Date of MSc: 1979/80
MSc Project Title:
Restricted Headroom and its Effects on Manual Exertion
Pre-MSc Background:
Science A Levels, Physiology Degree
Pre-MSc View of HCI/Cognitive Ergonomics:
Non-existent – I came to the MSc. Course with a strong predisposition towards the more physical and physiological aspects of Ergonomics.
Post-MSc View of HCI/Cognitive Ergonomics:
I came away from the course recognising that interaction with the ‘man-machine’ interface encompassed the cognitive as well as the physical. An appreciation of the importance of psychology in any workplace design also came about from considering some rudimentary display technologies. The impact of cognitive design considerations in control rooms, control panels and control systems was made clear from case studies of incidents such as the (then) recent 3-Mile Island nuclear accident, the Papa India air-crash and the Torrey Canyon oil spill disaster. All of these had some element of faulty or counter-intuitive user interface design that was at least partially responsible for the ensuing disaster. Since widespread personal computing was still in its infancy and the internet was still some way off, these exemplars were used as currency in discussing poor cognitive design.
Subsequent-to-MSc View of HCI/Cognitive Ergonomics:
I ended up working in the Human Factors research department at the Post Office Research Centre, which subsequently became the BT Research Labs. I then spent several years working on a variety of cognitive aspects of HCI – mainly on email and remote group working and interaction. This work culminated in a book:
‘User Interface Design for Computer Systems’, (Ellis-Horwood, 1988).
Additional Reflections:
I decided to apply for the MSc Ergonomics course quite late in the day. I had just finished my Physiology degree at Chelsea College where Rainer Goldsmith was the professor and I had been looking to get funding to study for a physiology-based PhD. As various PhD opportunities came and went during the summer of 1979, I decided that my interest in applied physiology that had been aroused at Chelsea could be usefully stretched to encompass Ergonomics so I applied for the MSc almost as a back up whilst I continued to seek an interesting and funded PhD.
Once all my PhD options had dried up I was more than happy to fully embrace the MSc Ergonomics course, which by then had offered me a place. It was John Long’s inaugural year as Director of Studies; undoubtedly our decision to ‘join’ the MSc, albeit in very different capacities, was to profoundly affect the future paths of our careers.
The following reflections are, at the time of writing, being generated some 33 years ex post facto and therefore subject to all the normal frailties of human memory and so come with the expected health warnings regarding accuracy.
All of the 10-12 students on the course were male (and Rachel in particular will testify that this set up an unusually and highly competitive course dynamic) and from a wide variety of backgrounds. True to its interdisciplinary roots the course had attracted representatives from psychology, engineering and physiology; though I think psychologists formed the largest constituency.
The course itself offered a rich selection of guest lecturers mainly, but not exclusively, from colleges within the University of London. The breadth of topics covered was in hindsight quite staggering, and for a physiologist with a negligible grounding in engineering or psychology, quite daunting. This poses an intellectual and practical question for the multi-disciplinary course designer: How much course time should be devoted to bringing all the students up to an acceptable level of knowledge in the academic disciplines that are new to them?
The variety was a real strength of the course making each week very different and it kept us students constantly on our toes not only mentally but also physically since we were forever dashing from Bedford Way to the Royal Free at Hampstead or Birkbeck or the RAE at Farnborough – there was never a dull moment.
Because personal computing was still in its infancy (there were a few Apple IIs and Commodore Pets around some university departments) the application of Ergonomics to user interface design and other computer-based tasks was brand new and not a core component of the MSc in those far-off days. The focus of the course was perhaps more centred on the physical and gross engineering design aspects of the workplace and its environment. This is no surprise but it makes one appreciate how much, in the last 30 or so years, first world countries have become knowledge-based economies with vast numbers of workers desk-bound and screen-dependent. It is only a slight exaggeration to claim that for ergonomists in1980 Etienne Grandjean and popliteal height ruled!
Because there were so few of us on the course there were ample opportunities for group discussions and because John Long was new too – he attended many of the visits with us and I recall a number of entertaining debates en route which John led or sometimes refereed.
Visits to coal mines, control rooms and military research establishments were popular features of the course and these punctuated the regular diet of guest lectures at frequent intervals. The visits were always eye-opening – most of the students were young and therefore relatively unfamiliar with the world of work and the many design challenges to be analysed and surmounted in every aspect of the work environment. Our naivety meant that every visit and every new workplace caused us to rethink and recalculate the size and scope of the opportunity for improvement based on the well-rounded multi-disciplinary approach that ergonomics offered. Most of us had yet to encounter the twin perils of corporate budget constraints and corporate inertia, which made (and probably still make) design changes to anything but the most health and safety threatening of issues a political encounter first and foremost.
In hindsight this naivety could have been anticipated and we might have benefited from an appreciation not only of the different battles that the ‘Corporate Ergonomist’ would need to fight but also the different theatres of war that we would need to be equipped to fight in. From ‘death by committee’ to corporate apathy, the working ergonomist needs a good arsenal at his disposal just to earn the right to apply the design principles and theory that were diligently acquired on the MSc. I for one started my life as a working ergonomist (or to be precise a human factors specialist) at the then Post Office Research Centre with an expectation that there was no question that any recommendations for improvements that I came up with would be hastily adopted.
It would be churlish to be overly critical of a course that was so instrumental in determining my future but away from the academic aspects of the course, I recall that in a sense we did not ‘belong’ in the same way that undergraduates ‘belong’ within the university and collegiate environment. At the time I just thought that this was how post-graduate study was supposed to be; but I see now that this was partially as a result of the multi-disciplinary and peripatetic nature of the course itself. As a body of students we did not really mix with our contemporaries on either a social or intellectual basis. Some of this was because we were completing an MSc in a single academic year and there was little time to fraternise with the wider college community, but there was also little opportunity. Maybe this was because our small designated area in Bedford Way was on the periphery of the main campus and we did not share many common areas with students of other disciplines. Whatever the reason I do not think at that time we felt part of a wider college community.
Besides the academic credentials that accrued after completing the MSc, I for one, left with an appreciation of the stimulating challenges and opportunities that a working ergonomist was going to encounter. I think that I left the course pretty well equipped to apply sound design principles and more importantly to develop both research methodologies and practical techniques that allowed me to fulfil a valuable role as an ergonomist.