Decision making, team monitoring and organisational performance. Part three, Team performance monitoring research stream

This research report is a report for the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC project: Practical Decision Tools for Improved Decision-Making in Complex Situations. The project plan for this research includes three main research streams: Decision making, team monitoring and organizational performance. The initial work in the project has identified that the three research streams in the project are best treated as interrelated but distinct bodies of work. Each of the research streams has been coordinated by one of the principal researchers in the project and each research stream is thus considered separately. While we have chosen to present the research streams individually there is a large degree of interrelation between the streams, particularly between the team monitoring and organizational performance streams; and both are informed by the decision-making tranche of work. The interdependence of these streams will be emphasized in later phases of the research project. This report presents an overview of the work conducted in each of the three research streams. More information about each of these research streams is contained in three separate reports called respectively: Decision Making, Team Monitoring & Organizational Performance. The overview of research conducted so far is followed by a section that outlines the next stages of the project

Key technology-related human factors issues

Introducing new technology generally has the potential to improve safety and/or efficiency. For example, Positive Train Control is designed to both enhance operations and increase safety. Positive Train Control is designed to protect the train from driver error by applying the brakes if the system thinks the driver will over-speed, pass a signal showing a red aspect or operate outside limits set by train controllers (Wreathall, Woods, Bing and Christoffersen, 2007). This seeks to reduce driver errors that lead to worker injuries, harm to the general public and significant economic losses for the rail operators (Wreathall, Woods et al., 2007). According to Wreathall, Woods et al. (2007), the US National Transportation Safety Board has identified over 100 collisions that could have been avoided by a full-function Positive Train Control system. The installation of a similar system in the UK (known as the Train Protection Warning System, TPWS) that intervenes if the train is predicted to over-speed or fail to stop at a red signal has led to a 22 per cent reduction in signals passed at danger (SPADs) and an estimated 86 per cent reduction in overall risk (Rail Accident Investigation Branch, 2008). This presents an impressive case for the installation of such systems in the rail industry

Improving teamwork

Effective teamwork is vital when managing emergencies. High pressure situations sometimes cause a breakdown in teamwork leading to poor operational response. New research has developed tools to help improve teamwork through better real time identification and resolution of teamwork issues

Coordination and cooperation in air traffic control (ATC)

A number of new technologies and initiatives have been developed in the air traffic control environment that are designed to meet the challenge of managing the significant projected growth in air traffic by the year 2025. These technologies are typically based on iterations of the current formally specified system with little consideration of the system as enacted by people. In Australia, the air traffic control (ATC) systems are designed to enable large volumes of aircraft to be controlled with minimal need for interaction between the controllers. Controllers are able to initiate and execute pre- defined plans with a minimal level of collaboration (called coordination) with other controllers. However, there is some evidence that controllers engage in more detailed forms of collaboration (called cooperation) with other controllers to manage anomalies and make a somewhat efficient system more effective. At the level of individual ATC interactions cooperative activities are rarely articulated in Australian ATC procedures, training programs or formal checking systems, nor are they typically considered by new developments that are designed to enhance system capacity. This study examines the patterns of coordination and cooperation used by air traffic controllers in an Australian ATC facility on normal everyday workdays. The analysis of these observation found that almost a third of interactions with other controllers could be classified as cooperative, with about two thirds of the interactions being coordinative. This shows that there is a high likelihood that controllers are engaging in collaborative activities beyond what would be expected by the system as designed. This suggests that more focus needs to be placed on the way that controllers are actively managing safety in the context of Australian ATC procedures, training programs, and checking systems. In addition, this research has implications for the development of new systems designed to enhance capacity

Identifying and resolving coordinated decision making breakdowns in emergency management

Effective coordination is an essential part of managing large-scale emergencies. It is important for key personnel in emergency management agencies to be able to identify and resolve breakdowns in coordination quickly and effectively. This paper focuses on how this is done by Australian regional coordinators. Eleven regional coordinators from three emergency management agencies in Australia participated in individual simulated table-top emergency management exercises involving a concurrent semi-structured interview. Results indicated that two breakdown identification strategies were used: internal (information and intuition-based) and external (network). Two breakdown resolution strategies were identified: response and preparedness. Five ‘response’ resolution strategies were employed: delegating representatives, providing additional resources, asserting authority, mentoring staff and replacing disruptive staff. Two ‘preparedness’ breakdown resolution strategies were employed: preplanning and building a cooperative culture. These results contribute to our understanding of how people identify and resolve breakdowns in coordination from the position of operational oversight

Don't just do something, stand there!

Goal seduction is a phenomenon where the goal that someone is trying to achieve exerts too much influence over their decision making, leading to sub-optimal performance. In emergency management given the important and urgent nature of the goals that people are trying to achieve mitigating goal seduction is an important part of a safe and effective response. This paper explores the types, consequences and management of goal seduction in volunteer fire brigades in Australia. Ten experienced volunteer incident commanders participated in a semi-structured interview on challenging situations they had faced. The experience of the incident commanders ranged from nine to 34 years (M=22). A thematic analysis revealed examples of goal seduction, the problems it could cause and the way it was managed by incident controllers. Goal seduction could affect both the incident controller and the crew, with one controller succumbing to goal seduction and acting in a way that violated policy. It is important then that incident controllers are aware of the effects of goal seduction and seek to manage its influence on themselves and their crew. Goal seduction is the pressure to try to achieve a goal when this is not the safest course of action. In such situations the best advice may be “don’t just do something, stand there.

Collaborative adaptation in a constrained system: Getting the balance right

Controllers actively manage the traffic system, often collaboratively, by adapting processes and procedures. This ability to adapt and adjust in a collaborative way is critical to both safety and efficiency. But collaborative adaptation can come at a cost, in time, effort or specific risks. How can we get the balance right

Teamwork checklists

Good teamwork is an increasingly important part of emergency management. When teams aren’t working effectively a variety of problems can result, that include: confusion, miscommunication, differing plans and unexpected actions. It is important then to ensure that teams are performing as well as possible. To help people think in more detail about how their teams are functioning the CFS and researchers from the Bushfire & Natural Hazards CRC have joined together to develop a straight-forward, practical set of teamwork checklists. The checklists contain a number of questions that help people consider the communication, coordination and cooperation of the team. If issues are identified then this prompts a discussion with members of that team about how to resolve the issue. A number of high level resolution strategies are suggested in the checklists. The tools provide a very flexible way to look at teamwork. The tools can be used by team-members; team-leaders; or by people close to, but outside the the team (such as group officers). The tools can be used as a health check during an operational response, to identify suspected problems, as a debrief tool or to promote better teamwork during training. The research conducted on the checklists has been very positive and suggests that the checklists provide useful information that helps people identify issues in teams. If you are interested in finding out more about the teamwork checklists please contact Mark Thomason

Factors affecting the decision making of pilots who fly in outback Australia

The objective of this paper is to explore factors that affect the decision making of bush pilots who fly in the Outback Australia. To date, the findings and theories of how pilots make decisions have predominantly been based around large-scale commercial operations. Only a small number of studies have identified factors that affect the decision making of bush Pilots flying small commercial operations. These previous studies have predominantly focused on Alaskan pilots and no studies have considered bush pilots in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve pilots aged between 24 and 63 years. Participants were asked to discuss their experiences of flying in the Australian Outback. Factors that affected pilots’ decision making were extracted from the transcripts using a thematic analysis technique. Factors that affected Australian Outback pilots’ decision making could be categorized into three main themes; organizational, social, and personal factors. Broad similarities exist between these factors and those that affect the decision making of pilots in Alaska, although some unique factors could be identified. This study builds on the literature of factors that can influence the flight-related decision of bush pilots and is the first study to examine this topic in an Australian context. Gaining a better understanding of the factors that can lead bush pilots to make poor decisions will allow initiatives to be developed that provide safety skills for all of the people involved in a flight

Making effective use of task analysis to identify human factors issues in new rail technology

Task analysis is an important tool that enables designers to consider the human factors implications of a new technology. This paper details a task analysis for the task of driving long-haul freight trains in Australia and describes how this task analysis was used to evaluate a new in-cab information support technology. This paper then explores similarities and differences between this task analysis and one proposed by Roth and Multer (2009). It is argued that these two task analyses can form the basis for many future task analyses so that we can avoid ‘reinventing the wheel,’ allowing us to focus more on potential interesting differences between operations and geographical locations