Research to Practice to Research

Abstract

This is the first of two panels to discuss pathways and barriers in moving promising ergonomic concepts from research to practice and in moving important ergonomic problems from practice to research. The panelists are from a variety of industry sectors and academia. The session will start with a 5-minute introductory statement from each panelist; therefore, most of the session will be a discussion between panelists and the audience on the topic. On the research side there is difficulty in conducting good research capable of demonstrating a safety or productivity value for promising ergonomic interventions. Problems include poor access to workplaces to conduct the research, lack of funding, difficulty obtaining a control group, etc. Some practitioners believe that well-designed research is not necessary for industry to make decisions on adoption. On the industry side barriers to adopting promising ergonomic interventions include lack of convincing data, cost, anticipation of reduced productivity, poor usability, poor acknowledgement of a problem, and history/legacy (“we have always done it this way and the process works”). Likewise, practitioners may have difficulty convincing academics to study ergonomic problems that they face daily in the workplace and they may perceive that academics study concepts that have little value for industry. Barriers for academics to take on these important topics may be related to funding, lack of clear design related solutions, limited impact, and research on a topic that is too applied or related to a proprietary idea. The goal is to improve understanding of different perspectives and generate ideas for improving the process of research to practice to research (RtPtR).

Using expert perspectives to explore factors affecting choice of methods in safety analysis

“…Practitioners may be less familiar with FRAM for a variety of reasons including; costs associated with training to use methods, lack of communication between practitioners and researchers, and organisations dictating the choice of methods to be used (Underwood & Waterson, 2013). Practitioners can feel that researchers' interests do not align with their own and that research provides little value for industry (Reid, 2016). They may also rely on older methods as they are unaware of the reliability, validity or cost effectiveness of emerging methods and have limited accessibility to journal articles where these may be discussed (Reid, 2016).…”

“…Practitioners can feel that researchers' interests do not align with their own and that research provides little value for industry (Reid, 2016). They may also rely on older methods as they are unaware of the reliability, validity or cost effectiveness of emerging methods and have limited accessibility to journal articles where these may be discussed (Reid, 2016). Addressing the researchpractice gap is important to avoid missing opportunities to use the best available methods to understand accident causation and safety improvements in increasingly more complex industrial situations and settings (Goode et al, 2019;Ryan, 2020;Chung & Shorrock;2011).…”