Why Plain Language Matters in Ergonomics Training

Plain language in ergonomics training helps prevent misunderstandings, improves trust and engagement, and ensures workers and supervisors can apply injury prevention strategies effectively.

• By Carrie Taylor
• Feb 06, 2026

Why Plain Language Matters in Ergonomics Training

“Plain language” has been defined by the International Standards Organization as “communication that puts readers first.” (ISO 24495-1)

Ergonomics aims to design work for people. Logically, one might expect ergonomists to be adept at communicating with end users in mind. However, like many safety-related disciplines, ergonomics has developed a language of its own. We talk about forces, postures, repetition, static exertions, and joint angles. Most health and safety professionals who regularly collaborate with ergonomists have enough exposure to understand these terms. Supervisors and workers often do not.

When ergonomics concepts are misunderstood, the consequences are not trivial. Misinterpretation can lead to poor uptake of controls, ineffective training, frustration on the shop floor, and, ultimately, missed opportunities for injury prevention. In this article, I’ll explore how these misinterpretations can play out—and why plain language matters.

Using plain language means taking the time to understand the audience, organizing material deliberately, and choosing words that help the reader or listener understand what to do and why it matters.

Understanding the Audience

For most people, the word posture implies “sitting up straight” or “not slouching.” To an ergonomist, however, awkward posture can include kneeling, twisting, reaching, pinching, or working overhead. When workers are told their posture puts them at high risk of injury, they may reasonably feel criticized or blamed.

Even in office environments—where posture appears to be under an individual’s control—ergonomists tend to focus on the drivers of posture rather than the worker’s choices. A forward-perched or slouched posture is often caused by a chair that is too high or a seat pan that is too deep. While we might document a “poor posture,” the issue lies with the equipment, not the worker.

Unless we are communicating with another ergonomist, the word posture often does more harm than good in written reports and training materials. The same applies to terms like fixed-height or static, whose plain-language meanings rarely align with the ergonomist’s intent.

For health and safety professionals, this distinction matters. Language that feels judgment-based can erode trust, reduce engagement, and undermine the safety culture you are trying to build.

Writing for Someone Else to Deliver

We’ve been writing scripts for ergonomics safety talks that are intended to be delivered by supervisors, lead hands, joint health and safety committee members, or health and safety professionals. Writing material that someone else must deliver is far more challenging than writing something you present yourself.

Imagine being asked to deliver a talk on gear design or food chemistry. Many facilitators worry that someone will ask a question they cannot answer. Complex language amplifies that anxiety and increases the likelihood that the message will be skipped, altered, or rushed.

Clear, plain language acts as a risk control for training quality. It reduces facilitator anxiety, improves consistency, and helps ensure the message lands as intended. The goal is not to “dumb down” the content, but to make it clear, unambiguous, and usable.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Every organization and profession relies on acronyms, and ergonomics is no exception. If short forms must be used, they should be defined immediately and refreshed periodically.

A practical rule of thumb: If an acronym is not commonly used on the shop floor, it probably does not belong in a training script.

Writing a Training Script

The five-minute ergonomics lessons we’ve been developing each include a hands-on activity. Writing instructions to someone else can facilitate these activities has taught us several practical lessons:

• Write as if you are speaking directly to participants. Read the script out loud, simplify it, and then simplify it again. Test it with naïve participants to ensure the instructions are clear.
• Use photographs or visuals to show facilitators what correct positioning and movement should look like.
• Avoid parentheses within sentences. While tempting, bracketed clarifications become distractions for facilitators who are reading aloud.
• Provide facilitator cues separately, using a different font, colour, or section. These cues can support timing or suggest debrief responses.
• Avoid jargon, especially words that have a different meaning in plain language.
• Use generous spacing. Dense text is intimidating and difficult to navigate during a live session.

Final Thoughts

Writing in plain language takes more time than writing for peers. It requires the writer to understand the reader and translate complex concepts into words that can be easily interpreted and acted upon.

I’ve often thought that consultants’ value lies in their ability to communicate succinctly. That may explain why so much of my time is spent deleting words from draft documents. In ergonomics training, plain language is not a stylistic preference—it is a professional responsibility and a critical component of effective injury prevention.