Work Ergonomic Analysis and Change Laboratory: Similarities and Complementarities Between Interventionist Methods

The objective of this study is to compare the interventionist methodologies of Ergonomic Work Analysis (EWA) influenced by a French approach, and the Change Laboratory method based on the Activity Theory approach. This study aims at identifying complementarities and convergences between these methods to improve work related accident and diseases prevention. Reference publications of these two methodologies were selected to make a theoretical comparison between the approaches. The criteria selected for the comparison were: units of analysis and key concepts, main methodological principles, the role of demand, main steps of the method, the relationship between the diagnosis and creation and construction of new solutions processes, the role of researcher / interventionist, the role of practitioners and ethical issues. Based on this comparison, resources will be drawn from both approaches to map out the ingredients for efficient intervention for the prevention of accidents and health problems related to work. We argue that ergonomic analysis has as its main strength deep and detailed understanding of the actions and operations of workers engaged in real work, while, on the other hand, the Change Laboratory seeks understanding within a historical and systemic perspective and emphasizes intervention in the whole activity system.

[1]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Activity theory and individual and social transformation. , 1999 .

[2]  F. Daniellou,et al.  Les facteurs humains et organisationnels de la sécurité industrielle: un état de l’art , 2010 .

[3]  F. Daniellou,et al.  L’intervention ergonomique comme acte pédagogique , 2010 .

[4]  Jaakko Virkkunen,et al.  The Change Laboratory: A Tool for Collaborative Development of Work and Education , 2013 .

[5]  Pascal Beguin.  When users and designers meet each other in the design process , 2009 .

[6]  R. Oliveira.  O trabalho do Antropólogo: olhar, ouvir, escrever , 1996, Revista de Antropologia.

[7]  J. Faverge.  L’analyse du travail , 1956, Bulletin de psychologie.

[8]  Corinne Gaudart,et al.  A quel homme le travail doit-il être adapté ? , 2006 .

[9]  François Hubault.  Nature d'intervention, nature de savoir , 2007 .

[10]  Y. Engeström,et al.  The change laboratory as a tool for transforming work , 1996 .

[11]  François Daniellou,et al.  The French-speaking ergonomists' approach to work activity: cross-influences of field intervention and conceptual models , 2005 .

[12]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research , 2014 .

[13]  A. N. Leont’ev,et al.  Activity, consciousness, and personality , 1978 .

[14]  Cetu.  Facteurs humains et organisationnels de la sécurité , 2008 .

[15]  F. Guérin,et al.  Compreender o trabalho para transformá-lo: a prática da ergonomia , 2001 .

[16]  Francisco de Paula Antunes Lima,et al.  The start up as a phase of architectural design process. , 2012, Work.

[17]  Renata Wey Berti Mendes,et al.  Da vigilância para prevenção de acidentes de trabalho: contribuição da ergonomia da atividade , 2012 .

[18]  Yrjö Engeström,et al.  From design experiments to formative interventions , 2008, ICLS.

[19]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Perspectives on activity theory: Play, learning, and instruction , 1999 .

[20]  J. Shaoul.  Human Error , 1973, Nature.