Principles of procedural support in man-machine systems

Two alternative ways of embedding human performance models into man-machine systems exist, namely embedding them directly into the man-machine interface or into the technical system proper as a decision support. The boundary between these two solutions is rather fuzzy and their simultaneous application could also be reasonable and effective

Reclaiming human machine nature

Extending and modifying his domain of life by artifact production is one of the main characteristics of humankind. From the first hominid, who used a wood stick or a stone for extending his upper limbs and augmenting his gesture strength, to current systems engineers who used technologies for augmenting human cognition, perception and action, extending human body capabilities remains a big issue. From more than fifty years cybernetics, computer and cognitive sciences have imposed only one reductionist model of human machine systems: cognitive systems. Inspired by philosophy, behaviorist psychology and the information treatment metaphor, the cognitive system paradigm requires a function view and a functional analysis in human systems design process. According that design approach, human have been reduced to his metaphysical and functional properties in a new dualism. Human body requirements have been left to physical ergonomics or "physiology". With multidisciplinary convergence, the issues of "human-machine" systems and "human artifacts" evolve. The loss of biological and social boundaries between human organisms and interactive and informational physical artifact questions the current engineering methods and ergonomic design of cognitive systems. New developpment of human machine systems for intensive care, human space activities or bio-engineering sytems requires grounding human systems design on a renewed epistemological framework for future human systems model and evidence based "bio-engineering". In that context, reclaiming human factors, augmented human and human machine nature is a necessityComment: Published in HCI International 2014, Heraklion : Greece (2014

A study of the Resilience Analysis Grid method and its applicability to the water sector in England and Wales

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.This paper presents an adaptation of the Resilience Analysis Grid (RAG) method framed on the Resilience Engineering theory as a proposal for tackling the lack of organisational resilience metrics in the water sector of England and Wales. The method was adapted to the sector by selecting 16 indicators and the addition of a ‘Resilience Ethos’ section to the grid. Its applicability was tested by analysing the evolution of resilience in Ofwat’s Price Reviews 2009 (PR09), 2014 (PR14) and 2019 (PR19). Key conclusions obtained were that: (I) PR14 acts as a pivot between PR09 and PR19, as it installs a new regulatory approach; (II) the sector has advanced significantly towards greater consideration of resilience and its management in PR19; and, (III) the PRs lack instruments for in‐period performance assessment. The RAG method proved to be simple and flexible to use, delivering clear and straightforward graphical results.Engineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNorthumbrian Water LtdUniversity of Exete