Toward General Principles for Resilience Engineering

Maintaining the performance of infrastructure‐dependent systems in the face of surprises and unknowable risks is a grand challenge. Addressing this issue requires a better understanding of enabling conditions or principles that promote system resilience in a universal way. In this study, a set of such principles is interpreted as a group of interrelated conditions or organizational qualities that, taken together, engender system resilience. The field of resilience engineering identifies basic system or organizational qualities (e.g., abilities for learning) that are associated with enhanced general resilience and has packaged them into a set of principles that should be fostered. However, supporting conditions that give rise to such first‐order system qualities remain elusive in the field. An integrative understanding of how such conditions co‐occur and fit together to bring about resilience, therefore, has been less clear. This article contributes to addressing this gap by identifying a potentially more comprehensive set of principles for building general resilience in infrastructure‐dependent systems. In approaching this aim, we organize scattered notions from across the literature. To reflect the partly self‐organizing nature of infrastructure‐dependent systems, we compare and synthesize two lines of research on resilience: resilience engineering and social‐ecological system resilience. Although some of the principles discussed within the two fields overlap, there are some nuanced differences. By comparing and synthesizing the knowledge developed in them, we recommend an updated set of resilience‐enhancing principles for infrastructure‐dependent systems. In addition to proposing an expanded list of principles, we illustrate how these principles can co‐occur and their interdependencies.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/156462/2/risa13494_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/156462/1/risa13494.pd

Perchlorate Complexes of Mercury(II) with Tertiary Arsines & Phosphines

436-43

Tertiary Arsine Complexes of Copper & Zinc Group Metals with Coordinated Perchlorate

133-13

Evaluating design proposals for complex systems with work domain analysis

In this paper we propose a new framework for evaluating designs based on work domain analysis, the first phase of cognitive work analysis. We develop a rationale for a new approach to evaluation by describing the unique characteristics of complex systems and by showing that systems engineering techniques only partially accommodate these characteristics. We then present work domain analysis as a complementary framework for evaluation. We explain this technique by example by showing how the Australian Defence Force used work domain analysis to evaluate design proposals for a new system called Airborne Early Warning and Control. This case study also demonstrates that work domain analysis is a useful and feasible approach that complements standard techniques for evaluation and that promotes a central role for human factors professionals early in the system design and development process. Actual or potential applications of this research include the evaluation of designs for complex systems

Designing teams for first-of-a-kind, complex systems using the initial phases of cognitive work analysis: Case study

We present a technique for team design based on cognitive work analysis (CWA). We first develop a rationale for this technique by discussing the limitations of conventional approaches for team design in light of the special characteristics of first-of-a-kind, complex systems. We then introduce the CWA-based technique for team design and provide a case study of how we used this technique to design a team for a first-of-a-kind, complex military system during the early stages of its development. In addition to illustrating the CWA-based technique by example, the case study allows us to evaluate the technique. This case study demonstrates that the CWA-based technique for team design is both feasible and useful, although empirical validation of the technique is still necessary. Applications of this work include the design of teams for first-of-a-kind, complex systems in military, medical, and industrial domains

Adaptive Flexibility: Examining the Role of Expertise in the Decision Making of Authorised Firearms Officers during Armed Confrontation

Identifying the cognitive processes underlying tactical decision making is vital for two purposes; (i) reducing risk through improved training, and (ii) facilitating the public’s attitudes toward the legitimacy of the Police and criminal justice system. Despite this, very little research has been conducted into British Police decision-making involving the use of firearms. This study begins to address this gap by examining the impact expertise has on British Police use of force decisions during armed confrontations. In order to do so, the tactical decision making processes of twelve expert Specialised Firearms Officers (SFOs) and eleven novice Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) during armed confrontations were compared using Cognitive Task Analysis methods. Data were coded using categories derived from theory and patterns inductively emergent within the data. The results found expert SFOs to be more flexible in adaptive responding to situational changes, whilst novice AFOs reported a more sequential and linear process of tactical decision making. In identifying the key features of expertise within this specific environment (‘adaptive flexibility’), this study has both theoretical and practical implications for the acceleration of AFO expertise acquisition in order to bridge the existing expertise gap resulting from a lack of available qualified Operational Force Commanders