Problems of ergonomics of the workplace. Chapter from the book “Ergonomic workplace design” 2017
The abstract of the chapter of the modern (2017) book “Ergonomic workplace design” is dedicated to the ergonomics of working office space. Given the number of dull and very dull Russian offices - the information is very important. Good and timeless books on computer space ergonomics are rare (especially those in which a computer is not called a computer), and if they are found, everything is in English. Scientists at Cornell University, one of the leading universities of the USA, have published a book summarizing all the modern and most relevant studies on the ergonomics of the workplace (office, school, laboratory, university, etc.). The information below is very important for anyone who dreams of organizing a comfortable and efficient office.
Section II
Ergonomic workplace problems
8. Office workplace
Peter Vink, Iris Bakker, Liesbeth Groenesteijn
8.1. Mental office work
')
In 2012, there were 230 million knowledge workers worldwide (Manyika et al. 2013). In theses of doctoral dissertations Kastelein (2014), Bakker (2014) and Groenesteijn (2015) the need for increased attention to the ergonomics of office interiors is noted in connection with the increase in the number of knowledge workers. Such employees spend their working time in new office environments, such as combi-office (see Figure 8.1), at computers and other technical means of communication. New technologies provide alternative options for the execution of work, as well as reduce the need to visit the office. Often the place of work becomes a house, hotel or waiting room at the airport (Groenesteijn 2015). However, Kastelein (2014) notes that despite the growth in remote work, a number of leading companies such as Apple, Yahoo !, Google hold firm beliefs that having workers in one place is crucial to their success. Perhaps this view is based on the fact that physical proximity can lead to random encounters (Hagstrom 1965; Kraut et al. 1988; Appel-Meulenbroek 2014), which in turn can be the basis for a new look at products and services.
What these workers have in common, no matter where and when they work, is that they all do their work sitting for hours at a computer, laptop or other mobile device. In this regard, it becomes extremely important to pay attention to the functionality of ergonomic seat designs (Groenesteijn 2015). In addition, in the context of mental work, the design of office premises, conference rooms, rest rooms, and tables becomes of current importance.
This chapter presents research in the field of health care and productivity of people of mental and office work. Attention is paid to the space around the office (see section 8.3), to the organization of the internal space of the office (see sections 8.4 and 8.5), but the focus is on the workplace (see sections 8.6 and 8.7), the conference room (see section 8.8 .). The next chapter is about sustainable productivity in the office (see section 8.2).
Figure 8.1. An example of the Dutch combi-office, (a) an open space that facilitates the performance of communicative tasks, (b) an example of a room with the possibility of concentration.
8.2. Sustained productivity
The only reason for organizing an office or providing employees with information and communication technologies is to help create sustainable productivity. Of course, in the barn you can be productive for some time, but in the long term, in the absence of direct eye contact with colleagues, the quality of communication deteriorates and the health of employees is threatened. In this chapter, sustainable performance is understood as productivity that can be performed by workers who can also maintain their health. Health is defined as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being (WHO 2003). In any case, generalizations should be made with caution. Labor productivity and health are defined in a broad sense. For example, productivity also includes creativity, and health includes comfort and well-being.
8.3. Space around the office
The office environment also has an impact on productivity and health. An office surrounded by parks, a walk in nature during a break can reduce work stress. Park et al. (2010) showed various effects when comparing the walk of 280 test subjects in the forest and around the city. When walking in the woods, the level of cortisol in saliva is significantly lower (by 15.8%), mean arterial pressure is much lower (by 1.9%), heart rate is lower than when walking through the city. These physical parameters are related to the level of stress in the body and they indicate a decrease in stress in the environment. Another interesting observation is Park et al. (2010) shows that after 14 minutes of contemplation of the forest, the same symptoms as described above appear. This means that the view from the window also affects stress. Bazley and Vink (2008) found that workers who had mountain views from a window were more satisfied than those who did not have windows. The health effects of species are well known. Ulrich (1984) showed 30 years ago that patients gallbladder recovered much faster when they looked at nature from a window than those who looked at walls. A more recent survey conducted among 785 office workers showed that labor productivity was higher for those who had a window with a view of nature (Nicol 2006). Some countries even have standards for windows. Dutch regulations stipulate that offices that are used for a day for 2 hours or more must have daylight access (Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor 1998).
8.4. Office space
Microclimate affects performance. Based on a measurement of workers' opinions, Kosonen and Tan (2004) state that a room temperature of 27˚C has a 30% lower productivity compared to 21˚C, but Hedge and Gaygen (2010) found that productivity was higher at 25˚ C than at lower temperatures, which indicates the optimum range. Climate studies have shown that there is no single indicator of the convenience of indoor temperature. For example, a comfortable room temperature depends on the outdoor temperature (De Dear and Brager 2002). In the northern hemisphere, higher room temperatures are preferred in summer than in winter. The level of thermal perception is not within one season. People who live or work in buildings with natural ventilation, where they can open windows, become accustomed to temperature diversity. Their temperature perception develops over a wider range, and their preferred range of comfort is wider (De Dear and Brager 2002). Simply put, people get used to a wider range of temperatures and thereby expand their comfort zone. Roelofsen (2013) showed that thermal comfort depends on age. Older people have a smaller range of comfortable indoor temperatures than young people. Perhaps the most important piece of advice is that people should be able to control the temperature changes in the room (Roelofsen 2016), which means that they can open a window or adapt the temperature locally with a thermostat. Temperature is not the only significant factor in office space.
Satish et al. (2012) showed that a high concentration of carbon dioxide significantly reduces the efficiency of the decision-making process, but sound and light are also of great importance. Hongisto (2005) states that concentration on a task is reduced by 7% in the presence of strong ambient noise. Aries and Zonneveldt (2009) argue that light is needed to solve complex problems, and that glare should be avoided, as it reduces productivity. In addition, working with a view of green plants has a positive effect on creativity (Shibata and Suzuki 2002; Klein Hesselink et al. 2006), which is a form of productivity, although for some types of monotonous office work, there was a decrease in productivity by 12% for places with views of the plants.
8.5 Office format
Office layout can be implemented in different ways, but it should always contribute to the activities and tasks of employees. In fact, the only reason for organizing an office is employee support. There are small companies that do not have an office, use remote work, special public cabinets (seats2meets in the Netherlands) or restaurant meetings, but most organizations have an office. Different space layout requirements combine dedicated areas for focused work, as well as areas for work and communication. Rieck and Kelter (2005) showed in their study of 706 employees that comfort and performance are highest in a combined office (see Figure 8.2), where employees can choose their own working space that best suits their needs. A study by Blok et al. (2009) showed that labor productivity and a sense of comfort increased significantly in the group of 1,125 employees displaced from rooms with 6-7 people to the combi-office (see Figure 8.3).
8.6. Individual workplace
The choice of workplace is highly dependent on the task. Large screens are required for design and design tasks, while more powerful computers and laptops are often needed for information and communication tasks. For work performed on the tablet, it is better to use an additional keyboard and an adjustable stand for setting a comfortable viewing angle. Albin (2014) showed that for a tablet computer, employees preferred an angle of 33˚ relative to the horizontal. In addition, a height-adjustable table is required. A study conducted among 45 employees (Vink and Kompier 1997) showed that there is no one ideal table height. The height depends on the anthropometry of the worker, the device used and the type of task. Training staff ergonomic standards is also necessary. This training pays off due to the beneficial effects of these standards on health and productivity.
Figure 8.2. Convenience and productivity in a study of 706 employees working in different offices (Rieck and Kelter 2005). The higher the number, the higher the comfort and productivity.
In many textbooks and websites (for example, ergo.human.cornell.edu/ergoguide.html ) the ideal workplace is described as one where an employee can work in a neutral posture, with legs firmly on the ground; upper part of legs approximately in a horizontal position, feet extended forward from the line of the knee, so that the angle between the knee and lower leg is more than 90˚; trunk slightly rejected (up to 20 ); head and neck balanced and upright; the upper arm is vertical and the lower arm is horizontal; arms and wrists are straight and flat. The seat and table must be adjustable to maintain this position.
Figure 8.3. a) a room for six people in an old design b) a room in a new design
While the posture described is the established standard of the correct posture, it is just a healthy posture; for in the case of prolonged sitting, it is much more important to change poses during the working day (Ellegast et al. 2012; Groenesteijn 2015). For work focused on reading, lying postures with back and head support are preferred. Office workers prefer to tilt the backrest by 123˚ during the reading process (Groenesteijn 2015). Wilke et al. (1999) showed that the pressure in the vertebral discs in this position is less than in the upright sitting position. Gscheidle and Reed (2004) found that a backrest angle of 114˚ is preferred for reading in an office chair. This means that a good office chair should be adjustable in height, and the seat bowl and backrest should rotate in the sagittal plane. Ellegast et al. (2012) showed that the type of office chair does not matter much, it is important the presence of mobility and adjustability.
As for the armrest and the position of the seat bowl, there is a lot of controversy. Be that as it may, there is literature emphasizing the importance of having arm support, as well as a function of support when getting up and down in a chair, which is especially important for older workers. The armrest reduces upper muscle activity and discomfort of the trapezius muscle. Hedge et al. (2011) showed a reduction in the number of complaints from workers who have armrests in chairs, from 24% to 16%. Goossens and Snijders (1995) showed that when the seat is horizontal, forces arise that move the upper leg and buttocks forward, which increases discomfort. A slight tilt of the seat back prevents this drawback. In the US, there is standard ergonomics that imposes important requirements for the design of the chair (ANSI-HFES 100 2007). There is also an international standard of ergonomics, which relates to the design of ergonomic workplaces (ISO 9241-5 1998).
An important issue is the adjustability of jobs. Vink et al. (2007) showed that 63% of workers in the Netherlands never adjusted their chairs, and some of them also do not have their own table. These are the so-called flexworkers, workers who share their jobs with the rest. Groenesteijn (2015) studied two seat designs - a) a complex adjustable chair with a large number of elements and b) a simple one with a small number of adjustment elements - and suggested using these chairs for workers who have their own jobs and flexworkers. Most workers adjusted the height of the seat, the height of the armrests, and the backrest of office chairs at first use. Time to adjust the height of the seat and the height of the armrests was less than a simple chair. Adjusting the angle of the back took considerable time and was difficult to implement without instructions. Flexworkers compared with workers who have their jobs, quickly adjusted their seats. The quality of adjustment after talking with an expert increased by 32%, which shows the importance of educational instruction.
8.7. Partially standing work and changing poses
The risk of office work is the lack of physical activity. According to Commissaris et al. (2014) physical passivity is closely associated with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, depression, obesity, and some forms of cancer. 3.2 million people die prematurely from the passive style of work. Long periods of continuous sitting in a sitting position are one of the risk factors (Buckley et al. 2015). Hu et al. (2003) state that every 2-hour sitting increases the risk of obesity by 5% and the risk of developing diabetes by 7% in female workers. One of the possibilities of increasing mobility is the alternation of a sitting position with a standing position. In some situations, standing posture, even preferably seated. Sengupta and Das (2000) show that the accessibility zone increases when standing, just as the ability to use force often increases (Yates and Karwowksi 1992). On the other hand, standing for most of the working day is not recommended. A review of 17 studies (McCulloch 2002) shows that standing work increases the risk of problems with the veins in the legs, problems with the back and legs, and also affects preterm labor, as confirmed by studies by Krause et al. (2000) and Tiichsen et al. (2000). Probably, a change of posture has a positive effect. There was some improvement in the sit-up table. Aaras et al. (2001) showed, for example, that a standing position when working with visual display devices significantly reduces the activity of the trapezius muscle compared to the sitting position. Velinga (2001) showed that in 84% of subjects the state of health improved after the introduction of seated-standing tables.
However, skepticism still exists with regard to sit-up tables. Research Velinga (2001) showed, for example, that half of the user group stood only for 15 minutes a day, and 10% never used the option of standing. Wilks et al. (2006) after examining 90 employees of four companies, they found that after 1 month of using combined tables, more than 60% of workers did not adjust tables for standing posture. In a study conducted by Vink et al. (2005), workers could stand, sit in an ordinary office chair and on a bar stool (Figure 8.4). Apparently, work in these positions led to a reduction in discomfort in the neck and back, and work in a standing position occupied 8% of the total time. The main conclusion is that it is worth trying to fill the office interior with additional features of standing and partial standing, as this may contribute to the diversity of working postures.
Figure 8.4. Workplace that allows you to change the position during the day
Recently, TNO, the second largest applied research institute in Europe, has investigated the impact of a bike-table — oxidesk (see Figure 8.5). The first test results (Oxidesk 2016) show that reading can be carried out faster on oxide in comparison with a regular table. Other tasks are also feasible around this table. Research results showed that 36% of subjects reported increased concentration. In addition, 68% reported that they would like to use oxidesk daily. Commissaris et al. (2014) tested 15 people in 6 different positions: sitting, standing, on a treadmill, on a walking simulator, a bicycle with 25% load and a bicycle with 40% load - to perform 7 different exercises: print (5 minutes) , editing (5 minutes), using the mouse (5 minutes), using the phone (3 minutes), perception test, flanker test, memorization test (6-8 minutes). Found minimal differences in the performance of tasks on thinking; call quality was rated lower in dynamic positions; typing speed was much slower when walking; mouse control has deteriorated in all dynamic activities. Thus, it is likely that a stable position is most beneficial for typewriting and mouse control, whereas dynamic positions are most beneficial for creative thinking, all other activities do not differ in either static or dynamic work patterns.
Using a treadmill, bicycle, elliptical trainer, or any other is an option to stimulate movement during work.But of course other options are possible, up to a walk during meetings. In addition, and interior design plays an important role. If the stairs are hidden, do not expect them to be used. Well-thought-out stairs or the indispensable need to use them (see Figure 8.6) are also a good way to stimulate movement during work.
Figure 8.5. Oxidesk - cycling and work
Figure 8.6. The path to the second floor leads only through the stairs.
8.8. Negotiation room interior
, , . , 2,6% (3,3 , ) . , (Finch 2012). , . . , 44% (Duijvestijn et al. 2007). , , (Csikszentmihalyi 2003; Gaillard 2003; Giancola 2011) .
8.7. ) Square, b) Oval, c) Home, d) Stool
, 20% 40% . - ; 70% (NOBIS 2001). , 35% , 50% (The Muse 2016). , , , , . , , . , , . , , , . 14- (Square), 3 3-, 4 4-. – (Oval), 14 . – - , , (Home). , , – - 14- (Stools). . , . - , , , . , , / , . 112 (3-12 ) 12- (. 8.7). , , , . 30 120 . 8.8 8.9 , Stool, Square. 8.8 , Square , Stool – . Square Home, – Oval.
8.8. ) b) , .
8.9. ) b) . , .
Figure 8.10. Distribution of subjects' opinions on the compliance of interiors with various tasks.
Figure 8.10 shows that Oval is considered, depending on the circumstances, for the exchange of information, its assimilation and analysis. The survey showed that 34% of participants indicated that Home is most suitable for very sensitive and sensitive meetings. It is also suitable for generating ideas. The study also showed that 50% of participants noted the interior of Stool as the most suitable for generating ideas in a short time.
Of course, since this study was conducted at the same enterprise with its specific characteristics, conclusions should be made with caution. True, other studies show the same results. Kooij-de Bode et al. (2009) emphasizes the fact that Square is least suitable for various types of meetings, and Oval is most suitable for sharing information.
The results of this study show that Square's interior should be avoided because it contributes to low participant engagement, low atmosphere and low group activity. Oval interior for most meetings is most preferable, it creates a greater involvement of participants. To stimulate group activity and satisfaction with the meeting, the interior of the Stool will be most suitable. The interior of Home is most suitable for long creative meetings, and for short ones - Stool.
Another type of conference room is also promising - with standing places (see Figure 8.11). Bluedorn et al. (2003) showed that the standing meeting is 34% shorter, but ends with the same result and quality as a sedentary. In 2008, a similar experiment was conducted in the Netherlands with similar indicators (Managers Online 2016).
8.11.
8.9. Conclusion
The main idea of this chapter was the understanding that the interior of the office is primarily aimed at supporting employees in carrying out their tasks in the long term. This means that the office is focused on sustainable performance. Work tasks and activities should be supported by the office environment, and health should also be maintained. Routine clerical work in the office gives way to work with a lot of creative information. New devices will come to the office. The tablet computer has now become part of the work environment, but other devices will come along, and with them new activities.
In the current situation with these technical means, health and productivity in offices can be improved by choosing the following:
- The location of the office, which is surrounded by nature or the park.
- A room that is adapted to the tasks and easily controlled by staff.
- Planning, tailored to the task (combi-office is suitable for many tasks).
- A workplace, which ideally is not only adapted to the solution of the current task, but also stimulates a change in posture.
- Various conference rooms that fit certain types of meetings: round and oval for most meetings, standing or sitting on bar stools for more active participation.
Section II
Ergonomic workplace problems
8. Office workplace
Peter Vink, Iris Bakker, Liesbeth Groenesteijn
Content
8.1. Mental office work
8.2. Sustained productivity
8.3. Space around the office
8.4. Office space
8.5. Office format
8.6. Individual workplace
8.7. Partially standing work and changing poses
8.8. Negotiation room interior
8.9. Conclusion Bibliography
8.2. Sustained productivity
8.3. Space around the office
8.4. Office space
8.5. Office format
8.6. Individual workplace
8.7. Partially standing work and changing poses
8.8. Negotiation room interior
8.9. Conclusion Bibliography
8.1. Mental office work
')
In 2012, there were 230 million knowledge workers worldwide (Manyika et al. 2013). In theses of doctoral dissertations Kastelein (2014), Bakker (2014) and Groenesteijn (2015) the need for increased attention to the ergonomics of office interiors is noted in connection with the increase in the number of knowledge workers. Such employees spend their working time in new office environments, such as combi-office (see Figure 8.1), at computers and other technical means of communication. New technologies provide alternative options for the execution of work, as well as reduce the need to visit the office. Often the place of work becomes a house, hotel or waiting room at the airport (Groenesteijn 2015). However, Kastelein (2014) notes that despite the growth in remote work, a number of leading companies such as Apple, Yahoo !, Google hold firm beliefs that having workers in one place is crucial to their success. Perhaps this view is based on the fact that physical proximity can lead to random encounters (Hagstrom 1965; Kraut et al. 1988; Appel-Meulenbroek 2014), which in turn can be the basis for a new look at products and services.
What these workers have in common, no matter where and when they work, is that they all do their work sitting for hours at a computer, laptop or other mobile device. In this regard, it becomes extremely important to pay attention to the functionality of ergonomic seat designs (Groenesteijn 2015). In addition, in the context of mental work, the design of office premises, conference rooms, rest rooms, and tables becomes of current importance.
This chapter presents research in the field of health care and productivity of people of mental and office work. Attention is paid to the space around the office (see section 8.3), to the organization of the internal space of the office (see sections 8.4 and 8.5), but the focus is on the workplace (see sections 8.6 and 8.7), the conference room (see section 8.8 .). The next chapter is about sustainable productivity in the office (see section 8.2).
Figure 8.1. An example of the Dutch combi-office, (a) an open space that facilitates the performance of communicative tasks, (b) an example of a room with the possibility of concentration.
8.2. Sustained productivity
The only reason for organizing an office or providing employees with information and communication technologies is to help create sustainable productivity. Of course, in the barn you can be productive for some time, but in the long term, in the absence of direct eye contact with colleagues, the quality of communication deteriorates and the health of employees is threatened. In this chapter, sustainable performance is understood as productivity that can be performed by workers who can also maintain their health. Health is defined as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being (WHO 2003). In any case, generalizations should be made with caution. Labor productivity and health are defined in a broad sense. For example, productivity also includes creativity, and health includes comfort and well-being.
8.3. Space around the office
The office environment also has an impact on productivity and health. An office surrounded by parks, a walk in nature during a break can reduce work stress. Park et al. (2010) showed various effects when comparing the walk of 280 test subjects in the forest and around the city. When walking in the woods, the level of cortisol in saliva is significantly lower (by 15.8%), mean arterial pressure is much lower (by 1.9%), heart rate is lower than when walking through the city. These physical parameters are related to the level of stress in the body and they indicate a decrease in stress in the environment. Another interesting observation is Park et al. (2010) shows that after 14 minutes of contemplation of the forest, the same symptoms as described above appear. This means that the view from the window also affects stress. Bazley and Vink (2008) found that workers who had mountain views from a window were more satisfied than those who did not have windows. The health effects of species are well known. Ulrich (1984) showed 30 years ago that patients gallbladder recovered much faster when they looked at nature from a window than those who looked at walls. A more recent survey conducted among 785 office workers showed that labor productivity was higher for those who had a window with a view of nature (Nicol 2006). Some countries even have standards for windows. Dutch regulations stipulate that offices that are used for a day for 2 hours or more must have daylight access (Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor 1998).
8.4. Office space
Microclimate affects performance. Based on a measurement of workers' opinions, Kosonen and Tan (2004) state that a room temperature of 27˚C has a 30% lower productivity compared to 21˚C, but Hedge and Gaygen (2010) found that productivity was higher at 25˚ C than at lower temperatures, which indicates the optimum range. Climate studies have shown that there is no single indicator of the convenience of indoor temperature. For example, a comfortable room temperature depends on the outdoor temperature (De Dear and Brager 2002). In the northern hemisphere, higher room temperatures are preferred in summer than in winter. The level of thermal perception is not within one season. People who live or work in buildings with natural ventilation, where they can open windows, become accustomed to temperature diversity. Their temperature perception develops over a wider range, and their preferred range of comfort is wider (De Dear and Brager 2002). Simply put, people get used to a wider range of temperatures and thereby expand their comfort zone. Roelofsen (2013) showed that thermal comfort depends on age. Older people have a smaller range of comfortable indoor temperatures than young people. Perhaps the most important piece of advice is that people should be able to control the temperature changes in the room (Roelofsen 2016), which means that they can open a window or adapt the temperature locally with a thermostat. Temperature is not the only significant factor in office space.
Satish et al. (2012) showed that a high concentration of carbon dioxide significantly reduces the efficiency of the decision-making process, but sound and light are also of great importance. Hongisto (2005) states that concentration on a task is reduced by 7% in the presence of strong ambient noise. Aries and Zonneveldt (2009) argue that light is needed to solve complex problems, and that glare should be avoided, as it reduces productivity. In addition, working with a view of green plants has a positive effect on creativity (Shibata and Suzuki 2002; Klein Hesselink et al. 2006), which is a form of productivity, although for some types of monotonous office work, there was a decrease in productivity by 12% for places with views of the plants.
8.5 Office format
Office layout can be implemented in different ways, but it should always contribute to the activities and tasks of employees. In fact, the only reason for organizing an office is employee support. There are small companies that do not have an office, use remote work, special public cabinets (seats2meets in the Netherlands) or restaurant meetings, but most organizations have an office. Different space layout requirements combine dedicated areas for focused work, as well as areas for work and communication. Rieck and Kelter (2005) showed in their study of 706 employees that comfort and performance are highest in a combined office (see Figure 8.2), where employees can choose their own working space that best suits their needs. A study by Blok et al. (2009) showed that labor productivity and a sense of comfort increased significantly in the group of 1,125 employees displaced from rooms with 6-7 people to the combi-office (see Figure 8.3).
8.6. Individual workplace
The choice of workplace is highly dependent on the task. Large screens are required for design and design tasks, while more powerful computers and laptops are often needed for information and communication tasks. For work performed on the tablet, it is better to use an additional keyboard and an adjustable stand for setting a comfortable viewing angle. Albin (2014) showed that for a tablet computer, employees preferred an angle of 33˚ relative to the horizontal. In addition, a height-adjustable table is required. A study conducted among 45 employees (Vink and Kompier 1997) showed that there is no one ideal table height. The height depends on the anthropometry of the worker, the device used and the type of task. Training staff ergonomic standards is also necessary. This training pays off due to the beneficial effects of these standards on health and productivity.
Figure 8.2. Convenience and productivity in a study of 706 employees working in different offices (Rieck and Kelter 2005). The higher the number, the higher the comfort and productivity.
In many textbooks and websites (for example, ergo.human.cornell.edu/ergoguide.html ) the ideal workplace is described as one where an employee can work in a neutral posture, with legs firmly on the ground; upper part of legs approximately in a horizontal position, feet extended forward from the line of the knee, so that the angle between the knee and lower leg is more than 90˚; trunk slightly rejected (up to 20 ); head and neck balanced and upright; the upper arm is vertical and the lower arm is horizontal; arms and wrists are straight and flat. The seat and table must be adjustable to maintain this position.
Figure 8.3. a) a room for six people in an old design b) a room in a new design
While the posture described is the established standard of the correct posture, it is just a healthy posture; for in the case of prolonged sitting, it is much more important to change poses during the working day (Ellegast et al. 2012; Groenesteijn 2015). For work focused on reading, lying postures with back and head support are preferred. Office workers prefer to tilt the backrest by 123˚ during the reading process (Groenesteijn 2015). Wilke et al. (1999) showed that the pressure in the vertebral discs in this position is less than in the upright sitting position. Gscheidle and Reed (2004) found that a backrest angle of 114˚ is preferred for reading in an office chair. This means that a good office chair should be adjustable in height, and the seat bowl and backrest should rotate in the sagittal plane. Ellegast et al. (2012) showed that the type of office chair does not matter much, it is important the presence of mobility and adjustability.
As for the armrest and the position of the seat bowl, there is a lot of controversy. Be that as it may, there is literature emphasizing the importance of having arm support, as well as a function of support when getting up and down in a chair, which is especially important for older workers. The armrest reduces upper muscle activity and discomfort of the trapezius muscle. Hedge et al. (2011) showed a reduction in the number of complaints from workers who have armrests in chairs, from 24% to 16%. Goossens and Snijders (1995) showed that when the seat is horizontal, forces arise that move the upper leg and buttocks forward, which increases discomfort. A slight tilt of the seat back prevents this drawback. In the US, there is standard ergonomics that imposes important requirements for the design of the chair (ANSI-HFES 100 2007). There is also an international standard of ergonomics, which relates to the design of ergonomic workplaces (ISO 9241-5 1998).
An important issue is the adjustability of jobs. Vink et al. (2007) showed that 63% of workers in the Netherlands never adjusted their chairs, and some of them also do not have their own table. These are the so-called flexworkers, workers who share their jobs with the rest. Groenesteijn (2015) studied two seat designs - a) a complex adjustable chair with a large number of elements and b) a simple one with a small number of adjustment elements - and suggested using these chairs for workers who have their own jobs and flexworkers. Most workers adjusted the height of the seat, the height of the armrests, and the backrest of office chairs at first use. Time to adjust the height of the seat and the height of the armrests was less than a simple chair. Adjusting the angle of the back took considerable time and was difficult to implement without instructions. Flexworkers compared with workers who have their jobs, quickly adjusted their seats. The quality of adjustment after talking with an expert increased by 32%, which shows the importance of educational instruction.
8.7. Partially standing work and changing poses
The risk of office work is the lack of physical activity. According to Commissaris et al. (2014) physical passivity is closely associated with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, depression, obesity, and some forms of cancer. 3.2 million people die prematurely from the passive style of work. Long periods of continuous sitting in a sitting position are one of the risk factors (Buckley et al. 2015). Hu et al. (2003) state that every 2-hour sitting increases the risk of obesity by 5% and the risk of developing diabetes by 7% in female workers. One of the possibilities of increasing mobility is the alternation of a sitting position with a standing position. In some situations, standing posture, even preferably seated. Sengupta and Das (2000) show that the accessibility zone increases when standing, just as the ability to use force often increases (Yates and Karwowksi 1992). On the other hand, standing for most of the working day is not recommended. A review of 17 studies (McCulloch 2002) shows that standing work increases the risk of problems with the veins in the legs, problems with the back and legs, and also affects preterm labor, as confirmed by studies by Krause et al. (2000) and Tiichsen et al. (2000). Probably, a change of posture has a positive effect. There was some improvement in the sit-up table. Aaras et al. (2001) showed, for example, that a standing position when working with visual display devices significantly reduces the activity of the trapezius muscle compared to the sitting position. Velinga (2001) showed that in 84% of subjects the state of health improved after the introduction of seated-standing tables.
However, skepticism still exists with regard to sit-up tables. Research Velinga (2001) showed, for example, that half of the user group stood only for 15 minutes a day, and 10% never used the option of standing. Wilks et al. (2006) after examining 90 employees of four companies, they found that after 1 month of using combined tables, more than 60% of workers did not adjust tables for standing posture. In a study conducted by Vink et al. (2005), workers could stand, sit in an ordinary office chair and on a bar stool (Figure 8.4). Apparently, work in these positions led to a reduction in discomfort in the neck and back, and work in a standing position occupied 8% of the total time. The main conclusion is that it is worth trying to fill the office interior with additional features of standing and partial standing, as this may contribute to the diversity of working postures.
Figure 8.4. Workplace that allows you to change the position during the day
Recently, TNO, the second largest applied research institute in Europe, has investigated the impact of a bike-table — oxidesk (see Figure 8.5). The first test results (Oxidesk 2016) show that reading can be carried out faster on oxide in comparison with a regular table. Other tasks are also feasible around this table. Research results showed that 36% of subjects reported increased concentration. In addition, 68% reported that they would like to use oxidesk daily. Commissaris et al. (2014) tested 15 people in 6 different positions: sitting, standing, on a treadmill, on a walking simulator, a bicycle with 25% load and a bicycle with 40% load - to perform 7 different exercises: print (5 minutes) , editing (5 minutes), using the mouse (5 minutes), using the phone (3 minutes), perception test, flanker test, memorization test (6-8 minutes). Found minimal differences in the performance of tasks on thinking; call quality was rated lower in dynamic positions; typing speed was much slower when walking; mouse control has deteriorated in all dynamic activities. Thus, it is likely that a stable position is most beneficial for typewriting and mouse control, whereas dynamic positions are most beneficial for creative thinking, all other activities do not differ in either static or dynamic work patterns.
Using a treadmill, bicycle, elliptical trainer, or any other is an option to stimulate movement during work.But of course other options are possible, up to a walk during meetings. In addition, and interior design plays an important role. If the stairs are hidden, do not expect them to be used. Well-thought-out stairs or the indispensable need to use them (see Figure 8.6) are also a good way to stimulate movement during work.
Figure 8.5. Oxidesk - cycling and work
Figure 8.6. The path to the second floor leads only through the stairs.
8.8. Negotiation room interior
, , . , 2,6% (3,3 , ) . , (Finch 2012). , . . , 44% (Duijvestijn et al. 2007). , , (Csikszentmihalyi 2003; Gaillard 2003; Giancola 2011) .
8.7. ) Square, b) Oval, c) Home, d) Stool
, 20% 40% . - ; 70% (NOBIS 2001). , 35% , 50% (The Muse 2016). , , , , . , , . , , . , , , . 14- (Square), 3 3-, 4 4-. – (Oval), 14 . – - , , (Home). , , – - 14- (Stools). . , . - , , , . , , / , . 112 (3-12 ) 12- (. 8.7). , , , . 30 120 . 8.8 8.9 , Stool, Square. 8.8 , Square , Stool – . Square Home, – Oval.
8.8. ) b) , .
8.9. ) b) . , .
Figure 8.10. Distribution of subjects' opinions on the compliance of interiors with various tasks.
Figure 8.10 shows that Oval is considered, depending on the circumstances, for the exchange of information, its assimilation and analysis. The survey showed that 34% of participants indicated that Home is most suitable for very sensitive and sensitive meetings. It is also suitable for generating ideas. The study also showed that 50% of participants noted the interior of Stool as the most suitable for generating ideas in a short time.
Of course, since this study was conducted at the same enterprise with its specific characteristics, conclusions should be made with caution. True, other studies show the same results. Kooij-de Bode et al. (2009) emphasizes the fact that Square is least suitable for various types of meetings, and Oval is most suitable for sharing information.
The results of this study show that Square's interior should be avoided because it contributes to low participant engagement, low atmosphere and low group activity. Oval interior for most meetings is most preferable, it creates a greater involvement of participants. To stimulate group activity and satisfaction with the meeting, the interior of the Stool will be most suitable. The interior of Home is most suitable for long creative meetings, and for short ones - Stool.
Another type of conference room is also promising - with standing places (see Figure 8.11). Bluedorn et al. (2003) showed that the standing meeting is 34% shorter, but ends with the same result and quality as a sedentary. In 2008, a similar experiment was conducted in the Netherlands with similar indicators (Managers Online 2016).
8.11.
8.9. Conclusion
The main idea of this chapter was the understanding that the interior of the office is primarily aimed at supporting employees in carrying out their tasks in the long term. This means that the office is focused on sustainable performance. Work tasks and activities should be supported by the office environment, and health should also be maintained. Routine clerical work in the office gives way to work with a lot of creative information. New devices will come to the office. The tablet computer has now become part of the work environment, but other devices will come along, and with them new activities.
In the current situation with these technical means, health and productivity in offices can be improved by choosing the following:
- The location of the office, which is surrounded by nature or the park.
- A room that is adapted to the tasks and easily controlled by staff.
- Planning, tailored to the task (combi-office is suitable for many tasks).
- A workplace, which ideally is not only adapted to the solution of the current task, but also stimulates a change in posture.
- Various conference rooms that fit certain types of meetings: round and oval for most meetings, standing or sitting on bar stools for more active participation.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/322106/
All Articles