Together for Mental Health at Work 2026–2028

Psychosocial risks are closely linked to the way work is organised and managed. Excessive workload, conflicting demands, unclear responsibilities, limited autonomy and inadequate support are familiar problems in many workplaces. Their consequences may appear as stress, fatigue, health complaints or difficulties in maintaining performance. Preventing these problems requires a closer examination of the working conditions that produce them.

Ergonomics examines how people, tasks, technologies, the working environment and organisational arrangements interact. Psychosocial hazards often arise from these interactions. Excessive time pressure, for example, may result from unrealistic production targets, unreliable equipment, frequent interruptions or conflicting instructions. Several factors may be present at the same time, making it difficult to identify the causes of the problem without examining how work is performed.

Job descriptions, procedures and organisational charts rarely provide a complete account of everyday work. Employees have to deal with unexpected situations, changing priorities, missing information and limitations of the equipment or systems they use. They develop ways of keeping work going despite these difficulties. Such adaptations may be essential for achieving organisational objectives, but they can also increase workload and uncertainty, particularly when the additional effort remains invisible to management. Observation of work activities and discussions with employees can reveal these conditions and help explain why apparently reasonable work arrangements create difficulties in practice.

Workload assessment illustrates the contribution of ergonomic analysis. Counting tasks or measuring working time may provide useful information, but the demands placed on workers also depend on task complexity, interruptions, time constraints, available resources and the need to coordinate with others. The same workload may have very different consequences depending on the degree of control workers have over their activities and the support they receive. Identifying these differences helps determine whether preventive measures should address staffing, scheduling, procedures, equipment or the distribution of responsibilities.

Organisational and technological changes deserve similar attention. New information systems, automated processes and digital communication tools can reduce unnecessary work, but they can also increase cognitive demands, fragment activities or introduce new forms of monitoring and control. Problems frequently emerge when systems are introduced without sufficient consideration of actual work activities. Involving workers in design and implementation, testing solutions under realistic conditions and evaluating their use after introduction can reduce these difficulties. Ergonomic methods can be applied throughout this process, from the analysis of existing work to the assessment of proposed changes.

The identification of psychosocial hazards must lead to decisions about working conditions. Surveys and interviews can indicate where problems exist, but they do not necessarily explain their causes or identify suitable measures. Ergonomic work analysis can provide the additional information needed to develop interventions. Depending on the findings, these may include changes in task allocation, work processes, staffing arrangements, information systems, communication practices or the degree of autonomy available to workers. Their effectiveness needs to be checked after implementation, taking account of health, safety, performance and well-being.

The possibilities for prevention also depend on who has control over the conditions concerned. Employees may be able to adjust certain aspects of their own work, while decisions about workload, staffing, production targets or organisational structures usually belong to management. Measures directed at individual workers have limited value when the source of harmful exposure remains unchanged. Ergonomic analysis should therefore identify the relevant decision-makers alongside the hazards themselves, so that recommendations can be translated into organisational action.

Psychosocial risk prevention involves several professional groups. Occupational safety and health professionals support the identification and assessment of risks and the organisation of preventive activities. Ergonomists contribute methods for analysing work systems, understanding the demands of actual work and designing improvements. Managers are responsible for decisions affecting work organisation and resources, while workers provide essential knowledge of the conditions they experience. These contributions need to be coordinated, particularly when preventive measures require changes across organisational boundaries.

The Together for Mental Health at Work 2026–2028 campaign offers a common framework for addressing these issues across Europe. Ergonomics has much to contribute through its established methods of work analysis, human-centred design, participatory approaches and evaluation. Experience gained from workplace redesign, technological change and organisational development can also support the prevention of psychosocial risks.

FEES invites its member societies and ergonomics professionals to share practical examples of how ergonomic methods have been used to identify psychosocial hazards and improve working conditions. Cases that describe the initial problem, the analysis undertaken, the decisions made and the results achieved would be especially valuable. They can help demonstrate what ergonomics contributes to prevention and how this contribution can be integrated into occupational safety and health practice.