Ergonomics studies how work, tools, and environments can be perfectly tailored to the unique capabilities and limits of the human body and mind. Its guiding principle: adapt the task to the person, not the other way around.

The discipline took flight in the mid-20th century, notably within aviation. Poorly designed cockpits were causing accidents frequently blamed on "human error," when the true culprit was an interface that ignored the pilot's natural limitations. French-school ergonomics (pioneered by Alain Wisner) brilliantly distinguishes prescribed work—what is expected on paper—from real work—what actually happens in practice—and builds designs based on the latter.

This is the foundational tension, and it is as much political as it is technical. When a gap arises between a person and their tool, two paths emerge: adapt the tool to the person (ergonomics), or demand that the person adapt to the tool (through training, discipline, or warnings like "just be careful"). The second path is often cheaper in the short term, yet deeply unfair, placing the burden of poor design entirely on the user. Calling something "human error" is frequently just a convenient way to excuse a flawed design.

Ergonomics goes far beyond the physical—posture and physical effort. It encompasses cognitive ergonomics—mental workload and attention span—as well as organizational ergonomics, looking at coordination and pacing. A poorly designed system drains energy; a brilliant design elevates performance.

Our core belief aligns perfectly with true ergonomics: we design for real work and real bodies, not for an idealized operator. When something felt "off" in practice, we first investigate what the design overlooked, rather than asking people to adapt through extra effort.

What is at play elsewhere: usability, cognition and cognitive load, affordance, human-centered design, and the overall employee experience.

References: Ergonomics derived from human factors (aviation); A. Wisner, distinction between prescribed work and real work.