Workstation Analysis

What the analysis examines

Workstation analysis examines how well the physical setup in which the employee spends a large part of the day fits that person’s body measurements and task content. The elements examined are desk height and use of the work surface, the chair’s sitting height and back and arm support, the height of the screen and its distance from the eyes, the position of the keyboard and mouse, whether the forearm is supported, and the reaching distance of frequently used objects.

These elements are taken not one by one but in relation to each other. A change in chair height may create a need for foot support; if desk height is fixed, keyboard position determines shoulder position. The analysis aims to define where this chain breaks.

The second field of examination is how the station is used. The same station creates different loading patterns for an employee who writes while looking at a screen for long periods and for an employee who spends the day on the phone. That is why task content and how it is distributed during the day are part of the analysis.

How the analysis is done

The analysis starts with observing the employee in their usual work pattern. Working position, the position of the arm and shoulder, neck angle, how the back is supported and wrist position are observed; measurable elements of the station are recorded. A short conversation then gathers information about work intensity during the day, the habit of changing position, and situations the employee finds difficult.

The findings are recorded at station level and at task-type level. That way a concrete adjustment recommendation can be prepared for a single station, and mismatches that repeat at similar stations can also be seen. In organisations with many similar stations it is possible to proceed through representative stations and generalise the findings at group level.

The analysis is not a diagnostic process. An employee’s musculoskeletal complaints are the subject of an appropriate health assessment; the work done within the analysis is to describe the physical working conditions in which the complaint arises and to bring out the elements that can be improved.

Adjustment decisions that come out of the analysis

For each station, recommendations are gathered at three levels. The first level is adjustments that can be resolved by setting existing equipment; these can usually be applied the same day. The second level is adjustments that need a change in layout: the position of the screen, the place of the keyboard on the desk, repositioning frequently used materials.

The third level is adjustments that point to a need for extra equipment or furniture. This need is stated with its rationale and prioritised; stations where it is genuinely needed are separated from those where it can be resolved by adjustment. That way the organisation can take equipment decisions on an observation-based rationale.

When recommendations are prepared, whether the station belongs to one person or is used in rotation is decisive. At stations that belong to a person, adjustments are made once and kept; at shared stations the adjustments need to be repeatable quickly at each sitting. This distinction changes both the form of the recommended adjustment and the content that will be passed to the employee.

How workable the recommendations are also relates to how free the employee is to change their own station. In setups where adjustment authority is limited or the furniture is fixed, alternatives that would achieve the same outcome through a change in layout are recommended. That is why, for each finding, workable options according to the organisation’s conditions are defined, not a single solution.

The value of keeping a record

A station-level record makes the ergonomics work repeatable. When a new employee starts or a team moves, it is known at which measurements the station was previously set. The same record also makes comparison possible at the reassessment stage.

In the corporate report, station findings are summarised at department and task-type level. Sample tables on the pages or in presentations are prepared to show the structure of the report and do not contain real organisation data.

The record also sets the content of employee training. Which mismatches repeat most often is seen in the analysis, and the training is built on those themes. That way employees proceed through situations they actually meet in their own work environment, rather than a general ergonomics account, and apply what they learn directly at their own stations.