See, Judi E.; Handley, Holly A.H.; Savage-Knepshield, Pamela A.
The Human Readiness Level (HRL) scale is a simple nine-level scale that brings structure and consistency to the real-world application of user-centered design. It enables multidisciplinary consideration of human-focused elements during the system development process. Use of the standardized set of questions comprising the HRL scale results in a single human readiness number that communicates system readiness for human use. The Human Views (HVs) are part of an architecture framework that provides a repository for human-focused system information that can be used during system development to support the evaluation of HRL levels. This paper illustrates how HRLs and HVs can be used in combination to support user-centered design processes. A real-world example for a U.S. Army software modernization program is described to demonstrate application of HRLs and HVs in the context of user-centered design.
See, Judi E.; Rosenfeld, Robert B.; Taylor, Sylvester; Wedic, K.M.
An analogy is drawn between the study of human behavior and the study of plutonium to demonstrate that soft and hard sciences are more similar than different, making the distinction moot and unproductive. The studies of human behavior and plutonium follow a common scientific research cycle that aligns with Thomas Kuhn’s views of scientific change. This common research cycle provides evidence that the thought processes and methodologies required for success are congruent in the soft and hard sciences. The primary implication from this analogy is that scientists in all disciplines should eradicate the distinction between soft and hard sciences. Focusing on similarities rather than differences among researchers from different disciplines is necessary to enhance collective intelligence and the type of transdisciplinary collaboration required to tackle difficult sociotechnical problems.
The Human Readiness Level scale complements and supplements the existing technology readiness level scale to support comprehensive and systematic evaluation of human system aspects throughout a system’s life cycle. The objective is to ensure humans can use a fielded technology or system as intended to support mission operations safely and effectively. This article defines the nine human readiness levels in the scale, explains their meaning, and illustrates their application using a helmet-mounted display example.
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Salazar, George; See, Judi E.; Handley, Holly A.H.; Craft, Richard
The Human Readiness Levels (HRL) scale is a simple nine-level scale developed as an adjunct to complement and supplement the existing Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) scale widely used across government agencies and industry. A multi-agency working group consisting of nearly 30 members representing the broader human systems integration (HSI) community throughout the Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Energy (DOE), other federal agencies, industry, and academia was established in August 2019. The working group’s charter was to mature the HRL scale and evaluate its utility, reliability, and validity for implementation in the systems acquisition lifecycle. Toward that end, the working group examined applicability of the HRL scale for a range of scenarios. This panel will discuss outcomes from the working group’s activities regarding HRL scale structure and usage.
See, Judi E.; Hubbard, Patricia Y.; Surbey, Barbara J.
The Systems Analysis & Decision Support (02150) group completed a review of the research literature on workspace and office design in 2016 for the Asset Management Department (04853). The goal was to characterize results and lessons learned from existing research to understand the effectiveness of current workspaces at Sandia National Laboratories and inform guidance for future workspace design. The study team reviewed 96 documents, published primarily since the year 2000, covering a range of factors associated with workspace design - workspace costs, acoustics, collaboration and privacy, generational preferences, employee health, performance and productivity, organizational retention, and workspace satisfaction. The research literature consistently highlighted the relative deficiencies of open-plan office spaces as compared to traditional private enclosed offices for knowledge workers. While open-plan offices can provide some cost savings, they may not be cost effective in the long term due to future hidden costs incurred by degradations in employee productivity, increased attrition, and increased sickness absences as well as any post-construction modifications needed to resolve emerging workspace issues. The chief deficiencies of open-plan offices include lower levels of employee satisfaction due to reduced visual and auditory privacy, increased interruptions, distractions from irrelevant background speech, less physical space, and more ambient noise. The drawbacks reported in the literature tend to outweigh any benefits associated with potential facilitation of coworker interactions and collaboration. Key suggestions identified in the literature to guide and optimize workspace and office design are provided.
The Systems Analysis & Decision Support group (2150) at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) led a study from 2015 to 2017 to investigate the utility of various options to achieve systematic and comprehensive incorporation of the human component of a system throughout the product lifecycle. Although technology readiness levels (TRL) are widely used in the systems engineering process to address technical maturity throughout design and development, a comparable technique to estimate the readiness of a technology for human operator use is lacking at SNL. The present study was designed to investigate the utility of a human readiness levels (HRL) scale to complement the TRL scale for the types of nuclear deterrence work conducted at SNL. The study team conducted 24 interviews with 26 individuals to (1) understand the extent to which current baseline design and development approaches at SNL incorporate the human dimension and (2) estimate the utility of various options to fully incorporate the human element in SNL work. Results confirmed that current processes do not manage the human component of a system systematically or comprehensively across programs. Although multiple options were seen to have some utility to address this shortcoming, an approach combining human readiness assessments within the existing TRL scale was perceived as relatively more useful for SNL. The study team created a proposed path forward to progress from the current ad hoc, reactive approach to a systematic, comprehensive, and rigorous approach characterized by full consideration of the human component of a system within and across programs and throughout the entire product lifecycle.
A controlled between-groups experiment was conducted to demonstrate the value of human factors for process design. Twenty-four Sandia National Laboratories employees completed a simple visual inspection task simulating receipt inspection. The experimental group process was designed to conform to human factors and visual inspection principles, whereas the control group process was designed without consideration of such principles. Results indicated the experimental group exhibited superior performance accuracy, lower workload, and more favorable usability ratings as compared to the control group. The study provides evidence to help human factors experts revitalize the critical message regarding the benefits of human factors involvement for a new generation of systems engineers.
A controlled between-groups experiment was conducted to demonstrate the value of human factors for process design. Most evidence to convey the benefits of human factors is derived from reactive studies of existing flawed systems designed with little or no human factors involvement. Controlled experiments conducted explicitly to demonstrate the benefits of human factors have been scarce since the 1990s. Further, most previous research focused on product or interface design as opposed to process design. The present study was designed to fill these research gaps. Toward that end, 24 Sandia National Laboratories employees completed a simple visual inspection task simulating receipt inspection. The experimental group process was designed to conform to human factors and visual inspection principles, whereas the control group process was designed without consideration of such principles. Results indicated the experimental group exhibited superior performance accuracy, lower workload, and more favorable usability ratings as compared to the control group. Given the differences observed in the simple task used in the present study, the author concluded that incorporating human factors should have even greater benefits for complex products and processes. The study provides evidence to help human factors practitioners revitalize the critical message regarding the benefits of human factors involvement for a new generation of designers.
Since 2010, the concept of human readiness levels has been under development as a possible supplement to the existing technology readiness level (TRL) scale. The intent is to provide a mechanism to address safety and performance risks associated with the human component in a system that parallels the TRL structure already familiar to the systems engineering community. Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, initiated a study in 2015 to evaluate options to incorporate human readiness planning for Sandia processes and products. The study team has collected the majority of baseline assessment data and has conducted interviews to understand staff perceptions of four different options for human readiness planning. Preliminary results suggest that all four options may have a vital role, depending on the type of work performed and the phase of product development. Upon completion of data collection, the utility of identified solutions will be assessed in one or more test cases.