|
Ergonomics and Human Error
Fool Proof Design for us all - Part II
by HYPERLINK "http://www.opconline.com/team.html"Jane E. Sleeth
Subsequent to writing Part I of this article on human error in the workplace, home and in all of our activities of daily living, I have been aware of numerous articles in newspapers and on TV. These programs and articles all deliver a consistent message; human error is all around us and the end users are generally to "blame" for many of these mistakes and errors.
The latest example was discussed during an American TV news program, which described a large and growing problem with end users of cell phones "accidentally" calling 911 centres. This results in large and unmanageable volumes of calls being screened at these centres which has resulted in more serious calls not being fielded in a timely manner at these centres. In one state alone there were 64,000 calls to the 911 call centre over a one-year time span. The TV program interviewed both the Call Centre representatives as well as the cell phone manufacturers to determine what they felt was the underlying cause for all of these "errors". Can you guess what the consensus was from these two groups? The end user - the human element - was consistently deemed to be the only cause for these errors.
Take this a step further and consider what both groups felt the solution was for decreasing the frequency of these calls? The 911 Call Centres had contacted many of the cell phone manufacturers to inform them that some action steps needed to be put into place to stop the problem. In turn, the manufacturers each sent a letter to the cell phone users. In the letter they informed the callers that there are too many phone calls being made in error to the 911 Call Centres and warned the end users to stop making these errors! Sounds like those safety programs that place emphasis on retraining the employee and changing their behaviours while they attempt to hammer in a nail with a screwdriver! The bottom line - if we as health & safety professionals and HR managers do not provide the right tools and equipment but tell someone to do something a certain way then errors will only follow (and be repeated over and over again).
If we look at cell phones from a human factors design perspective you will notice that there is a feature built into the phones which permit a one button access to the 911 Call Centres. Following are typical scenarios which were documented as regularly occurring and contributed to the idea that this is therefore "human error":
Place a cell phone into the hands of an end user with 95th percentile hand/finger size and then try to depress one key at a time. What occurs is that two or three keys are depressed instead of the one intended key.
Place the cell phone into the hands of an end user with a cognitive impairment or impaired eyesight. The end user often depresses a specific button thinking they had activated an alternative function. Attach the cell phone to your belt buckle (the cell phone manufacturers make the plastic attachment for this purpose) and if you happen to have a larger girth and bend forward to get into the cab of your vehicle. The cell phone inadvertently hits your leg or stomach and the 1 button emergency call feature is activated. These are the common reasons why the cell phones were activated inadvertently. Yet it is interesting how this is still considered to be "human error" by the manufacturer and call centres. In these three scenarios, the error is directly related to inadequate design of the keys, incorrect choice of button for 911 activation and lack of usability testing on the part of the manufacturers. A warning letter to end-users will in no way prevent the human error.
For more information on "accidental cell calls" HYPERLINK "http://www.stopaccidentalcalls.com"www.stopaccidentalcalls.com
|
