MPG Feedback Data on a Honda from humanfactorsblog.org

This great article http://www.humanfactorsblog.org/2008/11/26/interface-aid-for-hyper-milers/ from www.humanfactorsblog.org reminded us of another EPSRC funded project ‘Footlite‘ that colleagues and some of the Real World Design team are working on.

Both this dashboard ‘widget’ from Honda and one aspect of the Footlite project are working on eliciting a more economical driving style from the user of the vehicle. It would have been too easy for this to have been presented in a lecturing and instructive manner and for the user to feel restricted in their enjoyment of driving. 

Instead, the more economically you drive the more you little seedling grows into a tree throughout the course of your journey, effectively presenting the concept of driving economically in an intrinsically motivating manner.

This is also similar in style to another Japanese ‘innovation/fad’ a few years back of Tamagotchis a virtual pet that children (and adults) could nurture in a similarly engaging and intrinsically motivating manner.

Are there any other situations where manufacturers have (or should) take inspiration from toys or computer game companies to make products more engaging?

An example of a poor consideration of Ergonomics courtesy of Garr Reynolds Presentation Zen Blog

The obvious question is how could the designer have used Ergonomics or a Human Centred Design Process to prevent the confusion that this key card clearly caused on numerous occasions?

1. Make sure that the text was suitably legible for all the likely users of the product.
2. That there was a legible instruction on the ‘wrong side’ of the key to turn it over.
3. And perhaps even an indication on the lock itself of which side up the key should be entered.

Alternative Human Centred Design of Hotel Door Lock

We’re looking forward to hearing from you.

“At 12:22 on Friday the [BBC Radio 2 Controller] Controller sent a one word reply from her BlackBerry authorising inclusion of the [controversial] material ‘Yes’ “

I’m sure most of us can empathise with having to simplify or hurry our response to something either by text message or email, or in fact misunderstanding something completely that we might perhaps have preferred to communicate in more detail in person or over the phone.

To our mind this is a similar symptom of poor ergonomics to that of “User Self Blame” discussed in our last post: In this case the issue is of users being held responsible for how they communicate when how they communicate may have been heavily influenced by limitations in the product or system they were using. Or limitations imposed by their ability or inability to use that product or system. Those limitations could most likely have occurred as a result of poor consideration of the user’s ergonomic requirements, such as how easy the original message was to read on the phone and thus how well it was understood. Or how easy it was to write a reply to the message which might have led to a short and nondescript response.

The reality is that it may have been a combination of factors entirely independent of the BBC Radio Controller receiving and responding to an email on her mobile phone, that led to all the problems. What was revealing however, was how the report from the BBC Trust made reference to that fact that she had used a Blackberry to do so. Perhaps implying that this was a contributing factor in her making the decision that she did.

Have you ever felt limited by technology?

Have you experienced any situations where there was a breakdown in communication or an unintended consequence of you using technology?

Do you think this might have been caused by the technology not allowing you to behave or communicate in the way you really wanted to?

We’d love to hear about stories like this as we think very often they occur as a result of a poor consideration of the Ergonomics of the user and could therefore be great additions to our exhibition at the Design Museum.

‘Captain Steve‘ on www.boattest.com (picked up from Ergonomics In The News)

How many times do we catch ourselves saying or thinking “that’s my fault” or “I’m just not very good with…[insert any one of the following]…technology/mobile phones/computers…” or even in this particular case boats!

It is our contention that this user ’self-blame’, is perhaps one of the first indications of a poor consideration of Ergonomics within the design process of the product that elicits it.

Next time you catch yourself thinking such thoughts or even worse writing off even using something on this justification (including perhaps commenting on this blog…?!) ask yourself: “Is it actually my fault? Or is it the designer’s fault for not understanding me and my requirements well enough?”

You’ll hear more from us on this topic over the coming weeks, but in the meantime if there are any products that spring to mind straight away that ellicit these sort of responses in you, let us know, your story could form part of our exhibition and help us in our mission to raise awareness of ergonomics in our daily lives.

We’d like to share Peter’s sentiment by rephrasing it more positively: “Ergonomics prevents bad design and poor functionality.” Because as we all know, and as the old cliche goes, prevention is better than cure!

Unfortunately, as this article reveals, often Ergonomics is often only integrated into the Design Process as a ‘cure’ for poorly considered human interaction as opposed to acting as the starting point in a genuinely human centred design process.  

“Design should make technology understandable and accessible. It should ensure that people can make use of devices.” Gerd E. Wilsdorf, chief designer for Siemens Electronic Devices in Munich.

It is Ergonomics that will enable Design and Designers to do this.

What do you think? What does Ergonomics mean to you? Do you have any examples of products where the designer has not made technology accessible to you? Use the comments link on this post to let us know and we could feature your story in an exhibition at The Design Museum in London in a year’s time.

Lets be honest, none of us would like it if in a years time we had put together an exhibition of stuff you didn’t like or thought was boring or have even seen already. There’s only one way to stop this happening and that’s to let us know right now via the ‘Comments’ link at the top of the post: What does the word ‘Ergonomics’ mean to you?

There are no right or wrong answers, some people we’ve asked think its about chairs, others think its about taps or even how to think more efficiently.  What does it mean to you? If your answer is particularly innovative or exciting it could be made into an exhibit at the exhibition next year.

PS. If you’re in need some inspiration click on the ‘About Us’ link on the left of the blog!

Whilst the specific answers are of course confidential, they will inspire a series of posts to this blog over the next few weeks that we hope will begin to demonstrate the impact of Ergonomics on real world design. We hope you will check back again soon as we give you the chance to engage directly with members of the Human Factors and Ergonomics community.

Please also use the blog to ask questions to let us know what you think!

1.    How would you describe Ergonomics? Or in other words what does it mean to you?

2.    Can you give an example of good ergonomics?

3.    Or bad Ergonomics?

4.    In what industries or in the design of what type of products is Ergonomics most important?

There are no right or wrong answers here so please let us know what you think, it’s your first opportunity to be involved in the design of the exhibition, imagine if every designer asked you what you wanted their next product to be like? That would be real world design!