Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “sociotechnical problems”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

5 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Crew collaboration in space: a naturalistic decision-making perspective

Successful long-duration space missions will depend on the ability of crewmembers to respond promptly and effectively to unanticipated problems that arise under highly stressful conditions. Naturalistic decision making (NDM) exploits the knowledge and experience of decision makers in meaningful work domains, especially complex sociotechnical systems, including aviation and space. Decision making in these ambiguous, dynamic, high-risk environments is a complex task that involves defining the nature of the problem and crafting a response to achieve one's goals. Goal conflicts, time pressures, and uncertain outcomes may further complicate the process. This paper reviews theory and research pertaining to the NDM model and traces some of the implications for space crews and other groups that perform meaningful work in extreme environments. It concludes with specific recommendations for preparing exploration crews to use NDM effectively.

Review, Tutorial↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Realizing a Spacesuit Compatible Augmented Reality System to Meet the Work Needs of Future Human Spaceflight Exploration

In this paper, we identify the broad range of challenges associated with creating an augmented reality for future spaceflight missions. The challenges were framed within a sociotechnical framework to explore how an imagined augmented reality system might one day help crew cope with future exploration mission demands. Key challenges include an augmented reality system cannot simply be designed to help a single suited astronaut and must enable the broader mission team. There exists a host of optical, compute, and control technical challenges that must be simultaneously addressed while the work domain itself is in development. There exist limited methods to help cope with the envisioned world problem; however, we emphasize a few strategies to articulate work design assumptions and host this detail in a transparent fashion. Finally, we note the broader organizational constraints that shape the creation of such novel technology for spaceflight. By addressing these broad range of challenges directly, early in the design and development process, key trade-offs can be considered and fundamental concerns within the community can be addressed to yield desired mission outcomes.

Matthew J. Miller↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Reports of Resilient Performance: Investigating Operators' Descriptions of Safety-producing Behaviors in the Aviation Safety Reporting System

While many existing taxonomies and frameworks provide a common vocabulary for describing how human operators fail in the context of sociotechnical systems, at present, there is no common vocabulary to describe how humans succeed. Such a framework would facilitate systematically collecting and analyzing data on how human performance can produce safety, not just how it can reduce safety. One potentially rich source of currently available information for exploring desired performance is the reports submitted to NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). These de-identified, confidential, and voluntary narrative reports are submitted by pilots, controllers, ground operators, and others within aviation operations. While these reports are primarily submitted to describe safety risks, incidents, and problems, they also often describe how those risks were mitigated, and provide a window into aspects of everyday work in aviation. This paper describes an analysis of ASRS narratives to understand how operators talk about their own resilient behaviors during adverse safety conditions and events. Guided by Erik Hollnagel’s Resilience Assessment Grid framework (i.e., anticipate, monitor, respond, learn), we illustrate our approach and methodology with examples from reports. We also highlight some of the challenges and how further research is needed in developing a taxonomy of operators’ descriptions of resilient performance.

resilient behaviors↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Reports of Resilient Performance: Investigating Operators' Descriptions of Safety-producing Behaviors in the Aviation Safety Reporting System

While many existing taxonomies and frameworks provide a common vocabulary for describing how human operators fail in the context of sociotechnical systems, at present, there is no common vocabulary to describe how humans succeed. Such a framework would facilitate systematically collecting and analyzing data on how human performance can produce safety, not just how it can reduce safety. One potentially rich source of currently available information for exploring desired performance is the reports submitted to NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). These de-identified, confidential, and voluntary narrative reports are submitted by pilots, controllers, ground operators, and others within aviation operations. While these reports are primarily submitted to describe safety risks, incidents, and problems, they also often describe how those risks were mitigated, and provide a window into aspects of everyday work in aviation. These reports can be searched in a variety of ways. This paper describes methods for systematically examining ASRS narratives to understand how operators talk about their own resilient behaviors during adverse safety conditions and events. Guided by Erik Hollnagel’s Resilience Assessment Grid framework (i.e., anticipate, monitor, respond, learn), various approaches and tools for such inquiries are described. The approach, process, challenges, and suggestions to building an operator-based description of resilient performance are discussed, and tools to facilitate data analysis to maximize learning from these reports are described.

ASRS narratives↗
NASA NTRS2010

Collective Intelligence and Three Aspects of Planning in Organizations: A NASA Example

For many complex sociotechnical systems, planning seems to require explicit coordination; certainly, in executing a plan the activities of different actors must be tightly coupled. However, distributing the needed planning information can be very burdensome and error prone, because different groups need different collections of information, updated or kept current on different time cycles. Further, the information needed to form successful plans is often highly distributed, and while feedback about the success of prior plans may exist, it may not be available to those in a position of using this to improve plans or to detect and resolve other problems in the system (Weick, 1995). Tools to support various aspects of planning have been developed, and can provide a huge benefit to the individuals working on that aspect. To be tractable, most solutions address a quite bounded slice of work, isolating it from the larger context. Prospective planning takes place over multiple, nested cycles of decision making. This builds a plan that specifies activities of different granularity. "Subplans" may specify multiple parallel activities by different groups and individuals, as well as sequential, nested actions by a single actor. Planning produces valuable, sharable, external, representations: in addition to prospective use, plans support retrospective assessment and also action in the present. Viewing planning in a larger context - both temporal and organizational -- enables noticing what one does not know and generating more systemic and effective solutions. Viewing a problem as one of collective intelligence invites thinking about the larger organizational context. Many approaches to supporting collective intelligence do not support execution of highly contingent actions, distributed across many players, and hence provide incomplete support for planning. However, CI technology maybe helpful in managing the processes of gathering information for decision making in planning and of distributing plan information to various actors, needed on various time cycles.

Billman, Dorrit↗