It might not seem a long time ago, but since the introduction of personal computers, there has been a dramatic change in the way we work and spend our leisure time. Gradually and almost insidiously, we are finding ourselves in a seated position more often. When considering all activities aside work that are carried out in sitting, office workers surmount a staggering 14-hours-a-day in the sedentary position.
This shift in our physical environment and how we interact with it has not been matched by any significant evolutionary adaptations. In other words, many of our activities are confining us to a physically restrained environment for which our bodies are not designed.
The research is consistently showing that as the hours we spend in sitting increase, our quality of life and wellbeing decreases. One might even ask whether the seated position is a consequence of a more technologically advanced society, or a price.
“Ignoring the effects of poor ergonomics does not stop the repercussions from happening”
When it comes to office work, personnel are expected to perform to their best abilities and each individual is held accountable of their performance. Yet, seldom is the work environment held to proper scrutiny. It is fair to say that most employers lack the understanding that sitting ergonomics has on both our physical bodies and psyche.
Nonetheless, ignoring the effects of poor ergonomics does not stop the repercussions from happening; it only leads to problems surfacing in seemingly unrelated ways, such as decreased productivity, more time off from work, and job shifting. Therefore, not addressing proper sitting ergonomics will cost you and your company far more than if you do.
An Introduction to Ergonomics
So, let’s make a familiar analogy to better understand the concept of ergonomics; for example, good footwear. We can all relate to the basic requirements of good footwear – how it looks, performs and fits are three criteria we run through our decision making of purchasing such goods; and of all three, the correct size of the shoe is the single and most important factor.
Purchasing a shoe too big, or worse, still too small, overshadows any other characteristic the shoe might have. The concept of ergonomics is very similar, and more so with prolonged sitting, where the one-size-fits-all application of ergonomics does not apply. Unfortunately, ergonomics is still a relatively new concept and the application of such knowledge is still lacking. This would explain why most designers and customers barely consider factors other than those they can relate to, primarily aesthetics, price and instant comfort.
Till this day, the predominant factor that sells office furniture is the aesthetic factor. I will not dispel the value of aesthetics completely, since aesthetics plays a role on our emotive being, as we will see later. For now, suffice to say that workers are being presented with these metaphorical shoes, which look pristine and aesthetically pleasing. Yet, this ‘equipment’ might not be appropriate for the nature of the task, nor for its duration or the stature of the person carrying out such task. How is one expected to walk the walk if these metaphorical shoes we are referring to as work stations are inappropriate on so many levels?
Understanding Ergonomics – The Three-Dimensional Approach
A common definition of ergonomics is ‘adjust the task to the person rather than the person to the task’. Yet in practice, the design of furniture is in most cases only subject to aesthetic scrutiny. The measurements applied to these designs are made to a standard that favors those who fall closest to what is considered the norm.
To be effective, ergonomics have to be comprehensive of three factors. When these three factors are considered in the design of a work station, there will be a promotion of a good posture that can be sustained for prolonged periods. In turn, this will lead to enhanced productivity, improved quality of work and improved well-being on a psychological, emotional and physical level. These are three factors in relation to the ergonomic requirements whilst sitting.
I – The Physical Body: As obvious as it may sound, one cannot sit properly if their physical body presents limitations. The requirements for maintaining and sustaining optimal posture during sitting are well known. In essence, a good posture is one that meets the following criteria:
- Functionality: the posture adopted must allow for the designated task to be fulfilled. For example, when using a keyboard, the preferred posture would be one of sitting. Standing would still be considered a functional posture for typing, yet as functional as this posture might be, it loses points when fulfilling the second criteria, i.e effortless.
- Effortlessness: a posture that requires too much effort will pose limitations on theindividual, as in trying to force a good posture they will find their attention deviating away from the task at hand. This, in turn, could lead to an inferior quality of work and possible injury.
- Health: the adopted posture should not impose any detriment to one’s health or physical well-being. Thus, whilst slouching at a desk might qualify as functional (it allows adequate interaction with a computer) and effortless (most of the load of our torso is suspended upon ligaments rather than held upright by muscles) it would still lead to both short-term and long-term trauma to parts of the physical body.
2 – The Emotional Being:
We might not be experts in deducing what is going on with another person, but have you noticed how easy it is for all to relate to the body language of others? Most of us have a good grasp of someone’s body-language when they’re burdened with a problem, feeling depressed, or facing ill-health; and how this varies from another’s body-language who has just received positive and excellent news. In simple terms, the way we feel gets manifested in the way we express and carry ourselves.
…we can use our posture to evoke an emotive state that favours a thinking style that is more in line with the task at hand.
Well, the reverse holds also true, and science is now emerging to back this up. A conscious decision to the way we move or hold ourselves, will exert an influence how we feel.
So, as the phrase ‘fake it till you make it’ suggests, it seems we can literally choose which emotional state to draw from our repertoire by adopting the posture and gestures that go with such a state. Of course, there is no singular emotional state that should be prized above others. What is being suggested is that as the requirements of the task are known, we can use our posture to evoke an emotive state that favours a thinking style that is more in line with the task at hand.
3 – The Psycho-Emotive Being:
In the 21st century, we find many who believe that as we have ascended to the realm of rational beings, we have vanquished our emotive nature. Indeed, some come close to venerate the idea that we could act like automatons; ever objective in our calculations and decision makings.
But this is far from the truth. In practice, elements of the brain that have been established prior to the dawn of reason, still exert a strong yet unconscious influence on the mental rationalisations we make. In simple terms, we might think we are being rational in our thinking, but the trajectory of those thoughts is often set insidiously by our emotive being. Thus, we may present a strong case in favour or against something; the direction towards which our argument gravitates can be said to have been established by our unconscious / emotive being.
The importance of this insight is that if our sitting posture and gestures are conducive to trigger a negative emotional state such as apathy, lethargy or doubt, we might unwarily of such feelingfind ourselves voicing concerns or performing in a way that is expressive of such state. On the other hand, if we consciously choose to sit in a manner that is conducive to feeling lucid, alert, and energetic, we might find that our thought processes fall in that same direction too.
Conclusion
In some branches of psychotherapy it is recognised that any behaviour is appropriate if matched by the right context. For example, during a negotiation, an aggressive stance might be desirable. Such forward leaning posture is also desirable when one needs to look smart and be productive. On the other hand, during problem solving where creativity is required, a posture that is more laid back and conducive to pondering and creative thinking would be desired.
“there is no singular sitting posture that everyone must conform to” What is being said is that there is no singular sitting posture that everyone must conform to; the ideal sitting posture is to be determined by the requirements of the job at hand whilst taking into consideration both the person’s stature and duration of the task. The ergonomics adopted in this case would serve to support more than just the physical being of the individual but promote a sitting posture that is conducive