Resilience Markers for Safer Systems and Organisations

If computer systems are to be designed to foster resilient performance it is important to be able to identify contributors to resilience. The emerging practice of Resilience Engineering has identified that people are still a primary source of resilience, and that the design of distributed systems should provide ways of helping people and organisations to cope with complexity. Although resilience has been identified as a desired property, researchers and practitioners do not have a clear understanding of what manifestations of resilience look like. This paper discusses some examples of strategies that people can adopt that improve the resilience of a system. Critically, analysis reveals that the generation of these strategies is only possible if the system facilitates them. As an example, this paper discusses practices, such as reflection, that are known to encourage resilient behavior in people. Reflection allows systems to better prepare for oncoming demands. We show that contributors to the practice of reflection manifest themselves at different levels of abstraction: from individual strategies to practices in, for example, control room environments. The analysis of interaction at these levels enables resilient properties of a system to be `seen', so that systems can be designed to explicitly support them. We then present an analysis of resilience at an organisational level within the nuclear domain. This highlights some of the challenges facing the Resilience Engineering approach and the need for using a collective language to articulate knowledge of resilient practices across domains.

[1]  J. E. Groves,et al.  Made in America: Science, Technology and American Modernist Poets , 1989 .

[2]  Ann Blandford,et al.  DiCoT: A Methodology for Applying Distributed Cognition to the Design of Teamworking Systems , 2005, DSV-IS.

[3]  Jakob E. Bardram,et al.  Temporal Coordination –On Time and Coordination of CollaborativeActivities at a Surgical Department , 2000, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[4]  Giovanni Masino,et al.  Information technology artefacts as structuring devices in organizations: design, appropriation and use issues , 2003, Interact. Comput..

[5]  G. Klein,et al.  Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods , 1993 .

[6]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Does Being Motivated to Avoid Procedural Errors Influence Their Systematicity , 2007 .

[7]  David Kirsh,et al.  Adapting the Environment Instead of Oneself , 2022 .

[8]  Frank Spillers,et al.  Temporal attributes of shared artifacts in collaborative task environments , 2003 .

[9]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  A Working Memory Model of a Common Procedural Error , 1997, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Gene I. Rochlin,et al.  Safe operation as a social construct , 1999 .

[11]  Peter Wright.  The harassed decision maker: Time pressures, distractions, and the use of evidence. , 1974 .

[12]  T. Ganiats.  Human Error in Medicine , 1995 .

[13]  E BardramJakob.  Temporal Coordination On Time and Coordination of CollaborativeActivities at a Surgical Department , 2000 .

[14]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Epilogue: Resilience Engineering Precepts , 2006 .

[15]  D. Nathanael,et al.  The interplay between work practices and prescription: a key issue for organizational resilience , 2006 .

[16]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Understanding emergency medical dispatch in terms of distributed cognition: a case study , 2006, Ergonomics.

[17]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Cognitive Resilience: Reflection-in-action and on-action , 2007 .

[18]  Hiroshi Ujita,et al.  Development and Verification of a Plant Navigation System Displaying Symptom-Based Procedure , 2001, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[19]  S. Dekker.  Failure to adapt or adaptations that fail: contrasting models on procedures and safety. , 2003, Applied ergonomics.

[20]  Peggy A. Ertmer,et al.  The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective , 1996 .

[21]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Joint Cognitive Systems: Foundations of Cognitive Systems Engineering , 2005 .

[22]  James D. Hollan,et al.  Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research , 2000, TCHI.