A work domain analysis of shipboard Command and Control

Abstract : Shipboard Command and Control (C2) presents unique challenges for decision support. Tactical decisions require that the ship's Command Team gain timely access to and comprehend the significance of large amounts of information that may impact on the mission. While operations depend heavily on doctrine and standard procedures, many tactical details must be established in real time, particularly as unanticipated events or anomalous situations arise. This imposes significant cognitive demands on operators for active situation assessment and decision making, where benefits for performance improvements may be expected from incorporating advanced support tools like decision support systems and integrative work aids and displays. Cognitive Work Analysis (CWA) is a layered, systems-based analysis framework that specifically addresses system design to support operators in unanticipated situations. Its first layer is a work domain analysis (WDA), which develops hierarchical models representing the intentional, functional, and physical properties of the work domain, at different levels of abstraction, as well as the relations between these levels. In this document, we discuss the results of a year-long study of the application of WDA to tactical C2 for the Canadian Navy's HALIFAX Class frigate. We review the WDA models that resulted and briefly describe some applications of the CWA approach in this work environment. This work is part of ongoing research to evaluate the role of CWA in C2 system design.

[1]  Nancy J. Cooke,et al.  Varieties of knowledge elicitation techniques , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  Kim J. Vicente,et al.  Inducing effective operator control through ecological interface design , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[3]  K. Mosier,et al.  Human Decision Makers and Automated Decision Aids: Made for Each Other? , 1996 .

[4]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[5]  Gary Klein,et al.  Implications of the Naturalistic Decision Making Framework for Information Dominance. , 1997 .

[6]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Cognitive Systems Engineering , 2022 .

[7]  Stephanie Guerlain.  Factors Influencing the Cooperative Problem-Solving of People and Computers , 1993 .

[8]  M. Mesarovic,et al.  Theory of Hierarchical, Multilevel, Systems , 1970 .

[9]  A Kirlik,et al.  Modeling Strategic Behavior in Human-Automation Interaction: Why an "Aid" Can (and Should) Go Unused , 1993, Human factors.

[10]  M. Tyndall,et al.  COPING WITH COMPLEXITY , 1999 .

[11]  Richard T. Kelly,et al.  Implications of Decision Making Research for Decision Support and Displays , 1998 .

[12]  Kim J. Vicente,et al.  Improving dynamic decision making in complex systems through ecological interface design: A research overview , 1996 .

[13]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .

[14]  Morten Lind.  MAKING SENSE OF THE ABSTRACTION HIERARCHY , 1999 .

[15]  N. M. Morris,et al.  On Looking into the Black Box: Prospects and Limits in the Search for Mental Models , 1986 .

[16]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decisionmaking and system management , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[17]  Arthur K. Cebrowski,et al.  Network-Centric Warfare: Its Origin and Future , 1998 .

[18]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Performance Consequences of Automation-Induced 'Complacency' , 1993 .

[19]  Morten Lind,et al.  Modeling goals and functions of complex industrial plants , 1994, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[20]  James Llinas,et al.  Handbook of Multisensor Data Fusion , 2001 .

[21]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Mapping Cognitive Demands in Complex Problem-Solving Worlds , 1987, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[22]  Catherine M. Burns,et al.  A work domain model to support shipboard command and control , 2000, Smc 2000 conference proceedings. 2000 ieee international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 'cybernetics evolving to systems, humans, organizations, and their complex interactions' (cat. no.0.