Common Misconception of Ergonomics: “Ergonomics Is Expensive”
If I had a penny for every time I’ve heard that ergonomics is “expensive” I wouldn’t be writing this blog but instead sitting on a beach somewhere. The perception that ergonomics is expensive seems to be a widely held belief in many people I’ve talked to whether they are clients, potential clients or at people I’ve met at conferences, meetings or networking events. I’ve seen this perception prevent the implementation of ergonomic programs at more companies that I’d care to admit. The question that must be asked is, “Is the perception true or false?” The answer is both, true and false, depending on how ergonomics is approached, used and measured.
If ergonomics is used in the “traditional” way, i.e. for safety, to reduce/prevent injuries, then ergonomics can be expensive. The cost/benefit ratio may not be that compelling. However, if ergonomics is used to its fullest and in my opinion, the way it should be used, then the cost/benefit ratio is much improved and the ROI is without question.
Let me explain. We all know that ROI is calculated as benefits (savings)/cost. So from an ergonomics perspective it looks this:
ROI =Savings & Improvement from ALL Stakeholders
Cost of Ergonomics Process
Notice I included the words “ALL Stakeholders”. The purpose of ergonomics by definition is to increase “human well-being and optimize system performance”. The “system” in this case are the business systems. Ergonomics impacts many more systems than just safety. Ergonomics affects the productivity, efficiency and quality of systems, i.e. work flow, inputs-throughputs-outputs, costs/unit, production time/unit. Ergonomics also affects the satisfaction and engagement of employees. From the consumer angle, ergonomics affects customer service, marketing/sales success and the usability of products. As you can see the cost of ergonomics can become quite small in comparison to the resulting benefits when all stakeholders are taken into the equation. Unfortunately, the “traditional” use of ergonomics and therefore the “traditional” business case has a stronghold in many companies, amidst safety professionals and the public at large.
When a business case if based on savings on reducing injuries and workers compensation costs, unless the costs are unusually high, the ROI is “fair at best” and therefore, ergonomics is seen as expensive. When using only one stakeholder, i.e. safety, I don’t blame the CFO and senior leaders in companies to resist ergonomics on the basis of cost. I blame the person doing the business case for not including the benefits for all the other stakeholders. Reducing the risk of injury impacts a great deal more than just work comp numbers, it will most likely result in increasing employee satisfaction/engagement, time savings in production (things are made easier to do—less reaching, less lifting, better tools, less mouse clicking, etc.), better quality (less errors, less defects, etc.) to name just a few other benefits. The numbers (dollars) of these non-safety benefits should be measured, tracked and included in the ergonomic business case.
If those who are in charge of ergonomics at their company don’t expand their stakeholder list and include them in the business case and ROI calculations then the perception of ergonomics as expensive will persist. It is my hope and professional goal that all who do ergonomics understand, appreciate and measure every positive (tangible and intangible) aspect that ergonomics brings to their company. It is only by doing so that the perception of ergonomics will change from “it’s too expensive to do ” to “it’s too expensive NOT to do”.