A qualitative study of safety and human factors challenges in process control rooms operators

Abstract

Process control rooms are critical operational hubs where operators monitor and manage complex industrial processes. However, these environments often present unique safety and ergonomic challenges. Understanding these challenges from the operator’s perspective is essential to developing effective solutions that enhance both safety and ergonomics in control rooms. The aim of this qualitative study was to investigate the specific safety and human factors issues faced by control room operators, drawing on their first-hand experiences to identify key concerns and propose actionable recommendations. Fifteen in-depth interviews were conducted with control room operators across three process industries in Iran over a 3-month period from June 2024 to August 2024. A conventional content analysis approach was used to analyze the data. The written transcript of each interview served as the unit of analysis, and data analysis was performed using MAXQDA v.2022 software. Analysis of interview data yielded 580 codes, categorized into 14 main categories and 41 subcategories. Key findings include overall workload (197 codes) followed by health hazards (69 codes) and workstation design (54 codes), highlighting ergonomic concerns. Economic and social challenges, physical hazards, and organizational factors also emerged as critical issues. Additional categories like acoustic factors, lighting, and environmental factors emphasized the need for noise, lighting, and workspace management. Lastly environmental factors, security and strategic issues, aesthetic considerations and chemical hazards highlighted additional aspects of control rooms in process industries. These findings underscore the multifaceted safety and ergonomic challenges in control rooms, necessitating targeted interventions for operator well-being.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-025-08335-1.

Introduction

Control Rooms (CRs) are intricate socio-technical systems that are crucial for the operation of process industries. CRs include interconnected elements: operators, technology, and work procedures. All of the elements impact the safety and overall system performance^1,2. There are two main types of CR: analog and digital. An analog CR utilizes devices, such as gauges, meters, and physical controllers, to measure and display data³. In contrast, the digital type uses computer-based devices, digital displays, and complex software programs to acquire, process, visualize, and handle data⁴. However, in many of these environments, improving operators’ health, an undeniable prerequisite for safety, has been overlooked. Operators in both types of CRs encounter severe challenges such as repetitive work with switches and gauges in analog CR and cognitive fatigue and unusual mental load due to a multitude of screens and complex software in digital types. Safety in control rooms encompasses several critical aspects to ensure the protection of personnel, equipment, and operations⁵. Electrical safety includes the proper installation and periodic inspection of electrical equipment to prevent hazards like electric shocks⁶. Fire safety measures, such as fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, and evacuation plans, are vital to mitigate potential hazards. Safety performance focuses on improving system efficiency while preventing, identifying, and managing risks to protect both equipment and personnel. Communication safety emphasizes the reliability of communication systems among personnel and equipment to avoid failures⁷. Operational safety involves adhering to strict protocols for system monitoring, equipment handling, and responding to malfunctions or alarms, which can be reinforced through regular staff training and drills⁸. Finally, emergency preparedness, including the availability of first-aid kits and communication devices, ensures quick and effective responses to any unforeseen incidents, keeping the control room a secure and efficient environment⁹. In terms of human factors, aspects such as workstation design, proper lighting, adjustable room temperatures, noise level, and cognitive factors are crucial in control room design^10,11. These issues indicate how the absence of human factors and safety principles directly threatens operational safety. The hazardous industries’ history confirms this claim. The Chernobyl disaster is an instructive example of the deadly interaction of human error and poor design, which occurred on April 26, 1986. The disaster occurred due to a combination of flawed reactor design and human error during a safety test. Critical mistakes, like disabling safety systems and operating under unstable conditions, along with inadequate training and communication among control room operators, led to the explosion and radioactive release. These factors highlighted the importance of stringent safety measures and addressing design flaws¹². Another example is the Three Mile Island disaster (1979) in the United States, where stressed operators failed to detect a risen tank pressure correctly due to the cluttered and unintuitive analog display design, which led to the nuclear reactor’s partial meltdown¹³. Similarly, the Bhopal gas leak disaster in India (1984) indicates how fatigue and poor decision-making caused a disaster with more than 15,000 victims¹⁴. Incomplete maintenance, poor safety protocols, and miscommunication led to the Piper Alpha disaster, one of the deadliest offshore oil rig accidents. The control room played a key role in the tragedy, as failures in communication during shift handovers led to the reactivation of unsafe equipment. This highlights the critical importance of effective control room operations, clear communication, and robust safety measures to prevent similar catastrophes¹⁵. In the field of safety and human factors, various studies have provided significant insights, particularly in control room environments. For instance, one study assessed the effect of a posture correction–based intervention on the occurrence of musculoskeletal symptoms and fatigue among Control Room Operators (CROs)¹⁶. Another study applied an intelligent adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system model and cognitive reliability error analysis method to assess human reliability influencing factors and dynamic decision-making styles of the CROs¹⁷. The SHERPA technique has also been applied in high-risk control room settings, focusing on categorizing and mitigating human errors^18,19. Further, Tung used scenarios, human factors, and situation awareness to create a framework for analyzing and improving human-computer interaction design²⁰. Additionally, Ghalenoei et al. assessed the impact of workload on the cognitive performance of CROs using task analysis (HTA), NASA-TLX for workload assessment, and evaluation of cognitive performance through tests on sustained attention, simple reaction, and working memory at the beginning and end of work shifts²¹. Despite the value these studies offer, none of them directly incorporated operator feedback to evaluate the work environment. This illustrates the importance of a comprehensive study that explicitly integrates operator perspectives to address ergonomic and safety challenges holistically. Recently, another factor that compounds these challenges is the cyber threat. Attacks such as ransomware or manipulation of sensor data create operational disturbances and increase the cognitive load of operators due to their sense of distrust and confusion. For example, in the Colonial Pipeline cyberattack (2021), the control room operations were halted for days. Operators were forced to conduct manual adjustments under extreme stress, without proper ergonomic support²². This study will investigate the specific challenges related to safety and human factors that control room operators face in process industries. By interviewing operators, we can gain a first hand understanding of their experiences and identify crucial areas for improvement. The study’s findings will help us better understand the factors that influence operator performance and safety, as well as provide important recommendations for improving control room design, operation, and overall workplace well-being.

Martial and methods

Research design and participants

In the first step, a team of four members, including two safety specialists (M.J. and R.J.) and two human factors specialists (A.Ch. and H.M.) with unique and significant knowledge related to the project, was carefully structured. We used semi-structured interviews as our primary data collection method. This approach allowed for a flexible yet guided exploration of the research topics, providing both structure and the opportunity for participants to express their thoughts in their words^23,24. The interviews were conducted using an interview guide (Table 1), which ensured key themes were covered while allowing the interviewer to explore participants’ responses further. This format encouraged a conversational flow and enabled the capture of nuanced data. All interviews were conducted in accordance with relevant ethical guidelines and regulations. Specifically, the study followed the Helsinki Declaration for informed consent, ensuring that all control room operators received detailed explanations of the study’s objectives and voluntarily agreed to participate²⁵. Additionally, APA Ethical Principles were applied to maintain confidentiality, anonymizing identifiable information and securing data storage²⁶. The study also adhered to the Belmont Report, ensuring respect for participants’ well-being and minimizing disruptions to their professional responsibilities and psychological comfort²⁷.

Table 1.

Interview Guide.

Professional and experience back ground: 1.Please describe your work experience as an operator in control room of process industries

Tasks and Responsibility questions: 1. Please explain your responsibilities, duties, and the systems you work with in the control room. 2. Explain the complexity and criticality of the processes that you oversee and control in the control room.

Safety and Ergonomics questions: 1. What risks do you believe threaten you in the control room? 2. What safety issues do you see in the control room? 3. What ergonomic and design issues do you see in the control room? 4. How is the teamwork and communication between you and your colleagues? 5. Do you experience pressure, stress, or excessive workload in your workplace? If yes, what do you attribute this to?

To ensure comprehensive data collection, we employed the saturation strategy. Data saturation is achieved when no new themes or insights emerge from the interviews, indicating that sufficient depth has been reached. This point is crucial in qualitative research, indicating that the data collected sufficiently answers the research questions^28,29.

This study involved 15 male participants who were CROs and supervisors from various process industries to ensure a comprehensive understanding of control room safety and ergonomic challenges. CROs provided insights into operational aspects, while supervisors contributed perspectives on organizational and procedural factors. Integrating both viewpoints provided a balanced representation of practical and managerial experiences. These differences were systematically incorporated into the thematic coding process using Braun & Clarke’s thematic analysis, ensuring that both operational and managerial perspectives were appropriately represented in the findings³⁰. This approach allowed for a more holistic assessment, ensuring appropriate representation of both operational and managerial perspectives in the findings.

We selected them through purposive sampling to ensure they had substantial experience addressing safety and ergonomic challenges in control room settings. Their professional experience ranged from 5 to 22 years, with roles encompassing both operational and managerial responsibilities. The individuals’ ages ranged from 27 to 59, representing diverse perspectives on the unique demands of process industry environments. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and their identities were anonymized to protect confidentiality. Table 2 presented more information about the participants.

Table 2.

Characteristics of the study participants.

Age (mean (SD))	42.9(8.2)
Experience years (mean (SD))	13 (4.6)
Education (n)
Diploma	2
Bachelor	9
Master	4
Job Position (n)
Control room operator	12
Shift supervisor	3

Procedure

To ensure methodological rigor and consistency in data collection, all interviews were conducted by a single researcher (R.J.). This approach was chosen to minimize variations in questioning style, maintain interpretative integrity, and enhance reliability in thematic analysis³¹. By maintaining uniformity in interactions, this approach minimized potential biases associated with multiple interviewers and enhanced participants’ engagement depth³². The interviews were conducted in a secluded private room within three distinct process industries in Iran from June 2024 to August 2024. Data collection and site visits was carried out within these three industries, ensuring a focused investigation of operator experiences within their respective work environment.

Participants provided informed consent before taking part in the study. To ensure consistency in data collection, a semi-structured interview guide was developed. The guide was cooperatively designed by all authors in accordance with the established principles and practices of Olson³³. In each industry, three interviews were conducted with three operators in two different shifts. After transcribing and analyzing the data from the initial interviews, three additional interviews were conducted in the subsequent industry, with the same procedure repeated until saturation was reached. The duration of the interviews ranged from 30 to 58 min, depending on each operator’s experience and their ability to articulate their thoughts. All interviews were captured in audio format. Following the collection of participants’ demographic information, each interview commenced with inquiries regarding their experiences as operators in the control room. The interview progressed with questions regarding safety and ergonomics. During the interview, the interviewer provided participants with a summary of the operator’s response to each question to ensure their understanding. If responses were inaccurate or ambiguous, the interviewer asked operators to clarify their meaning by providing additional details or examples. This is helpful for data enhancement.

Analytic strategy

Fifteen in-depth interviews were conducted with control room operators. Conventional content analysis was used for data analysis in parallel with data collection. Before transcribing the recorded audio files, they were listened to multiple times. After transcription, the texts were carefully reviewed three times on average by the first (R.J.) and third (H.M.) authors to validate their consistency with the original audio content. This iterative process helped identify and refine any discrepancies, ensuring that the nuances and depth of responses were preserved, thereby strengthening the reliability of the analysis. The written transcript of each interview served as the unit of analysis, and data analysis was performed using MAXQDA v.2022 software. The first codes were derived by identifying participants’ statements containing significant information as meaning units. The coding process followed an inductive approach, meaning that codes were generated directly from the data rather than predefined. Initially, meaning units containing significant information were identified within the transcripts. The complex coding process began with a comprehensive review of the entire interview transcript, ensuring a deep understanding before assigning relevant codes to specific portions of text. The iterative approach for code categorization started with those recognized in the initial interview. Each new code from subsequent interviews was compared with previously established codes derived from prior interviews to assess thematic consistency and refine emergent patterns. This process ensured that themes evolved organically based on participants’ narratives, maintaining a data-driven and flexible framework rather than relying on predefined coding systems. To address questions or misunderstandings detected across the coding process, they documented and subsequently asked in further interviews to enhance comprehension and explanation. To ensure reliability, two other authors (M.J. and AR.Ch.) reviewed the coding framework. Their role was limited to evaluating the codes without participating in the initial coding process, helping to enhance methodological rigor and minimize subjective bias. By incorporating their assessments, the study ensured a robust and data-driven thematic analysis. Throughout the research phases, the primary researcher repeatedly presented the findings of initial coding to the third author as an expert in qualitative analysis. The gathering of data lasted until the first author determined that theoretical data saturation was achieved. In this step, the third author reviewed and confirmed the attainment of data saturation. Following the agreement, the researchers conducted three additional interviews to confirm the absence of any emerging themes. The authors fully analyzed their data and integrated it into the findings. This thorough and cooperative approach aimed to ensure the rigor and trustworthiness of the data analysis, ultimately leading to the identification of key themes and patterns within the interviews.

In the next step, R.J. and H.M. collaborated to precisely categorize the codes, utilizing a comprehensive approach based on three elements: a review of relevant theories and scholarly literature, empirical findings derived from interviews with operators, and conceptual justification. This conceptual decision allowed us to reflect both the complexity described in established theoretical frameworks and the realities encountered by operators in their daily work. Codes were systematically reviewed and refined through multiple iterations to enhance accuracy and consistency. The resulting categorization was subsequently reviewed and confirmed by M.J. and A.R.CH. This rigorous approach was applied across all study categories to ensure meaningful and robust representation of the data. Table 3 shows the categories and subcategories identified through content analysis, together with the references used for categorization, as part of the analytic strategy described above.

Table 3.

Categories, subcategories, and supporting references for each category.

Category	Subcategory	Supportive References
Overall Workload	Stress and responsibility, Mental demand, Physical demand, Supportive-social environment	34–36
Health Hazards	Development of musculoskeletal disorders, Eye strain or damage, Disruption of the body’s circadian rhythm, Presence of biting animals and insects in the control room, Insufficient sleep and rest, Gastrointestinal diseases or digestive issues, Risk of Irritability, anxiety and mood swings, Electromagnetic radiation exposure	37–40
Workstation Design	Unsuitable chair and desk, Unsuitable mouse and display, Inefficient Use of Natural Light, Absence of footrest, Privacy and Personal Space Concerns	41,42
Economic and social challenges	Economic and financial pressure, Work-life conflict	43,44
Physical Hazards	Fire hazard, Electric shock, Slipping and falling in control room, Control room vulnerability from equipment explosion	45
Welfare and Facilities	Rest and Recreational Facilities, Welfare Services	46
Acoustic Factors	Annoying noise, Annoying vibration	47
Lighting and Visual Factors	Lighting design and functionality	48
Organizational Structure Factors	Team Interaction issues, Employee engagement issues, Training and development issues	49,50
Managing Issues	Human Resource Management, Retirement Issues	51,52
Environmental Factors	Thermal Environment, Indoor Air Quality	53
Security and Strategic Issues	Terrorist and cyber-attacks on process industries, Weakness in security Measures, Potential for Conflict with Local Residents	54,55
Aesthetic Considerations	Aesthetic Deficiencies	56
Chemical Hazards	Leakage and exposure to chemicals, Presence of unpleasant odors in the control room	57

Trustworthiness

The credibility, dependability, and transferability of the data and findings were assessed using the method proposed by Graneheim and Lundman⁵⁸. Credibility was established through a three-month engagement in data collection and member checking, where participants confirmed the accuracy of their responses. The data analysis process was conducted by a research team (authors) who are experts in two fields (safety and human factors) by reviewing the extracted codes and related categories. After 12 interviews, no new codes or information emerged, indicating data saturation. To further validate the findings, additional interviews were conducted with three more participants. The codes were revised if necessary. Dependability was ensured through a semi-structured interview guide and a consistent classification system for data analysis.

Results

In this study, interviews were analyzed using content analysis methods in MAXQDA software. Following the analysis of the interviews, we identified 580 codes and subsequently categorized them into 14 categories with 41 subcategories. Figure 1 shows all identified categories with their total number of codes.

Fig. 1.

Total number of codes in each category.

The overall workload category with 197 codes highlights its predominant significance in CRs. Health hazards with 69 codes underline the health-related concerns in CROs. The third category, with 54 codes, was the work station design, suggesting the critical role of ergonomics in creating optimal operator performance. Economic and social challenges (40 codes) and physical hazards (36 codes) also take significant attention and emphasize economic pressure and physical hazards in the control room environment. Welfare and facilities, organizational structure factors, and managing issues with 30, 22, and 18 codes respectively suggest the ongoing organizational and managerial considerations. Categories such as acoustic factors and lighting and visual factors highlight the need for noise and lighting management. Lastly, environmental factors, security and strategic issues, aesthetic considerations, and chemical hazards have codes ranging from 10 to 17, showing other different aspects of control rooms in process industries that should be considered for operators’ safety and well-being. We will describe and discuss each category and its subcategory in the following sections. In addition, all categories and subcategories with samples of identified codes are presented in a supplementary file. In this section, sample codes were written in text with italic format.

Overall work load

The Overall workload category has the highest number of codes in this study. The current research identified four subcategories for this category, as shown in Fig. 2. Dividing overall workload into subcategories is an important strategy for more precise assessment and then planning better management of its impacts on individuals and systems. Stress and responsibility with 128 codes was the first subcategory and showed its role as the most contributing factor to overall workload. The second subcategory was mental workload, with 41 codes. The third and fourth were supportive social environment and physical workload, with 16 and 12 codes, respectively.

Fig. 2.

Subcategories of overall workload.

The subcategory of stress and responsibility includes various factors that significantly increase workplace stress, also affecting operators’ performance and well-being. One of these factors is fear of accidents, which dominantly originated from the critical and hazardous nature of the work environment. One operator said, “I always worry that if I make a mistake, a serious accident could occur. This thought constantly occupies my mind. P 15”. Another factor is the need for a second job due to the economic pressures and insufficient basic income. One operator reported, “In addition to work stress, I also have the stress of needing a second job due to insufficient income because the financial pressure is too great. P 14”. Economic problems were also reported. This issue was related to the livelihood and financial challenges faced by the operators. In addition, social responsibility towards the people of the community was another contributor to stress. Another factor reported by most operators is shift work and long working hours. This causes stress because operators feel they don’t have enough time to recover, do personal activities, or relax. For example, one operator mentioned that “One source of our stress is the long working hours, which are annoying for those who are confined to this for 12 hours a day for years. P 1.” The operators also mentioned that alarm activation, being responsive, the need for quick reaction, unpredictable work, and excessive responsibility are some factors that create a stressful condition in the control room. Dangerous Nature of the Workplace was the most repeated code by participants, which is related to the essence of control rooms. Many of the operators emphasized that working in a control room environment always is stressful. One of them stated, “I always have to be careful; a moment of inattention means a major disaster. P5.” Work-related distractions/preoccupations, difficult working conditions, lack of replacement for retired personnel, and feeling left behind the other people are other elements that caused stress for operators.

In the mental demand subcategory, one of the key factors is the complexity of tasks that forces operators to keep their minds constantly engaged in detailed analysis and quick decision-making. For instance, an operator mentioned that “Sometimes I feel like I should be a computer that must analyze all the details; it really tires my mind. P7”. Meanwhile, being a beginner in control rooms or inadequate training creates more mental workload in operators. To confirm this issue, one of the participants said, “When you haven’t trained enough, this psychological pressure increases and reduces your self-confidence. P 13”. The coordination with other units, the need to closely monitor processes, and the need for proper task execution also intensify the psychological demand. On the other hand, the need for continuous production and frequent calls from higher authorities, combined with the criticality of under-control processes, make the work environment a high-pressure place. Furthermore, operators also reported that the need for reporting information to higher authorities, high task sequencing, and the presence of unrelated individuals in the CR were among the factors that imposed high pressure on them. The need for rapid response and the necessity of making correct decisions to changes or emergencies make this situation more difficult, especially when the lack of emergency operating procedures (EOP) in CRs is an issue. This was stated by a participant as follows: “We do not have emergency response guidelines in case of emergencies, which can cause confusion. P 2”. In addition, elements such as the need for constant awareness and self-control keep operators’ minds constantly engaged and prevent opportunities for mental rest. Exclusion from the labor law’s provisions on hazardous and strenuous jobs creates a sense of being ignored for operators that increases mental demand, as mentioned by an operator: “Our work is very hard, but we are not subject to protective laws such as labor law’s provisions on hazardous and strenuous jobs, which causes us a lot of psychological burden. P 12”. Lastly, ambiguity of career future was another factor that impacted the operator’s mental health. A lack of clarity in the career future or security can reduce motivation.

In terms of supportive social environment factors, one operator stated that “I feel that many of our colleagues in other departments do not understand our real working conditions. P 1.” This clearly indicates a lack of understanding by colleagues in CRs can cause some problems for operators. Another individual, in terms of lack of support from managers, said that “Managers rarely pay attention to our conditions here or understand our problems and feelings. P 3”. The Unfamiliarity of new personnel with the CR requirements was another problem that operators experienced. Additionally, they express concerns about the lack of feeling valued that affects their performance. For example, one of them mentioned that “Sometimes I think no one sees our efforts. Maybe no one values ​​us. P 5”. The gap between experienced and beginner operators also was an important issue. In this regard, an experienced operator stated, “Many newcomers don’t know how complicated our work is, which makes most of the tasks fall on the shoulders of experienced people. This issue puts more pressure on us and sometimes causes tension between us and them. P 5”. Finally, lack of public understanding of the importance and nature of CR operators’ work was another challenge. This public indifference creates an unpleasant feeling among operators that, over time, negatively affects their work motivation.

Regarding the physical demand, prolonged sitting was the most frequent challenge reported by participants. They have to sit behind their desks for long hours during shift work. This problem, especially with non-ergonomic chairs, can cause discomfort and problems such as chronic shoulder, neck, and back pain. The statement such as “One of our problems is sitting for a long time during the work shift. P 10” is one example of the reported claim. Prolonged screen exposure is the second identified key element that relates to visual and psychological problems. Blurred vision, eye fatigue, dry eyes, headaches, and other problems can result from this prolonged exposure. One operator stated that “We work with the monitor for long hours, which damages our eyes. P 1.” Employees also reported occasional manual tasks as a concern. In some situations, especially during emergencies and technical problems, they need immediate physical actions to adjust the problems that can have a significant effect on physical fatigue.

Health hazards

In the current study, the second category was health hazards, with 8 subcategories and 69identified codes. The tree map in Fig. 3 shows the subcategories with their percentages of the category total codes. In the following, the hazards will be described with mention of the operator’s experiences and explanation of the existing conditions.

Fig. 3.

Sub-Categories of Health Hazards.

Electromagnetic radiation exposure from screens and devices had the highest number of codes in the category. In this regard, one operator stated that “one of the worst problems we have is the electromagnetic radiation of the equipment, which is very effective on the internal organ system of the body P 13.” Irritability, anxiety, and mood swings were also frequently reported problems. Operators stated that night shift work is the main cause of such problems that can have negative effects on their lives and social relationships. For instance, one operator said that after the night shift, especially until noon or evening, we are not normal at all, and it can have a negative impact on interactions. P 2”. Insufficient sleep and rest hours due to a lack of rest regulations during night shifts were mentioned by participants. This causes the operator to lack the energy to do their job and can also affect their health. In the night shift, individuals have little sleep and do not have enough rest and must constantly pay attention to the systems. The next day when they go home, they don’t get anything done, and it has a negative effect on their nerves and interactions inside and outside the house. P 3” Development of musculoskeletal disorders was another prevalent complaint. These disorders are mainly caused by prolonged static postures during work hours that impose significant pressure on their vertebral column and muscles. A participant stated that, “In terms of ergonomics, we sat here for 12 h. This condition has caused severe pain in my back and neck, and I feel that these pains are getting worse day by day. P 8”.

Participants mentioned that the proximity to agricultural lands and establishment of industries in foothills were two factors contributing to the presence of biting animals and insects in the CR. One of the operators noted, “Here, dangerous biting animals enter the control room that can threaten our health. P 1.” Eye strain or damage is another health risk of operators in control rooms. This issue is highlighted by operators’ statements such as “One of our problems is constantly sitting behind the monitor, which causes damage to our eyes. P 7”. Due to the high focus required to process detailed information on the screen, operators experience issues such as eye fatigue, blurred vision, and headaches. Constant exposure to light during night shifts can disrupt the circadian rhythm (the 24-hour biological clock of the body). This disruption can reduce the operator’s productivity and also lead to problems such as excessive fatigue and decreased energy during the day. One operator complains that “There is a lot of light here during the night shift that disturbs my sleep. I can’t sleep well even when I go home. P 13”. Regarding gastrointestinal diseases or digestive issues Eating during the night shift work and an unhealthy diet during the night shift work were two main causes stated by the study participants. According to one of the operators that mentioned, “I had cancer a few years ago, and the doctor said one of the reasons is that you eat and work out of time P 10,” this problem can be a serious threat to their health.

Work station design

The third category encompassed concerns about workstation design. The category contained 54 identified codes. 40.7% of them were allocated to the chair and desk subcategory. The second sub-category was display and mouse, with 38.9% of codes. Privacy and personal space concerns as a third subcategory had 9.3% of codes. %3.7 of codes were allocated to each subcategory of access issues to necessary information, use of natural light, and footrest. Many operators’ complaints were about unsuitable chair and desk. In terms of chairs, they mentioned problems such as old and low-quality chairs, malfunctioning height adjustment, long replacement time, long repair period, and no periodic replacement. Statements such as “The chairs are not suitable for the operator’s 12-hour work and are of poor quality. P14” showed the problems. In addition, short height, lack of height adjustability, and ineffectiveness of temporary desk height adjustment solutions were the reported desk problems. As stated by operators, “Our desk height is short, and we have to bend down to look at the monitor. P 8.” These problems caused discomfort and bad posture. Display-related issues such as outdated monitors, lack of height adjustability, monitor radiation, and absence of radiation shields affected operators’ performances. For example, one operator mentioned that “the displays are not industrial and are not suitable for our work P 2”. In terms of mouse, some concerns were outdated mouse, short cable length, non-industrial mouse and worn-out mouse. These concerns affect the operator’s comfort and productivity. Access issues to necessary information included codes such as the distance of necessary monitoring displays from the workstation and lack of shared-off display. Operators were concerned about their privacy and personal spaces in control rooms, stating different issues such as feeling confined in the control room, lack of personal privacy, and lack of physical privacy. For example, an operator said, “We need a closed environment around ourselves, both personal and physical. P 1” Other subcategories in workstation design were presented in Appendix A.

Economic and social challenges

In this category, the two main subcategories were work-life conflict and economic and financial pressure, which accounted for 57% and 43% of the codes, respectively. Work-life conflict was a serious problem. Not taking official holidays and difficulty in adjusting with family were parts of these concerns. One operator stated that “The problem is that we are working during the holidays, and this causes objections and upset to the families P2.” Others also mentioned the reduction in their capacity after shift work and family stress in adapting to shift work. These issues have seriously impacted the social and family interactions of operators. In the economic and financial pressure sub-category, regarding the privatization of industries, one operator stated, “Since the company became private, we have not felt job security, and support in various fields has decreased. P 3.” Economic problems were raised as another major concern. Non-implementation of certain legal items in salary as well as non-payment of allowances and bonuses and incompatibility of work and salary were among other reported problems. For example, an individual admitted, “Our salaries are not commensurate with the work we do and are not enough to cover our living expenses. P 1.”

Welfare and facility

Operators reported various issues related to welfare and facilities, which can be categorized into two main subcategories: rest and recreational facilities (81% of codes) and welfare services (19% of codes). A significant concern was rest and recreational facilities. Problems included inadequate welfare services and facilities, lack of access to amenities such as cinemas, restaurants, travel, and entertainment programs for children, insufficient recreational accommodations, and the absence of sports equipment at the workplace. For instance, one operator stated, “Sports facilities could reduce our workload, but we do not have the necessary equipment. P4.” Additionally, the lack of adequate and suitable rest areas was another critical issue. Welfare services also raised concerns among operators. They expressed dissatisfaction with the absence of industry-specific hospitals, small pantry areas, and the lack of a separate visiting room in the control room. One operator noted, “Our pantry is so small that we can’t even do simple things like heat up food. P 9”. Other reported issues included no allocation for purchasing allowances, unsatisfactory food, and inadequate transportation services.

Acoustic factors

We identified two main subcategories in this category: annoying noise and annoying vibration, which together account for 66.7% and 33.3% of the total codes, respectively. A primary concern in the studied control rooms was annoying noise. Non-acoustic control room structures and noisy site equipment contributed to this problem. One participant noted, “One of the most annoying noises we encounter in the control room is the noise of site equipment. P 12.” Additionally, factors such as a lack of organizational culture, no separate maintenance room, and no designated visiting area exacerbated the noise levels in control rooms. Other sources of annoying noise included control room equipment, communication telephones, and central ventilation systems. Annoying vibrations were also an important issue. Operators frequently reported that the vibration from site equipment and the absence of vibration isolation were persistent problems. One operator remarked, “The constant vibration of the site equipment we feel in the control room is bothering us and making us lose focus. P 13.” Other sources of vibration included radio and wireless communication systems, network and communication devices, power supplies and UPS units, and computers and processors.

Physical hazards

Figure 4 illustrates the four subcategories of physical hazards and their corresponding code percentages.

Fig. 4.

Sub-categories of physical Hazards.

Operators reported several contributing factors related to the risk of slipping and falling, including slippery flooring, scattered cables, insufficient lighting, and the lack of safety footwear. An operator noted, “These scattered cables in the control room pose a risk of falling for us. P5.” Another significant hazard was the fire risk, which is exacerbated by the presence of flammable materials and a non-insulated ceiling in the control room. Additionally, the absence of an automatic fire suppression system heightened operators’ concerns. A participant remarked, “Despite the large amount of electronic equipment in the control room, our fire extinguishing system is not automatic, and the results could be dangerous. P6.” Electric shock, primarily due to unshielded cables and the presence of electrical equipment, was another hazard. One operator pointed out, “As you can see, we have a lot of electrical equipment in the control room that can cause electric shock. P15.” Finally, high pressure in the work process increases the risk of the vulnerability of the control room to equipment explosions. These issues underscore the urgent need to enhance physical safety and eliminate existing hazards in control rooms.

Lighting and visual factors

The category of lighting and visual factors refers to aspects that affect the quality and comfort of operators’ vision. All known factors in this field are listed in the subcategory of lighting design and functionality. The use of improper lamps and inappropriate light color in control rooms caused poor lighting quality. In addition, excessive brightness at night was one of the biggest concerns. In this regard, one operator mentioned, “During the night shift, there is excessive white light reflection in the command control room, which is annoying. P 8.” Poor lighting design, outdated lighting systems, and a high number of burnt-out bulbs exacerbate the lighting problems in these control rooms.

Organizational structure factors

In this category, the results revealed that the primary challenges faced by workers included team interaction issues (13.6% of codes), employee engagement issues (50% of codes), and training and development issues (36.4% of codes). One key concern among operators was a lack of participation in organizational decision-making. They also noted the absence of employee surveys within their organizations, which contributed to their frustrations. Operators felt that a top-down perspective and insufficient interaction between managers and employees created challenging work conditions as one operator expressed, “We have no role in organizational decision-making, and this discourages us. P 3”. Additionally, operators reported tension among team members stemming from conflicts and misunderstandings about work processes. Some were particularly worried about disagreements regarding command issuance, which can hinder coordination and productivity. One operator remarked, “One of the problems we have is that sometimes there are disagreements about commands and how to implement them. P11”. Regarding training and development, operators reported several issues that negatively impacted their experience. They mentioned that conducting training on rest days, a lack of transportation for training classes, and mandatory attendance requirements increased their dissatisfaction. For instance, one operator stated, “one of the problems with our training classes is that they don’t have separate transportation. P 13” Furthermore, a lack of attention to employee comfort and insufficient training courses, along with a lack of retraining opportunities, were also significant concerns.

Managing issues

In the qualitative study, operators provide valuable feedback on challenges related to human resource management (55.6% of codes) and retirement issues (44.4% of codes). This finding emphasized the urgent need to improve the management process and prepare employees for different stages of work and life. One of the stated issues was the necessity of selecting suitable individuals for operations as well as the necessity of employing experienced individuals in supervisory roles. It indicates that the selection of expert and qualified personnel has a direct impact on individual and team performances. One operator stated that “people who choose to work in the control room must be mentally fit. We need people who can react quickly in sensitive situations. P5.” Furthermore, issues such as the necessity of encouraging experience sharing and the necessity for job rotation of operators were reported. Retirement issues also have critical importance, particularly concerns about a decrease in social interactions, a decline in life skills, and a lack of familiarity with social changes. One operator stated, “When you get retired, you find that you don’t know anyone; you can’t communicate with anyone in society. P5.” The emergence of family problems was another problem after retirement. These problems showed the necessity for training and preparing control room staff for the transition to retirement life.

Environmental factors

Operators’ concerns regarding environmental factors are divided into two subcategories: thermal environment (76.5% of codes) and indoor air quality (23.5% of codes). A major issue identified was the lack of a central heating and cooling system, which negatively impacts employees’ comfort and concentration. In this regard, one operator stated, “Because we do not have a central heating and cooling system, we face heating and cooling problems in summer and winter. P13.” Frequent trips to the control room also emerged as a concern related to thermal conditions, as they can disrupt proper airflow. Additionally, air quality in control rooms is another critical issue, primarily caused by malfunctions in the central ventilation system and its obsolescence and lack of maintenance. A participant remarked, “Our air conditioning system is old and hasn’t been repaired, so it doesn’t work properly P8.” Other factors include incomplete isolation of the control room, proximity to agricultural areas, emissions from printers, the presence of a battery bank in the control room, and the impact of polluted work clothes.

Security and strategic issues

Security and strategic issues were related to terrorist and cyberattacks (64.7% of codes), security weaknesses (29.4% of codes), and potential conflicts with local residents (5.9% of codes). These findings highlight the critical nature of process industries and the urgent need to strengthen security measures to protect personnel and assets. One major concern was the threat of terrorist and cyberattacks, driven by the political and military tensions in the Middle East and the strategic importance of process industries. As one operator noted, “Given the conditions in the Middle East, the stress of a cyberattack or terrorist attack is always with us. P 11.” Security weaknesses, stemming from factors like insufficient security personnel and an over-reliance on CCTV cameras, also raised alarms. An operator commented, “One of the security weaknesses we have is that we rely solely on CCTV cameras and don’t have enough security personnel. P 9.” Additionally, operators pointed out that a lack of defensive tools and the extensive area of industrial operations complicate security conditions. Finally, operators highlighted that the industrial use of local natural resources could lead to conflicts with local residents. For instance, one participant remarked, “Here we are using the water resources of this region, and if they are compromised, there is a risk of conflict with us. P 11.”

Aesthetic considerations

Aesthetic considerations in control rooms were a major issue reported by operators. They believed that aesthetic deficiencies can directly impact their job incentive and satisfaction. Inappropriate color schemes for walls, ceilings, and flooring had negative effects on operators’ concentration and caused premature fatigue. One operator mentioned, “The color of the walls, ceiling, etc., is not suitable for the control room and does not make us feel good and is boring. P 3.” Lack of green spaces and indoor plants and absence of aquariums or water features were also reported by operators as some deficiencies that they suffered.

Chemical hazards

Leakage and exposure to chemicals (90% of codes) and the presence of an unpleasant odor in the control room (10% of codes) were two main subcategories of chemical hazards that were presented in the following. The presence of hazardous chemicals in the process and the degradation of process equipment were mentioned as two main reasons for leakage and exposure to chemicals in control rooms, as stated by one participant: “The equipment we have in the process is worn out, and chemical leaks could occur at any moment. P 15.” Some operators suffered from unpleasant odors in control rooms due to improper disposal of industrial wastewater. In this regard a participant stated, “The unpleasant smell in the control room is bothering us due to improper sewage disposal. P 1.”

Discussion

Control room operators play a critical role in maintaining system efficiency and safety. However, their work environment presents unique ergonomic and safety challenges that can impact both performance and well-being. Understanding these challenges from the operators’ perspective is key to creating effective solutions. This study investigated these concerns through qualitative analysis. By conducting semi-structured interviews with operators, we have identified several issues that shape their experience in the control room. The following sections will explain these findings and provide recommendations for enhancing workplace ergonomics and safety.

Overall work load

Workload in an industrial organizational context refers to the amount of work that is expected to be performed by an individual or a team in a specific time frame⁵⁹. In this study, the term “overall workload” is used to encompass the combined psychological, physical, and social demands experienced by operators in the workplace. This broader definition reflects the multidimensional nature of workload as conceptualized in contemporary human factors and ergonomics research^34,35. Four subcategories of operator concerns emerged, namely stress and responsibility, mental demand, physical demand, and a supportive social environment. Stress and responsibility were two significant factors, particularly in high-pressure environments such as control rooms where decision-making and accountability are paramount⁶⁰. Factors such as fear of accidents, the hazardous nature of work, social responsibility, and economic pressure increase the stress levels of operators. Basha and Maiti also stated that the fear of accidents is a major source of stress in critical environments⁶¹. As stated in Glavas and Kelley’s research, the effect of social responsibility on stress indicates a feeling of intense social pressure among employees⁶². The economic pressure and need for a second job align with the findings of Wu et al., who investigate the direct impact of economic pressure on workers⁶³. The study of Härmä et al. showed that long shift hours can lead to an increase in stress and a decrease in recovery among workers, which supports our results⁶⁴. In terms of mental demand, task complexity, as a key factor, forces the operators to concentrate and make accurate and quick decisions. As stated by Tams et al., this pressure and task complexity have negative impacts on workers’ mental health⁶⁵. In addition, some situations, such as being a beginner or insufficient training, can increase their mental demand as it causes mental pressure that decreases their self-confidence⁶⁶. The need for proper task execution, the necessity of making correct decisions, and response time limitations increase the mental demand. Issues such as ambiguity about career future were also investigated in Shoss’s study, and their results showed that job uncertainty affects the mental health of operators because it can reduce their motivation⁶⁷. A socially supportive environment in control rooms is an important aspect that affects the performance, productivity, and mental health of operators. Qualitative studies reported that a lack of a socially supportive environment leads to operators’ mental pressure and also decreases their motivation^68,69. In the current study, a lack of understanding by colleagues and managers caused disappointment among operators. Previous studies supported these findings. Other concerns included the unfamiliarity of new personnel with the control room requirements and the gap in experience between seasoned workers and newcomers, which resulted in a higher workload and increased stress for experienced employees. This, coupled with feelings of worthlessness among employees, reduces their motivation over time. Previous studies support these findings. Schaufeli and Taris showed that the lack of social and managerial support can negatively impact feelings of worth and motivation³⁴. Tummers and Den Dulk assessed the effect of public neglect of critical responsibility and found that it leads to negative works⁷⁰. Additionally, Berg et al. reported how differences in workers’ skills affect their performance at work⁷¹. In terms of physical demand, operators reported important sources such as prolonged sitting, prolonged screen exposure, and occasional manual tasks. These factors can cause physical discomfort and damage to their visual system. Studies indicated that prolonged sitting and screen use lead to physical problems such as chronic pain in the shoulders, neck, and back, as well as visual fatigue^72–74. These results showed the need to improve the ergonomic design and adopt strategies in the work environment to reduce operators’ physical strain.

Health hazards

The study’s operator interview revealed that health hazards were a critical issue in control rooms. Electromagnetic radiation exposure from electric and electronic devices was a major concern among operators because it can lead to adverse health hazards. The World Health Organization (WHO) emphasized that continuous exposure to electromagnetic radiation can be harmful to long-term human health⁷⁵. Participants repeatedly reported experiencing irritability, anxiety, and mood swings, primarily as a result of working night shifts. Night shift work causes mental and social disorders because it works against the body’s biological clock⁷⁶. Another challenge was the lack of sufficient sleep and rest, which resulted from various factors, including long shift durations and inadequate rest regulations during night shifts. Operators complained about insufficient energy for performing their duties and its harmful effect on their health. Findings in other studies also demonstrate that insufficient sleep decreases job performance and increases the risk of illness^77,78. The development of musculoskeletal disorders was reported by operators as a result of long-term sitting and static posture that imposes high pressure on their spinal cords and muscles. International studies^79,80. confirmed the results, emphasizing the importance of proper ergonomics in reducing these disorders. Operators reported that prolonged visual tasks caused their eye strain. In many work environments, screen-related problems such as blurred vision, eye fatigue, and headaches are common⁸¹. The American Optometric Association (AOA) reported that prolonged visual tasks can lead to eye problems and require adherence to eye health protocols⁸². Constant exposure to light during night shifts disrupts the body’s circadian rhythm, decreasing the operator’s productivity and creating problems such as extreme fatigue. Many studies^83–85. have proven the effects of disruption of the body’s circadian rhythm on human health and performance. James et al. showed that this disruption can have significant effects on workers’ health and productivity⁸⁶. Finally, a serious threat to operators’ health is the development of gastrointestinal diseases or digestive issues caused by consuming an unhealthy diet while working night shifts. Other studies also showed the negative impacts of nighttime diets and meal timing on digestive health^87,88. All the health hazards mentioned require improved work policies and environmental conditions to support operators’ health.

Work station design

Workstation design, particularly in control rooms, significantly impacts operator ergonomics and safety. This study highlights operators’ concerns regarding various aspects of their workstation design. Issues related to chairs and desks, such as non-adjustable heights and outdated chairs, can lead to physical discomfort and musculoskeletal disorders. Bazazan et al. found that ergonomic and adjustable devices can reduce physical strain and enhance body posture¹⁶. Additionally, outdated monitors and mice can impair accuracy and concentration, leading to visual fatigue. Research indicates that screen radiation negatively affects workers’ eye health and mental well-being^89,90. Therefore, creating ergonomic setups tailored to individual needs and upgrading equipment can yield numerous positive outcomes. Beyond physical aspects, operators also expressed concerns about limited access to necessary information, as well as the lack of privacy and personal space. Poorly designed workspaces that restrict access to essential displays can hinder quick reaction times and effective decision-making. This aligns with Wickens et al.‘s study, which emphasizes the importance of information accessibility for improving worker performance⁹¹. Furthermore, insufficient personal space can elevate stress levels and reduce job satisfaction, as noted in Laurence et al.‘s research⁹². Consequently, improving both the physical and overall design of workstations is essential for enhancing operator satisfaction and productivity.

Economic and social challenges

In the current study, operators reported facing various economic and social challenges that directly impact their work and personal lives. A significant issue identified was work-life conflict, which led to dissatisfaction and placed pressure on their families. The inability to take official holidays and difficulties in adjusting to family responsibilities exacerbated this problem. Previous research has shown that work-family conflict can lead to increased stress and lower job satisfaction^93,94. Additionally, this conflict negatively affects family relationships and individuals’ mental well-being⁹⁵. Regarding economic issues, the privatization of industries has emerged as a major concern, heightening operators’ worries about job security and diminishing their legal and financial protections. The disparity between work demands and salary has created significant economic pressure. Prior studies indicate that these issues adversely affect workers’ motivation, performance, and overall satisfaction⁹⁶. Consequently, addressing economic and social challenges is essential for enhancing workforce satisfaction and efficiency, warranting the serious attention of companies and policymakers.

Welfare and facility

Regarding welfare and facilities, which was an important category in this study, workers reported many factors that affected their work quality. On one hand, problems such as inadequate welfare services and facilities, lack of leisure programs, lack of adequate and suitable rest areas, lack of official rest regulations during night shifts, lack of recreational accommodations, and absence of sports equipment at the workplace were stated by operators. The findings, especially in comparison with other studies, indicate new dimensions of welfare problems in industrial environments. Studies showed that welfare and sports facilities in work environments can have a significant positive impact on workers’ physical and mental health, as well as improve their productivity^97,98. On the other hand, issues such as deficiencies in welfare services, such as no industry-specific hospital and small pantry areas, specifically in places where employees have to work for long periods, can have serious negative impacts on workers’ health and satisfaction. This dissatisfaction can reduce their motivation, increase their voluntary turnover, and eventually decrease organizational productivity^99,100. Considering these findings, it can be concluded that welfare and facilities play a critical role in improving working conditions and employee health. Therefore, providing adequate and sufficient welfare services, specifically rest and recreational facilities, can be an effective solution to increase job satisfaction and organizational productivity.

Acoustic factors

Acoustic factors in control rooms were a primary concern for operators. Participants repeatedly complained about annoying noise from site equipment and the non-acoustic design of control rooms. These findings align with other studies that indicate neglecting acoustic aspects and inadequate design in work environments can lead to issues such as sleep disturbances, premature fatigue, mood changes, and decreased job satisfaction^101,102. Specifically, research has shown that noise from devices and insufficient space in critical environments severely affect worker performance, resulting in increased stress, reduced concentration, and premature fatigue^103,104. Additionally, participants expressed concern about annoying vibrations that disrupted their concentration during task execution. This issue has also been reported in other industries, particularly those using heavy and mobile equipment¹⁰⁵. Workplaces with uncontrolled vibration and noise have experienced low productivity, fatigue, and long-term physical injuries^106,107. Therefore, improving acoustic conditions in these environments is essential. Measures such as design enhancements, sound insulation, and allocating suitable spaces for equipment maintenance can help mitigate the effects of sound and vibration.

Physical hazards

Physical hazards were another category in the qualitative study. Three main sub-categories, including fire hazard, electric shock, and control room vulnerability from equipment explosion, were identified. In terms of fire hazard, some factors such as the presence of flammable materials, non-insulated ceilings, and non-automatic fire suppression were identified by operators’ interviews. Studies showed that non-automatic fire suppression is one of the fire aggravating factors. They also showed that improper design of structures and improper storage are factors that contribute to the occurrence and escalation of fires^108,109. Another critical hazard was electric shock as a result of a range of factors, such as the presence of unshielded cables and the presence of electrical equipment in control rooms. The findings are in line with other research that emphasized cable isolation and advanced safety instrument application in industrial environments. They proposed that modern protective equipment and regular monitoring can decrease these hazards significantly^110,111. In addition, the vulnerability of control rooms from equipment explosion is stated as an important concern. High pressure in processes can lead to a destructive explosion¹¹². Modern engineering design and active control systems can effectively reduce the possibility of explosions.

Lighting and visual factors

In the lighting and visual factors category, the results indicated that factors such as poor design of the lighting system, inappropriate light color, burnt-out bulbs, and excessive brightness at night negatively affected lighting quality in control rooms. Other studies also showed that the illuminance level, contrast ratios, and correlated color temperature affect workers’ task performance^113,114. Poor lighting conditions can negatively impact alertness, core body temperature, hormone secretion, cognitive performance of night shift workers, visual performance, visual comfort, and behavior¹¹⁵. To reduce the mentioned challenges and improve the conditions, solutions such as improving or redesigning lighting systems, using high-quality bulbs, and implementing smart indoor lighting systems can be applied in control rooms.

Organizational structure factors

The organizational structure factors were sorted into three sub-categories, including employee engagement, training and development, and team interaction issues. In terms of employee engagement, issues such as lack of participation in organizational decision-making, a top-down perspective, lack of employee surveys, and lack of interaction between managers and employees were reported by operators. These findings are consistent with Herzberg’s Hierarchy of Needs theory that emphasizes the importance of motivational factors such as workers’ participation in decision-making. Research indicates that worker engagement directly influences organizational performance and commitment^116,117. They also indicate that strong hierarchical structures reduce job satisfaction¹¹⁸. In addition, Den Hartog et al. reported that 68% of respondents identified the lack of feedback mechanisms as the main cause of demotivation¹¹⁹. Conducting training on rest days, lack of transportation service for training classes, mandatory attendance in training classes, and insufficient training and retraining courses were among the important concerns regarding training and development. These problems violate the principles of the “Kirkpatrick Four-Level Evaluation Model,” which emphasizes audience satisfaction (Level 1) as a prerequisite for effective learning¹²⁰. Tension among team members and disagreements over issuing commands were part of team interaction issues. These findings are confirmed by Tarkman’s theory of group dynamics. The theory establishes brainstorming as the essential element for team construction¹²¹. However, when these conflicts continue systematically, team performance will decrease, according to the findings of Jehn and Mannix¹²². Furthermore, the presence of clear job manuals reduces process conflicts. Conversely, even when conflict exists, management can turn these tensions into a driver for innovation if they employ a transformational leadership style¹²². The discussion and analysis clarified that organizational structure factors profoundly impact employees’ performance, their internal communication, and coordination. To resolve these challenges, organizations should take various actions such as effective participation of workers, improving team processes, and designing a useful training system.

Managing issues

The managing issues category showed that human resource management in operational environments such as control rooms required the selection of expert and experienced individuals for supervisory roles, as well as the application of mechanisms including facilitating experience sharing and job rotation to improve individual and team performance. The analysis confirms traditional research accomplishments outlined by Kirkpatrick in his four-level model. The model emphasizes the selection of competent individuals as the basis of educational effectiveness¹²². However, participants particularly emphasized the psychological fitness of operators, such as quick decision-making in emergency situations. It refers to a qualitative dimension that is less explored in quantitative research that assesses only technical competencies. On the other hand, retirement-related concerns (for example, a decrease in social interactions, family problems, and lack of familiarity with social changes) indicated the psychosocial challenges of retirement in stressful jobs. Studies such as Zhao et al. addressed this issue by working on the role of transformational leadership in reducing tensions¹²³. But this qualitative study, by exploring concepts such as the necessity of staff training for transition to retirement life, creates a deeper understanding of organizational support needs in this area. Despite quantitative studies that rely on statistics such as job satisfaction or retirement rates, this qualitative study indicates the retirement’s multidimensional nature by stating direct quotes such as P5’s experience that emphasize the necessity of a more holistic approach to organizational policies.

Environmental factors

In terms of environmental factors, the findings showed that the thermal environment (lack of a central heating and cooling system, frequent access to the control room) and indoor air quality (central ventilation system malfunction, proximity to agricultural areas, battery bank in the control room, polluted work clothes) had negative effects on operators’ performance and well-being. This is compatible with ergonomics research such as the Cui W et al. study that showed the direct relationship between temperatures outside of the thermal comfort range and cognitive performance reduction¹²⁴. However, this study identified a new dimension by mentioning specific factors such as the impact of printers and battery banks on air quality that have received less attention in other studies. On the other hand, in the current study, the control room’s proximity to agricultural areas as a unique environmental factor is remarkably different from previous research, which mainly focused on industrial pollution¹²⁵. This illustrates the importance of a qualitative approach in identifying specific geo-environmental factors that may be disregarded in standard theoretical frameworks. The analysis affirms the need to incorporate qualitative components (operator lived experience) with technical standards to create more efficient and safer work environment designs.

Security and strategic issue

Terrorist and cyberattacks were a critical concern of operators in this research. It is consistent with Ibekwe et al., who showed geopolitical tensions in the Middle East are a major factor in increasing the vulnerability of critical infrastructure¹²⁶. Our research confirms that the stress of cyber threats (P11) affects the operator’s performance and has a negative effect on emergency decision-making mechanisms. It is in line with the Bada and Nurse study that assessed the social and psychological impact of cyberattacks¹²⁷. In addition, weaknesses in security measures, such as reliance on CCTV cameras and insufficient security personnel/staff, were another important security concern. Another study also showed that automated security systems (such as CCTV) with human support were successful in containing advanced intrusions¹²⁸. The large scale of the industrial environment and security coverage limitations are similar to Georgescu, who reported on the necessity of integrating intelligent surveillance systems with human-based approaches in terms of critical facilities in Eastern Europe protection¹²⁹. Alignment of the results with standards such as ANSI/API 780 (physical security of the petroleum industry) and ISO 27,001 (cybersecurity) illustrates the need for hybrid strategies (technical-human) application. Such qualitative analysis identifies security gaps as well as emphasizes the need for collaboration among the disciplines of cybersecurity, industrial psychology, and crisis management.

Aesthetic consideration

Aesthetic deficiencies in the study, such as inappropriate color schemes for walls, ceilings, and flooring, lack of green spaces and indoor plants, and absence of aquariums or water features, negatively affect operators’ concentration and cause premature fatigue. Many studies in the field of cognitive ergonomics and environmental psychology confirmed the results^130–133. Regarding the negative impacts of wall, ceiling, and floor colors on operators, Hidayetoglu et al.‘s research indicated that the use of cool colors (such as blue) in stressful environments enhanced cognitive performance. The lack of greenery, houseplants, or water features mentioned by operators is compatible with the “Biophilic Design” theoretical framework¹³⁴. Knight and Haslam stated that the presence of plants in the work environment can increase employees’ engagement, satisfaction, concentration, and their perception of air quality¹³⁵. Another study reported that installing aquariums can be associated with important well-being and health benefits¹³³. The discussed issue illustrates that aesthetic aspects should be considered in control room design because they have a positive impact on operators in such critical environments.

Chemical hazards

In the study, leakage and exposure to chemicals and the presence of unpleasant odors in the control room were reported as two challenges that operators faced in control rooms. Research showed that equipment failure and inadequate maintenance activities caused accidents that posed chemical exposure hazards to workers^136,137. The issue highlights that disregarding equipment maintenance is not just a technical gap but a strategic gap in risk management, which is reflected in operators’ comments (e.g., P 15). The operators’ complaint about unpleasant odors due to improper disposal of industrial wastewater is in line with a study that confirms the direct relation between ineffective ventilation systems and perceptual errors in work environments¹³⁸. Many quantitative studies address accident statistics, but this research reported the operators’ lived experiences. In addition, it indicates that an integrated safety-ergonomics model, such as the ISO 11,064 standard, is necessary for control room design with a specific concentration on operators’ voices as a complement to technical data.

Limitations

A key limitation of this study was its reliance on recall during data collection, as operators were asked to reflect on their experiences and challenges in the control room environment. However, conducting interviews within the actual control room settings, where the work practices and associated stressors occurred, likely supported greater accuracy in recall compared to interviews conducted in neutral or unfamiliar locations. Additionally, while this study focused on control room operators within three process industries in Iran, the findings may have broader relevance to operators in similar high-pressure, safety-critical environments worldwide. Nevertheless, cultural, organizational, and industry-specific differences may limit the generalizability of the results to other contexts.

Conclusion

The qualitative study revealed that operators encounter numerous issues that adversely impact their mental and physical health, as well as their operational performance. A pressing concern that demands immediate attention is the need to redesign the control room with a human-centric approach. By prioritizing ergonomic principles, we can enhance operators’ efficiency and comfort while establishing a foundation for safety within the system. This redesign will address physical and environmental factors, as well as the organizational and socioeconomic elements that influence employees’ work conditions. Additionally, the study stresses the need for management involvement and a review of organizational structures to recognize and actively address operators’ concerns. Integrating ergonomic and safety principles into control room design and operations fosters a harmonious relationship between technological advancement and human health. To ensure progress, all stakeholders must collaborate to implement lasting changes that integrate strategic management, structural reforms, and ergonomic well-being. This multi-dimensional approach will optimize operator satisfaction and operational efficiency, ultimately creating a safer and more resilient control room.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Author contributions

R.J: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, writing-Review & Editing. A.Ch: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, writing-Review & Editing. H.M: Conceptualization, Methodology, formal analysing, writing- Review & Editing. M.J: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision, Project administration.

Funding

This article was extracted from a thesis written by Ms. Razieh Janizadeh, a PhD student of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), and was financially supported by SUMS via grant No. 29146.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study and, therefore, are not publicly available. Notably, the data will be made available to the editor and reviewers for peer review upon request and with the appropriate non-disclosure agreements in place to ensure confidentiality. For other researchers, the data are available upon reasonable request and with permission from the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Those interested in accessing the data should contact the first author (R.J), via email at janizadehraziyeh@yahoo.com.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethic consideration

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Approval Code: IR.SIMS.SCHEANUT.REC1402.132). All participants provided informed consent before taking part in the study. To ensure confidentiality, identities were anonymized using coded files, accessible only to the primary researcher. Participants retained the right to pause, discontinue, or reschedule interviews at their convenience. The researcher prioritized participant well-being by conducting interviews in appropriate and comfortable settings.

Declaration of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process

During the preparation of this work the authors used “edit GPT” and “grammar checker of Quill but” in order to improve the readability and language of the manuscript. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the published article.