Task complexity as a performance shaping factor: A review and recommendations in Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis (SPAR-H) adaption

Rasmussen, Martin; Standal, Martin Inge; Laumann, Karin

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2015.03.005

Cited by 69 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These include lack of active management, training and competence; fluctuations in activity level; insufficient communication (Jaernes et al, 2005); task complexity (Jaernes et al, 2005;Rasmussen, Standal, & Laumann, 2015); and interorganizational cooperation (Jaernes et al, 2005;Milch & Laumann, 2016). To manage such challenges, a holistic approach seems important.…”

Section: Human Factors Challenges In Offshore Drillingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to explore how human factors were taken into account in the development of a new type of drilling equipment. This study is part of a larger project on the understanding of human factors in the design and implementation of automated drilling technology. The principal study was a longitudinal study lasting 4 years that involved 43 interviews, offshore and onshore observations, and 2 surveys. MethodThe analysis in this paper is based on 7 informants who were either part of the design team or the paramount project team developing new automated drilling technology for an offshore oil-and gas-producing installation in the same development project, in addition to project documents. The informants were interviewed using semi-structured interviews, and grounded theory based on the coding process of Corbin and Strauss (1990) was used to analyse the data. 2 ResultsThe core category was found to be insufficient human factor analyses performed in the development phase due to the two main categories, namely 1) insufficient information coordination and 2) narrow focus in different phases of the project. This was found to contribute to increased costs, low user friendliness, and end users' insufficient knowledge of safe usage and potential risks. ConclusionOur conclusion was that homogenous top competence involving technical aspects contributed to developers' lack of understanding of the need for sufficient analyses of end user requirements and of the tasks that would be affected by the new technology. Hence, we argue that technological development could benefit from including human factors experts from the project's outset to bridge the gap between the lack of relevant information and sufficient information on which to base development decisions. In addition, we contend that performing human factors analyses throughout the development of a project would be beneficial due to the potential of hindering cultural aspects such as a non-questioning culture, which is viewed as a hazard in high-risk organizations.Keywords: human factors, human reliability, automated technology, safety, petroleum industry, technology development 3 IntroductionThe offshore oil and gas industry is considered a high-risk industry where minor incidents can lead to major accidents; thus, safety is a main priority (Årstad et al., 2010).Consequences of non-successful development and implementation of new technology have the potential of resulting in unwanted incidents and, in worst-case scenarios, major accidents.Because studies from the nuclear industry show that between 20 and 50% of incidents involve design mistakes (Taylor, 2007), it is important to involve strategies that ensure safety in technological development projects. Traditionally, the focus on safety in the development of new technology has been on technical aspects. Although lately there has been a growing focus on the human end users of the technology (ISO 11064, 2000;NORSOK, 2004 Saetren and Laumann (2015a) conducted a study where they found that too much trus...

show abstract

Section: Human Factors Challenges In Offshore Drillingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1999, standardized plant analysis risk-human reliability (SPAR-H) was developed to succeed the accident sequence precursor (ASP) program (16,33). Moreover, SPAR-H is the most practical technique that can be used by practitioners in any industry and this method calculates the likelihood of risks in post-initiator scenarios.…”

Section: Spar-h Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Using Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human (SPAR-H) and Bayesian Network (BN) for Pipeline Inspection Gauges (PIG) Operation: A Case Study in a Gas Transmission Plant

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pigging operation is one of the maintenance activities that is used to check pipeline functionality in operational conditions using a PIG device and high pressure of liquid/gas, which is potentially hazardous. Objectives: The present study aimed at customizing SPAR-H methodology for the pigging operation using Bayesian networks (BNs). It also aimed at identifying and analyzing human errors in pigging operation in a gas transmission company. Methods: The current article was composed of two main steps. In the first step, the SPAR-H BN model was developed using expertelicited prior probabilities of pigging operation applied to Bayesian network. In this step, CPTs of PSF nodes are constructed using prior probabilities, which are achieved from expert opinion. The CPT of error node is developed using coding process of SPAR-H formula in a simulation node. In the second step, a descriptive study was carried out to estimate the probability of human errors in pigging operation in a gas transmission plant in Iran. First, hierarchical task analysis (HTA) was conducted by walking through the pigging operation and interviews with workers. Next, the SPAR-H BN model was utilized for estimation of human error probability. Results: The developed model was tested on the pigging operation subtasks. In the considered case study, the mean probability of human error was estimated as 0.184. The highest probability of human error was related to "opening the kicker valve for enhancing pressure" subtask. Conclusions: The BNs were helpful to adapt the SPAR-H methodology to the pigging operation using dedicated prior probabilities. Beside that, the probabilities of human error can be updated taking into account the more realistic operational and environmental conditions.

show abstract

“…23 The increase of the task complexity results from the increments in certain complexity categories of a task, such as the number of procedures in the task, the scope that task covers, and the unpredictability in the task performing. 24 From the perspective of cognitive psychology, these increments in different complexity categories would use additional cognitive resources from the operator and decrease the operator's performance. Under a high level of task complexity, it would evoke an acute stress response from the operator.…”

Section: Task Demands and Task Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The task demands‐resources method: A new approach to human reliability analysis from a psychological perspective

Pan

Zhao

et al. 2019

Quality & Reliability Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study proposes a new approach to human reliability analysis (HRA) by introducing the occupational stress model in human resources management. Most existing HRA methods are restricted to a given set of risk factors in the task context, which are often called performance shaping factors (PSFs), and they are built on the causal relationship between PSFs and human performance, with little concern for the psychological factors that drive human behavior. We argue that a well‐developed occupational stress model that incorporates comprehensive working conditions and focuses on psychological factors offers us a new perspective to evaluate human reliability. The proposed approach, namely, the task demands‐resources (TD‐R) method, considers that the PSFs, in the task context, can be categorized into two different groups: task demands and task resources. These two PSF groups can both motivate and stress the operators during the task, thereby influencing their performances. Based on the theoretical framework of the TD‐R method, we also designed a probabilistic model linking motivational intensity to human error probability (HEP) under different stress levels. A human reliability experiment has been conducted to validate the effectiveness and flexibility of the TD‐R method. The experiment results showed that the TD‐R method could produce a meaningful explanation for the operators' performances and provide a quantification result for HEP.

show abstract

Task complexity as a performance shaping factor: A review and recommendations in Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis (SPAR-H) adaption

Cited by 69 publications

References 27 publications

A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?

A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?

Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Using Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human (SPAR-H) and Bayesian Network (BN) for Pipeline Inspection Gauges (PIG) Operation: A Case Study in a Gas Transmission Plant

The task demands‐resources method: A new approach to human reliability analysis from a psychological perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About