ABSTRACT
The new (soon to be launched in 2015) edition of “Evaluation of Human Work” has afforded a contemporary overview of what methods leading researchers in E/HF are currently adopting and advocating. It has also thrown out a challenge regarding how E/HF professionals should be able to evolve as individuals, reflect on what tools work and do not work, in which circumstances, and why. By acknowledging the notion of E/HF as reflective practice we can continue to develop appropriate methods and tools, along with the underlying theoretical frameworks that support the translation of our work to different domains. E/HF may not always be about delivering the ‘right’ solution(s), but is always about delivering the right approach.
This has lead, in the past, to a sometimes uncomfortable debate regarding the ‘hard’ scientific approaches versus the merits of a ‘softer’qualitative methods. This debate however, will be even more contentious as it explores the notion of ergonomics as a reflective, creative craft v an evidence driven, research based science.
