Visualising safety: The potential for using sociotechnical systems models in prospective safety assessment and design

© 2018 There is growing emphasis within safety science and Human Factors/Ergonomics on the benefits of applying a sociotechnical systems perspective in order to influence design and thereby improve safety in everyday operations. This article examines how viewing work as a sociotechnical system – using visual models and representations – helps in understanding how work is performed and how it contributes to safe operations. A series of five models, developed using methods from Activity Theory, Cybernetics, Cognitive Systems Engineering and Resilience Engineering, are used to illustrate the work of maritime pilots and Vessel Traffic Services operators. Each model is examined using a modelling framework for prospective safety assessment, with the conclusion that it is how the models are applied, rather than their underlying methodologies, which determines their usefulness in this context. Different models highlight different aspects of work and facilitate discussion of safety, for example in a participatory design process, and we discuss criteria to guide their use and evaluation.

[1]  J. L. Coze Reflecting on Jens Rasmussen's legacy (2) behind and beyond, a 'constructivist turn'. , 2017 .

[2]  MariAnne Karlsson A framework for the study of the relationship between user and artefact. , 1999 .

[3]  T. Grøtan,et al.  Hunting high and low for resilience: Sensitization from the contextual shadows of compliance , 2013 .

[4]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  A HUMAN ERROR APPROACH TO AVIATION ACCIDENT ANALYSIS , 2003 .

[5]  J. S. Abildgaard,et al.  Supporting Sensemaking to Promote a Systemic View of Organizational Change – Contributions from Activity Theory , 2017 .

[6]  I. Svedung,et al.  Proactive Risk Management in a Dynamic Society , 2000 .

[7]  Linda de Vries,et al.  Here be monsters: Investigating sociotechnical interaction in safety-critical work in the maritime domain. , 2016 .

[8]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem , 1997 .

[9]  E. Hollnagel FRAM: The Functional Resonance Analysis Method: Modelling Complex Socio-technical Systems , 2012 .

[10]  Robyn Hopcroft,et al.  Work Domain Analysis: Theoretical Concepts and Methodology , 2005 .

[11]  B. Latour Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory , 2005 .

[12]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Safety-I and Safety-II: The Past and Future of Safety Management , 2014 .

[13]  Jean-Christophe Le Coze,et al.  Outlines of a sensitising model for industrial safety assessment , 2013 .

[14]  John R Wilson,et al.  Fundamentals of systems ergonomics/human factors. , 2014, Applied ergonomics.

[15]  J. L. Coze New models for new times. An anti-dualist move , 2013 .

[16]  Gesa Praetorius,et al.  Control and Resilience Within the Maritime Traffic Management Domain , 2014 .

[17]  John Stoop,et al.  Are safety investigations pro-active? , 2012 .

[18]  S. Giles,et al.  Incident reporting and analysis , 2005 .

[19]  Gavan Lintern,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance: Eliciting and Representing the Knowledge of Experts , 2006 .

[20]  Gesa Praetorius,et al.  Modelling Vessel Traffic Service to understand resilience in everyday operations , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[21]  Jonas Andersson,et al.  To Develop Viable Human Factors Engineering Methods for Improved Industrial Use , 2011, HCI.

[22]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  A Rose by Any Other Name...Would Probably Be Given an Acronym , 2002, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[23]  Barbara Czarniawska,et al.  Social Science Research: From Field to Desk , 2014 .

[24]  Norbert Wiener,et al.  Cybernetics. , 1948, Scientific American.

[25]  Giulio Di Gravio,et al.  Defining the functional resonance analysis space: Combining Abstraction Hierarchy and FRAM , 2017, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[26]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[27]  David D. Woods,et al.  Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[28]  Ole Broberg,et al.  Participatory ergonomics in design processes: the role of boundary objects. , 2011, Applied ergonomics.

[29]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Using FRAM beyond safety: a case study to explore how sociotechnical systems can flourish or stall , 2016 .

[30]  Claire Williams,et al.  Human factors and ergonomics methods in practice: three fundamental constraints , 2016 .

[31]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Hierarchical task analysis vs. cognitive work analysis: comparison of theory, methodology and contribution to system design , 2010 .

[32]  A. Hale,et al.  HRO and RE: A pragmatic perspective , 2016, Safety Science.

[33]  P. Waterson,et al.  Recurring themes in the legacy of Jens Rasmussen. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[34]  Linda de Vries,et al.  Work as Done? Understanding the Practice of Sociotechnical Work in the Maritime Domain: , 2017 .

[35]  Sidney Dekker,et al.  Managing Multiple and Conflicting Goals in Dynamic and Complex Situations: Exploring the Practical Field of Maritime Pilots , 2012 .

[36]  Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose,et al.  The Human–Artifact Model: An Activity Theoretical Approach to Artifact Ecologies , 2011, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[37]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Human Factors Methods: A Practical Guide for Engineering and Design , 2012 .

[38]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology: a 30-year retrospective , 1999 .

[39]  Neelam Naikar,et al.  Cognitive work analysis: An influential legacy extending beyond human factors and engineering. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[40]  H. Kanis,et al.  Reliability and validity of findings in ergonomics research , 2014 .

[41]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Human factors/ergonomics as a systems discipline? "The human use of human beings" revisited. , 2014, Applied ergonomics.

[42]  Lucy Suchman,et al.  Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions , 2006 .

[43]  Yrjö Engeström Cognition and communication at work: The tensions of judging: Handling cases of driving under the influence of alcohol in Finland and California , 1996 .

[44]  Gesa Praetorius,et al.  Maritime traffic management: a need for central coordination? , 2012, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[45]  Lars Skyttner,et al.  General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives, Practice , 2006 .

[46]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. , 2000, Ergonomics.

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

[48]  L. Suchman Centers of coordination : a case and some themes. , 1997 .

[49]  Paulo Victor Rodrigues de Carvalho,et al.  Modelling performance variabilities in oil spill response to improve system resilience , 2016 .

[50]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events , 2010 .

[51]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  A new accident model for engineering safer systems , 2004 .

[52]  A. Hale,et al.  Working to rule, or working safely? Part 1: A state of the art review , 2013 .

[53]  Lucy A. Suchman,et al.  Making work visible , 1995, CACM.

[54]  Anastácio Pinto Gonçalves Filho,et al.  Maturity models and safety culture: A critical review , 2018, Safety Science.