about

My introduction to Office Ergonomics began when I was hired by a Swedish company to

implement the fully adjustable workstations they began marketing in Canada in 1976. It

included numerous office visits throughout Scandinavia as part of my training. Coming from a

world of fixed height desks and standard recommendations I was literally stunned to see

everyone sitting and working in perfectly supported postures, at work surfaces and in chairs that

were adjusted to meet individual physical and functional needs, Widely different heights

reflected the differences in how tall we all are, and our shapes. Products included bi-level adjustable computer tables, though they were usually shared by groups of people in thosedays.

Educated in how to measure individual needs, I trained others back in Canada and we began

offering our services to each employee who was provided with one of those uniquely adjustable

workstations. “We would like to adjust your desk and your chair to suit your physical

requirements,” and… virtually everyone said “no”. “Thanks but no thanks.” Stunned, we could

think of nothing else to say but, “let us apply what we learned in Sweden, and if you don’t like it,

we’ll change it back again." Not sure if the word, 'Sweden’ made the difference but they would

usually change their minds and let us make the adjustments that accommodated their specific

needs.

And… nothing. At least not at first. It usually took a few weeks but then we would start getting

feedback. “My back doesn’t hurt any more.” “My shoulders stopped hurting.” “ My knee pain is

gone.” And on and on. 

I'll never forget Lynn Brown coming into our office to thank us personally. “I have been suffering from swelling in my ankles and feet for years. The doctors have tried every kind of medication and nothing worked.” She continued, “but since you lowered my desk and chair, the swelling has gone away.” Even though Sweden had taught us how to measure individual needs, but not why, Lynn was shorter than average and we figured that before being lowered, her chair was cutting off the circulation of blood to her lower legs.

Regardless of what pain was eliminated, you could say we had a reverse education. Apply basic

human measuring techniques, hear about the discomfort that went away, then figure out why.

That knowledge was not being taught anywhere in North America back then, yet became even

more important when computers began to proliferate in the early 80’s. 

What didn’t change? The initial refusal from almost everyone to let us apply what we knew. Until Alain Chalifour, our consultant in Montreal, changed everything in 1981.

In a Quebec office where all of the employees were using computers in fixed postures and at

heights that did not accommodate their individual needs, the manager listened to Alain’s

comments about the discomfort it HAD to be causing, and had one dismissive comment. “No

one has ever complained.” 

Alain persisted and eventually the manager said that if Alain could prove that he did in fact have a problem he would look at doing something. So Alain prepared an employee questionnaire. It asked the employees if they were experiencing any of the dozen or so discomforts we had been eliminating, and allowed them to grade its severity. 

Surprisingly, virtually everyone identified a pain that they considered serious. In fact most noted 2 or 3. Results that have never changed with continued use of the questionnaire, decade after decade.

Obviously the immediate question would be, if almost everyone was experiencing some degree

of discomfort and pain, why did virtually no-one ever complain, properly adjust the chair and

workstation they had, or want us to show them how?

Fortunately, when Alain Chalifour created the questionnaire, it included a unique question that

would explain everything. It was, “To what do you attribute your discomfort?” From that first time and decade after decade, the responses to that question have made it consistently clear: most

people attribute their discomfort and pain to a problem or weakness within themselves. 

Pain in backs, wrists, shoulders, knees, necks, eyes, heads and more, were usually explained in ways that can be summarized as meaning, “there’s something wrong with me.” Even individuals who

associated their discomfort with using computers still thought of it as a problem ‘they’ had.

Once we knew this, we immediately developed an employee Training and Education seminar in

which we demonstrated the relationship between how they sat and worked and the pain and 

discomfort it could cause.  We also stressed that they must not accept physical discomfort as part of their work. At the end of the seminar we offered each attendee one on one assistance, in their workstation, to help each determine the specific ways they needed to sit and work to eliminate and prevent working pain and discomfort. Virtually everyone has wanted that assistance.

You could say that is when our education as consultants really began. Once in their workstation,

many would let us know exactly what they were experiencing and anxiously await our help.

Sometimes they would describe a pain for which we could not identify a cause. Frequently we

felt like detectives, trying to figure out what was causing a specific pain. Over and over again,

we would find that their most serious discomfort was caused by something they spent the least

amount of time doing. Reaching for a phone, paper from a printer, a binder off a shelf, a file from

a cabinet, a shared stapler, etc., as little as 10 times a day would cause serious discomfort over

time if done awkwardly. They wouldn’t know what they had been doing so it was up to us to

figure it out.

As our knowledge and experience grew and we eliminated more and more pain and discomfort,

we realized that it was our seminars and one on one sessions that were most important. We

could help anyone and everyone, regardless of the adjustability of their chair or workstation. We

also found that we were often asked to write detailed analysis of an employee’s pain or

discomfort so they could take it to their doctor. Every time the doctor would agree with our

assessment of the cause of their patients pain, or its exacerbation of an existing condition. We

certainly knew that what we were doing was much more important than an individual’s doctor,

because while they could treat the symptoms, almost always with medication, we could

eliminate the cause.

We also began to learn that there was an enormous financial benefit to employers where we

provided our services, because of the positive impact it had on employee productivity. Increases

of 35% to 50% were being reported. That become easy to understand once we knew how most

employees react to the discomfort they experience. They take breaks. Long breaks, and lots of

them. In fact a major communication company that called us had already determined that their employeeswere only working half the day in total. When asked what they did the rest of the time, we were told, “they walk, around, talk to each other, look out the window” After we finished our

implementation program, the on-premises absentee rate dropped from 50% to 25%, resulting in

a clearly defined 50% increase in their productivity.

Unfortunately all has not been positive. The Government got involved and in their well

intentioned hope of helping employees they did the opposite. We already knew then that you

could give 10 people the same task and they could need 10 different solutions to meet their

specific physical and functional needs. Except the government thought it would be helpful to

make Standard Ergonomic Recommendations. Some of those recommendations, like elevated

monitors and arms on chairs have actually been huge causes of employee discomfort and pain.

Others, like articulating keyboard support arms and document holders, have been virtually unusable and also caused pain and discomfort. Some very beneficial products, like heightadjustable desks, were ignored.

We have persisted with our approach, in spite of the errors in the Government guidelines and

the willingness of most in the Ergonomic Community to stick with them, without question.

Hopefully these videos will educate Ergonomists as much as it does individual employees. Then

we can all turn our backs on Standard Ergonomic Recommendations that are actually hurting

employees, and focus on finding out what they really need as individuals.

Steven Price

Senior Consultant