SAGE Open
Janua y-Ma ch 2017: 1 –11
© The Au ho (s) 2017
DOI: 10.1177/2158244016685135
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/sgo
C ea i e Commons CC-BY: This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 3.0 License
(h p://www.c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/3.0/) which pe mi s any use, ep oduc ion and dis ibu ion o
he wo k wi hou u he pe mission p o ided he o iginal wo k is a ibu ed as speci ied on he SAGE and Open Access pages
(h ps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-a -sage).
A icle
Fu u e wo kplaces will be a ec ed by he p essu es o apid
echnological change, aging popula ion, and declining
wo k o ce, and consequen ly, many schola s ag ee ha
e gonomics needs o gain mo e ele ance a wo kplaces
(B ewe & Hsiang, 2002; Caple, 2008; Cha ness, 2008;
Cha ness & Holley, 2004; C oasmun, 2004; Dul e al.,
2012; Kumashi o, 2000; Schwoe e & May, 1996; Walke ,
2006). This is especially ue in he case o o ice wo k as
mos o ices ha e unde gone, and will mos likely unde go,
ex ensi e changes when i comes o adop ing new echnolo-
gies and p oduc s. Al hough academics and policy make s
migh ag ee ha he e is a eal need o de elop he p ac ice
o e gonomics, he e may be o he con adic o y de elop-
men s in mode n cul u e ha a e also e lec ed in he o ga-
niza ional cul u e as well as design cul u e, and hose may
in ac diminish he ole played by he p ac ice and unde -
s anding o e gonomics.
The objec o his s udy is no e gonomics as such; a he ,
i is unde s ood as a cul u al idea and esou ce ha ac o s can
u ilize o di e en pu poses in di e en con ex s. The a icle
analyzes how he ision o e gonomics is cons uc ed du ing
a manu ac u ing p ocess in a company ha specializes in
p oducing e gonomic o ice u ni u e and p oduc s, and how
his ision is in e wined wi h ce ain concep ions o o ice
wo ke s and wo k spaces.
Those who design and p oduce ma e ial objec s and in e-
io design concep s o o ganiza ional se ings an icipa e how
hei p oduc s will be in e ac ed wi h, and how hey will i
wi hin speci ic spaces (Dan , 2008). The ision o he ole o
e gonomics, and he ela ed isions o u u e wo ke s and
wo k en i onmen s ac as ools ha help o ganize design
knowledge o c ea e a sha ed concep ion and consensus o
he aims o speci ic p ojec s. In addi ion, he isions o u u e
o ice wo ke s and o ice en i onmen s do no jus e lec
eali y bu ac i ely s i e o shape i and con ibu e o c ea -
ing ha eali y (Pollock & Williams, 2010). The idea ha he
p oduce s’ and designe s’ in en ions and ideas a e in some
ways embodied in he design and also esponded o by he
use s (see Koskinen, 2006; Koskinen, 2007; Mazé &
Reds öm, 2007; Sil e s one & Haddon, 1996; Tiles &
Obe diek, 1995) is no new, bu he e is s ill a lack o empi i-
cal esea ch ha iden i ies he p ac ices and a gumen s which
aim o eeze hese isions and in en ions in o ce ain kind o
o ice spaces and u ni u e.
Analyzing he ma e ial and aes he ic dimensions o mod-
e n o ganiza ional cul u e has la ely become a ich and g ow-
ing ield o c i ical esea ch (see, o example, Chugh &
Hancock, 2009; Cohen, 2010; Dale, 2005; Dean, 2005;
685135SGOXXX10.1177/2158244016685135SAGE OpenPe e i
esea ch-a icle2017
1Uni e si y o Tampe e, Finland
Co esponding Au ho :
Vi e Pe e i, School o Social Sciences and Humani ies, Uni e si y o
Tampe e, Linna 5059, Kale an ie 5, Tampe e 33014, Finland.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
Bad Enough E gonomics: A Case S udy o
an O ice Chai
Vi e Pe e i1
Abs ac
The a icle analyzes e gonomics as a social and cul u al phenomenon, as some hing ha is o mula ed and desc ibed by
speake s in a speci ic social con ex ; in a company ha is specialized in p oducing e gonomic o ice u ni u e. Th ough a
case s udy o an o ice chai , he a icle examines how e gonomics and i s associa ion wi h he ision o he po en ial use s
and hei wo king spaces a e cons uc ed by he ele an ac o s in p ojec mee ings and indi idual in e iews du ing he
manu ac u ing p ocess. The a icle is conce ned wi h how, in he p ocess o p oducing an o ice chai , he chai gains an
iden i y o an aes he ic design objec and how his comes o mean he e o mula ion o he idea o e gonomics. The empi ical
analysis also p o ides insigh in o how he somewha g and discou ses o so capi alism o aes he ic economy a e no
abs ac , bu e y much g ounded in e e yday p ac ices o an o ganiza ion. The a icle es ablishes how he ision sha ed by
all he ele an ac o s in i es ac i e, lexible, and coope a i e end-use s and how he ision also has po en ial ma e ial e ec s.
The esea ch is an e hnog aphically inspi ed case s udy ha d aws ideas om discu si e psychology.
Keywo ds
o ice u ni u e, e gonomics, discu si e psychology, e hnog aphy, design, o ice wo k, so capi alism, aes he ic economy
2 SAGE Open
Gab iel, 2005; Gab iel & Lang, 2008; G ego y, 2011;
Hancock & Tyle , 2007; Lopez, 2010; Ra aeli & Vilnai-
Ya e z, 2004; S a i & deMon oux, 2002; Val onen, 2012;
Wi z, Wa hu s , & Nickson, 2003). This ield o esea ch
shows how he design o objec s and spa ial se ings o mod-
e n o ganiza ions is also a physical embodimen o a speci ic
o ganiza ion’s cul u e and alues. Some imes, he display o
hings and people is iden i ied as p esen ing he alues o
“knowledgeable capi alism” o “so capi alism” (Chugh &
Hancock, 2009; Heelas, 2002, pp. 81-83; Th i , 2005, pp.
20-47) o “aes he ic economy” (Böhme, 2003; En wis le,
2009), while highligh ing he so cha ac e is ic o mode n
wo k li e: c ea i i y, inspi a ion, emo ions, and aes he ics.
Indeed, i would be nai e o assume ha he isions he
designe s and p oduce s p omo e would be somehow iso-
la ed om la ge cul u al and socie al alues and discou ses.
Howe e , as pa o his de eloping ield o esea ch, he
e o mula ion o e gonomics has ye no gained a en ion,
and his a icle aims o shed ligh on he speci ic meanings o
e gonomics and hei possible consequences h ough a case
s udy o an o ice chai .
Cen al o he li e a u e conce ning so capi alism is he
p oposi ion ha i is a o m o capi alism ha pu s emphasis
on o ganiza ions as lexible en i ies ha “go wi h he low,”
always in ac ion and on he mo e, aiming o p oduce wo ke s
who i his ype o an o ganiza ion. Flexible o ganiza ions
aim o ec ea e hemsel es by a emp ing o gene a e new
adi ions and ep esen a ions o hemsel es and he wo ld,
ins ead o accep ing es ablished knowledge. In ac , he
e usal o es ablished knowledge is he basic p emise on
which hese o ganiza ions a e buil . Also, one o m o his
ec ea ion is o p omo e new kinds o o ice buildings ha
ma e ialize and demons a e he new lexible o ganiza ion
usually by ying o maximize social in e ac ion and inno a-
ion (Th i , 2005). The he o ic o so capi alism is he he -
o ic o ca ing and sha ing (Th i , 2005), and i is conce ned,
as al eady men ioned, wi h beau y, emo ions, and play ul-
ness (Chugh & Hancock, 2009). I s i es o enhance com-
mi men and mo i a ion (Heelas, 2002, p. 81), and ies o
c ea e new slogans, ans o m in o ma ion and knowledge o
ind “ esh” ways o mo i a e employees and a ac cus om-
e s. This he o ic iden i ies he success o an o ganiza ion o
lie wi h cul u e, na a i es, knowledge, and c ea i i y a he
han wi h echnologies, a ionali y, and cos –bene i calcula-
ions e en hough i s p ac ices ha e a s ong u ili a ian
dimension, and i is basically an a emp , as Paul Heelas
(2002) no es, o ins umen alize hese so alues o eco-
nomic ends.
The li e a u e conce ning so capi alism has some impo -
an esonances wi h he wo k o Ge no Böhme (2003) as is
also poin ed ou by Shalene Chugh and Hancock (2009).
Böhme comes o he conclusion ha we ha e en e ed in o an
ad anced phase o capi alism which may be cha ac e ized by
an aes he ic economy. By his, he means ha he aes he ic
quali ies o commodi ies ha e de eloped in o an au onomous
alue, a new ype o use alue. Wha is cen al he e is he way
commodi ies can be a ac i e, add new eeling o places,
spaces, and people, and “se e o s age, cos ume and in ensi y
li e” (Böhme, 2003, p. 72).
Böhme also in oduces he concep o aes he ic labo
which e e s o all hose p ac ices ha “aim o gi e an appea -
ance o hings and people, ci ies and landscapes, o endow
hem wi h an au a, o lend hem an a mosphe e,” and acco d-
ing o Böhme, his concep encompasses all human ac i i-
ies, be i he ac i i ies o a is s, designe s, o p oduce s, ha
aim o “lend o hings, people and ensembles ha mo e which
goes beyond hei handiness and objec i e p esence.”
Aes he ic labo e s ake pa in he p ocess o c ea ing a new
alue, a s aging alue, and he e Böhme also expands he
de ini ion o aes he ic labo o include mo e han jus embod-
ied sel -p esen a ions o employees. He cas s ligh on he
impo ance o analyzing he p ocess o c ea ing s aging alue
wi h all i s p ac ices, hings, and people who in e ac o c e-
a e his some hing mo e (Chugh & Hancock, 2009). Joanne
En wis le (2002, 2009) has also a gued in a o o ha iew,
s a ing ha al hough some esea ch has been ca ied ou on
he ma ke condi ions unde which di e en cul u al a i ac s
wi h an aes he ic alue a e p oduced, he e is cu en ly a lack
o empi ical wo k wi hin di e en ields o cul u al p oduc-
ion and se ices o allow us o uly map he di e si y o
p ac ices in which he aes he ic alue is p oduced. And i is
p ecisely his p ocess ha my a icle discusses. The objec i e
o he a icle is how, in he p ocess o p oducing an o ice
chai , he chai gains an iden i y o a special aes he ic design
objec ha has his some hing mo e, and how his also comes
o mean he e o mula ion o he idea o e gonomics. The
empi ical analysis also aims o demons a e how he some-
wha g and discou ses o so capi alism o aes he ic econ-
omy a e no me e abs ac ions bu e y much g ounded in he
e e yday p ac ices and discou ses o an o ganiza ion.
The a icle p oceeds as ollows. Be o e ep esen ing he
esul s o he case s udy, I will discuss, in b ie , e gonomics
as a his o ical and cul u al idea. A e ha , he me hodologi-
cal app oach and he da a used will be in oduced in sho .
The cons uc ion o a new ision is analyzed in de ail in he
subsequen sec ions. The las sec ion o analysis aims a
examining how he chai can be analyzed as an embodimen
o he new ision. In he concluding sec ion, I p esen and
discuss he cen al indings.
The Idea o E gonomics
Mos o en, “e gonomics” e e s o a biomedical amewo k
which ocuses on he measu able quali ies o human–en i-
onmen in e ac ion and he esul an s ess o he body.
Howe e , o ganiza ional and social issues ha did no adi-
ionally exis in he co e o e gonomics ha e la ely been con-
side ed o be gaining mo e ele ance; he e o e, he
in eg a ion o social scien i ic knowledge wi h e gonomics
has inc eased (Mo ay, 2008). Fo example, o e he las ew
Pe e i 3
yea s, a ield o e gonomics called mac oe gonomics, which
aims a c ea ing ce ain no el guidelines o he p ac ice o
e gonomics, has been gaining mo e impo ance (Caldwell,
2008; Ha o & Kleine , 2008; Thebe ge & Neumann, 2010).
I ecognizes, among o he hings, he impo ance o o gani-
za ional cul u e, his o y, and goals and is also conce ned wi h
he ac ual design p ocesses o p oduc s and he o ganiza-
ions’ en i onmen s. Ye , e gonomics and design as changing
cul u al phenomenon in capi alism ha e so a no a ac ed
a en ion in empi ical s udies.
Wo k on chai com o was s a ed in ea nes in he 1940s
and 1950s, a ound he same ime as he e m e gonomics was
in oduced. Howe e , he backg ound o he idea o e go-
nomics can be iden i ied in he F.W. Taylo ’s scien i ic man-
agemen and in he wa e o s. As new weapon y was ushed
in o mass p oduc ion, i was soon ealized ha design deci-
sions a ec ed pe o mance and eliabili y in a majo way
(Pe e i, 2004; Pheasan , 1996). Scien i ic managemen p o-
mo ed he idea o di e en asks being di ided among expe s
and di e en expe s being sepa a ed spa ially and sea ed in
di e en ypes o chai s. This idea de eloped in o a hie a -
chical o ganiza ion o chai s which has had a long-las ing
e ec on o ice chai design. Typically, gene al o ice wo k-
e s, execu i es, and manage s si in chai s ha e lec hei
s a us in he company (Oli a es, 2011).
A e he Second Wo ld Wa in G ea B i ain, a g oup
consis ing o membe s who had backg ounds in enginee -
ing, medicine, and human sciences o med a socie y ha
was o s udy “human beings in hei wo king en i onmen ,”
and he socie y came up wi h he wo d “e gonomics” o
desc ibe wha hey we e doing. All he membe s o he soci-
e y had been in ol ed in esea ch conce ning he capaci ies
o soldie s (Pheasan , 1996). A e he Fi s and Second
Wo ld Wa s, he cul u al no ion o “men al heal h” s a ed o
change, as many soldie s we e su e ing om a ious psy-
chological symp oms ha had be o e he wa s been consid-
e ed biological and mo e o less p eexis ing weaknesses in
he pe sonali y. I was ealized ha s ess ul ci cums ances
can p oduce “shell shock,” empo a y psycho ic symp oms
(C ocq, 2005; Ja is, 2009; Pe e i, 2004; Rae, 2007). A e
he wa s, his new knowledge was aken in o accoun when
designing wo kplaces and ools ha would imp o e e go-
nomics (Pe e i, 2004).
In e es in e gonomics inc eased e en u he a e he
i s comme cial compu e s based on ansis o s a i ed.
Resea che s who we e in e es ed in “human ac o s” s a ed
o analyze people’s cogni i e s yles and sys em design con-
ce ning compu e s in he la e 1960s and h ough he 1970s
(G udin, 2006, pp. 405-407). Be o e he mid-1980s, e go-
nomic u ni u e design ocused on suppo ing he body; bu
om he mid-1980s, e gonomic design had o suppo he
body o 8 consecu i e hou s o sea ed PC use. A ha ime,
he Council o he Eu opean Union passed legisla ion ha se
minimum e gonomic s anda ds o be me in he wo kplace.
This o igina ed pa ly om an inc eased public awa eness o
consume goods’ abili y o ei he suppo o p e en heal h
and wellness—whe he hey we e ood, ciga e es, ca s, o
o ice chai s (Oli a es, 2011).
Howe e , p oduc s we e designed wi h he use s’ poin o
iew in mind e en be o e he 1940s. The ac ha hings such
as chai s o si and elax on ha e exis ed is a good example o
ha . Al eady in he Vic o ian e a, u ni u e called pa en sea -
ing was de eloped o p e en spinal ill heal h. The pa en
sea ing led he way o e gonomic u ni u e al eady 120
yea s be o e e gonomics as a e m was coined. Howe e , he
Vic o ian cul u e ailed o app ecia e he chai ha was o
assis pos u e, and i was conside ed ulga o anyone else
han he elde ly o he disabled o use. In he Vic o ian e a,
main aining a digni ied and up igh pos u e speci ically
wi hou he help and suppo o u ni u e demons a ed
mo ali y, sophis ica ion, and willpowe (Pyn & Higgs,
2008). This example u he p o es how good usabili y and
e gonomics, which we e o cou se no he e ms used a ha
ime, a e no ixed and objec i e ac s bu cul u ally and his-
o ically shaped.
In he la e 19 h cen u y, he Ame ican a chi ec Louis
Sulli an (1896) became amous o p esen ing he idea ha i
is ac ually a na u al law ha o m should always ollow unc-
ion, indica ing ha he unc ional conside a ions should de e -
mine he design o an objec . Howe e , in p ac ice he p oduc s
designed by he ep esen a i es o he Mode n Mo emen
we e no ha “use -cen ed”; a he , he ea ly “ unc ionalism”
came o mean jus he lack o o namen a ion:
Acco ding o his heo y, unc ional objec s a e, o necessi y,
aes he ically pleasing. This is called “ unc ionalism.” I was he
dominan heo y unde lying he so-called “Mode n Mo emen ”
in design. When we conside such mode n classics as he Ma cel
B eue “Wassily” chai (1925) o he Mies an de Rohe
“Ba celona” chai (1929) we ind e y li le ela ionship be ween
he o m o hese sea s and ha o he human body which i is
(p esumably) hei unc ion o suppo . The ac ha such pieces
a e commonly e e ed o as “occasional chai s” implies ha
hey a e wi hou pa icula unc ion— excep o be used
“occasionally.” (Pheasan , 1996, p. 9)
The so-called Pos mode n Mo emen in A s a gued
agains he cen al ideas o unc ionalism. Co in Hughes-
S an on (1968) claimed ha pos mode nism was less “an i-
pu i anical and mo e humanis ic han he mode n school,”
and i means ha “we may no longe ( o gi e a single exam-
ple) ha e o choose be ween e gonomic bu clinically dull
ca s, and pleasu e-gi ing bu dange ous ca s” (p. 43). In his
ision, pos mode nism no only p oduced mo e a ie y, dec-
o a ion, play ulness, and lamboyance in design bu also
acknowledged he impo ance o e gonomics. I is qui e
in e es ing how in his con ex “mode nism,” wi h i s s i ing
o designs ha would se e a pu pose o i s use s, is now
associa ed wi h an ihumanism ha igno es “all hose o he
human needs ha gi e so much pleasu e and sa is ac ion.”
4 SAGE Open
In he 21s cen u y, claims ha e eme ged ha ollow he
basic a gumen o pos mode nis s and de elop i a bi u he
by a guing ha aes he ically pleasing is ac ually na u ally
unc ional. This a gumen goes on o say ha unc ionali y
should ollow he o m, as pleasu able objec s a e na u ally
good o he use s. Fu he mo e, i is a gued ha mode n
design places a oo much emphasis on usabili y and no
enough on he aes he ics ha p omo e enjoymen and plea-
su e (e.g., Bly he & W igh , 2003; No man, 2004; T ac insky,
2006). Donald No man, who has been one o he mos p om-
inen ad oca es o use -cen e ed design, has p e iously
a gued (No man, 1998) ha he usabili y o e e yday hings
is he mos impo an aspec o design. Recen ly, No man has
claimed ha he emo ional aspec may a e all be mo e
impo an , and ha i hings a e a ac i e, hey usually wo k
be e . F om ha ollows ha as he p oduc s make people
happie , people will also become mo e c ea i e and inno a-
i e in hei wo k (No man, 2004). La ely, he idea (also
amilia om he he o ic o he so-called so capi alism)
ha aes he ically pleasing, good looking, o “cool” o ice
design p omo es in en ions and inspi a ion has been widely
emb aced by he business sec o (e.g. Howell Hi , 2012;
Youshaei, 2012), and when sea ching o in o ma ion on he
In e ne using sea ch e ms such as “good o ice design,” i
soon becomes clea ha especially in o ma ion echnology
(IT), ad e ising, and media companies such as Facebook,
Skype, Pixa , and Google a e p esen ed as leading he way
o his line o hinking.
By analyzing how my in o man s alk abou e gonomics
in his s udy, I do no y o classi y hem as ad oca es o a
ce ain iew o e gonomics. The in e iewees employ exis -
ing and eme gen cul u al no ions o e gonomics as concep-
ual esou ces by which hey jus i y hei no ions. The his o y
o he idea o e gonomics and he w i ings ela ed o so
capi alism a e ele an , because hey p o ide backg ound o
he in e iewees’ commen s analyzed he e. Economic o ces
a e a he co e o e gonomics as hey b ing in he claims o
humans o adap o wo king en i onmen s. E en hough
e gonomics ep esen s he “humani a ian a gumen in o gan-
isa ion s udies” (Ho baue , 2000), om a sociological pe -
spec i e i is also an ideological p ac ice, which shapes
bodies, ac ions, and social ela ions.
Resea ch Ma e ial and he
Me hodological App oach
When I became in e es ed in he p ac ice o e gonomics in
he ield o indus ial design, especially in he con ex o
mode n o ices, I con ac ed a company ha specializes in
e gonomic o ice u ni u e. I eques ed a pe mission om he
company’s di ec o s o ga he in o ma ion o hei design
p ac ices. Soon, I go an app o al o join in and ollow a
design p ocess ha we ( he company’s p oduc manage , one
o he company’s designe s and I) decided would mos p ob-
ably be comple ed wi hin he ime ha I had unding o his
esea ch p ojec (2009-2012) and which he p oduc manage
also desc ibed as “a e y in e es ing case.”
I did no in o m he company’s di ec o s in ad ance ha I
was speci ically in e es ed in he p ac ice o e gonomics, as I
al eady knew i o be hei specialis ield. Much o my su -
p ise, when I inqui ed abou he e gonomic p ac ices o he
company o o he di e en ac o s, he in o man s looked
mos ly bewilde ed and/o uncom o able and a imes e en
i i a ed. A i s , I was a leas as bewilde ed as my in o -
man s. As e gonomics conce ning o ice u ni u e means wo
di e en hings, i s , labo a o y es s o p o e ha he p od-
uc passes he equi emen s o e gonomic s anda ds, and sec-
ond, he designe ’s and he eam’s expe ise o p oduce a
sui able chai o ce ain chosen si ua ions and wo k asks,
much o his knowledge is ei he s anda dized o p obably
aken o g an ed, and he e o e, di icul o a icula e. I was
only la e ha I came o ealize ha maybe his e y awk-
wa dness i sel con ained some hing in e es ing, some hing
wo h e lec ing on.
My esea ch is an e hnog aphically inspi ed case s udy o
an o ice chai . The ieldwo k pe iod las ed om Sep embe
2009 o summe 2012, and included obse a ions abou and
in e iews a an o ganiza ion, which specializes in p oducing
e gonomic o ice u ni u e and p oduc s. To ge o know he
company, I began by explo ing he company’s annual epo s
(2007-2008), and du ing he p ojec , I con inually ollowed
i s websi e, Facebook page, and e e y hing ha was w i en
abou i in magazines and newspape s. The ieldwo k in he
company consis ed o in o mal discussions ega ding he
o ganiza ion’s design p ac ices, s udying documen s exp ess-
ing he guidelines o design and manu ac u e as well as
in e iews wi h ele an ac o s. The p ojec eam ha wo ked
on manu ac u ing his o ice chai consis ed o se e al engi-
nee s, wo people om he ma ke ing depa men , a ma ke -
ing di ec o , p ojec manage , echnical designe , and
indus ial designe . The indus ial designe was hi ed om
ou side he company o wo k on his pa icula o ice chai .
The in e iews ook place ei he in he indus ial designe ’s
i m, he company’s head o ice, o in one o he company’s
ac o ies whe e he ac ual p oduc ion, p oduc de elopmen
mee ings, and di e en labo a o y es s ook place.
Fo he pu poses o his a icle, da a ha consis o in o mal
mee ings and discussions, indi idual in e iews wi h he
designe o he chai , he company’s p oduc manage , he
design di ec o , and he design manage , along wi h he mee -
ings wi h he p ojec eam, ha e been analyzed. Al oge he , he
da a consis o 15 mee ings ha we e no eco ded ( hese ook
place in he company’s labo a o y, company’s es au an o
du ing ca jou neys om he company’s head o ice o he ac-
o y) and o se en indi idual in e iews and i e mee ings o
he p ojec eam ha we e eco ded and ansc ibed. The indi-
idual in e iews las ed om 1 o 2 h , and he mee ings wi h
he p ojec eam las ed om 1 o 3 h . The da a also include a
ilm las ing 30 min, whe e he designe explains and ske ches
ou he design p ocess. This ilm was o iginally made o he
Pe e i 5
s a who a e in ol ed in he p oduc ion o selling o he p od-
uc s o “make hem mo e mo i a ed and in ol ed in he p oj-
ec ,” as desc ibed by he p oduc manage in an in e iew. The
mo e in o mal discussions ha we e no eco ded we e w i en
down as ield no es. Fo he pu poses o his a icle, whene e
possible, I ied o ind he da a samples om he da a ha
we e ansc ibed, so ha I could show wo d o wo d how
in o man s desc ibed o jus i ied some hing.
In addi ion, he da a con ain no es om p ojec mee ings
w i en by he echnical designe , and a business abs ac o he
chai (18 Powe Poin slides) c ea ed and w i en by he p od-
uc manage . The business abs ac includes a “p oduc po o-
lio,” which is an a i ac used o e alua e, de ine, and jus i y
he place o he p oduc in ela ion o he company’s o he
p oduc s and o simila p oduc s p oduced by compe i o s. The
po olio is u ilized o de ine he ma ke “slo ” he p oduc is
in ended o : which kinds o en i onmen s i is designed o ,
and wha he design and p ice indica e o i s place among o he
p oduc s. The da a also include pho os and ield no es o he
in e na ional S ockholm Fu ni u e Fai whe e he speci ic
chai was in oduced and ma ke ed o he i s ime.
The analy ic app oach has de i ed some ideas om dis-
cu si e psychology. Acco ding o discu si e psychology,
a i ac s can be pe cei ed as ha ing in i a ion and inhibi ion
owa d ce ain kinds o ac ions. An a icle by B own and
Middle on (2006) d aws basic ideas om discu si e psy-
chology, and hey assume he posi ion ha a i ac s can be
concei ed as ma e ial amewo ks, which ei he enable o
cons ain ce ain discou ses o p ac ices. They add ha i is
easonable o assume ha objec s place limi s on he ways
hey can be desc ibed and cons uc ed in a discou se, bu
hey do no exis “jus he e.” Ins ead o assuming ha he e
exis s a gi en objec wo ld, which people desc ibe h ough
“ hings as hey a e,” hey s a e ha a i ac s and wo kplace
communica ion can be app oached by analyzing “how hey
a e o mula ed and desc ibed by speake s,” and hus “ he
mu ual o ien a ion o speake s o hings is a discu si e
accomplishmen , which can be s udied as such” (B own &
Middle on, 2006, pp. 195-196). Acco ding o his poin o
iew, e gonomic knowledge is some hing ha speake s and
ac o s cons uc in alk and use as a linguis ic esou ce a he
han jus possess. Hence, a ocus on cons uc ions in alk
equi es he ecogni ion o discou se as “s a egies and mean-
ings” cons uc ed in con e sa ions. Discu si e psychology
in ol es looking a he o ms o language use, i s con en s
and unc ions. Th ough language, we ind ways o speak
abou objec s and a i ac s, which may ha e po en ial ma e-
ial e ec s (B own, Middle on, & Ligh oo , 2001).
The Chai as a Symbol o
O ganiza ional Change
The company in ques ion, which I shall e e o as Möbel o
p ese e i s anonymi y, is an old Scandina ian amily busi-
ness which designs and p oduces in e io solu ions o
wo king en i onmen s and public spaces. I is adi ionally
well known o i s high s anda ds o e gonomic u ni u e and
is one o he la ges companies in i s sec o in Eu ope. The
need o modi y he b and o he na a i e o he o ganiza ion
has de eloped, as no ed by he di ec o s, on he ealiza ion
ha he i m has es ablished i sel as a p ominen ac o in he
ield o e gonomic o ice u ni u e. This ision o he com-
pany is so well es ablished ha , as Möbel’s p ojec manage
s a ed, he ision o good e gonomics has deg aded o he
essen ial images o he company:
You ha e o hink o wha is an indi idual p oduc ’s syne gy
wi h ou s a egy. We ha e his new slogan ha we a e launching,
Emo ional Places, which I dig. In my line o wo k, i has been a
bu den ha Möbel is so s ongly seen as a company ha p oduces
good e gonomic o ice u ni u e. When a chi ec s design
sepa a e spaces o indi iduals o wo k on hei compu e s hey
hink o Möbel, bu when hey design lounges, en ance halls
and boa d ooms, i is a di e en case. (No embe 2009)
I was clea om he ou se ha he manu ac u e s wan ed
o p oduce a chai ha would s and o he ongoing o ganiza-
ional change o gain ha “syne gy wi h he new s a egy,” as
he p ojec manage s a ed. The chai and he p oduc s o ol-
low would compose a new “p oduc amily” and would also
ad oca e a new line o hinking o he whole o ganiza ion,
bo h ou side and inside he o ganiza ion. In he business
abs ac , he chai is desc ibed as embodying a “classic” line,
“emo ional design” and “ imeless design” ha “will easily
adap o di e en kinds o a chi ec u al en i onmen s.”
The new way o hinking was also explained as dis anc-
ing he company om he old- ashioned ways o making
decisions. One way o pu sue his, as I lea ned om a
Scandina ian business magazine, was ha he company
“sna ched” a new design di ec o om a globally well-
known IT company. The idea was ha he new design di ec-
o would b ing wi h him a mo e con empo a y line o
hinking and making business, and one embodimen o ha ,
as he p oduc manage s a ed, was he p oduc po olio ha
he new design di ec o had c ea ed a e his a i al. This
pa icula design di ec o desc ibed in an in e iew ha he
way o hinking in Möbel was e y old ashioned and
b ough wi h i “a social democ a ic way o making deci-
sions” as opposed o a mo e “ ocused way ha will also
enable mo e high p o ile p oduc s and no g ey mass.” This
is a discu si e ac ic known as a “con as a gumen ”
(Edwa ds & Po e , 1992, p. 163). A speake makes his e -
sion seem like a ac by con as ing i wi h an al e na i e ha
seems uncon incing and like a bad choice.
In an in e iew, he p ojec manage labeled he “old way”
as a “Swedish mode o discussing e e y hing endlessly and
lis ening o e e yone, so ha be o e long e e y idea is i i-
a ed.” In a p ojec mee ing in sp ing 2010, he u ni u e
designe also commen ed on he p og ess o he p ojec in an
i onic manne , and s a ed ha he did no objec o
“Scandina ian dynamics” as such “i we achie e a deep

6 SAGE Open
commi men ,” o which he echnical designe eplied ha
he slowes pa o he p ocess was inally o e , and i was
ime o eally ge o wo k. All he key ac o s o he design
p ocess equen ly u ilized a discu si e cons uc ion o he
“old model” as a he o ical ac ha needed no o he jus i ica-
ions. I was a discu si e esou ce ha a icula ed, depending
on he con ex , a “na u al connec ion” be ween he chai and
he new b and, o be ween he chai and a ision o he
changing wo ld o mode n o ices. In hese cons uc ions, he
old ision is o en geog aphically and poli ically localized: I
is a Swedish o Scandina ian way, he social democ a ic way
o hinking and making hings. The new ision does no ha e
a simila kind o explici geog aphical loca ion o poli ical
iden i y; al hough i seems e iden ha i is no a social dem-
oc a ic iew no is i es ic ed geog aphically o Scandina ia.
O he wise, iden i ying he old ision as Scandina ian and
social democ a ic would be senseless.
Below, he p ojec manage desc ibes he changes in mod-
e n wo k li e, which a e closely connec ed o he new ision
and design o his speci ic chai :
Wo king is so di e en nowadays, and people wo k in so many
di e en places. People wo k mo e a home and also, acco ding
o a esul o a ecen esea ch conduc ed by Kon o Sys em
[name changed], nowadays, o ices a e mo e han jus ha . . .
hey a e mee ing places. Mode n wo k li e is e y agmen ed:
people wo k in di e en places, hey a el, hey wo k in hei
home o ices, and inc easingly, o ice spaces a e becoming
mee ing places, no so much ese ed o indi idual s anda d
wo k s a ions anymo e. People a el mo e, and no e e yone
needs a sepa a e desk. Tha p oduces challenges o his
collec ion as well. (…) So you ha e his lounge-like chai , whe e
you si in a elaxed manne , and he communica ion is also
di e en . I belie e ha he u ni u e cul i a es beha iou so ha
when you ha e mo e casual colou s and design, i is no a
mee ing in a adi ional sense anymo e; a he , i is a con e sa ion.
You can ha e a small side- able and you lap op on i , you can
check some hing, bu you can also si com o ably. Now you
ha e o si s i ly on you small chai s a small ables, he ou o
you. (No embe 2010)
Based on he da a, i seems ha he new o ganiza ional
cul u e o he b and o he company indica es a new mode o
hinking abou wo k en i onmen s. As in he exce p abo e,
hey a e no longe seen as o ices o public spaces o lounges
o en ance halls o boa d ooms, bu as he p ojec manage
claims, i s and o emos , as “mee ing places.” Thus, he
u ni u e would need o be mo e elaxed o suppo and p o-
duce ee and mo e inspi a ional con e sa ions and mee -
ings. In he exce p abo e, mode n wo k li e is seen as a
collec ion o agmen s and di e en con ex s whe e one
wo ks. The connec ion be ween agmen ed wo k asks and
changing wo kplaces ollowed by a need o c ea e mo e
places as mee ing places is no ob ious. One migh e en sug-
ges ha agmen ed wo k li e could call o a coun e bal-
ance in he o m o mo e sepa a e wo k s a ions, bu he
p ojec manage jus i ies his isions by e e ing o ecen
esea ch. Thus, his iews ha e addi ional scien i ic basis and
do no seem o equi e u he jus i ica ion. The di ec o p o-
ides de ails o he si ua ion o emphasize he di e ence
be ween he old and new models.
The i m Kon o Sys em ( he name has been changed) ha
p oduced he esea ch p ojec , which he p ojec manage
uses as a jus i ica ion o his isions, is a company ha p o-
ides se ices o o he companies en ing o ice spaces. The
esea ch p ojec in ques ion was ca ied ou by se e al ins i-
u ions, and Möbel was one o he sponso s and collabo a o s
o he p ojec . The companies in ol ed o e ed he cases o
he esea ch p ojec and he cases deal , o example, wi h
mobili y, open plan o ices and new wo k space solu ions. In
he esea ch epo , he cases we e hen explici ly desc ibed
as e lec ing con empo a y wo king li e. This was no a
esea ch esul as such bu adop ed as a s a ing poin o he
esea ch p ojec . Thus, his is a de ining momen o he
ision and he design p ojec , because a his poin he ision
gained a new s a us and a new iden i y: I was no only a
ision in a u opian sense bu i became scien i ic knowledge.
To pu i blun ly, he companies ed he esea ch p ojec wi h
isions in he o m o case s udies ha we e de ined as ep e-
sen ing he ecen de elopmen s o wo king li e and spaces.
As quid p o quo, hey gain a new s a us and iden i y o hei
isions.
The old wo ld o mee ings and mee ing spaces is con-
s uc ed in he exce p as a si ua ion whe e people ha e o
“si s i ly in small chai s.” The lounge-like chai , which is
adi ionally seen as no being in ended o si ing on o long
du a ions, is now cons uc ed as he ideal: I is mo e com o -
able, and no only ha , bu i also p oduces mo e ci ilized
beha io . The e o e, he mee ing is no longe a adi ional
mee ing bu a “con e sa ion.” This ision implies a discus-
sion ha is ee o au ho i a ian aspec s. I is a con e sa ion,
whe e pe sons mee and sha e hei iews.
While he ele an ac o s ep esen he old model as an
an i hesis o he new model o o ganiza ional cul u e, he
clea opposi ion be ween hese models is ac ually ambiguous
when analyzed om a discu si e poin o iew. The old
model was e e ed o, in a ious con ex s o he in e iew,
as a “Swedish” o “Scandina ian” way o discussing hings
inde ini ely, and he eby was ing all chances o c ea ing
any hing eally inno a i e. The new model seems o call o
an a i ude owa d wo k whe e sha ing ideas and con e sa-
ions is he mos impo an and essen ial elemen o c ea ing
new ideas and inno a ions. I seems ha he old model s ands
o cons an discussions and he new model signi ies mo e
con e sa ions and less wo king alone. The di e ence seems
o be ha he new model’s con e sa ions ake place in mo e
open o ices among he designed u ni u e ha is de ined as
mo e casual and ee spi i ed. Thus, he wo ke s o he new
model ha e hei discussions in ull iew o e e yone, and
hese con e sa ions a e s aged by special design u ni u e.
Pe e i 7
In he i s da a sample, he p ojec manage s a ed ha “i
has been a bu den ha Möbel is so s ongly seen as a com-
pany ha p oduces good e gonomic o ice u ni u e.” Thus,
he meanings a ached o e gonomics a e con adic o y. On
one hand, i is one o hei special ields o expe ise and he
key elemen in hei success, and on he o he hand, i seems
o be one o he cen al easons hey ha e de eloped a need
o emold hei b and and hei ision.
The Re o mula ion o E gonomics
When I inqui ed abou he indus ial designe ’s ision o
mode n wo k spaces as he con ex o his p oduc s, he also
u ilized he discu si e esou ce o “ he old model” o o ice
en i onmen s “when he s a ic idea o e gonomics was he
cen al way o pe cei e hings he e in Scandina ia” and con-
inues in an i onic manne “people we e si ua ed in lines in
hei own wo k ooms doing he same wo k; i was like ac-
o y wo ke s in o ice en i onmen s, bu now i is mo e
mobile.” And jus a ew sen ences la e in he in e iew, he
con inues desc ibing he o ice chai s ha we e c ea ed on
he basis o his old model:
They we e passi e chai s, and he expec a ion was ha a pe sons’
neck and hands we e o be in a ce ain ixed posi ion. I do no
belie e in ha . I belie e ha he s a ing poin has o be good,
bu no ixed and s a ic, and a human being he sel needs o be
ac i e. She has o ge up, she has o each o hings, she has o
s e ch in di e en di ec ions, and aise he legs up and o he
hings as well. (Decembe 2009)
In e es ingly, in his ex ac , he e gonomic quali y o a
chai is no cons uc ed solely as a ea u e o he chai . Mo e
emphasis is ac ually laid on he use o he chai . She has he
obliga ion o ake esponsibili y o he e gonomics o he
chai ; she has o s ay on he mo e and no expec ha
he o ice u ni u e will ake ca e o he neck o hands.
Conside ed om a ealis ic poin o iew, his is a easonable
a gumen , bu when conside ed om a discu si e pe spec-
i e, he s a emen aises se e al ques ions. Fi s , he con-
s uc ion o an “old model” communica es a ision o o ice
wo k consis ing o mono onous and epea ed asks, which
eminds one o ac o y wo k. Thus, he new open o ices
seem o p oduce mo e in e es ing wo k and du ies, whe eas
sepa a e wo k ooms encou age mono onous wo k. The new
open o ice and he u ni u e ha goes wi h he new o ice
model also allow people o be mo e mobile and almos guide
hem o be on he mo e. Consequen ly, he e gonomics o a
wo king en i onmen becomes he esponsibili y o an indi-
idual wo ke . A chai ’s ole in his new se ing is o encou -
age wo ke s o be on he mo e. A chai needs o be good
enough o si on bu no so good ha people would enjoy
emaining sea ed o long pe iods o ime. The key elemen
o wha migh be called “new e gonomics” is ac ually ha
he chai needs o be bad enough o encou age i s use s o ge
up. The o ice chai s ha ha e adi ionally been conside ed
as e gonomic o ice chai s wi h hei adjus able a m es s,
back es s, and head es s a e now ede ined as passi e chai s.
Consequen ly, in he “new e gonomics” he ac i i y o pas-
si i y o a chai is no a ea u e o he chai bu o he use .
In he mee ings o he p ojec eam, he e gonomic quali y
is e y a ely discussed o he han when e e ed o in an
i onic manne as belonging o an old- ashioned iew on
designing o wo k en i onmen s. Once a a p ojec mee ing,
we go o si on he p o o ypes o he chai , and each o us had
a chance o make a b ie commen on he expe ience. Mos ly
he commen s could be in e p e ed as posi i e o neu al
(“ e y nice” o “like i ” o jus “mmm”), he only excep ion
being he echnical designe who claimed ha he chai did
no i his body ype. Nobody esponded o his commen , no
e en he designe .
The e gonomic quali y o he chai is mos explici ly
add essed in he ilm ha was p oduced in sp ing 2010 o
“mo i a e he employees” who ake pa in he p oduc ion o
ma ke ing o he chai . In he ilm, he designe desc ibes a
ce ain ea u e o he chai ha is ypical o chai s he has
designed, and adds ha his is “ i s o all, e gonomically
e y well designed” and “enables good si ing posi ion and
does no pu p essu e on he legs.” La e in he ilm, he
designe announces ha he has hopes o how he p oduc s
will be ma ke ed, and no es ha he wan s o say some hing
mo e abou he e gonomics o he chai : “I chai s we e cho-
sen by o e, he cus ome s would choose a chai ha enables
only a passi e si ing posi ion.” He con inues ha hese
chai s “would emind one o child en’s ca sea s, which eel
sa e, bu in ha posi ion you canno eally mo e any hing bu
you inge s.” He emphasizes he absu di y by ac ing as
being squeezed in a ca sea in a posi ion in which he looks
like he can only hold his hands abo e his shoulde s and mo e
his inge s.
Appa en ly he e gonomic quali y o a chai is some hing
ha canno be e alua ed by he cus ome s. The example o a
child’s ca sea , e en hough an anecdo e, shows ha cus om-
e s’ opinions and knowledge o e gonomics a e qui e in an-
ile, and he cus ome s make choices ha migh eel “sa e” o
good. The e o e, he selle s ha e o gi e ad ice, so ha cus-
ome s do no make hese easy mis akes. In o he wo ds, he
cus ome s need o be di ec ed, so ha hey do no choose
p oduc s ha eel good, bu om a designe ’s poin o iew,
do no unc ion p ope ly in new o ice en i onmen s ha
need mo e ac i e use s.
The Embodimen o he New Vision o
O ice Wo k
The ac i e na u e o his speci ic chai is o en men ioned as i s
mos impo an ea u e. In p ac ice, he chai is designed o be
lexible in a sense ha i allows a iny amoun o mo emen . I
is no en i ely i m and immobile, no a ocking-chai -like
8 SAGE Open
objec , bu elas ic. This is cong uen wi h he isions ha con-
cep ualized wo ke s who a e, abo e all, mobile and sha e
elaxed con e sa ions. The chai i sel encou ages small
mo emen . I is also consis en wi h he ision o mode n
o ice spaces, in which employees do no ha e sepa a e wo k
s a ions bu use wha e e ee space he e is in an o e all open-
space o ice o ei he wo k on hei lap ops o ha e a cha wi h
cowo ke s o cus ome s. In e es ingly, his lexibili y is ne e
men ioned as e gonomically good e en hough i enables a i-
ous si ing posi ions.
In he business abs ac , he chai is desc ibed as “a uni-
e sal chai ,” which will i e e y kind o si ua ion. Acco ding
o he designe , he lexibili y o he chai enables i o be
used o se e al pu poses: o wo k alone on he lap op, o ea
lunch, o ha e a casual con e sa ion in a mo e elaxed si ing
posi ion, o o ha e a mo e o mal mee ing. Also, he ac ha
he chai is designed o esemble lounge u ni u e, as
explained by he p ojec manage , in i es wo ke s o be on
he mo e and no emain sea ed o long pe iods o ime.
The designe a icula es in an indi idual in e iew and
also in a p ojec mee ing in sp ing 2010 ha he design o he
chai becomes mos appa en when he e a e many such
chai s in he same space. The designe hen goes in o saying
ha se e al o hese chai s oge he p oduce a “ce ain bal-
anced hy hm.” The p ojec manage also e lec s ha i is a
ea u e ha can e en be app ecia ed om a dis ance and
om ou side he o ice building. Thus, he chai s compose a
o m ha is mos dis inc i e only when iewed om a dis-
ance, o example, h ough la ge pano ama windows.
Because o his, he di ec o s decide ha se e al chai s mus
be acked high up on a wall as he chai is p esen ed a he
in e na ional S ockholm Fu ni u e Fai . O he wise, he “spe-
cial hy hm” ha can only be p ope ly app ecia ed om a a
would no be isible o he cus ome s. This ea u e seems o
speci ically sui an open-space o ice. Thus, i i s in well in
o ice buildings ha ha e glass walls and a e s aged o be
iewed om ou side o inside.
When he chai is in oduced a he ai , he company
gi es ou a p ess elease in which hey s a e ha hey a e
in oducing a new ision o mode n wo k li e. This is a new
p ac ice, since be o e his he p ess eleases ha e jus in o-
duced speci ic pieces o u ni u e. Now, he u ni u e is men-
ioned only in b ie a he end o he p ess elease. In o he
wo ds, now he company is selling a ision, and he u ni u e
is in a seconda y posi ion. The ision is aking he leading
ole. The chai is in oduced as an illus a ion o he ision, a
ma e ializa ion o i .
Wi h he p oduc ion o his chai , he company also es ab-
lishes se e al o he new p ac ices. The di ec o s and he
designe epo in indi idual in e iews ha in his speci ic
p ojec , all he decision make s (i.e., he di ec o s and he
designe ) me se e al imes e en be o e s a ing he coope a-
ion o discuss he cha ac e is ics o he new b and and o
de elop a sha ed unde s anding o he ision o new o ice
en i onmen s and also o wha kind o special know-how
hey expec ed he designe o b ing along. Acco ding o he
in e iewees, i was unusual o hese mee ings o ake place
mo e han a yea be o e any de ailed plans o he speci ic
p oduc exis ed. The di ec o s explain ha hey wan ed o be
su e ha he designe g asped hei whole ision. Then, he
di ec o s made a deal wi h he designe ha he would be
p esen in all he p ojec mee ings and would commi his
ime o make a ilm whe e he would explain he s o y o he
chai . These we e all new p ac ices.
The p ojec manage explains he need o hese new p o-
cedu es by saying ha i is impo an ha he chai is s ongly
associa ed wi h he designe who has won se e al design
p izes, and ha i would no be as con incing i he p ojec
manage ins ead o he designe we e o explain he meaning
o his chai and i s posi ion as pa o he new b and and
ision o he enginee s and ma ke ing people. I is much
mo e “mo i a ing” when he designe himsel akes pa in
he mee ings and deli e s he s o y. “S o ies a e i al when
you wan o make a p oduc sell,” cla i ies he p ojec man-
age . Thus, you could say ha he di ec o s u ilize he
designe as a b and managing ool who sells he idea o he
new b and o hei employees.
In he ilm, he designe explains he ision o changing
wo k en i onmen s, and hus deli e s he main idea o he
new b and o he employees. He desc ibes how he chai can
be ecognized as a e lec ion o his ision. He also na a es
how he chai can be iden i ied as his c ea ion, because i has
ce ain de ails ha esemble some ea u es o no he n na u e
and wild li e. Thus, he designe associa es he indi idual
p oduc as pa o a la ge en i y o his en i e wo k as a
designe , and he eby, indi idual chai s gain an iden i y as
aes he ic design objec s ha ha e a his o y longe han he
sepa a e p oduc as such. They a e no jus o ice chai s bu
au hen ic design objec s o be app ecia ed as pa o a la ge
en i y and a long his o y. The designe inco po a es au hen-
ici y and o iginali y no only in o he p oduc bu also in o
he new b and.
Conclusion
Wi h he help o his case s udy, he a icle was able o p o-
ide insigh in o how ma e ial objec s come o ca y and
media e “ideological meanings” (see Mazé & Reds öm,
2007) ha may ha e e y conc e e impac s on o ganiza ional
p ac ices and cul u e, and e en on wo ke s’ heal h. In o he
wo ds, he e o mula ion o e gonomics does no only mean
new ideas and concep s bu also e y conc e e ma e ial
e ec s on human bodies. Also, design is no only a ma e o
aes he ics o usabili y bu i is also abou poli ics.
The con ibu ion o his a icle is wo old. The a icle has
demons a ed how in he p ocess o p oducing an o ice
chai , he chai gains a s a us o an aes he ic objec . In addi-
ion, he empi ical analysis p o ides insigh in o how so
capi alism is g ounded in he e e yday p ac ices and dis-
cou ses o he o ganiza ion. The a icle analyzes how he
Pe e i 9
e o mula ion o e gonomics in he company is in e wined
wi h a ision in line wi h he ideas o so capi alism. In he
co e o ha ision is he aes he ic objec which has o “speak”
he ision in i s ma e ialized o m. The objec s and a i ac s
ha con ey he ision canno be jus any kinds o objec s:
They ha e o ha e he s a us o an aes he ic design objec .
Thus, es ablishing he ision as u h also means ele a ing
and ennobling he iden i y o he objec as an aes he ic objec .
The ac ha when he chai is p esen ed o he wide public
o he i s ime, i is being acked up high on a wall abo e
ou heads could, in a way, be seen as a e lec ion o i s ele-
a ed cha ac e . The chai is abo e he e e yday li e, and
hus, may e en p omise o aise us up and abo e he con-
s ain s o he mundane.
Despi e being small-scale and hus o some ex en
es ic ed, he a icle cas s ligh on he p ocess o c ea ing
s aging alue wi h all i s p ac ices, hings, and people who
in e ac o c ea e his some hing mo e. The ision as a discu -
si e o he o ical accomplishmen is accompanied by se e al
p ac ices and a gumen s ha wo k o gi e he chai an iden-
i y o an aes he ic objec and, hence, make i in o a ma e ial-
ized o m o he ision. The con as a gumen wo ks o
jus i y he ision on a discu si e le el; he esea ch p ojec
helps u n he u opia in o a e lec ion o eali y; he mee ings
be ween he company’s di ec o s and he designe solidi y
he ision as a sha ed goal; he new p ess elease aises he
ision in o a p ima y ole, and he designe ’s p esence a he
mee ings and in ol emen in p oducing a “mo i a ional”
ilm associa e he chai mo e s ongly wi h he ision and he
designe , and so he chai gains a s a us o a c ea ion o an
awa d-winning designe . Thus, he s a us o an aes he ic
objec comes in o being as a esul o mul iple p ac ices and
choices made by he di ec o s o he company, he designe ,
he ma ke ing people, he esea che s, and he consume s.
As hose a o emen ioned p ac ices and discu si e means
s i e o eeze he in en ions o he manu ac u es, his p o-
cess can also be seen as domes ica ion o he ideas o so
capi alism. The ision mani es s i sel h ough his uni e sal
chai in con as wi h he Scandina ian o Swedish chai s
and p ac ices emphasizing he local (as meaning he e
es ic ed, passi e, and na ow) na u e o he “old” and adi-
ional. No only is his new chai global o in e na ional in
na u e bu pompously uni e sal as well. In his con ex ,
Scandina ian does no mean au hen ici y, pu i y, o equali y
as in he ma ke ing s a egies o , o example, Ikea o some
Scandina ian cosme ic b ands and clo hing companies.
Acco ding o he ision, e gonomics belongs o he pas , and
in he pas i was e y much he local way o pe cei e and
design hings. E en hough he oo s o e gonomics a e no
o iginally in Scandina ia, he ac ha e gonomics is so
s ongly associa ed wi h he Scandina ian con ex is linked
in he da a wi h he idea o Scandina ia as a p omised land o
echnical enginee ing as well as he so-called social engi-
nee ing. Howe e , he old way is ne e desc ibed in a ma e
o ac way bu wi h i ony which could implica e ha he
ision has no es ablished i sel as he dominan u h in
Scandina ia since o he wise he e would be no eason o
idicule he old way. Ra he , i could jus be p esen ed as a
his o ical concep ion ha no longe p e ails.
As said be o e, al hough policy make s and academics
may sha e he opinion ha he impo ance o e gonomics is
g owing, in he da a, e gonomics is cons uc ed as almos he
keywo d o a bygone age and o old- ashioned ideas.
E gonomics is passé and no e en ashionably e o. I is a
mode nis d eam ha does no ake in o accoun he consum-
e s’ supposed yea ning o colo , beau y, and mobili y. The
jux aposi ion o e gonomics and he so-called humanism has
i s oo s in he 1960s pos mode nism ha saw e gonomics as
oo a ional an idea lacking pleasu e, play ulness, and lam-
boyance. Needless o say ha hose we e no he o iginal
aims o “e gonomics” as a de eloping idea and p ac ice a e
he Wo ld Wa s. I was no de eloped o b ing in he un o
wo kplaces bu o make hem mo e e icien and sa e. One
migh hink ha e gonomics and good usabili y a e ixed and
objec i e ac s, bu he a icle p o es how hey a e cul u ally
and his o ically shaped. In so capi alism, he o ice u ni-
u e needs o be e gonomically bad enough o encou age he
use s o ake mo e esponsibili y o hei own heal h.
The new ision is p esen ed as poli ically neu al and
humane as i claims o o e mo e ee-spi i ed mee ings,
casual and colo ul mee ing spaces in con as wi h he social
democ a ic way ha p oduces g ay mass and g ay o ice
wo ke s. Yes e day’s e gonomic chai s a e ede ined as pas-
si e, and he new lounge-like u ni u e is p esen ed as he
ideal. This “occasional chai ” o he day is de ined as mo e
use iendly in a no el way: E gonomics ceases o be he
esponsibili y o he designe and he manu ac u e , and
becomes he esponsibili y o he new mobile wo ke , pa o
he sel -discipline. I he Vic o ian age e used he basic
ideas o e gonomics o demons a e sophis ica ion and will-
powe , ou age e uses simila alues o demons a e he
s aging powe o hings, mobili y, and indi iduali y o ideas
and people as well as o sa e money. Lounge-like u ni u e
goes wi h an open plan o ice ha will sa e squa e oo age
and educe cos s. The di ec o s o he company also admi
his o be he case. The e is no eason o hide i as i is con-
side ed a na u al ac .
The new ision aims a c ea ing a wo ld consis ing o
people, objec s, and en i onmen s ha compose a uni y ha
would “welcome” his p oduc as a na u al elemen wi h i s
associa ions. The new ision is desc ibed as mo e demo-
c a ic as i in i es an open o ice whe e e e y hing and
e e yone a e in iew. The chai i sel is democ a ic in ha
sense ha e e yone, ega dless o hei s a us in he com-
pany, is sea ed in his e y same uni e sal chai . In o he
wo ds, in his con ex democ acy does no mean one’s own
pe sonal space and e gonomic u ni u e bu he same aes-
he ic design u ni u e and isibili y o e e yone. Howe e ,
his uni e sal ision does no include e e y hing and e e y-
body. The chai is sui able, o example, o wo king on a