphone. Task completion time and task

completion rate were measured, along with several subjective

measures such as perceived usability, aff ect and workload. The

results showed better performance scores for younger adults

than older adults for task completion time.

For older adult users there was a mismatch between usability

ratings and task completion time but not between usability

ratings and task completion rate. An interesting fi nding was

also the dissociation between usability ratings and objective

performance, which emerged for older adult users during

touchscreen operation. It showed that older adults gave the

touchscreen a better usability rating than was justifi ed from

their performance. This fi nding appears to be contradictory at

fi rst sight, say the researchers, but may be explained by low

user expectations with regard to new technical devices such

as touchscreens. Age-related diff erences in the importance of

speed and accuracy in task completion point to the need to

consider more strongly the factor user age in usability research

and practice.

Andreas Sonderegger, Sven Schmutz,& Juergen Sauer (2015). The

infl uence of age in usability testing. Applied Ergonomics (52)

pp291-300.

Selected papers

Applied Ergonomics Volume 52 contd & 53 part A, 2015

› Variable Message Signs for road tunnel evacuations

› Age-related diff erences in balance control during stair descent

› Feedback and cognitive function during sleep deprivation

› Aircraft passenger comfort experience: underlying factors

› The science behind codes and standards for safe walkways

› Using the Rapid Offi ce Strain Assessment (ROSA)

› Concentration on performance with P300-based BCI systems

› Reliability, performance and trust in adaptable automation

› Pressure distribution while sitting in offi ce chairs

› Eff ects of overhead work confi guration on muscle activity

› Eff ects of EVA gloves on grip strength and fatigue

› Climatic and psychosocial risks of heat illness incidents

› Evaluation of load carriage systems used by police offi cers

› Vertical ground reaction force assessment in fi eld situations

› Ergonomic evaluation of drywall installation

› The eff ect of rest break schedule on acute low back pain

Behaviour and Information TechnologyVolume 34, Issue 10, 2015

› Multi-touch tabletop technology to facilitate collaboration

› Aff ective forecasting of the value of a telemedicine service

› Defi ning UX goals to guide the design of industrial systems

› Usability and intentions to use electronic textbooks

› Determinants of online safety behaviour

International Journal of Injury Control and

Safety PromotionVolume 22, Issue 3, 2015

› Distracted driving: prevalence, problems and prevention

› A standardised mortuary-based injury surveillance system

› Pedestrian injuries in the United Arab Emirates

› Measurement of a drowning incidence rate

› Epidemiology of injuries in metropolitan Tehran, Iran

› Progress in preventing injuries: analysis of policies in Europe

› Child drowning prevention in the Philippines

› Comparison of unintentional injury patterns in 1978 and 2008

› Paediatric trauma in the USA: hospital resource use

› Risk assessment of maintenance operations

Journal of Sports Sciences

Volume 33, Issue 15, 2015

› Front crawl swimming: role of the entry-and-stretch phase

› Eff ects of cold water immersion on recovery from sprinting

› Repeated sprint ability in young basketball players

› Predictors of adherence to contemporary dance training

› The validity an iPhone app for measuring jump performance

› How should ‘hot’ players in basketball be defended?

› The impact of making-weight on performance in jockeys

› Eff ects of a short-term fatigue protocol on punt-kicking

› Reliability of data from skin markers after heel impacts

› Diff erences between back kicks and jumping back kicks

› Elbow joint kinematics and wrist speed in cricket fast bowling


Feature

The importance of attitudes for

ensuring security compliance

Ashley Knight & Ann Bicknell

One of the big issues facing organisations today is how to keep their commercially sensitive information and customer data secure. Last year, 90% of large organisations suff ered an information security (IS) breach, with 75% of large organisations experiencing a breach directly as a result of their employees’ actions. Th is is a problem for organisations because if information is lost, leaked online or falls into the wrong hands, it can damage an organisation’s reputation, can make them vulnerable to legal and regulatory problems and can result in signifi cant cost and revenue implications.To tackle this issue, many organisations have introduced information security policies (ISPs) which describe how information should be dealt with, employees’ information security responsibilities and the consequences of security policy violations. However, despite having policies in place, employees do not always comply with them.Much existing research has tried to examine the factors that infl uence whether or not employees comply with ISPs. However, measuring compliance behaviour is ethically sensitive because the identifi cation of poor behaviours could result in disciplinary action or individuals losing their jobs. Most research has therefore tended to focus on the factors that infl uence compliance intentions, since intention is viewed as a predictor of actual behaviour. A popular theory that has been used to explain ISP compliance intention is the theory of planned behaviour. Th is theory suggests that intention to perform behaviour is infl uenced by attitudes, group norms and feelings of being able to perform the action. While some research supports this theory and suggests these factors infl uence ISP compliance intention, other research does not. In addition, a key factor that has been shown to infl uence compliance intentions in similar domains, such as safety, is leadership. However, leadership has received relatively little attention to date as a factor that could potentially infl uence compliance intentions in the security domain.

To understand more about the factors that infl uence ISP compliance, a series of semi-structured interviews was carried out. Th is more qualitative form of data was taken in order to gain greater insight and potentially provide some clarity over how and why diff erent factors infl uence compliance. Th e interview questions covered topics relating to the infl uence of leadership, attitudes, norms and feelings of control on ISP compliance intentions. However, the semi-structured nature of the interview also allowed new insights to emerge. All of the interviewees were employed within a large UK organisation and had experience of dealing with sensitive information as part of their daily role. In total, nine individuals of varying levels of seniority took part. Th e interviews were transcribed and then analysed using thematic analysis to highlight any themes in the data.

Attitudes

One of the key fi ndings was that attitudes towards security had a strong infl uence over whether or not participants complied with the ISP, with more positive security attitudes leading to greater compliance intentions. Th e formation of these attitudes appeared to be shaped by numerous factors including: the perceived importance of security; the burden or diffi culty of complying; the likelihood of receiving rewards or sanctions; and their general awareness of the ISP.Many participants felt that security was important because of the type of sensitive work they did and because their organisation had placed a strong emphasis on it. Th is perception of importance led to positive attitudes towards compliance and highlights the need for organisations to make sure that security is central to the business. However, if the security processes were perceived as too onerous, participants reported less positive compliance attitudes. Th is resistance to performing diffi cult or time-consuming security procedures could be overcome, however, if participants believed that they would be punished for not complying, or if they felt that they would receive positive

ABOUT THE

AUTHORS

Ashley Knight is

an MSc student

at the University

of Leicester. Dr

Ann Bicknell

is a Chartered

Psychologist

who is a Tutor

Practitioner at

the University

of Leicester and

development

consultant for

Ashorne Hill

Management

College.


rewards, for complying.

Ability to comply

If participants felt that it was within their ability to comply, they tended to report stronger compliance intentions. Th is ability to comply was shaped by how diffi cult the IS processes were perceived to be. Many IS processes were seen as time-consuming or as a hindrance to primary work duties. However, if support was available, through easy-to-follow processes or assistance from others, intention to comply was increased.Participants also reported feeling more able to comply if the practices were dealt with regularly, but less able to comply if they did not have suffi cient policy knowledge. For example, some aspects of the policy were seen as insuffi ciently detailed, leading to feelings of uncertainty about what was expected of them. Th is suggests suffi cient ISP awareness is important for ensuring individuals feel able to comply.

Norms

Participants reported that the norms amongst their peers and colleagues had a strong infl uence on their ISP compliance intentions. Th ey reported oft en following group norms as a result of a desire to be part of the team, even if this meant disregarding the procedures set out in the ISP. However, if participants felt that failing to follow the process would likely lead to a serious incident, negative norms tended to be rejected, suggesting that a balance is struck between the severity of the breach and the need to be part of the team.

Leadership

Many participants reported that leadership indirectly infl uenced their compliance intentions by helping to shape attitudes, norms, ability to comply and their awareness of the ISP. Leadership appeared to infl uence these factors via three mechanisms: acting as a role-model; communicating about security; and providing appropriate resources to support and facilitate security.By acting as a role-model and displaying appropriate behaviours, leaders were able to act as a point of reference and remind employees of security’s importance. However, participants stated that they were only infl uenced by their leaders if they were visible in the organisation and if they respected them. Furthermore, if leaders communicated enthusiastically about

security, this was viewed as a sign of their commitment to security. Th is communication appeared to help convince employees of security’s importance. Despite this, more experienced participants reported being less infl uenced by management communications than newer employees, possibly because their attitudes had already been formed.Th is highlights the importance of instilling security practices into employees in the early stages of their career. Managers also helped employees feel more able to comply if they provided support with security processes and ensured their employees had the necessary resources to comply. Th is perceived ability to comply, in turn led to more positive compliance intentions and highlights leadership’s role as a facilitator of security.Th e majority of the fi ndings identifi ed in this research support the existing literature that suggests attitudes, norms and feelings of control infl uence ISP compliance intentions. However, this study also provides rich insights into how and why these factors might infl uence compliance intentions and highlights numerous practical recommendations for improving compliance intentions. Th ese fi ndings outline the importance of the way the ISP is communicated and presented and suggest that it needs to be clear and detailed. Furthermore, they highlight the need to make security central to the organisation, to make it something that is communicated about regularly and to ensure that the potential for sanctions or rewards is understood by all.A further key fi nding is that leadership and local relationships can play an important role in shaping ISP compliance intentions. Th is suggests that the development of appropriate leadership styles and team cultures should be considered in order to improve compliance intentions. Since relatively little research exists in this area, this confers valuable insights for a topic that will only grow in signifi cance for many organisations. Future research should continue to focus on how the attitudes and behaviours of the team and the leader can be critical in shaping compliance intentions and the organisation’s security culture in meaningful ways that minimise the risks of an IS breach.


Trust me, I am Virtual RealityVirtual Reality (VR), that is an immersive environment where

people can interact, has always been seen as a fantasy

technology, one of the tools possible only in fi lms, along with

fl ying cars and time machines. Indeed, a technology that

permits people to be in another world, where they can feel,

hear and touch an object is a system that was hard to believe

until few years ago. Fortunately, VR’s fate has seen a diff erent

path from fl ying cars and time machines, and we can, today,

experience this technology.

VR is currently employed in fi elds such as psychology for phobia

treatments, medicine for pain reduction, training for pilots

and in industries such as automotive. The reason why VR is so

widely implemented is that it permits the users to be in a world

that would be diffi cult to replicate in real life.

For example, in the case of pilot training, the possibility

to carry out the fi rst phases of training in a virtual plane

eliminates the danger, cost and the time of using a real

plane. In the case of phobia treatments, VR can show a

threatening object, that the patient can touch and hear, with

the advantage of having a fake, and less stressful, experience.

This is a huge advance in terms of technology and innovation

and can potentially assist users and workers while helping

businesses save money and time.

However, as is the case for all new technologies, there are

some issues when implementing a new system in a work

practice. Among the problems that could appear, I focused my

research on the issue of trust. In the correct implementation

of a system, one of the most important preconditions is that

the actual users are willing to rely on it. We can think of VR as a

co-worker: if you don’t trust your colleague, working with them

would result in a diffi cult and sometimes counter-productive

situation. Exactly the same thing can happen with technology.

Despite the fact that trust in a person and in a system are

equally important in jobs now, the process of relying on a

person or on a technology is diff erent. When relying on another

person, the response of that person is part of the decision to

trust (that is, do they trust me back?), but this is not true for

technologies, since a system cannot respond back in the same

way.

This lack of response means that there has to be another type of

theory related to trust in technology, diff erent from the one of

trust in people. Therefore, I decided to develop a framework to

investigate what characteristics a system must have to in order

to be trustworthy and improve the eff ectiveness of the users

who are using it.

My framework hypothesis is that to make a VR system

trustworthy it has to be usable, accepted and as similar as

possible to the real world.

As can be deduced from this description, my research is not

about inventing a new system. I am trying to improve an

already existing technology, trying to solve an extremely

important issue such as trust, in order to help the correct

implementation of VR, leading to a more productive and

successful work practice. Indeed, a system is useless if this

system is not built following human needs and the right

processes. As Craig Federighi, Apple’s Vice President of software

engineering recently said: “New is easy, right is hard”.

Davide Salanitri

Davide Salanitri has a Masters in psychology from the University

of Padua, Italy and is currently a PhD student at The University

of Nottingham for the project: “Trust in Virtual Reality”. He

would like to acknowledge Jaguar Land Rover for co-funding the

research work on which this piece is based.

The PhD Blogby Steph Eaves

This month has been all about the writing

up of my thesis. I had a short assessment

meeting with my internal assessor, Professor Sue Hignett which

allowed me to successfully pass through into my fourth and

fi nal ‘writing up’ year of my PhD. We have provisionally agreed

that my hand in date will be early December and my viva will

be arranged for some time in early January!

During this time, a whole new cohort of students arrived at

Loughborough University. In addition to completing my PhD I

am also a sub-warden for Elvyn Richards Hall of Residence. This

means that I live in Hall with the students, both new freshers

and returning second and third years.

Along with two other PhD students, I am responsible for the

wellbeing of the students. I help with pastoral issues, fi rst aid,

fi re alarms and the general running of the Hall.

So along with writing up, it’s been fantastic to welcome

hundreds of new students into the bubble that is

Loughborough University!

I have one chapter left to write, and then my thesis will be in its

draft format. It’s hard to believe how quickly this time has come

around, it seems like only yesterday that I was walking around

the Design School on my induction on the fi rst day of my PhD

studies, listening to the advice from other students.

I wish I had listened and had written more over the past years.

Although I feel pleased that I did write some things, I would

urge new PhD students to write down everything you think of!

Your future self will thank you for it – I promise!

Early Careers Network


The impact of students at the IEA CongressAustralians call Melbourne the city of four-seasons-in-one-day.

Yet as ergonomists from around the world converged in our

city, a week of uncharacteristically sunny weather emerged

too. From the offi ng, the tone was set for the IEA 2015 19th

Triennial Congress in August. Our six days were dense with

learning and socialising, as many delegates were reunited with

familiar friends and colleagues.

An energy of enthusiasm greeted us right from the welcome

drinks. The opening of the congress included an Indigenous

Elder welcoming us to their country and the delegation being

taught the correct pronunciation of “g’day”. For students,

the congress held particular promise of new and important

connections.

We began the week with social events specifi cally for students

(including a student lunch and dinner). Here, we mingled with

peers from Australia, New Zealand, North America, France,

Germany, Ukraine, Sweden, Japan, Malaysia, Croatia, Columbia

and Denmark.

Students also shared their work in a range of presentations.

This included a student-lead study exploring the experiences

of student engagement in IEA federated societies. The Three

Minute Thesis (3MT) competition was also a highlight on

the IEA student calendar. Nine of us battled it out to share

our thesis in just three minutes. Topics ranged from work/

life balance, to better back health, and consideration of wrist

angles.

The excitement of meeting new people and travelling abroad

may be reason enough for students to attend an IEA congress.

However, from personal experience, it seems a stronger

underlying purpose exists for our presence at such events. In

fact, my whole ergonomics journey began at an international

congress.

I spent the fi rst 18 months of my undergraduate training

fearing I had made a mistake. Speech Pathology and I did not

seem to fi t. Despite this, I won a university student prize to

attend Speech Pathology’s equivalent of the IEA congress. Here,

a 15 minute presentation on the third day of the congress was

to alter my academic and career trajectory for the better.

A researcher called Erki Vilkman spoke about Vocal Ergonomics.

As I listened to him explain what human factors was (in the

context of voice), I began to realise exactly what I wanted to do.

This ergonomics thing sounded amazing and I wanted in. I have

attended many conferences since then including the CIEHF’s

2015 conference in Daventry. Each time, I seem to gain clarity

on what I want to pursue and why it should matter to others.

Conferences have a way of anchoring the goals and ideas of

students into what could be the future of our profession, which

can be career defi ning. It is also evident in our profession

that not all students are ‘35 and under’. Most of us come with

another occupation or training background. Conferences

provide a safe space for students to explore how their non-

human factors qualifi cations fi t with ergonomics. They also

provide spaces for established ergonomists to see the new

connections ergonomics and human factors is making.

So other than allowing students to ‘fi nd their tribe’, what

are the benefi ts for our profession in supporting student

conference attendance? Many occupations tout that students

are the future of their profession. I would argue that this

is keenly true in the global ergonomics and human factors

community. While often resource poor, students are typically

far more time rich than established ergonomists.

At international events, such as the IEA congress, we are also

ambassadors. We showcase the strengths of our institutions,

along with the strengths of our societies. These links benefi t

the discipline far more broadly than just helping out students.

If my peers at the IEA congress are the yard stick, students are

also enthusiastic to embrace current and future initiatives of

the profession. This was highlighted by the student initiated

meetings with IEA executive members where future global

engagement of students and early career ergonomists were

discussed. From these meetings, a preliminary report was

tabled to the IEA executive, including how students and early

career ergonomists (ECE) can directly enrich our profession:

Specifi cally, it is envisaged that students/ECE will assist in

the fi delity of supporting engagement at local and global

levels of the ergonomics profession. This will allow the direct

enrichment and future sustainability of federated societies,

and the IEA as a whole. Further, through engagement with

this demographic of IEA members, opportunities for outreach

to support communities can be cultivated. The enhanced

engagement with these members can also strengthen the

advancement of research and links of ergonomics with other

disciplines.

Attendance at international events fosters more than just

networking opportunities for CIEHF student members. It also

provides us opportunities to have a global presence. When this

is coupled with CIEHF’s ethos of supporting student and early

career ergonomists, being part of our tribe is an exciting place

to be.

Katie Buckley


Feature

Conquering stage fright: a virtual

audience for musicians

Teresa Castle-Green

Music performance anxiety can have debilitating consequences for performers, aff ecting their confi dence levels and preventing them from delivering performances to the normal standards of which they are capable. As a performer in an acoustic duo myself, I have experienced stage fright fi rst hand, from nausea before performances to physical shaking on stage. It is something that I have learned to live with and am gradually getting over with increased experience. Th is is not an unfamiliar story within music circles; a large number of musicians struggle with stage fright throughout their careers. Surveys have found as many as 70% of musicians report experiencing anxiety that has impacted performances. Musical performance requires complex cognitive and sensorimotor skills, which can be greatly aff ected by the body’s fear responses. Shaking, sweating and feeling nauseous is not conducive to delivering a fl awless performance. Many musicians learn to manage their anxiety as they gain experience of performing on stage, but for others it can continue to be a problem throughout their entire lives. Th ere are numerous reports of amateur, student and professional musicians turning to self-medication of alcohol and drugs. Beta-blockers are oft en prescribed and others turn to cognitive behavioural therapy or hypnosis to overcome anxiety levels enough to enable them to continue performing music on stage. In some cases the fear of performing is so strong that it prevents budding musicians from even attempting to get up on stage to do what they love. Seeing and experiencing this problem fi rst hand led to my desire to focus my research on the use of technology within this domain.

Exposure therapy

A review of music performance anxiety literature revealed a number of potential causal factors. Th ese include situational variables, such as the presence of an audience, performer competence levels, trait anxiety and the complexity of the material being played. Th e most positive results in terms of treatment

research have been shown in relation to cognitive and behaviour therapies including the use of exposure therapy. In related fi elds virtual reality has been demonstrated as a useful tool in exposure therapy off ering therapists access to situations and contexts that would otherwise be unachievable. Th is led to the question of whether a virtual audience would be a useful tool in exposure therapy for stage fright. Research into the fear of public speaking has used virtual audiences and has shown promising results. Participants have reported increased anxiety levels and lower perceived performance ratings as a result of negative audience reactions. Other research found positive results from the use of a virtual audience for graded exposure on saxophone players within the educational context. Th is limited amount of related research led to the question: would these results be refl ected in the context of musicians performing at a virtual music festival?

The Virtual Music Festival

Before the virtual audience design could get underway I needed to expand on my own knowledge and gain a deeper understanding of performers’ experiences of stage fright. Interviews with experienced performers uncovered a number of potential causal factors relating to audience approval and performer confi dence levels. A literature review of audience behaviour expanded on this to ensure that a strong element of realism was captured within the design of the audience. I discovered that large crowds and audiences are surprisingly organised, with social norms being adhered to, right down to the length of the applause.Th e Virtual Music Festival was designed and developed to be delivered through a head-mounted display to allow musicians to play on a virtual stage in front of a computer-generated audience. A festival ambience was created with people milling around near the bar tent and people walking along a road in the distance. Campsites, burger vans, large shop tents, security guards and large speaker systems were

ABOUT THE

AUTHOR

Teresa Castle-

Green is a

psychology

graduate

who has just

completed an

MSc in Human-

Computer

Interaction at

the University of

Nottingham and

is now pursuing a

career in HC I.


also included to add to the realism of the setting. I created three diff erent audience conditions delivering approval feedback through audience movement to provide a positive, neutral and negative experience to performers. At the start of each condition there were 40 people located in front of the stage, waiting in anticipation for the music to start. Once the music started they gave some initial applause and then began to dance and move as though watching the music.During the neutral condition the audience size remained the same throughout. Th e positive feedback condition saw the audience size increase by a further 30 people, to 70 and the negative condition saw 30 people leave reducing the audience size to just 10. Th e movement of the people to and from the stage area was completed gradually within a three minute time period to ensure that the full condition was experienced before the end of an average length song.Audience applause was also used as visual and audio feedback. Research into political speeches has shown that ‘normal’ applause to show appreciation at the start and during speeches lasts for eight seconds. It is thought that anything longer than that is very appreciative and anything shorter is lukewarm in its appreciation level. I used this research to set the length of the initial applause for each condition. Th e neutral had eight seconds, the positive had ten and the negative had only six. I managed to fi nd 11 musicians from local open mic nights and street buskers who were willing to play an instrument and sing to my virtual audience. Each musician performed six songs in total, three that they knew well and three that they had recently learnt or had not performed live before, all whilst wired up to a virtual reality system. Th e performers’ guitar and microphone were plugged in to a mixing desk allowing it to be combined with the audio from the application on the computer. Noise cancelling earphones were used to cut out any background noise so the musicians could only hear themselves and their audience. Aft er performing each song they completed a questionnaire containing measures for state anxiety, a rating of how well they thought the performance went from 0-100 and copresence questions to evaluate the perceived interaction between the performer and the audience. A wrist-based heart-rate monitor was also used to obtain average readings for each condition.

Promising fi ndings

Th e results were promising with key fi ndings showing emotional responses to audience reactions as well as self-ratings of performance corresponding with audience feedback. Th e musicians reported experiencing higher levels of anxiety when the audience walked away from them and lower levels when more people were joining the audience. Th ey also appeared to use the reaction of the audience when rating how well they thought their performance had gone. Performance ratings were lowest in the negative audience condition and highest in the positive. Th e performers reported the experience as nerve racking but enjoyable. Some reported playing guitar whilst wearing a head-mounted display as challenging, but most faired quite well. Post-evaluation interviews indicated that some musicians had experienced feelings of ‘encouragement’ from the audience when it was increasing in size or feeling ‘upset’ when people walked away. Th is could be seen as a logical response on the face of it until considering that the participants were fully aware that it was computer-generated and not a real audience. Most of the participants reported that they chose to believe in the audience and indicated feelings of copresence as they talked about responding to the audience increasing and the audience responding to them when they were ‘bad’. A surprising result was that the use of anxiety management techniques during performances was also identifi ed. Some of the musicians spoke to the audience to introduce songs and to thank them for applause, seemingly to relax into the performance and to try to relate to the audience. Others showed signs of self-serving bias where they chose to take the positive reactions from the audience as due to their performance and negative reactions as pre-programmed or related to the audience’s musical preferences. Stage fright is a pressing issue for a large number of amateur, student and professional musicians. Th e use of a virtual audience within exposure therapy could increase the scope of treatment and allow exposure to situations that would not be accessible in real life.It would be interesting to expand on this research with a larger sample size, diff erent audience settings and collaboration between musicians, to gain a deeper understanding of the full potential that virtual audiences could have within this context.


Events

North East Regional Group meetingA time to get together to celebrate Chartership while doing

the hard work of planning for the future will take place at ABB

consulting offi ces, Billingham, Teeside on 22nd October 2015,

18:30-20:00.

There will be a presentation from CIEHF CE Steve Barraclough,

followed by a round table discussion to examine what people

want from the North East Regional Group and what we should

be planning for next year.

Anyone who wants to stay on can enjoy a curry and further

discussion. For more information see http://bit.ly/1Ld76M5.

Worker Health Protection

25-29 October 2015, Abu Dhabi

This is the second year of the BOHS Worker Health Protection

Conference in the Middle East. Last year’s inaugural conference,

was a great success with over 100 senior delegates from

across the region representing industry and government in

attendance. This year there is a packed two-day scientifi c

programme, professional development courses and

an exhibition that showcases the latest innovations in

occupational health and hygiene.

With an esteemed panel of high-profi le international

speakers, WHPC 2015 off ers a stimulating line-up of panel

discussions, presentations and Q&A. The sessions will address

the key themes which are relevant to today’s workforce in

the region. It will provide a multi-disciplinary perspective,

and in addition to occupational hygiene, will encompass key

aspects of occupational medicine and nursing, wellbeing and

environmental health.

For more information, visit www.whpc-me.com/2/home.aspx.

Predicting the Fatal Flaws – Can we do things

diff erently in aviation safety?

26-27 November 2015, Crawley

A conference presented by The Royal Aeronautical Society

Human Factors Group, the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics

and Human Factors, and NATS – National Air Traffi c Services.

The conference looks at threat trends including confl ict zone

overfl ight, changing pilot/controller and other teamwork

interactions, the eff ect of new organisational economic

pressures, and at the benefi ts and limitations of structured

responses from SMS to safety audit tools, Safety II and

Resilience Engineering. 10% discount for CIEHF members.

For more details, visit http://bit.ly/1OGUauV.

CIEHF

Regional

Group events

are open to

everyone, not

just CIEHF

members.

Human Factors in

Aviation Safety9-10 November 2015, East Midlands Airport

www.hf-aviation.org.uk Chartered Instituteof Ergonomics& Human Factors

At our upcoming aviation safety event, we consider the

question: Could the safety of the aviation industry be

compromised by advances in technology?

Aviation has the enviable reputation as one of very few large-

scale ‘ultra-safe’ industries. But the need for more fl ights at

lower fares and higher demands in the defence sector have

led a greater reliance on technology, particularly automation,

which places pressure on both the pilots and the systems in

which they work.

Experts from BAE Systems, Eurocontrol, EasyJet and NATS,

along with researchers and academics will discuss how human

factors contributes to ensuring that the aviation industry

maintains safety and reliability in the face of technological

change. The conference will give you a rare opportunity to gain

insight into the research, practice, innovation and technology

that drives this industry. The event is open to and values the

contribution of people from all sectors.

Key Sessions

› ‘Removing the error, from pilot error’ byDonough Wilson,

Coventry University Technocentre

› ‘Resilience Engineering as a Perspective in Understanding

Accident Causation’ by Shawn Pruchniki, Ohio State University

› ‘Putting the Science Back into CRM: Promoting Distributed

Cognition on the Flight Deck’ by Don Harris, Coventry

University

It’s the fi rst time we have run this event, but interest has been

very high due to the calibre of the speakers and the practical,

applicable nature of many of the talks. Book now to be part

of this important discussion and to advance your career by

learning from the best.

Places are available to CIEHF members for just £96.75 for one

day or £149.25 for both days with a 25% discount on standard

rates. For further information and to book please visit the event

website. All prices exclude VAT.


This event promises to be a very valuable opportunity for anyone who has

an interest in human factors in high-hazard industries.

Presenter John Lovegrove, who will speak about human factors practice at

this event writes:

As often publicised, the nuclear industry is feared by the British public

because of the association with the harm caused by exposure to nuclear

radiation. The impact of events such as those at Chernobyl and Fukushima

has been to focus the minds of all those connected to the nuclear industry

to concentrate on achieving the goal of protecting both the general public

and individual workers from exposure by following four principles:

› Adequate shielding for the hazard

› Reduced exposure time to the hazard

› Increase in the distance between people and the hazard

› Containment of the hazard

These four principles are at the heart of all approaches used across the

nuclear industry. That’s where the similarities end. Each sector within

the nuclear industry has a varied history that has contributed to the

diff erences in organisational design, job design and performance

requirements that exist today. Whenever you fi rst start at the

organisation, you have to learn how to fi t in. What are the design

processes, what is the scope of your role and the expectations of the

stakeholders? It’s quite common to fi nd out that the organisation has

created their own in-house human factors standards to match the

expectations of the stakeholders.

In many cases there is an underlying tick box culture, and we are involved

to keep the regulators happy, not because of what we bring to the table.

So, what do we off er? The organisations have become large complex

organisations that are constructed of a mixture of contractors and in-

house staff . They are complex systems, they have recognised that they

need help and their pleas for help were left unanswered for years. This

created a void which has been fi lled by management consultants, lean

consultants, and human performance consultants.

Ergonomists can also help with issues eff ecting the running of these

organisations. We have a wealth of experience, knowledge and

techniques that will identify interventions that will improve and

strengthen the long term prospects for an organisation. The role of

an ergonomist or human factors specialist is to understand how the

organisation functions and to deliver successful ergonomic interventions

that improve the health and wellbeing of all concerned by ensuring that

they can achieve their work goals.

The use of participatory ergonomics has been extremely useful in

focusing all of the stakeholders on how work is actually done, it

strengthens the bond between engineers, designers, safety case authors

and the operators by encouraging them to work together to overcome the

emergent issues associated with their work.

At the Human Factors Integration in the Nuclear Industry event, talks

throughout the day will provide an insight into how human factors is

practised and to refl ect on how we work within the diff erent nuclear

organisations.

Ideas from other industries also enrich the expertise that already resides

in the nuclear industry. We hope to broaden the focus from trying to raise

the credibility of human factors within an organisation to boosting the

credibility of human factors and ergonomics across the entire nuclear

industry.

For more information on the event, including the full programme and

booking options, visit the website at www.hf-nuclear.org.uk.

As a CIEHF member you get 25% off our standard delegate rates. Student

Members get 40% off .

If you have any queries please contact James Walton, Marketing & Events

Manager on 07736 893347 or email [email protected].


www.hf-nuclear.org.uk

Human Factors Integration inthe Nuclear Industry9th November 2015East Midlands Airport, UK


Opinion

Creating a positive cultureChad Lilley is a behavioural safety specialist and owner and Lead

Coach of Chad Lilley International. Here he describes how his

coaching practice developed.

Creating a Positive Culture™ has evolved over a 14 year process.

It all started when I was a construction manager working

in Dublin on a $1.4 billion biopharma project. Up until this

point I never really believed that senior management really

meant safety was number one. Maybe through their actions

or through my years of experience, I just thought it was

something they had to say when what they really meant was

to get the job done as quickly as possible to the best of your

ability and let’s hope no one gets hurt along the way.

This project was diff erent: they seemed to put more of an eff ort

into safety, even better still, a few times in the early days there

were decisions made that proved to me that they did think

safety came fi rst. This experience, along with my curiosity,

plus having some great managers, started my journey into

achieving something more.

After this project I went on to be the project manager for

the Lend Lease group, heading up their behavioural change

programme covering the Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA)

region. This project led to two and a half years of great

successes, some very frustrating challenges and acceleration in

my development. I worked day in day out with the consultants

that were advising us and, in places, we really made a

diff erence. However, my biggest growth in regards to my

thinking and my personal growth came with the frustrating

conversations I was having with our consultants. After a

while of asking what we do next and only ever receiving the

frustrating answer of “What would you like to do next?” I

decided I wasn’t getting very far, so I enrolled into a training

programme for Neuro-Linguistic Programming to fi gure out

a better, more streamlined way of getting my message across

and more importantly, making it sustainable.

In 2007 I left Lend Lease and started working with several

diff erent companies, once again delivering behavioural safety,

however, I started doing things diff erently. I started to focus on

what I wanted to achieve, instead of working away from what I

wanted to avoid. Looking back I realise that this was the major

shift, the thing that made the biggest diff erence. Most people

I know have heard of SMART goals. The S stands for specifi c,

and yet so much in safety, even with all the good intentions is

non-specifi c or very clear on what needs to be avoided, working

away from goals instead of moving towards goals. The results

I achieved with this shift made a big impact to me personally

and as a business, after this shift, the results changed in a

massive way.

I worked on the principle of “If you want to get a diff erent result

then without question, you have to do something diff erent”.

This in itself sounds very simple and most people get this at

an intellectual level but even so they tend to carry on doing

the same thing again expecting a diff erent result, essentially

banging their heads against a brick wall. I also took on the

thought that “Life is very simple, we don’t believe it can be

so simple so we complicate things!” and thirdly, “If you want

better answers you have to start by asking better questions!”

These three principles led to very clear thinking on a direction

forward, it moved things from, “how do I stop someone from

getting hurt?” to, “how do I inspire someone to be all they can

be?”, “how do I create a positive culture in the workplace?” We

are working safely over 90% of the time, but we focus on the

mistakes. How can we deal with the 10% and focus on the 90%

- how do we take what we are already doing well and make it

even better? Taking this approach people started to become

more open about what could be done, people were happier to

share their knowledge, their thoughts and their perceptions.

We started looking at our teams and in conjunction with

human needs psychology, we examined our strengths and

weaknesses, not to fi nd a weakness and tell someone that they

needed to work harder in this area, but to fi nd their weaknesses

that could be complemented by someone else’s strengths

and vice versa. It was an understanding that someone has a

weakness in an area due to the fact they aren’t interested in

that bit, so why make them work harder on what they don’t

enjoy when someone else in the team has that as a strength?

Another major factor was to explore why people like change -

so long as it is someone else that changes. There is a whole raft

of things here, however, some of the key aspects boiled down

to fear, the fear of looking bad. People don’t like others seeing

their weaknesses. This is where the team dynamics really kicked

in and we started to see results. We started to celebrate our

mistakes. Creating an environment where people no longer

look for who is at fault and instead look for what can be learned

from this improves the team dynamics greatly.

To make all of the above possible, we had to adopt a new look

at training. In our commercially-driven world, we tend to look

for short term gains instead of long term sustainable change,

it’s just the way we have been conditioned. It has created a

world where today most training is carried out for certifi cates

instead of for competency. We had to get people to understand

the need for coaching. We can deliver a training session that

would really provoke thinking and inspire change, however

to make it stick and be sustainable, it would need on-going

coaching as people just have a tendency to get caught up in

their day to day activities. Or, to put it another way, it would be

unrealistic to put someone in a gym for two days and expect

them to come out fi t - they have only been introduced to how

the machines work. Our training is the same, after two days we

have introduced you to what is possible and we can coach you

to make it happen.


Most behavioural programmes over the last 30 years have

recorded a maximum of 30% reduction, but I had started

to get feedback on my work that not only were the safety

records improving, and in some places up to a 70% reduction

in accidents also, programmes were starting to be met ahead

of schedule, re-work had been reduced, sick days had been

reduced and morale had been improved, and in some cases,

people had recorded an improvement in their relationships at

home.

I guess, this is where I changed the title to ‘Creating a Positive

Culture™’ as I fi rmly believe now that my work is no longer

just about behavioural safety, it is more about operational

excellence delivered through a coaching and mentoring process

in order to establish change, sustainable change that can and

does work in any environment.

When we move from making people the problem to them

being the solution, when we develop positive and meaningful

accident investigations instead of the fi ve whys, ‘who is to

blame’ mentality, when we start looking at good effi cient

leading indicators where we can make a profound infl uence on

people.

When we start getting into building good solid relationships

where people feel safe to show their vulnerabilities and get

over the fear of looking bad then we can make a massive

diff erence anywhere we work or interact with others. When

we start working and looking out for each other and wanting

the best for each other, where we celebrate others success and

learn from it, then we really can create a positive culture.

Chad Lilley

Chad will speak at the CIEHF’s Human

Factors Integration in the Nuclear Industry

event on November 9th. See www.

hf-nuclear.org.uk. For more information

about Chad Lilley International, visit www.

chadlilleyint.com.

Standing up in courtThe scientifi c and technical knowledge of ergonomists and

human factors specialists can be invaluable in the courtroom

making their expertise very sought after by legal teams.

Claire Dickinson from the Offi ce of Rail & Road (ORR) and John

Lovegrove of Canary Designs each presented and refl ected on

their experiences of being called upon as an expert witness in

court.

This was the fi rst joint event between the CIEHF North West

& North Wales Regional Group and the Safety & Reliability

Society (SaRS) and was hosted by AREVA RMC in Warrington on

Thursday 1st of October. The focus of this event was the role of

the expert witness in court. Emma Ridsdale (Regional Group

Lead) welcomed a turnout of 13 ergonomists, human factors

practitioners, safety consultants and engineers to the event.

Both John and Claire articulately described the often

challenging and unpredictable situations they found

themselves in during their involvement in the courtroom,

and emphasised the necessity of meticulous preparation

and professional integrity throughout the whole process.

The importance of individual resilience and the capability to

think on your feet was made very apparent throughout John

and Claire’s accounts as they described the sometimes erratic

and volatile characteristics of the courtroom and how they

overcame them.

John and Claire wrapped up their accounts by refl ecting on the

lessons they had learned from their experiences in the expert

witness role. Both went on to describe the positive infl uence

which these lessons have had on their work lives and how these

lessons transfer over to professional practice.

The fascinating subject matter throughout both presentations

stimulated an array of questions from the audience and opened

up a lively discussion about John and Claire’s experiences which

were invaluable in explaining the role of the expert witness and

the lessons which can be drawn from standing up in court.

Overall, the evening was a great success, as highlighted by one

attendee: “A hugely interesting and deeply personal insight into

what it is to be an expert witness - the ultimate test of one’s

credibility”. Ruairi Kennedy, Principal Consultant (Rail Safety),

CRA Risk Analysis.

Both the CIEHF and SaRS are very keen to join forces and deliver

more joint events in the future.

Matthew Holman

DIVERSIONS...Telling it like it is

A signpost in Cornwall.

Th anks to Mark Halliday for this contribution.


OBITUARY

Joan Ward

1919-2015

Joan joined the Department

of Ergonomics and

Cybernetics in 1961 as a

Research Assistant in the

then College of Advanced

Technology in Loughborough, shortly after the Department

opened in September 1960. Prior to this Joan spent her life in

South Africa. She graduated with a fi rst class honours degree

in English and Psychology at Rhodes University in 1941

and shortly afterwards became a journalist. Subsequently,

probably due to these two experiences coupled with

her outstanding intellect, she maintained her interest in

producing concise, clear, informative and direct reports

and papers for the general public and her fellow scientists

throughout her long and distinguished career.

In the decade before her arrival in the UK, Joan’s career took

an entirely new direction. She became knowledgeable in

anthropometry and work physiology working in a team led

by Professor Cyril Wyndham at the Transvaal and Orange

Free State Chamber of Mines in Johannesburg. It was mainly

concerned with studying the eff ects of heat stress on mine

workers and how these eff ects might be alleviated.

Other work involved detailed studies of the Kalahari Bushmen

which required living with them and sleeping by the fi re at

night in the Kalahari Desert. On one occasion she woke in the

middle of the night to see a leopard in the tree under which

she was sleeping. Fortunately, without Joan being told, the

leopard had been put in the tree by the Bushmen for the skin

to dry out after the meat had been taken to eat. The skin,

of course, was later to be used for clothing. These unique

experiences were subsequently recounted by Joan in a very

popular series of lectures.

Joan found the practice of apartheid which operated during

her lifetime in South Africa totally unacceptable and this was

the reason for her emigrating to Britain in 1961. At that time

Joan was the mother of three children, Lindsay, Sally and

Hugh, and also a single parent. To move to Loughborough

with an unknown long-term future was a particularly diffi cult

and courageous decision.

Joan rapidly became established in the Department

of Ergonomics and Cybernetics. Throughout the 1960s

she became well known for her pioneering work in the

application of anthropometry to the design of equipment,

especially in homes, offi ces, factories and schools. One

example is her research on suitable sizes for stairs for the

elderly, sponsored by the then Building Research Station. One

piece of research in which she was involved had unexpected

consequences. The research was on “Some Ergonomic Aspects

of Household Jugs” and was published in Ergonomics 1965,

Volume 8, Issue 4, pp455-465. The idea behind the research

was to show how ergonomics could be applied to a simple

consumer product using subjects handling the jugs and

having anthropometric, psychological and physiological as

well as physical measurements taken, and interrelationships

(if any) between the measurements established. The paper

caught the eye of staff in the Consumers’ Association, who up

to that time had only carried out physical tests on products

to establish which could be recommended. The Association

thought that ergonomics had something to off er. As a result

Joan, together with Stuart Kirk, were retained as consultants

and this led to the formation in 1970 of the Institute for

Consumer Ergonomics, generously funded in the fi rst instance

by the Consumers’ Association. Without the support of Joan,

the Institute would not have come into being, nor would

it have been as successful as it was without her advice,

guidance and scientifi c contribution. This was recognised

by the then Ergonomics Society in 1975 when the Institute

was awarded the Sir Frederic Bartlett Medal, the primary

award of the Society, and Joan as the Assistant Director was a

named recipient. She was also recognised for her substantial

contributions to ergonomics by the conferment of the

Ergonomics Society Special Award (now the William Floyd

Award) in 1993.

After the College of Advanced Technology became

Loughborough University in 1966, Joan was appointed

Lecturer in the Department of Ergonomics and Cybernetics

in 1967 and subsequently Senior Lecturer. She was highly

successful in her relationships with students to whom she

gave wise counsel on their many technical and personal

problems, especially when senior tutor to the MSc course in

ergonomics. Her counsel was always direct and realistic but

sympathetic and supportive.

In addition to the successful prosecution of her research,

teaching and administrative duties in the Department of

Ergonomics and Cybernetics (subsequently renamed the

Department of Human Sciences), which continued until her

retirement early in the 1980s, Joan was a highly respected

member of the Ergonomics Society, occupying at diff erent

times the roles of Treasurer and Registrar. In due course, she

was awarded the Society’s highest distinction of Honorary

Fellow. As a sideline in her younger years she was the

women’s squash champion of South Africa.

It was a privilege to have known such a capable, diligent,

modest, friendly and generous woman, a view universally

shared by her many colleagues, students and friends.

Peter Stone & Stuart Kirk

Obituary


Member Profi leJo Davies

Jo is a Human Factors Consultant with

Ergonomic Systems Engineering Ltd (www.

ese-assoc.demon.co.uk) and a Fellow of the CIEHF.

What sparked your interest in ergonomics and human

factors and how did your career develop?

I would say that my entry into ergonomics and human factors

is fairly unconventional. I had a few false starts, but I fi nally

settled down into a job that I found challenging at EASAMS

where I was working in a team of engineers carrying out fl ight

trials for the development of the radar system on the Tornado

GR1. I was given the task to investigate problems I had found

with the radar display and I began by creating an accurate

simulation of the display. I was breaking fresh ground as

there simply weren’t rapid prototyping facilities in 1978 and

I was integrating my small desk top machine with a graphics

terminal to achieve the results.

I really wanted to progress my career but lacked the

qualifi cations. The company sponsored me to do an Open

University degree which I started in 1979. I tailored the degree

to include science, technology, psychology, human factors and

system failures and other systems courses. I also embarked

upon an HNC in Computer Science. By this time I had moved

to the Human Factors Group working on the development of

the displays for the Tornado Air Defence Variant. I spent 7 years

conducting display assessments with pilots as a sub contract

to British Aerospace at Warton, Lancashire. I have always

emphasised the importance for human factors engineers to

appreciate the environment that the kit is being used in and in

August 1988 was the fi rst female civilian to fl y in the back seat

of the Tornado F3.

In 1990 I decided to move to BAe in Kingston and joined

the Cockpit Group which I took over as manager in 1992.

The opportunities for collaborative research with the other

Military Aircraft Division sites and key industrial and academia

partners were vast. We tackled a host of advanced pilot vehicle

interface developments, formalised Human Factors Integration

processes, methods and tools and supported the company’s

aircraft development projects.

In 1992 I was privileged to become the UK industry

representative on the NATO AGARD Aeromedical Panel where

I engaged with international world experts in human factors

research. I received their Excellence Award in 2001 for the

contribution that I made.

In 1999 I decided to become an independent consultant and

joined George Ward and Adrian Furniss at ESE associates Ltd.

One of the business strands that we developed was training

courses in human factors and systems engineering.

What advice do you have for aspiring ergonomists?

It really helps if you can be multi-disciplinary and talk to

others in their language. Also remember that you are never

alone - it is a broad discipline with many areas of specialism

and clearly it’s important to know what you know. But it’s also

important to know what you don’t know, know that it matters

and know someone who has the right experience to answer the

important questions.

What has been your greatest achievement in

ergonomics and human factors?

I have had some amazing opportunities in particular during my

NATO tasks when I co-chaired a working group with Dr Sandra

Hart exploring and producing the Designers Guide to Human

Performance Modelling. But probably one of my greatest

achievements in terms of the global accolades received were

the accident/incident reconstructions that I produced for the

CAA as airline training videos (www.caa.co.uk/humanfactors).

What issue concerning the discipline or profession

interests you currently?

It’s about public perception. I am currently working with

Stephen Pheasant Memorial Fund trustees to try and promote

a better understanding of why consideration of human

factors and ergonomics is so important and should not be

marginalised. Ideally we would like to attract the interest of

BBC4 and it’s challenging to come up with a contemporary and

original approach. We need to have more public presence in the

media and we need to recognise that ergonomics and human

factors does not stand alone, it needs to be well integrated with

other disciplines.

You run the Southern Regional Group. How did you get

involved in that and what benefi ts do you think the

group gives to the people who attend?

I fi rst went to a Regional Group meeting in 1982 when I joined

the then Ergonomics Society as a student member. When I

was based at BAe Farnborough Ted Lovesey and I decided to

work together to resurrect the local group. Meetings were well

attended and comprised presentations and discussions on

various topics. After I left BAe a formal steering group was set

up initially chaired by Richard Tait at QinetiQ. As we didn’t have

meeting rooms to use we visited the many large industrial or

academic organisations that had a strong human factors focus,

such as QinetiQ, IBM, AAIB, RNLI, NATS and AWE.

The benefi t to the group members is the insight into diff erent

practices and diff erent sectors and also the provision of an

excellent forum for networking. We plan to continue in this

fashion, so if anyone in the Southern Regional Group area hs

any ideas or are willing to host a meeting I would love to hear

from you. Visit our web page at www.ergonomics.org.uk/

regional-groups/southern-regional-group for more details.

Institute news


Membership updateThe Institute welcomes those listed below who have recently

been accepted as new members, and congratulates those who

have upgraded.

FellowsLinda Bellamy from the Netherlands. Managing Director at

White Queen BV.

Clare Pollard from Oxfordshire. Employed at AREVA RMC Ltd.

Registered MembersRyan Meeks from Avon. “I’m a Senior

Human Factors Engineer at Frazer-Nash

Consultancy Ltd in Bristol, specialising in

Human Factors Integration and human

sciences research primarily in defence and

security. I have worked on a wide range

of projects including research on insider threat attacks, HFI

for unmanned systems, and assessments of workload within

the operations rooms of naval ships. I graduated from the BSc

Ergonomics (Human Factors Design) course at Loughborough

University in 2011, with an industrial placement year at QinetiQ

in Farnborough.”

Neil Clark from Lothian. CEO at IHF Ltd.

Graduate MembersGareth Bundock from Wiltshire.

Chantal Trudel from Quebec, Canada.

Jake Collins from Warwickshire. Employed as a Comfort

Engineer at Lear Corporation.

Student MembersKirsty Mackay from Aberdeenshire.

Bill Gough from Birmingham.

Christopher Herbert from Bloomington, Indiana, USA.

Mark Eze from London.

Jim McPartlin from Northumberland. Employed at the MOD.

Christian Miguel Strubel from Switzerland.

Edel Straum from Liverpool.

Associate MembersDonna Carter from Australia. Employed as a Health and Safety

Advisor at Rio Tinto Weipa.

Keith Irving from North Yorkshire. Employed as a Flight Safety

Manager at Jet2.com.

Rachel Boville from Yorkshire. Employed at Jet2.com.

Nick Toff from Cambridgeshire.

Vanessa Ginn from Surrey.

Andrew Lilley from Norway. Employed at Human Factors

Solutions.

Dave Mahal from Avon. Employed at AACE Ltd.

Colin Knight from Leicestershire.

Mike Shannon from Kent. Employed at Human Performance

and Leadership Ltd.

Learning from IncidentsThe aim of a forthcoming special issue of Safety Science is to

provide researchers and practitioners with an opportunity to

present and discuss contemporary, forecasted and required

paradigm shifts to Learn from Incidents.

The ability to learn from incidents is essential for safety in

all organisations, industries, regulatory bodies and policy

makers. Safety Science has a long history of innovations in

theory, methodology, science and application. For example,

accident causation models that fi rst emerged in the early 1900s

have since evolved to consider entire systems and emergent

properties.

Similarly, methodologies have moved from focusing on tasks to

entire systems and the constraints shaping behaviour. However

Learning from Incidents is yet to embrace theories and methods

from the learning sciences. A new repertoire of theories,

methods and instruments evolved from interdisciplinary

perspectives is needed to Learn from Incidents eff ectively.

We welcome submissions from all disciplines, including, but

not restricted to Adult and Organisational Learning, Computer

Science, Engineering, Sociology, Industrial Psychology, Human

Factors Engineering.

The deadline for receipt of papers is 1st February 2016, with

a projected publication date of mid 2017. All papers will be

subjected to the standard peer-review procedures of the

journal. Potential authors are requested to submit their paper

for consideration to the guest editors prior to electronic

submission so that they can ensure its scope and quality is

suitable for the special issue.

Guidelines for authors can be found on the Safety Science web

page at www.journals.elsevier.com/safety-science/.

For more information and to submit a paper, email any of

the guest editors: Professor Neville Stanton, University of

Southampton, [email protected]; Dr Anoush Margaryan,

Glasgow Caledonian University, [email protected];

Professor Allison Littlejohn, Open University, Allison.littlejohn@

open.ac.uk.


The papers are in, now it’s time to book!

The call for papers for EHF2016 has now closed and we are very

pleased to say we have had a larger number of submissions

than in recent years. Thank you to everyone who has submitted

papers, posters and workshop proposals. As usual, the standard

is extremely high and our reviewers have a tough task ahead of

them selecting the best papers and proposals.

There have been a number of submissions in aviation,

manufacturing, healthcare, rail and practitioner considerations

so these look likely to be major themes for this event.

We have also received a number of workshop submissions on

a variety of topics so we will be reviewing these with a view to

formulating a strong set of interactive sessions for you.

Look out for the provisional programme around the middle of

November when we will also start to take bookings. Save the

dates of 19th to 21st of April 2016 on your calendar now.

With workshops, symposia, talks and networking

opportunities, these three days could be the most valuable

you will spend in 2016 developing your knowledge and your

connections. Find a friend, a collaborator, a mentor or even

a new job among the best and brightest in ergonomics and

human factors. Learn something, have some fun and go home

knowing you were there at the forefront, participating in the

biggest ergonomics and human factors conference in the UK.

Last year’s conference attracted over 220 delegates, not

including the people who came solely to hear our invited

speakers. EHF2016 will feature talks from top surgeon and non-

executive director of the new patient investigation service, Lord

Ara Darzi, director of user experience at Google, Dr Elizabeth

Churchill and Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT,

Nancy Leveson. The Broadbent Lecture will be delivered by

CIEHF members Steve Shorrock and Claire Williams.

And there will be the chance to enjoy the fun at our popular

quiz night and to relax at our annual dinner and awards

ceremony. The venue itself has a golf course, pool, gym and spa

facilities to help you wind down.

To ensure all our members can benefi t from the great career

opportunities that the conference aff ords, we have kept the

price as low as we can at only £95 for a single day’s attendance

and £399.50 for three days’ attendance with accommodation if

you book our early bird rates. Prices exclude VAT.

Go to www.ehf2016.org.uk/prices-and-booking for further

information.

19-21 April 2016, Daventry

Ergonomics &Human Factors 2016

Ship’s bridge design wins Ergonomics Design AwardAfter much deliberation by a distinguished line up of judges

over the four high quality shortlisted entries, the CIEHF’s

Ergonomics Design Award was won by Principal Engineer -

Human Factors and Control Centres Frøy Bjørneseth’s team at

Rolls-Royce Marine AS, based in Norway, for their innovative

Unifi ed Ship’s Bridge design.

The other three shortlisted entrants were all highly

commended: SEND, a patient data display by Lauren Morgan

of Oxford University; Express Banking Services design by

Ergonomie based in Australia; Intercity Express Train design by

DCA Design.

The judging was run in parallel with the CIEHF’s fi rst

Ergonomics In Design Seminar on 22nd September 2015 at the

Design Council in London, during the London Design Festival

week. The seminar focused on two workshops, ‘Designing

for changing demographics’ and ‘Measuring improvement

in new designs’ which were led by Robin Ellis of RED Design

Ergonomics Ltd and Dan Jenkins of DCA Design.

The entrants gave presentations to the six judges and 32

seminar delegates. The judges were John Wood of CCD Design

& Ergonomics and sponsor of the Award, Mat Hunter of the

Design Council, Jasper Holmes of RICA, Chris Ramsden of

the Chartered Society of Designers, Martin Bontoft of Team

Consulting and TomStewart of System Concepts.

The delegates enthusiastically engaged in the workshops and

the mix of experience and backgrounds amongst them led to

some interesting interaction and discussion. Early feedback on

the day was that many found it a useful and rewarding time

and they would attend further CIEHF workshops in the future.

Thanks to all the judges and workshop facilitators for their time

and eff ort in making the day a success. We will be studying the

detailed feedback we received with a view to running a similar

event next year.

For more information on the Rolls Royce ship’s bridge

design, see http://bit.ly/1OeY4i3. For more details about the

Ergonomics Design Award and Ergonomics In Design Seminar,

visit www.ergonomicsdesignaward.org.uk.


Recruitment

All of us working in ergonomics and human factors will know of

someone who stands out. Someone who perhaps doesn’t shout about

their achievements but whose knowledge, expertise and skill is obvious

to anyone who works with them. Someone who truly advances the

discipline, and whose insight and understanding is an inspiration to

others.

Honour that stand-out person and give them a great gift by nominating

them for one of our annual awards. Among them are:

The Sir Frederic Bartlett Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/

sir-frederic-bartlett-award) is for any individual who has made signifi cant

contributions to original fundamental, applied or methodological

research, development and application of knowledge and scholarship in

ergonomics/human factors.

The William Floyd Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/

william-fl oyd-award) is given to any individual or group who has made

outstanding and innovative contributions to ergonomics and human

factors.

The President’s Award (www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards/presidents-

award) is for any group, institution or organisation which has made

signifi cant contributions to research and development, and application of

knowledge generally in the fi eld of ergonomics and human factors.

Nominations close on the 31st October so don’t let time slip away, follow

the links now and nominate a person who deserves recognition for their

achievements.

Go to www.ergonomics.org.uk/awards now.

Celebrating excellence in ergonomics and human factors

Advertise withus

Reach all CIEHF members every

month.

Reach anyone worldwide with

a subscription to this magazine

through Kindle, iPhone and

Android Apps.

Reach students starting out

in their careers to seasoned

professionals running their

own businesses.

If you would like to advertise here, visit

www.ergonomics.org.uk/advertising

for full details of ad sizes and rates, and how to book.

Usability & Accessibility Specialistwww.ncr.com/careers

A permanent position is available in NCR’s Consumer Experience Design group based in Dundee, UK, working alongside other usability and design professionals.

Candidates with a background in ergonomics, human factors or human computer interaction are welcome. Those with a passion for making technology accessible to all will be preferred. The main focus will

applications.

Job details and application forms are at http://www.ncr.com/careers Search for job number 678158 or worldwide career opportunities located in Dundee.

Closing date 10th November


‘The Ergonomist’The magazine of the CIEHF

Publisher: The Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors

ISSN: 0268-5639 (print)ISSN: 2059-2221 (online)

Editors: Tina Worthy, [email protected], 07736

893350 & Frances Brown, [email protected].

Printed issue by: Premier Print Group, London. Printed on matt art paper, manufactured from recycled fi bre.

Advertisement Rates (ex VAT, dimensions HxWmm)

Quarter page (127 x 88) £475

Half page horizontal (127 x 180) £795

Half page vertical (257 x 88) £795

Full page (257 x 180) £1325

Discounts: Institute members and Registered Consultancies

are off ered a discount of 25% on the rates above.

Format: Copy should be supplied as a high resolution PDF

emailed to Tina Worthy. Copy can also be emailed as a Word

document by prior request.

Inserts: Inserts, in the form of a PDF, will be made available

to all members via our web portal on the day the issue is

published. Contact us for further details.

Deadlines: Adverts and inserts should be booked by the

20th of the month preceding publication. Copy deadline is

normally 25th of the month preceding publication.

Booking: Please call 07736 893351 or email advertising@

ergonomics.org.uk.

Online listing: All recruitment adverts published in

The Ergonomist are listed on the CIEHF website at www.

ergonomics.org.uk/jobs.

Opinions expressed in The Ergonomist are not necessarily those of the

Institute. Whilst every care is taken to provide accurate information, neither

the editors, staff , Council nor the Institute undertakes any liability for errors

or omissions. The mention of a service or product or inclusion of an advert

does not imply endorsement by the Institute.

Ergonomics EverywhereOur upcoming CIEHF event on 9th November focusing on the

challenges of the nuclear sector could arguably not come at a

better time. See page 15 of this issue for more event details.

On the civil side, the UK government has just agreed to

underwrite the investment from China required to support

the colossal development of Hinkley Point C on the north

Somerset coast. Two-thirds of the estimated £24bn cost of

building the power station is now covered by government

guarantees, even though EDF has agreed a ‘strike’ price – what

it will be paid for its electricity – that will make it the most

expensive power in the world, while earning the company,

when fully on stream, an estimated annual profi t of £5bn.

Hinkley C is costly because it is very large and pretty complex.

Fertile ground for ergonomists and human factors specialists,

you might think. For more than a decade, EDF, the state-

owned French energy giant, has been building two similar

reactors, one in France and one in Finland, both of which are

running late and neither of which has yet generated a watt of

electricity. EDF won the Hinkley contract partly because of our

Treasury obsession with not spending public money, but it has

struggled to raise the private fi nance.

We all probably agree that we should aim to decarbonise

the supply of power wherever we can, but even so, this

looks an expensive option. One windy day last July, 80% of

electricity generated in Germany came from renewables. We

know the wind doesn’t blow every day, so there is certainly

a role for nuclear. A good example of where great design

and innovative, safe operating practice which can both be

infl uenced by ergonomists could bring huge benefi ts to make

nuclear generation investments more and more meet the

hurdle rate.

On the military side, recent work by specialists to ensure that

nuclear deals such as that concluded recently in Iran remain

watertight and policeable shows that great innovation is

being brought to bear to uncover illicit potential production of

equipment able to turn peaceful civil use nuclear activity to a

military dimension. Previously, monitoring work focused on

availability, logistics and assembly of the physical hardware.

Manufacture of centrifuges was the prime example, when

assembled able to produce weapons-grade material. Bits of

the kit for centrifuges were in few hands, but recent violators

got smart, growing skills to manufacture kit of their own,

rendering this form of surveillance outmoded.

Now, specialists track patterns of activity exhibited by known

or suspected defectors, those able to bring their expertise

to bear to build centrifuges, by analysing phone traffi c,

emails, travel habits, consumption patterns and the like in an

attempt to uncover not the convergence of hardware, but the

bringing together of human expertise capable of producing

the hardware. Another set of skills that could no doubt

be informed, improved and augmented by human factors

specialists. The nuclear sector continues to evolve and provide

solid opportunities for good minds.

Steve Barraclough

CIEHF Chief Executive

[email protected]

With such a huge variety of options, how do you decide where to go next in

your career?

Whether you’re trying to fi nd your fi rst job, or looking to change the direction of your

career, it can be hard to decide where your skills and interests might best fi t into the many

industries in which human factors is applied.

The CIEHF Ergonomics Careers Day gives you a valuable opportunity to meet with people

who work in aviation, manufacturing, academia, design and healthcare among others

to get a fl avour for how your career might progress and to get important, personalised

information on what you can do to put yourself ahead of the competition in the hunt for

jobs.

At the Ergonomics Careers Day, you can:

› Meet potential employers

› Learn how ergonomics can make a real diff erence in all sectors

› Learn how to make the transition from student to professional

› Hear from those who have taken your route to a career in ergonomics

› Meet and chat to students on other courses

You can meet with representatives from companies large and small who are actively

recruiting to understand what they are looking for in job candidates. You may even fi nd

the perfect job for you!

Learn about an ergonomics and human factors career in:

› Aviation from NATS

› HCI from AMEC Foster Wheeler

› Nuclear from Cavendish Nuclear

› User Experience from DCA Design

› Defence from BAE Systems

› Manufacturing from Cranfi eld University

› Healthcare from Loughborough University

› Consultancy from ERM

Also rail, oil & gas and academia

Ergonomics Careers Day11 November 2015, Northampton

www.ergonomics-careers.org.uk


Don’t sit and dream about your career. Why not take this

opportunity and get out there and meet the people who

can make it happen? Book now at www.ergonomics-

careers.org.uk/booking.

Jobs Fair We have a number of exhibitors at our Jobs Fair who

are looking for people like you who are professional,

enthusiastic and willing to take on an exciting career in

their sector.

Ergonomist 544-October 2015 Information Security Leadership

Documents

Transcript of Ergonomist 544-October 2015 Information Security Leadership