A Framework of Human Systems Engineering

This book was written for both systems engineers and HSI practitioners who are designing and evaluating different types of sociotechnical systems across various domains. Many engineers have heard of HSE but don’t understand its importance in system development. This book presents a series of HSE applications on a range of topics, such as interface design, training requirements, personnel capabilities and limitations, and human task allocation. Each chapter represents a case study of the application of HSE from different dimensions of sociotechnical systems. The examples are organized using a sociotechnical system framework to reference the applications across multiple system types and domains. These case studies serve to illustrate the value of applying HSE to the broader engineering community and provide real‐world examples. The goal is to provide reference examples in a variety of domains and applications to educate engineers; the integration of the human user is listed as one of the enablers of SE in the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK).

As IEEE is primarily concerned with the engineering of electrical technologies, our goal is to include the perspective of design engineers who may be removed from the end user and unaware of potential concerns. The book chapters represent specific projects from the HSI TC members; the result is a set of stories that show the value of HSE through the development of human interfaces, improvement of human performance, effective use of human resources, and the design of safe and usable systems. The examples cross traditional SE sectors and identify a diverse set of HSE practices. Our contributed book is a source of information for engineers on current HSE applications.

Holly A. H. Handley, PhD, PE and Andreas Tolk, PhD

Holly A. H. Handley

Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

Keywords:human systems engineering; human system integration; ergonomics; socio‐technical framework;

Many human‐centered disciplines exist that focus on the integration of humans and systems. These disciplines, such as human factors (HF), human systems integration (HSI), and human factors engineering (HFE), are often used interchangeable but have distinct meanings. This introductory chapter identifies these varied disciplines and then defines the domain of human systems engineering (HSE). HSE implies that human has been “engineered” into the design, in contrast to “integrating” the user into the system at later stages of design.

The use of HSE for increasing complex and varied sociotechnical systems requires a more context‐specific suite of tools and processes to address the combination of human and system components. More often a wider range of system stakeholders, including design and development engineers, are becoming involved in, and are vested in, the success of both HSE‐ and HSI‐related efforts. To assist these efforts, a framework was developed based on the dimensions of sociotechnical system and domain types, with relationships to specific HSI and SE concerns. The development of this framework and its dimensions is also described in the chapter.

Finally, the framework is used to organize a wide range of case studies across a variety of system types and domains to provide examples of current work in the field. These case studies focus on both the systems engineering (SE) applications and the HSE successes. Linking the cases to the framework identifies the contextual variables, based on both sociotechnical system and domain characteristics, and links them to specific human system concerns. Our goal with this volume is to emphasize the role of systems engineers in the development of successful sociotechnical systems.

HF is a broad scientific and applied discipline. As a body of knowledge, HF is a collection of data and principles about human characteristics, capabilities, and limitations. This knowledge base is derived from empirical evidence from many fields and is used to help minimize the risk of systems by incorporating the diversity of human characteristics (England 2017). Ergonomics is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a system and the profession that applies theory, principles, data, and methods to design in order to optimize human well‐being and overall system performance (IEA 2018). The term “human factors” is generally considered synonymous with the term “ergonomics.” HF engineers or ergonomics practitioners apply the body of knowledge of HF to the design of systems to make them compatible with the abilities and limitations of the human user.

HF has always employed a systems approach; however, in large complex systems, it was recognized that the role of the human must be considered from multiple perspectives (Smillie 2019). HSI is the interdisciplinary technical process for integrating multiple human considerations into SE practice (DOA 2015). Seven HSI areas of concerns have been identified – manpower, personnel, training, HFE, health and safety, habitability, and survivability – all of which need to be addressed in an interconnected approach. The emphasis of the HSI effort is on the trade‐offs within and across these domains in order to evaluate all options in terms of overall system performance, risk, and personnel‐related ownership cost (SAE6906 2019). HSI provides a comprehensive snapshot of how human systems interaction has been addressed throughout the system development process by evaluating each of these domains as the system design progresses through different stages. It identifies what issues remain to be resolved, including their level of risk, and suggests potential mitigations.

Human factors integration (HFI) is a systematic process for identifying, tracking, and resolving human‐related issues ensuring a balanced development of both technological and human aspects of a system (Defence Standard 00‐251 2015). HFI is the term used in the United Kingdom equivalent to HSI. Similar to HSI, HFI draws on the breadth of the HF disciplines and emphasizes the need to facilitate HFI management activities of concern across seven similar domains: manpower, personnel, training, HFE, system safety, health hazard assessment, and social and organizational (England 2017). The methods and processes available for HFI can be broken down into both technical activities and management activities; HFI has a well‐defined process and can draw on many methods, tools, standards, and data in order to prevent operational and development risks (Bruseberg 2009).

The HSI discipline was established with the primary objective to enhance the success of the Department of Defense (DoD) systems by placing humans on more equal footing with design elements such as hardware and software (SAE6906 2019). SE is an interdisciplinary field of engineering and engineering management that focuses on how to design and manage complex systems over the system life cycle. While HSI is considered an enabler to SE practice, systems engineers need to be actively engaged to continuously consider the human as part of the total system throughout the design and development stages. HSE is the application of human principles, models, and techniques to system design with the goal of optimizing system performance by taking human capabilities and limitations into consideration (DOD 1988). HSE approaches the human system design from the perspective of the systems engineer and views the human component as a system resource. Human‐focused analyses that occur as part of the HSE evaluations determine the required interactions between users and technology and are essential to insure efficient processes and data exchange between the technology elements and the human users (Handley 2019a). In the United Kingdom, human‐centric systems engineering (HCSE) seeks better ways to address HF within mainstream SE while building on and optimizing the coherence of existing best practice. Similar to HSE, HCSE approaches HF from an SE viewpoint and aims to develop core SE practices that help engineering organizations adopt the best HF processes for their needs (England 2017).