Ergonomics, the War of Inches, and the Moment to Act

Risk ManagementArticleFebruary 16, 2026

The Goldfish Does Not See the Bowl He Is In

In my last article series, I focused on why ergonomics must be treated as a priority and why it deserves a dedicated place in this year’s budget. (Subscribe and read the articles). That conversation was necessary. For many organizations, it represents meaningful progress.

As I sat thinking about what my first article of the new year should be, one that continues that momentum and actually drives impact, a conversation from last week kept coming back to me. I was talking with a good friend (thank you Larry) when he said, “the goldfish does not see the bowl he is in.

For some reason, that phrase stuck.

It perfectly describes how ergonomic risk and under-developed ergonomic programs persist, even in organizations that genuinely believe they are doing the right things. Over time, systems become familiar. Work-arounds become normal. Discomfort becomes expected. When nothing appears broken, there is little urgency to change anything.

The bowl fades from view.

Ergonomics Is a War of Inches

Most musculoskeletal injuries are not caused by a single event. They are the result of small, repeated exposures that accumulate over time. An extra inch of reach. A slight twist. A workstation adjusted “close enough.” A process that saves seconds but adds strain.

This is a war of inches, and most organizations are losing it quietly.

Employees adapt, because that is what people do. They modify how they move, how they lift, and how they pace themselves to meet production demands. From the outside, work continues. From the inside, the cost is being paid incrementally by the body.

Because these losses are subtle and gradual, they rarely trigger action. Yet over months and years, they drive injuries, lost productivity, quality issues, and turnover.

Safe production is not achieved by eliminating risk in one sweeping effort. It is achieved by winning the small, daily battles that compound over time.

When Adaptation Masks System Failure

One of the most dangerous assumptions in operations is that if work is getting done, the system must be working.

Humans are remarkably good at compensating for poor design. That compensation is often mistaken for capability or resilience. In reality, it is a signal that the system is relying on the workforce to absorb design flaws.

From Kaizen perspective, this is waste.

Excess motion, awkward postures, unnecessary force, and fatigue are not individual problems. They are indicators that the system has drifted away from safe production. If improvement efforts reduce cycle time but increase physical strain, the organization has not improved the process. It has simply shifted cost from the operation to the employee.

That cost always comes back.

The Overlooked Spillover: Slips, Trips, and Falls

Ergonomic risk does not stop at musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).

Poor ergonomic conditions significantly contribute to slips, trips, and falls (STF), one of the most common and costly injury categories across industries. Awkward reaches, fatigue, reduced balance, obstructed walking paths, and unnecessary motion all increase the likelihood of a slip, trip, or fall.

Research consistently indicates that poor ergonomic conditions—such as awkward postures, excessive reaching, and physical strain—elevate the risk of STFs. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) identifies ¹^,² these ergonomic stressors as key contributors to fatigue and musculoskeletal strain, factors that can impair balance and movement stability. As ergonomic conditions worsen, STF incidents increase significantly.

This matters because slips, trips, and falls are often treated as housekeeping or behavioral issues. In reality, many are rooted in work design. Excess movement creates more opportunities for loss of balance. Fatigue reduces reaction time. Poor reach and layout force people into unstable positions.

Once again, the bowl is the system.

Addressing ergonomics upstream reduces more than MSDs. It reduces falls, near misses, and disruptions that directly impact safe production and operational continuity.

From Priority and Budget to Practice

In the previous series, the case was made for elevating ergonomics and funding it appropriately. All the data supports that decision. Musculoskeletal disorders remain one of the leading drivers of workers compensation costs and lost workdays across industries. The indirect costs are often several times higher than the direct costs, affecting productivity, quality, engagement, and retention.

Now the question becomes uncomfortable, but necessary.

What are we doing with the focus and the money?

Ergonomics cannot live as a policy statement, a training module, or a response to injuries. It must show up in how work is designed, how improvements are evaluated, and how leaders define success.

This is where many well-intentioned programs stall. The priority exists. The budget exists. The execution does not.

Seeing the Inches Before They Become Injuries

One reason ergonomic risk remains invisible is that early signals do not appear in incident data. They show up as discomfort, fatigue, inefficiency, near misses, and quiet workarounds. By the time an injury or fall appears, the organization is already late.

Structured approaches help bring those signals forward.

Ergonomic self-assessments, such as ZE-FIT, give employees a way to identify risk early and consistently. Individually, they increase awareness. Collectively, they reveal patterns across tasks, jobs, and locations that leadership cannot see through walkthroughs or lagging metrics.

When the same risks surface repeatedly, the system is telling you where inches are being lost every day.

Kaizen provides the discipline to act on that information. Ergonomics provides the lens to prioritize what truly matters. Together, they support safe production that is sustainable, not dependent on employee adaptation.

The New Year Is About Action

The start of a new year often brings strong intentions and renewed focus. Safe production, however, is not achieved through intention alone. It is achieved through design decisions, follow-through, and disciplined execution.

If ergonomics is truly a priority, it must be embedded in continuous improvement, not bolted on after injuries or falls occur. It must be treated as a core operational input, not a downstream consequence.

The goldfish does not see the bowl he is in.

Organizations that pause, examine the inches, and redesign work intentionally create environments where people do not have to absorb risk just to meet expectations. They create systems where safe production is the natural outcome.

The focus is there.

The budget is there.

Now it is time to do something about it.

Sources:

About the Author:

Jeffrey Smagacz, CPE - Principal Ergonomist, Zurich Resilience Solutions