Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
In the recent past, a new generation of the workplace has emerged, with new social consequences. In this era of e-commerce, organizations have to re-examine and re-organize what design the office or workplace should take. For example, if the handling of information is carried out more appropriately with a group of employees distance apart but connected with powerful networks of computers, the design of the office will definitely take a different format from the traditional office of desks and paperwork. In the past 3 decades, knowledge on what efficient office space for the efficient company has undergone numerous changes (Aubry, Julliard & Gibet 312). These new development come as fresh and new ways of thinking emerge in the new industries, bringing a lot of challenges to the traditional workplace (DPI 3).
Despite the enormous impact of technology, it is still hard to find an organization, be it governmental or non-governmental, that does not need an office space where their employees can come and join hands together for the purpose of organizational welfare. Information technology has created a workplace design where employees can share knowledge, innovate and make day to day running of business more efficient through designs such as the universal design in the corporate buildings as well as facilities (Nitanai 16). This paper highlights some of the basic concepts of universal design of workplace that comprises of buildings and facilities (e.g. transportation facilities, among many other public facilities) because it is used by all sorts of people ranging from the physically challenged to people of varied ages.
Background to the design
In modern economies, the concept of welfare-oriented urban buildings has gained momentum in the recent past, giving organizations a new form of challenge to keep up with the trend (Nitanai 17). In fact, the concept has got its roots in Northern Europe in the 1960s, when the region experienced rapid growth in the number of aged people in the workplace. In some regions, the concept has gained popularity and is mainly referred to as the philosophy of normalization, which aspires to create a society with little or no discrimination (Nitanai 17). This was to ensure that even the elderly and those disabled people are able to work as well as live in a normal way without barriers or interference (Preiser, 2001). In the United States, the concept spread at an alarming rate when many former soldiers who had been wounded needed support so that they could use the public facilities and receive services equally (Preiser 211). This saw the enactment of Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which was mandated to ensure an unrestricted use of public facilities and services by disabled people (Preiser 212).
Similarly, in Japan, workplace design was put into laws of the land such as the Heart Building Law of 1994, which was intended to promote the building of particular buildings for the elderly and disabled for their smooth usage (DPI 3). This was accompanied by the welfare-oriented Town Building ordinance enforced by the local governments in the entire country (DPI 4). One reason why many countries, especially the industrialized nations, have embraced universal design is the increasing aging population as a result of the declining birthrate in those societies (Lebovich 54). Due to this factor, many nations like Japan have raised the mandatory retirement age to 65, thus increasing the number of elderly people in the workplace, following the subsequent increase in old age citizens of 65 and above in recent years (Lebovich 56). To effectively counter this trend, each government passed laws and legislation to improve the designing and construction of buildings as well as facilities that would accommodate these groups in the future.
Coincidentally, there has been a steady increase in corporate social responsibility awareness among the companies that has led to several campaigns aiming at promoting universal design. Newton, Ormerod & Thomas (610) state that increased awareness of corporate social responsibility has heightened expectations on the universal design to serve as a means of communicating with customers (p.611). This kind of development increased the adaptability of many companies in their effort to increase approval from authorities and the increasingly informed public. In this sense, circumstances at the workplace are such that it must be integrated with corporate social responsibility in order to accommodate varied and skillful but physically disabled people and foreign clients without much difficulties or constraints. In several factories, the traditional policy has been to provide employees with a safe and easy-to-work labor environment has been cited as one of the reasons why the need to address workplace constraints arose (Nitanai 116).
The legal aspect of workplace suitability has also encouraged the adoption of universal design (Peterson 69). The need to achieve the legal employment rate of disabled people has emerged as a major challenge to the executives of major companies. In essence, companies that have failed to comply with the legal requirement are required to pay penalties, hence the need to comply with the law (Peterson 70). In fact, this has made many companies avoid the legal jungle by adopting the universal design of the workplace to improve corporate image and responsibility. Again, some local governments had adopted the policy that any firm applying for a tender must meet the legal aspect of disability employment rate to qualify for tender considerations.
Description of the design
Contrary to the design of public facilities, which are used by any number of people, companies are able to assume, to some degree of certainty, that the people who would be using the facilities are their employees and customers (Serenander 189). It is possible to also classify or identify situations where the age factor bars someone from using the facility, and cases where physical burden in particular groups of individuals makes everything hard for them to operate a common facility. It is therefore important to note that universal design requires that facilities be improved to accommodate such users with adverse and unique needs, hence the classification of the users in more precise characteristics than those of the public usage.
Customization of every Individuals Need
The need to customize the facilities at workplace has gained popularity due to factors highlighted above. For example, office chairs as well as other office furniture products have been designed to incorporate universal design philosophy, with many of them presently based on the body size concept (Lebovich 201). That is, they have been made with ability to accommodate various body sizes and postures since they are adjustable. In fact, the universal design office furniture can be adjusted for usage in the most desirable condition in order to provide relief for those suffering from backache as well pregnant women, and at the same time suitable for those with physical differences like height and body size (Lebovich, 214).
Manual Provision
The use of manuals for universally designed workplace and office is required as a prerequisite for complete approval of the place for specified usage (Marmot & Eley 31). The support got from manuals is used to cover operations or aspects of workplace assistance for people with disability. Where the disability cannot allow the person to use the manual, the receptionist and floor attendant are in a position to give adequate support to visitors once they have the information about the specific visitor in prior (Marmot & Eley 33). During the workplace planning stage, an analysis of what the work entails and the policy that guides the support requirements given to the persons in special needs is done, thus giving the contractors opportunity to build on the designs based on the need.
Vision Development
Companies use standardized guidelines from an ergonomic view, which are more effective and appropriate for companies to promote universal design (Lebovich, 2003). For instance, specific guidelines may be applied in the workspaces size and design prescription within an office setting, comprising of incidental space (e.g. passageway), and office periphery (e.g. parking lot) (Lebovich 71). These may act as indicators based on the use of wheelchairs as well as use by people who are visually challenged.
In principle, such a guideline elaborates and clarifies the legitimate approaches that can be adopted by office or workplace designers thus enabling them to work towards achieving universal design (Kanawaty 91; Imrie 132). Through this approach, it doesnt matter even if the design requirements cannot be immediately achieved due to high cost because the vision gives it time for improvement in the future (Imrie 136).
Evaluation of the Design
Evaluations of the Design processes
The tasks performed by individuals coupled with their jobs and roles determine, in part, deign of the office or workplace (Imrie 136). Another important factor considered for the design is the machines that are used in the organizations. In this manner, employee-machine interface basically exist in harmony only if the process is effective, safe, healthy and satisfying (Imrie 139). How well do people fit in the physical environment of the workplace? Accordingly, research indicates that major issues that affect healthy and efficient workplaces and environment are:
-
Worker task position: this is the position that will allow the worker/employee reach and grasp some material needed for work easily and without strain. Its sometimes referred to as distance orientation working zones, lines of sight and working sights,
-
Posture: this entails all aspects of working positions, e.g. being seated or standing or moving from one place to another within the office space or corridors,
-
Clearance: ability to clear and create access to places within the building. It also entails a place fit for free movement and carrying out any physical activity,
-
Machine Control: the place design should have a space enough to control and handle dimensions, clearances, and visibility of operations,
-
Force application: it should allow appropriate space to warrant specific postures when handling certain duties in the office,
-
Layout of workstation: the layout of the station should be such that the position of carrying out the duty is controlled for the work to be displayed effectively, and
-
Physical environment: such aspects as lighting system, noise, climate vibration, psychosocial, radiation effects should be analyzed keenly (Clarkson & Keates 201).
It is therefore critical to note that workplaces and their physical environment provide somewhat the best opportunity to use a participative methodology in the assessment as well as redesign of work (Clarkson & Keates 202). In fact, several researches indicate that if people are more willing and able to contribute to workplace design, issues usually became clearer and chances of coming up with solutions increase (Clarkson & Keates, 2003, Newton, Ormerod & Thomas 207). In summery, the best workplace for best result can be achieved through participative practices.
Actual Design Evaluation
Several aspects of environment have both positive and negative effects on all areas of individual and company well-being (Winter 199). In other words, all environments at the extreme will definitely affect the peoples health. It is therefore important to keep all the harmful aspect of the workplace environment to the most minimum level with no barrier to effective and healthy work performance (Winter 199). Ergonomic aspect therefore demands that all the causes of annoyance, discomfort or dissatisfaction are reduced to the acceptable minimum (US Department of Justice, 2009). For the universal design workplace, there are specific stages that have been designed to ensure appropriate evaluation of workplace for proper redesign.
It is an important step to carry out evaluation through the definition of objectives, where both the redesigning of a new workplace or new workplace for the ergonomics investigation and specification (Peterson 188). The universal design demands that all the disable people are consulted when redesigning an old workplace or designing a new one. In this case, consultation of all the workforce comprised of management, service departments and operators should basically take place at the initial stages early enough to encourage participative procedures (Peterson 189). The available records, for instance, of accidents, absenteeism, and complain of difficulty in usage by the physically challenged should be analyzed and taken into consideration during the redesign of an established workplace. In another strategy, new data may be collected in order to help authenticate the facts and ensure appropriate process of redesign (Peterson 190). In redesigning an existing workplace, it is also important to observe what is happening at present (US Department of Justice 3), e.g. how fit is the facility for usage by the visually-impaired people? What tasks are being performed and are they appropriate for all employees?
The process of enquiry can be taken through direct observation, where videos or photographs and drawings that describe the place are observed and analyzed adequately for proper outcome (Lebovich 207, Imrie 191). Indirect observations can be made through interviews, use of questionnaires and rating forms to relevant staff, the physically challenged staff (Imrie 192). The principle purpose of this observation is to help identify main ergonomics problems in the workplace, to enter into the work analysis, and thus provide a benchmark for data with which the new design can be compared and options weighed (Imrie 197).
Improvement Suggestions
In practice, what may appear ideal solution at initial stages of design may not be feasible either or both economically and technically, hence the need for compromise when completing a sound and relevant workplace design. For universal design, checks should be made with regard to health and safety of the physically challenged individuals (Clarkson & Keates 159). The evaluation of such proposed workplace can be done in a controlled condition isolated from the workplace (Clarkson & Keates 161). This is referred to as laboratory trials. Another test can be done at the workplace, a process described as field trials (Clarkson & Keates 161). Covington & Hannah (161) state that in most cases a mixture of testing will be best, where laboratory test is used to try out many small adaptations of basic idea and the field trials to validate the solution under realistic scenarios. In general, the art of evaluation should be a continuous process even after the system has been implemented to ensure that the target population usability if ascertained.
The other aspect that is worth improvement is the balancing of Space-and Time equation (Haber & Blank 289). In most organizations that are well managed, the main aim should be to use of time as well as space in a building to the maximum benefit of the company and individual employees, especially by taking the plight of the physically challenged seriously (Haber & Blank 290). In this approach, the methods used to observe and document the space usage over time will also allow managers to understand in details how staff spends their days at workplace. This can be very important, particularly when doing the redesigning as well as other application like time management issues (Haber & Blank 292). In practice, physically challenged staff may know general patterns of behavior, but they may give little thought to understanding the way in which people use buildings. This aspect indicates that such knowledge is basically hypothetical, since it involves only approximation of the truth. Careful documentation would be critical in this aspect and help develop clear-cut information on what this group would need to maximize their productivity and safety (Haber & Blank 312).
Works Cited
Aubry, Mathieu, Julliard, Frederic & Gibet, Syvie. The Ergonomic Analysis of the Workplace of Physically Disabled Individuals. Institute of Research and Development. 2009. Print.
Clarkson, John & Keates, Simon. Countering Design Exclusion: an Introduction to Inclusive Design. London. Springer-Verlag. 2003. Print.
Covington, G., & Hannah, B. Access by Design. New York. Van Nostrand Reinhold. 1996.
Haber, Gilda., & Blank, Thomas. Building design for handicapped and aged persons: Tall buildings and urban habitats. New York. McGraw Hill.. 2002. Print.
Imrie, Rob. Disability and the City: International Perspectives. London. Paul Chapman Publishing. 1996.
DPI. Japan National Assembly of Disabled Peoples International. 2009. Web.
Kanawaty, George. Introduction to Work Study. London. International Labor Office. 1992.
Lebovich, Bill. Design for Dignity: Studies in accessibility. New York. John Wiley & Sons. 2003. Print.
Marmot, Ferster & Eley, Joanna. Office Space Planning: Designs for Tomorrows Workplace. New York: McGraw Hill. 2000. Print.
Newton, Rita., Ormerod M., & Thomas, P. Disabled peoples experiences in the workplace environment in England. Equal Opportunities International. 2007. Print.
Nitanai, Shiro. Workplace for Universal design . JFMA Current. 2004. Print.
Peterson, Mary. Gracious Spaces, Universal Design in the Home. New York. McGraw Hill. 1999. Print.
Preiser, Wolfgang. Universal Design Handbook: From Accessibility for Disabled People to Universal Design: Challenges in Japan. Tokyo. McGraw-Hill. 2001. Print.
Serenander, Bengt. Building for Everyone: The Disabled and the Built Environment in Sweden. Vaxjo, Sweden. Davidsons Boktryckeri. 2006. Print.
US Department of Justice. American with Disability Act.. 2009. Web.
Winter, Steven. Accessible Housing by Design: Universal Principles in Practice. New York. McGraw Hill.. 1997. Print.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.