Modelling a macro-ergonomics approach to work systems design: An analysis of organizational context

2000 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 332-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danny C. K. Ho ◽  
Vincent G. Duffy
1998 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 831-865 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM J. CLANCEY ◽  
PATRICIA SACHS ◽  
MAARTEN SIERHUIS ◽  
RON VAN HOOF
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
Vol 44 (12) ◽  
pp. 2-757-2-757
Author(s):  
Andy Imada ◽  
Brian M. Kleiner ◽  
Mitsuo Nagamachi ◽  
Holger Luczak ◽  
Noe Palacios ◽  
...  

This panel will focus upon work systems design from a macroergonomic perspective. The panel will investigate the future of work systems from the viewpoint of: (1) an activity performed by; (2) humans with particular characteristics; (3) in a context. The researchers and practitioners on the panel have focused on one or more of these dimensions of work design/redesign, product design or organizational design. The design of 21st Century systems must take this broader perspective. In the same way, this panel mirrors the diversity of backgrounds, cultures and contexts for future work systems.


2000 ◽  
Vol 44 (12) ◽  
pp. 2-753-2-756
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Smith

This summary outlines major themes introduced during a multiple-session symposium series devoted to the topic of work design in the 21st century. The 6 sessions in the series address the future of work design in relation to: (1) macroergonomic analysis of work systems design; (2) production systems design and automation of work; (3) human factors research needs in internet design; (4) design of education and training; (5) work design and community design; and (6) work in extreme environments. Session chairs participated in a 7th panel session to offer perspectives on the future of work design in relation to session topics. These perspectives are summarized here. The panel co-chair, Michael Wade, also provides a perspective on future trends in the integration of work and recreation. Collectively, the session and panel participants provide a rich body of judgment and opinion regarding the trajectory and evolution of work design in the coming decades, as well as likely reciprocal interactions between changes in work design and transformations in performance of human sociotechnical, organizational and socioeconomic systems.


Author(s):  
Arturo Realyvásquez ◽  
Aidé Aracely Maldonado-Macías ◽  
Jaime Romero-González

Currently there is no a literature survey which evaluates and classifies the papers according to the macroergonomic factors and elements that authors consider needed to work systems' design. For that reason, this chapter offers a review to identify the most frequent macroergonomic work systems' design factors and elements enounced in literature and propose a classification for them. A manual search was performed in seven databases by using keywords such as sociotechnical systems, macroergonomics, and work systems design. Bibliographical sources were classified into five main groups, corresponding to the factors of work systems' design, named Peron factor, Organization factor, factor of Tools and Technology, Tasks factor, and Environment factor, and their corresponding subgroups (elements). The macroergonomic Organization factor presented the highest frequency, while the macroergonomic factor of Tools and Technology presented the lowest frequency. Regarding the elements, Teamwork was the most frequent, while Advanced Manufacturing technology and Work Schedules were the less frequent.


Author(s):  
William J. Clancey ◽  
Maarten Sierhuis ◽  
Chin Seah

AbstractDuring the 1980s, a community of artificial intelligence researchers became interested in formalizing problem solving methods (PSMs) as part of an effort called “second-generation expert systems.” We provide an example of how we are applying second-generation expert systems concepts in an agent-based system for space flight operations, the orbital communications adapter mirroring system (OCAMS), which was developed in the Brahms multiagent framework. Brahms modeling language provides an ontology for simulating work practices, including groups, agents, activities, communications, movements, and geographic areas.Activitiesare a behavioral unit of analysis to be contrasted withtasks, a functional unit of analysis. Problem solving occurs in the context of activities in the service of tasks; appropriate PSMs depend on the context: which people/roles are participating, what tools are available, how the results will be evaluated, and so forth. A work practice simulation facilitates designing workflow tools that appropriately interact with the physical and organizational context in which work occurs. OCAMS was developed using a simulation-to-implementation methodology, in which a prototype workflow tool was embedded in a Brahms simulation of how people would use the tool. The reusable components in a workflow system like OCAMS include entire “problem solvers” (e.g., a planning subsystem), interoperability frameworks, and agents that inspect and change the world. Thus, a tool kit for building workflow tools requires more than a library of PSMs, which play a relatively small role in the overall multiagent, systems-integration architecture. Our research concern has shifted to situations that may arise that are outside the OCAMS' capability. In practical decision making, people must reflect on the validity of their models. As programs becoming actors in the workplace, we need to develop systems that help people to understand the limitations of the models that drive the automated operations, which means in part detecting when the formalizations in the system are inadequate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document