In one respect, cell phones could be described as soundly ergonomic. For skin-tight occasions, Motorola makes the ultra-thin MotoRazr – the phone worn by the model in the company’s TV ad. Nokia’s answer is the haute-couture 8800, a miniscule accessory that was presented to the world on the runways of the Paris and Milan fashion houses. The same company makes N-Gage QD, shaped like a gaming console, for playing games between calls. These phones and their hundreds of cousins come with customizable features and options for fine-tuning preferences. Tools that fit individual needs demonstrate a core principle of ergonomics.

But if using a tool involves a struggle, it earns a "D" or worse for usability. A common criticism is that aim and accuracy suffer when adult hands finger child-sized buttons. Reviewers say tiny screens mar experiences like viewing pictures, browsing the Internet and emailing. Many regard the profusion of features as clutter, and want just the basics. Slow Web surfing, confusing icons and graphics and impenetrable instructions round out the picture of discontent.

Some users welcome all the features they can get on their phones, and regard complexity and struggle as an acceptable trade off. Others, arguably the majority, want simpler and less laden phones.

In August The Ergonomics Report™ ergonomicsreport.com, a subscription publication for readers needing a deeper view of current ergonomics issues, asked Bryce Rutter, Ph.D., to comment on users’ struggles with cell phones. An ergonomist-industrial designer, Dr. Rutter is the founder and CEO of Metaphase Design Group, which works with the industry on handset design. He suggested that the manufacturers have become aware of "revolt and pushback from the customer base" and of "feature sets that are totally meaningless" to consumers, but really don’t know what development tools to use to design products for a better fit.

He blames the product development process for the gap in what users want and what is available on the market. "It is flawed from the standpoint that it is more a technology-driven development process rather than a user-centered one. These companies are just hearing about this word ergonomics. They don’t really understand what it is, and as a result they have no appreciation for what it means and how to integrate it into … in my view, a very dated development process."

In August The Ergonomics Report™ asked researcher-designer Susan Tuttle of Motorola, in so many words, whether ergonomics is an afterthought for the cell phone industry. She rejected the suggestion emphatically. "We … at Motorola are constantly working to improve usability of our products, both from an ergonomic perspective, as well as from a cognitive perspective on the usability of the user interface, so there’s a process of continuous improvement that is going on," she said.

The Motorola designer, who directs a team of design researchers with backgrounds in human factors, perception psychology and industrial engineering, concedes there is a need for simpler phones, and says her company is doing "more than thinking about it." But rather than just throwing something out there, she added, "we are trying to understand that better … and driving that into actual product design."

If her work is representative across the industry, it seems ergonomics is not an afterthought for the manufacturers. Yet the complaints still roll in, and there is still no phone that meets the needs of users with simple preferences. The question the Motorola researcher wasn’t asked – and possibly should have been - is whether the findings of ergonomics teams are being bypassed in product releases.

Sources: Dr. Bryce Rutter; Susan Tuttle - Motorola; WirelessGuide.com; Electronic Business; Dev Hardware