Best getting in contact with the Ergonomics and Human Factors Society as they have specialist groups so should be able to give you some real life examples (or at least point you in the direction of some research etc). They have a newsletter but my copy is at home and TBH, I haven't had time this month to read through it in any detail and may have put it out for recycling [I've a 3 yr old at home who has a tendency to apply her artwork and stickers to any magazines left lying around so not sure if Peppa Pig would be the best example!]. Here's their website though http://www.ergonomics.org.uk/sigs/

Applications of 'human factors' and 'ergonomics' have mushroomed with the expansion of information and communications technology. Yet the essence of the discipline remains scientific applications of human knowledge to design and manage interfaces between individuals/groups and their physical and psychological environments. Probably the best case studies are reported in technical journals such as 'Ergonomics', these classic titles provide illustrative examples: > for physical ergonomics, 'Ergonomics, Work and Health', S Pheasant, Macmillan, 1992 > for psychological ergonomics, 'Human Error', J Reason, Cambridge University Press, 1990. A case study of how applying ergonomics to the design of partial automation of manual handling in a logistics department is provided by K Duignan in 'Handbook of Business Psychology', Whurr, 2005; it indicates how relevant changes included not only the standard changes to seats, screens and tables but also elimination of some roles, creation of others and wakening the departmental manager from his tomb. Several websites provide interesting examples of applying ergonomics. They include those of Auburn Engineers and of HumanTech who send regular e-newsletters to subscribers; HumanTech also provide high quality webinars free of charge. For insights into diverse applications of ergs in a huge variety of settings, a good place to start is the website of the International Association for Ergonomics, www.iea.cc, where you can find the URLs of professional national ergonomics societies, which in many cases present archives of newsletters and conference papers. The websites of the Australian, Canadian (French/English) and German (English/German) include particularly good illustrations of applications across many, many sectors (by no means only high hazard ones). It's important to realise how ergonomics/human factors is still at a relatively adolescent stage. Two of the UK's leading ergonomists, R Haslam and C Williams, published research in Ergonomics reporting that leaders in the profession regarded lack of interpersonal skills as a major barrier to improving acceptance of the profession and discipline; regrettably they failed to identify any way to improve this deficit - which perhaps reflects how much the scale of the split which has grown between occupational psychology and ergonomics in recent decades has reduced the vitality of ergs/HF practice in the British Isles.

I undertake quite a bit of work that could be considered 'human factors' in terms of engineering design. However I think the term HF isn't helpful - the term 'human factors' is too generic and can mean almost anything you want it to mean in terms of h&s. To cite a few, but not exhaustive list Staff selection and testing HSG 48 Human factors for accident causation HF aspects of engineering design - anthropometric factors, reach distances, force to operate valves Control room layouts Warning signs and colour coding of warning lights, warning sounders - time to respond to alarms Provision of written instruction and technical manuals - good and bad practice - use of language Heating, lighting, humidity - human tolerance Teamwork and interaction of people So what is human factors? Nice bit of self promotion on this thread as well and the usual endless obscure book referrences

In response to comments from JJ Prendergast regarding human factors being "too generic." You are correct that the topics you list all fit into the definition of HF given by KieranD I think there is a catch 22 here. I agree that the 'everything to everyone' approach causes confusion. But if we start to divide HF into distinct categories we risk losing the 'systems' approach that can make the greatest contribution. I would suggest that the same criticism could be made about health and safety. However, it may be the lack of maturity in HF that is the root of the perceived problem. I do feel that some companies have moved their understanding to the point where the confusion is not an issues, but I agree that they are very much the minority.

Thats rather sad, an I say this as an arch-anorak