The people in sysTems Tlcm handbook - Human Factors Integration ...

The people in systems
tlcm handbook
“A guide to the consideration of People Factors within
Through Life Capability Management”
Edition 1 SEPTEMBER 2009
Reprinted october 2010
human factors integration
defence technology centre

This work is part-funded by the Human Dimension and Medical Sciences Domain of the UK
Ministry of Defence Scientific Research Programme, and was initiated by the Domain Leader.
All recipients of this handbook are advised that it must not be copied in whole or in part or
be given further distribution outside the authority without the written permission of the
Domain Leader Human Dimension and Medical Sciences Domain.
Copyright BAE Systems 2010. All rights reserved. Created by Aerosystems International Ltd
on behalf of the HFI DTC consortium. The HFI DTC consortium consists of Aerosystems
International Ltd, Cranfield University, Lockheed Martin, MBDA, SEA, the University of
Southampton and the University of Birmingham.
The authors of this Handbook have asserted their moral rights under the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988, to be identified as the authors of this work.
Please note that due to the size and format of this Handbook, pictures and diagrams are for
illustrative purposes only. All references to the Acquisition Operating Framework (AOF) are
valid as of 01 April 2009.
Reprinted 2010 to amend contact details, ensure consistency of terminology
and correct typographical errors.
Feedback on this handbook is welcomed. Please email karen.lane@baesystems.com
Unless otherwise stated photographs © MOD/Crown Copyright, images from www.defenceimages.mod.uk

table of contents
F o r e w o r d 3
I n t r o D U C T I O N 4
S e c t i o n 1 : C a pa b i l i t y P l a n n i n g 7
The People Component of Capability 8
People Factors 8
The People Component and the DLOD 9
When should the People Component be considered within Capability Management? 18
High Level Operational Analysis, Balance of Investment Studies and COEIA 19
Risk Process 20
Capability Audit 21
Capability Investigations 22
Capability Planning and Assumptions List (CPAL) 23
Capability Management Strategy (CMS) 23
Capability Management Plan (CMP) 24
The Research Perspective and Research Goals 24
MODAF 25
S e c t i o n 2 : C a pa b i l i t y D e l i v e r y 29
Human Factors Integration 30
Benefits of HFI 36
HFI Domains 37
Mapping the HFI Domains to the DLOD 37
How to do HFI 45
Basic Activities 47
HFI Management Activities 48
HFI Strategy 49
HFI Plan (HFIP) 50
Early Human Factors Analysis 51
HFI or ‘People-Related’ Requirements and Acceptance 53
HFI Working Group 54
HFI Technical Activities 55
HFI Input to Key Project Documents 58
Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance Plan 59
HFI Assurance 60
Supporting HFI 61
S e c t i o n 3 : C a pa b i l i t y G e n e r at i o n 65
The roles of the Front Line Commands in acquisition 67
People Factors Relevant To FLCs 67
Mechanisms for capturing user feedback 68
Operational Lessons Identified 68
Operational Lessons Learned 69
Dissemination 70
Managing Lessons Identified 70
Defence Lessons Identified Management System (DLIMS) 70
Aviation Safety Information Management System (ASIMS) 70
Risk Management 72
A D D I T I O N A L I N F O R M AT I O N A N D R E S O U R C E S 74
C o n ta c t s 76
G l o s s a r y o f T e r m s 78
A n n e x A - E x a m p l e s o f P e o p l e Fa c t o r s a n d D e f i n i t i o n s 82

LIST OF FIGURES
F I G U R E 1 : TLCM Overview 5
F I G U R E 2 : The People Component of Capability and the DLOD 9
F I G U R E 3 : Capability Planning Roles and Responsibilities within Capability Management 19
F I G U R E 4 :
An overview of selected high-level relationships between Human Views (HVs),
outlining how each HV informs another 25
F I G U R E 5 : Capability Delivery Roles and Responsibilities within Capability Management 31
F I G U R E 6 : Key HFI activities mapped to the Systems Engineering and CADMID Lifecycle Model 46
F I G U R E 7 : HFI technical activities and associated management links 55
F I G U R E 8 :
Examples of the top-level requirements for achieving each of the nine levels of
HFI maturity on a project 60
F I G U R E 9 : Generation Roles and Responsibilities within Capability Management 66

FOREWORD
MOD recognises that Effective Defence
Capability is a product of capable, available
and sustainable systems and well-trained,
highly skilled and highly motivated people.
People are an integral component of
Defence Capability.
Many of the Systems we procure are
operated, maintained and sustained in
harsh operational environments and we
need to recognise this by ensuring that the
people component is considered equally
alongside other system components from
the very earliest stages of Capability
Planning, through delivery to the
generation of Force Elements At Readiness.
The People Component of Capability cuts
across all Defence Lines of Development.
Through Life Capability Management has
provided us with an opportunity that we
must now grasp to improve our
consideration of the people component in
systems. This includes more effective
engagement of Armed Forces personnel
with the industry teams contracted to
develop new systems and the DE&S
community delivering them.
The Capability Sponsor Joint Capabilities
Board has commissioned this Handbook to
raise awareness of the People Component
of Capability across the MOD Unified
Customer.
In addition to recruiting and retaining the
best people for the job, the department must
continue to train, motivate and equip our
personnel as effectively and efficiently as
possible. Capability planning and delivery
must include consideration of people-related
aspects from the outset, encompassing: duty
of care responsibilities; personnel
expectations; organisational structures and
culture; training resources; competence
management; usability of deployed systems,
etc. Resources for the People Component of
Capability must be identified and costed
within the Planning stage as this is one of
the biggest through life costs.
Dr Dai Morris - Head of Joint Training, Evaluation and
Simulation Capability
02/03

I N T R O D U C T I O N
INTRODUCTION
“Capability is not just a function of
equipment performance, but depends on a
combination of interacting elements. Some
of the most difficult issues to address lie in
the human factors area. The types of
systems we are specifying and procuring
now will shape the roles, responsibilities
and career paths of future servicemen and
women. They will also have to be operated
in very demanding circumstances of fatigue,
hunger, stress and even fear, by the sort of
men and women we recruit. They will
therefore determine not just the working
environment of our people, but ultimately,
their utility in these harsh conditions will
determine our operational success and our
ability to retain the right people.”
Vice Admiral Sir Jeremy Blackham
‘The Ministry of Defence (MOD)
recognises the crucial role that the
human plays in the achievement of
effective military capability, indeed
there are currently no military systems
in-service that can operate without
human intervention of some kind’
[AOF, 2009].
Through Life Capability
Management (TLCM)
Through Life Capability Management is the
MOD’s top-down approach to the delivery
of military Capability, based on Defence
Policy, tempered by tolerable risk. It is an
approach to the acquisition and in-service
management of military Capability in
which every aspect of new and existing
military Capability is planned and managed
coherently across all Defence Lines of
Development (DLOD) from cradle to grave
(see Figure 1).
TLCM provides the backdrop for
considering the human element during
Capability planning, delivery and
generation. The full integration of the
“People Component of Capability” is
essential to the delivery of military effect.
It is recognised that a failure to consider the
human element in acquisition can result in:
• Increased accidents and incidents
• Greater training costs
• Reduced performance and mission
effectiveness
• Breaches in duty of care
• A scarcity of appropriately skilled
personnel
• Substantial increases in design/redesign
costs

Through Life Capability Management
5. Capability
Investigation
6. Endorse
the CMP
Programme
Initiation
4. Shortfall &
Opportunity
Analysis
3. Baseline
Review &
Audit
Policy
Threat
Finance
2. Capability
Goals
CMP
1. Capability
Definition
Planning
Issues
T
E
P
I
D
O
I
L
Project
Programme Board
Project
Project
Project
F
E
@
R/
S
Planning
Delivery
Generation
Figure 1 - TLCM Overview
The MOD Unified Customer (MUC) has a
responsibility to manage the people-related
issues, risks 1 and costs that may be incurred
due to both operational and development
failures. This handbook highlights where
and when People in Systems need to be
considered during Capability Planning,
Delivery and Generation.
1
The terminology used to describe “issues” and “risks” in this
handbook is consistent with MOD Risk Management (JSP892).
The People in Systems Handbook is
aimed at all members of the MOD
Unified Customer community and
their suppliers. It is divided into
sections to support Capability
planning, delivery and generation.
Its purpose is to highlight the
importance of identifying, assessing
and mitigating ‘people-related risks’ in
TLCM and to raise awareness of the
opportunities for considering the
human element within acquisition.
04/05

Capability Planning1
This section addresses three main questions:
• What is the People Component of Capability?
• What is the relationship between the People Component and the DLOD?
• When should the People Component be considered within Capability Planning?
06/07

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
capability planning
“Capability is the enduring ability to
generate a desired operational outcome or
effect, and is relative to the threat, physical
environment and the contributions of
coalition partners. Capability is not
a particular system or equipment.”
[DA Learning Portal]
The People Component
of Capability
People are an integral part of Capability.
For example, the operational benefits of
Network Enabled Capability (NEC) to the
Close Combat environment will not be
realised unless personnel are available,
motivated, organised and trained
appropriately. Human aspects relating
particularly to team working, decision
making, situation awareness, information
processing and workload must be fully
understood and managed.
People Factors
Essentially, people factors influence the
effectiveness with which individuals, teams,
collectives and coalitions operate within the
defence environment. For example, new
technology and changes in ways of working
can impact the ability of a unit to operate
effectively during close combat operations.
The operations room onboard HMS Daring as she
arrives into HM Naval Base, Portsmouth for the first
time. HMS Daring is first in class of the Type 45 and
comes into service in 2010.
A systematic and comprehensive
consideration of the influence of the People
Component on military Capability is
essential.
To support Capability management
processes and activities, the People
Component can be broken down into a set
of people-related factors which are relevant
to all Defence Lines of Development.

A set of people factors has been derived
from key MOD guidance sources and
research outputs. Examples of people factors
are presented in Figure 2 and definitions of
each factor are provided in Annex A. This
list of factors should be used as a guide when
considering the People Component during
Capability planning, delivery and
generation (see Table 1 (page 18) for
guidance on when to consider the People
Component within Capability Planning).
The People Component
and the DLOD
The People Component of Capability resides
within each DLOD and not just within the
training and personnel Lines of
Development (LOD) see Figure 2. There is
not a one to one mapping between the
People Factors and the DLOD.
PEOPLE COMPONENT OF CAPABILITY -
Described in terms of a set of people factors
that may influence the ability of individuals,
teams, collectives and coalitions to operate
effectively within the defence environment.
Examples of people-related factors
(defined further at Annex A)
Resource Allocation Target Audience
Phasing
Training Output
Personnel Availability Training Resources
Manning Levels
Training Policy
The People
Component of
Capability should
be considered for
each DLOD and
not just within
the Training and
Personnel LOD.
DEFENCE LINES OF
DEVELOPMENT
• Training
• Equipment
• Personnel
• Infrastructure
• Concepts & Doctrine
• Organisation
• Information
• Logistics
I
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
Force Structures
Personnel Capabilities
New Technology
Safety Case
Figure 2 - The People
Component of Capability
and the DLOD
Competence
Management
Personnel
Expectations
Training Design
& Delivery
Training Organisation
Duty of Care
Organisational
Configuration
Social
Environment
Ways of Working
Questions can be asked to prompt
consideration of the People Component
within each DLOD. Examples are included
for each of the DLOD.
08/09

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Training LOD
The provision of the means to practise,
develop and validate, within constraints, the
practical application of a common military
doctrine to deliver a military Capability.
(N.B. - Text in brackets identifies examples of
relevant people factors, see Annex A).
Relevant questions could include:
• Will existing training organisations be
capable of supporting the future training
requirements of UK forces? (Training
Organisation / Target Audience)
• What new types of competences might be
required by service and civilian personnel
to ensure that the full benefits of new
capabilities (e.g. NEC) are realised?
(Competence Management)
• Is training policy aligned with future
manpower requirements, i.e. will
appropriate numbers and types of
personnel be trained to the required
standard within a specified timescale?
(Training Policy / Manning Levels)
• How should training be delivered to
maximise operational effectiveness?
(Training design and delivery)
• Does synthetic training provide an
opportunity to enhance the costeffectiveness
of training? (Training Policy)
• Has the training overhead of new ways of
working been considered? (Ways of
Working)
Army students are shown in a classroom undergoing Pashto language training at the Defence School of Languages
(DSL). The DSL at Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire is where students attend language training for deployment on
operations as interpreters.

A technician of 3 Army Air Corps (AAC) is shown adjusting a 30mm Cannon on an Apache attack helicopter. The M230
Cannon has an approximate rate of fire of 625 rounds per minute.
Equipment LOD
The provision of military platforms, systems
and weapons, (expendable and nonexpendable,
including updates to legacy
systems), needed to outfit/equip an
individual, group or organisation.
Relevant questions could include:
• Will new equipment enhance the
situational awareness and decision
making Capability of individuals, teams
and collectives? Will human capabilities
such as adaptability be exploited?
(New Technology)
• If reductions in manpower have been
considered as a means of reducing Whole
Life Cost (WLC), have the full implications
for manning structures, maintenance
burdens and the wider flexibility that may
be lost by reducing numbers been fully
understood? (Manning Levels)
• How different is the training required for
new Capability to that required for legacy
equipment – are individuals able to
multi-role between equipments?
(Workforce Competence Management)
• What duty of care considerations might
arise given the rapid in-service
introduction of new equipment to meet
Urgent Operational Requirements
(UORs)? (Duty of Care)
• Will significant investment in initial and
refresher training Capability be required
to ensure that service personnel are
competent to use new or modified
equipment? (Training Organisation)
10/11

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Personnel LOD
The timely provision of sufficient, capable
and motivated personnel to deliver Defence
outputs, now and in the future.
Relevant questions could include:
• Do any proposed changes lead to Branch
or manpower structures becoming
unsustainable? (Force Structure)
• Will the Capability require significant
changes to manning levels, now and in the
future? (Manning Levels)
• Are the physical and cognitive capabilities
required to support the Capability present
within the current workforce?
(Personnel Capabilities)
• How will the recruitment and retention of
service personnel today and in the future
(due to e.g. society’s attitudes towards the
armed forces) impact on the planned
Capability? (Competence Management)
• Will there be significant changes in
assumptions about the type of personnel
required throughout the life of the
Capability? (Personnel Availability)
• Will sufficient numbers of the right types
of personnel be available, given labour
market trends, to support the definition
and delivery of current and future
military and civilian training?
(Personnel Availability)
Members of the Joint Force Medical Group treating gunshot wound victims at Camp Bastion Hospital in Afghanistan.

In this dramatic image, the Officer Commanding 10 Troop is shown sending a situation report during an initial entry
into an enemy compound. M Company, 42 Commando Royal Marines took part in an operation to clear the
compounds used by the Taliban in Barikjo, Helmand Province, Southern Afghanistan, in early 2007. This was part of
Operation Volcano.
Information LOD
The provision of a coherent development
of data, information and knowledge
requirements for capabilities and all
processes designed to gather and handle
data, information and knowledge. Data is
defined as raw facts, without inherent
meaning, used by humans and systems.
Information is defined as data placed in
context. Knowledge is information applied
to a particular situation.
Relevant questions could include:
• To what extent will the Capability of the
organisation (e.g. Brigade HQ) to manage
and exploit information be enhanced by
e.g. NEC? (New Technology)
• How might improvements to the
timeliness and representation of
information increase operational tempo
and effectiveness? (New Technology)
12/13

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Concepts and Doctrine LOD
A Concept is an expression of the
capabilities that are likely to be used to
accomplish an activity in the future.
Doctrine is an expression of the principles
by which military forces guide their actions
and is a codification of how activity is
conducted today. It is authoritative, but
requires judgement in application.
Changes in concept and doctrine will have
an overarching effect on the People
Component (and vice versa) and it is
appropriate to consider this influence on all
People-related factors.
Relevant questions could include:
• How will concept and doctrine impact
current and future ways of working?
(Ways of Working)
• Is current training Capability appropriate
given concept and doctrinal changes?
(Training Organisation)
• How are people-related ‘Lessons
Identified’ being used to inform the
development of Capability? (e.g. New
Technology and Ways of Working)
A computer graphic simulation of a Future Protected Vehicle called Cammo. Equipment that could provide a
front-line force for troops of the future helped to launch the MOD’s new Defence Technology Plan. The Defence
Technology Plan is the first time the MOD has unveiled its long-term research needs. It underlines the importance of
science and technology in providing cutting-edge kit for the battlefield.

An Afghan woman stops a Royal Marine on patrol and asks him ‘What are you doing here?’. The Marine who was part
of Operation Sond Chara explained that he was part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and their
work to bring better security to the local area.
Organisation LOD
Relates to the operational and nonoperational
organisational relationships of
people. It typically includes military force
structures, MOD civilian organisational
structures and Defence contractors
providing support.
Relevant questions could include:
• Will the People Component be sufficiently
flexible to support the demands of
working within ad hoc teams or agile
groups? (Organisational Configurations)
• What cultural factors are likely to impact
the effectiveness of the Capability, e.g.
coalition operations? (Social Environment)
• How might differences in ways of working
between operational and non-operational
organisations impact effectiveness?
(Ways of Working)
14/15

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Infrastructure LOD
The acquisition, development, management
and disposal of all fixed, permanent
buildings and structures, land, utilities and
facility management services (both hard &
soft facility management) in support of
Defence capabilities. It includes estate
development and structures that support
military and civilian personnel.
Relevant questions could include:
• How might changes in accommodation
standards and base locations impact on
Capability? (Duty of Care / Personnel
Expectations)
• How do new processes and ways of
working impact on people, e.g. training
requirements, manning levels, personnel
capabilities? (Ways of Working)
• What impact will large IT Infrastructure
projects have on the delivery of military
Capability in terms of structures and
processes? (Ways of Working)
• What will be the impact of base relocation
on career progression and opportunities?
(Personnel Expectations)
RFA Argus in dry dock in
Falmouth. © V Holmes 2009.

RFA Argus photographed off the coast at Devonport, taking part in Replenishment at Sea (RAS) exercise with
RFA Black Rover.
Logistics LOD
The science of planning and carrying out
the operational movement and maintenance
of forces. In its most comprehensive sense,
it relates to the aspects of military
operations which deal with: the design and
development, acquisition, storage, transport,
distribution, maintenance, evacuation and
disposition of materiel; the transport of
personnel; the acquisition, construction,
maintenance, operation, and disposition of
facilities; the acquisition or furnishing of
services, medical and health service support.
‘Logistics’ provides a ‘context’ within which
to consider the full range of people-related
factors – from the selection and training of
personnel to fulfil logistics roles to the
organisation of logistics operations and duty
of care considerations.
Many questions applicable to other DLOD are
relevant to Logistics and therefore overlap.
• What impact on Support requirements
does reduced or lean manning have?
(Manning Levels)
• How will Contracted Logistics Support
(CLS) affect the availability of skilled
maintainers in theatre and hence
Capability? (Personnel Availability)
• What impact will CLS solutions have on
branch structures and trades within the
armed services? (Organisational
Configuration)
16/17

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Interoperability
The ability of UK Forces and, when
appropriate, forces of partner and other
nations to train, exercise and operate
effectively together in the execution of
assigned missions and tasks. In the context
of DLOD, Interoperability also covers
interactions between Services, UK Defence
capabilities, Other Government
Departments (OGD) and the civil aspects of
interoperability, including compatibility
with Civil Regulations.
Again the full range of people-related
factors apply, particularly those aspects
presented under the Personnel, Training
and Organisation DLOD.
Relevant questions could include:
• Does current training policy recognise the
importance of interoperability with key
allies? (Training Policy)
• Are the simulation capabilities in place to
support collaborative programmes with
other nations? (Training Organisation)
• Are the factors impacting effective
working with Non Governmental
Organisations (NGO)/OGD being
addressed? (Ways of Working)
• How does training on this Capability
interact with training-related Capabilities
in other Services? (Training Policy)
When should the People
Component be considered
within Capability
Management?
The People Component should be
considered throughout Capability
management - during Capability planning,
delivery and generation. The roles and
responsibilities of the MOD Unified Customer
during these stages are shown in Figure 3.
Several points already exist within the
current Capability Planning process for
considering the People Component of
Capability (e.g. during Capability Audit, risk
management). It is appropriate to exploit
these opportunities, rather than develop
additional processes. Examples of
opportunities within the Capability
planning process are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 - Examples of when and where the People
Component should be considered within Capability
planning.
Capability Planning Processes
• High Level Operational Analysis
• Balance of Investment
• Risk Process
• Capability Audit
• Capability Investigations
Capability Planning Products
• Risk Register
• Capability Planning and
Assumptions List
• Capability Management Strategy
• Capability Management Plan
• Research Perspective and Research
Goals
• MODAF

Cap Sponsor
DE&S
User
Centre
DST
Industry - Supplier
Unified
Customer
Generation
Capability Integration Groups
• Led by User
• Integrate LODs to generate Force Elements
• Years 1-4 Equipment Support Plan coherence
User feedback on
Capability gaps and
opportunities
Integration of new and/
or changed capability
Capability
Management
Capability Planning Groups
• Led by Capability Sponsor
• Devise plans for capability areas
• Lead Capability Investigations
• Prepare Options
• Drive Options through Planning Rounds
Planning
• Sponsors Programmes
• Programme Initiation
• Acceptance
Programme Boards
• Coordinates constituent projects to
deliver optimum capability outcome
• Three key roles:
3 Senior Responsible Owner =
Capability Sponsor
3 Programme Manager = DE&S
3 Business Change Manager = User
delivery
Figure 3 - Capability Planning Roles and
Responsibilities within Capability Management
Opportunities for
embedding the People
Component
Opportunities for considering the People
Component, shown in Table 1, are described
in the following sections.
High Level Operational
Analysis, Balance of
Investment Studies and
COEIA
High Level Operational Analysis and Balance
of Investment studies support the translation
of Defence Planning Assumptions into a set
of capabilities that are needed in order to
achieve desired effects and campaign
outcomes. This is a fundamental part of
Capability planning [AOF].
The People Component within
Operational Analysis (OA)
Collaboration between the OA and Human
Sciences communities should be
encouraged to ensure full representation of
the People Component (e.g. Operator and
team workload, information flow and
manning levels) within OA models and
studies. Where the human component is
critical, consideration should be given to
human-in-the-loop experimentation to
ensure effective understanding of the
interactions between the DLOD (training,
doctrine etc). Scrutineers should be aware
of the breadth of people factors when
evaluating the output of OA in support of
Combined Operational Effectiveness
Investment Appraisal (COEIA) submissions.
18/19

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Risk Process
A thorough and systematic consideration of
people-related risks is crucial and should be
an integral part of the Risk Processes
adopted by the Capability Sponsor.
ECC* Risk Categorisation Model
The ECC (now Capability Sponsor) Risk
Categorisation Model (v5) (ECC library of
Risk Events) provides a good starting point
for the identification of people-related risks.
It includes 11 risk categories largely
associated with the DLOD (e.g. Personnel,
Suppliers, Organisation, and Information)
and identifies 100+ risk sub-categories (e.g.
training, recruitment, retention, leadership,
reliability, disposal of equipment) with
standard descriptions (e.g. failure to provide
adequate training for existing staff, unable
to retain talented staff and inadequate
communication across the organisation).
Used together with the set of People Factors
(Annex A), it will be possible to identify
a comprehensive set of people-related risks
influencing Capability.
Involvement of specialist
Human Sciences Personnel
It is important to involve specialist Human
Sciences personnel at each stage of the risk
process (see contacts section). In particular,
the Human Sciences representative should
be responsible for assuring the
comprehensiveness of the list of People
related considerations generated at Stage 1
(Identify) and confirming the validity of
mitigation strategies developed at Stage 2
(Analyse) of the risk process.
Generic Four-Stage Risk Process
used by MOD
• Stage 1: Identify - What is the
possible range of people-related
risks associated with a particular
Capability (e.g. Logistic Support,
ISTAR, Land Close Battlespace and
Counter Terrorism)?
• Stage 2: Analyse - What is the
probability of occurrence and likely
impact of the range of peoplerelated
risks identified? What are
the high priority people-related
risks?
• Stage 3: Plan - What plans should
be put in place to ensure the
management of the people-related
risks?
• Stage 4: Manage - What resources
need to be put in place to ensure
the continued management of
people-related risks?
* The MOD Capability Sponsor was formerly known as the
Equipment Capability Customer.

Capability Audit
The Capability Audit is the Capability
Sponsor’s process for assessing the expected
operational capabilities of UK Forces –
based on the Equipment Procurement Plan
(EPP) and the Equipment Support Plan
(ESP) [AOF].
In the past, the equipment Capability Audit
process assumed that non-equipment aspects
would be addressed adequately elsewhere.
Within TLCM the need to audit the whole
Capability is recognised and this, by
definition, requires a thorough and systematic
consideration of the People Component.
ECC Capability Taxonomy
The ECC (now Capability Sponsor) Capability
Taxonomy is used to support the Capability
Audit process. This taxonomy comprises
both main Capability, (e.g. Logistic Support,
Deep Attack) and sub-capability
(e.g. situational awareness, survivability,
specialist training, decision making and
communication) areas.
Whilst some examples of people-related
factors are included within the subcapability
areas of this taxonomy, there are
many other relevant factors that need to be
considered, e.g. numbers and types of
personnel, individual, team and collective
training effectiveness and frequency,
operator performance and capabilities –
knowledge and skills.
It is recommended that a set of people-related
factors be used alongside the Capability
Taxonomy to support a more comprehensive
consideration of the People Component of
Capability in the audit process.
A pilot’s view from the cockpit of a Royal Air Force
Typhoon multi role fighter jet.
20/21

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Capability Investigations
Capability Investigations are undertaken to
identify generic options across all DLOD,
which could resolve Capability shortfalls
and exploit opportunities. In some instances,
Capability Investigations may form the basis
of a concept phase for a new equipment
project [AOF].
It is imperative that Capability
Investigations take due consideration of the
People Component of Capability.
Importantly, what may seem to be a benefit
of a Capability could result in an
unintended increase in workload,
a reduction in situation awareness, poor
decision making and an increase in the
training overhead. Therefore, Human
Sciences personnel should be fully engaged
at the project’s outset. Merely involving such
personnel subsequently during the conduct
of ‘human-in-the-loop’ investigations as part
of the design and development is too late.
Capability Investigations, particularly those
that include multi-disciplinary teams,
should implement a process for ensuring
the full consideration of the People
Component. This process should include a
methodology for identifying and monitoring
the consideration of relevant people factors
by the Capability Investigation team. It
should be noted that all MOD research
using human participants must be
conducted ethically and have MOD
Research Ethics Committee (MoDREC)
approval (JSP536).
Some considerations:
• What are the key people factors that
should be investigated and why?
• Who within the Capability Investigation
team is investigating which types of
people factors? Do they have the necessary
competences to undertake this work?
• Are the methodologies in place for
investigating people factors based on good
practice?
• What common definitions of key terms
should be adopted by the team e.g. for
situation awareness, workload, decision
making?
A soldier on the Trinasium assault course at Catterick Garrison makes a leap of faith into a cargo net. The aerial
assault course is designed to test and develop the courage of soldiers going over the various elements of the course.

Capability Planning and
Assumptions List (CPAL)
Every decision made in Capability
Management Planning will be underpinned
by a number of assumptions and these must
be captured and supported by rigorous data
where possible [AOF].
Different perspectives are considered when
forming assumptions – financial,
commercial, research, industrial and
Capability. The Capability perspective
includes all DLOD and as such needs to
consider the People Component.
Examples of people-related
assumptions:
• That appropriate numbers of
personnel will be available
through life.
• That the Capability will be
manpower neutral.
• That existing training facilities
(e.g. methods, media, and
frequency) will support the
achievement of the required
training standards.
Capability Management
Strategy (CMS)
A Capability Management Group (CMG)
uses a Capability Management Strategy
(CMS) to issue direction, guidance and tasks
that govern Capability Planning Groups
(CPG) in planning and delivering capabilities
on behalf of the CMG. It guides and
expresses the business and intent of a CMG
in a standard and defined format [AOF].
The CMS provides an important early
opportunity for raising awareness of the
need to consider the People Component of
Capability. Whilst a section on the People
Component is not yet referenced explicitly
in the standard CMS document format,
there is scope for its inclusion within, for
example, the opening ‘Context’ section.
A member of the Royal Engineers, at the British Army
Training Unit Suffield (BATUS), guides a Warrior light
tank over a No12 bridge. BATUS is located in Alberta
Canada and is one of the largest training areas the
British Army use to exercise their armoured battle
groups. It covers an area roughly 7 times the size of
Salisbury Plain Training Area.
The set of people-related factors can be used
to prompt the identification of relevant
assumptions.
People-related assumptions need to be
recorded within the Capability Planning
and Assumptions List (CPAL) and assigned
to a relevant owner who will be responsible
for ensuring their ongoing validity and for
updating the CPAL to reflect any changes.
22/23

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Capability Management
Plan (CMP)
A Capability Management Plan expresses
how a CPG sets the strategic conditions for
success within the group’s defined
Capability Area [AOF].
The standard format of the CMP, as
presented in the Acquisition Operating
Framework (AOF), provides opportunities
for documenting how the People
Component of Capability should be
addressed. Consideration should be given
to the inclusion of at least the following
within this document:
• Priority People-related risks
• People-related assumptions and
constraints
• The key outputs of People-related
Capability Investigations
The Research Perspective
and Research Goals
The research perspective is one of many
baseline perspectives presented as part of the
baseline review and audit during Capability
planning. This perspective is essential to
ensure that the Research Programme and
Capability Planning are coherent. The
Research perspective looks across the DLOD
and as such provides an important opportunity
for the consideration of the People Component
of Capability. In particular this perspective
involves the definition of research goals
and the assessment of these goals in
relation to Capability requirements. The
comprehensiveness of these goals should be
‘checked’ with reference to a set of people
factors – see examples at Annex A.
A Royal Air Force firefighter tackles a blaze during a
training exercise at RAF Marham in Norfolk.

MODAF
The MOD Architectural Framework
(MODAF) offers a way to describe current or
future enterprises from different
perspectives or viewpoints, e.g. strategic and
operational, to support the planning and
management of military Capability change.
Human Views (HVs) have been developed to
capture the People Component in a MODAFconsistent
format, providing an opportunity
for embedding people factors at the earliest
opportunity within Capability Planning (see
Figure 4). HVs play an important role in the
specification and management of
requirements. As a programme progresses
to Capability Delivery, HVs can also be used
to inform subsequent Human Factors
Integration (HFI) activities e.g. development
of People-Related Requirements in the User
Requirements Document (URD) and System
Requirements Document (SRD).
Figure 4 - An overview of selected high-level
relationships between Human Views (HVs),
outlining how each HV informs another.
24/25

c a p a b i l i t y p l a n n i n g
Key Points
• The People Component is an integral
part of Capability and should be
considered during capability
management – spanning planning,
delivery and generation.
• The People Component of Capability
is described in terms of a set of people
factors that influence the capability of
individuals, teams, collectives and
coalitions to operate effectively within
the defence environment.
• The People Component of Capability
should be considered for each DLOD –
not just within the Training and
Personnel LODs.
• Several opportunities already exist
within the Capability Management
process for the identification and
management of the People
Component.
• The Capability Sponsor risk process,
initiated during capability planning,
provides a critical opportunity for the
identification and management of the
People Component.
• The example list of People Factors,
introduced at Figure 2 and described at
Annex A, should be used alongside the
DLOD to prompt the identification and
management of the People Component
during Capability Planning.
From Capability
Planning to Delivery
It is essential that the people-related risks,
issues, assumptions and constraints that are
identified during Capability Planning are
flowed down to Programme Boards and
incorporated into the HFI process
conducted as part of Capability Delivery.
An important vehicle for this is the
requirements development process via the
URD and SRD.

A Typhoon Multi Role Fighter is serviced on
the tarmac prior to takeoff at RAF Coningsby.
26/27

Capability Delivery
This section addresses:
• Why HFI is important in Capability Delivery
• Main areas for consideration – the HFI domains
• Key HFI Management and Technical activities
2
The goal is to provide an initial introduction for MOD and
Industry personnel involved in HFI.
28/29

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
capability Delivery
‘Military systems can only achieve an
optimal level of performance and acceptable
level of safety if the operators’ and
maintainers’ requirements, capabilities and
limitations are considered during
equipment design.’ [AOF]
Human Factors
Integration
Human Factors Integration (HFI) is the MOD
process by which the People Component of
Capability is considered during Capability
Delivery (see Figure 5). It is a systematic
process for identifying, tracking and resolving
human-related considerations ensuring a
balanced development of both technologies
and human aspects of Capability.
Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) are
a key stakeholder in the coordination of HFI
activity at this stage of TLCM. Note that HFI
is sometimes referred to as Human-System
Integration (HSI).
HFI is part of the overall systems
engineering that allows the human
component of the system to be
effectively included in the trade-off
process.
It is important to note that although the HFI
process is applied during Capability
Delivery, many of the processes and
products it encompasses will have started
during Capability Planning e.g. the Through
Life Management Plan (TLMP), HFI
Strategy.
Whilst the complexity of technology has
developed at a rapid rate, the basic
capabilities of humans remain essentially
fixed. This is placing unsurpassed demands
on human operators. People are reasonably
good at adapting up to a point but
ultimately if whole systems, or Capabilities,
are not specified, designed, managed and
operated to take account of human strengths
and weaknesses problems will arise. This
could be in the form of basic design-induced
errors, reduced force effectiveness or
recruitment and retention difficulties.

Cap Sponsor
DE&S
User
Centre
DST
Industry - Supplier
Unified
Customer
Generation
Capability Integration Groups
• Led by User
• Integrate LODs to generate Force Elements
• Years 1-4 Equipment Support Plan coherence
User feedback on
Capability gaps and
opportunities
Integration of new and/
or changed capability
Capability
Management
Capability Planning Groups
• Led by Capability Sponsor
• Devise plans for capability areas
• Lead Capability Investigations
• Prepare Options
• Drive Options through Planning Rounds
Planning
• Sponsors Programmes
• Programme Initiation
• Acceptance
Programme Boards
• Coordinates constituent projects to
deliver optimum capability outcome
• Three key roles:
3 Senior Responsible Owner =
Capability Sponsor
3 Programme Manager = DE&S
3 Business Change Manager = User
delivery
Figure 5 - Capability Delivery Roles and
Responsibilities within Capability Management
• Personnel costs account for over 30% of the
Defence Budget (www.dasa.mod.uk)
• The Armed Services have to compete with
other employers for the limited supply of
new recruits with the basic abilities to
work with sophisticated technology.
When coupled with long-term
demographic and educational trends, this
means there is no guarantee that the
Services will be able to recruit and retain
the kinds of personnel that specific
military systems will require.
Therefore it is vital that Human Factors is
integrated into the design of systems be that
equipment or support solutions.
• The Standish Report (1995) showed that
Projects failed because of Incomplete
Requirements, particularly user
requirements, and Lack of User
Involvement in the design process.
Indeed, user involvement was seen as the
number one success factor in IT projects.
With the move towards NEC, the need to
consider Human Factors aspects is
highlighted, especially regarding usability
and team-working and how to assess these
in increasingly complex situations.
• Reducing errors is just one of the benefits
of good human factors. Products that have
successful HFI reduce liability, product
recalls, development costs, time to market,
training, support and maintenance costs.
30/31

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Case Study: A HFI Success
HFI was applied to the M1 series of battle
tanks. The earlier M60 tanks showed that
performance correlated with user intellect.
An Early Comparability Analysis (ECA)
showed clearly that, by redesigning for a
range of crew abilities, high system
performance could still be achieved and
now any M1 crew out-performs the best
M60 crew.
©General Dynamics Land Systems

Taking a broad-based, through-life approach
to HFI is crucial.
To ensure HFI is successful, it is important
to recognise that HFI is relevant:
• Throughout the Capability lifecycle from
earliest planning to disposal. Without
early involvement people-related risks can
be inadvertently designed into system
plans and will later have to be mitigated
at additional cost.
• When developing a whole Capability, e.g.
a new platform and all its support systems
and services. HFI is also relevant during
mid-life upgrades or smaller technology
insertions, e.g. a new communications
system.
• Across all aspects of Capability, e.g. not
just for traditional human-machine
interface design but also for development
of organisational support and
maintenance services.
• For all types of acquisition, including UOR
procurements or when Commercial Off
The Shelf (COTS) equipment is being
used, to ensure fitness for purpose.
• In relation to other acquisition activities.
It is easy to stove-pipe HFI and not
integrate it with other systems
engineering and test activities. This can
lead to inconsistencies in approach, HFI
aspects being overlooked and additional
later costs.
The Comanche Helicopter
programme (U.S. Army) was initiated
in 1983 to develop a lightweight
helicopter capable of conducting
armed reconnaissance and light
attack missions, to replace the Army’s
existing Capability.
The cost saving figure is estimated by
comparing manpower and training
costs of the Comanche to those of the
existing Capability and adding to that
an estimated saving through the
influence of HFI on the avoidance of
safety/health hazard costs. The
breakdown of savings is as follows:
• Manpower – cost reduction over
existing Capability: $2.67 billion
• Personnel, Training – cost reduction
over existing Capability: $440 million
• Safety, health hazards, soldier
survivability – costs avoided: $180
million
(Booher & Minninger, 2003)
32/33

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Case Study: Failure to
apply HFI
The case of the Single Role Minehunters
(National Audit Office 2000) is an example of
how insufficient consideration of HFI can
lead to significant costs.
After accepting the first of five Single Role
Minehunters into service, it was discovered
that it was difficult to recover the Remote
Control Mine Disposal System from the sea
back on board the ship in high seas, due to
the pitching and rolling of the ship. To
rectify the problem, it was necessary to
install a better crane with a remote control
facility, a platform for the operator to get
nearer to the water line and an additional
recovery hook and hook pole. This problem
can clearly be identified as a manual
handling problem, the likelihood of which
had been underestimated during
development.
Since the operational problems became
apparent soon after initial deployment, and
design actions were taken, the potential for
significant financial losses due to injuries,
damage or loss was averted. However, there
was a cost of £1.9 million associated with
design changes to overcome these
difficulties (Public Accounts Committee,
2000). Since the suppliers had met their
requirements, they were not liable for any
of the rework costs. The cost was carried by
the MOD as the procuring organisation.
It seems reasonable to assume that the
difficulties of recovering the Remote Control
Mine Disposal System in high seas had not
been identified as a risk with high-enough
priority. It can be argued that Human
Factors activities applied much earlier in
the design process could have prevented the
costs (e.g. as part of requirements
specification and prototype testing
activities). A standard HFI process may have
prevented the problems.

A remotely operated vehicle is
brought to the surface.
34/35

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Benefits of HFI
HFI provides a flexible process to support
the identification and mitigation of
people-related risks and issues during
Capability and equipment development.
• It ensures project relevant activities are
undertaken that analyse and develop
solutions to ensure optimised human
system interaction.
• It integrates effectively with Systems
Engineering activities and is subject to
scrutiny as part of the broader Technical
Assurance processes.
• It uses a framework of seven HFI Domains
to ensure that the range of human-related
considerations, issues, risks, assumptions,
constraints and requirements are captured
(see next page).
• It is a proactive approach to managing
human-related risks in which potential
benefits and costs are assessed.
• It provides a range of guidance and tools
to support both management and
technical activities.
Royal Marine Landing Craft hit the beach during an amphibious assault demonstration at Pentewan Beach, Cornwall.
The Marines of 40 Cdo had disembarked from HMS Ocean during Exercise Southwest Sword and were conducting
the exercise prior to deployment.

HFI Domains
HFI involves the identification and trade-off
of people-related aspects that could impact
Capability development and delivery. To
ensure all relevant dimensions are considered
a framework of seven domains is used.
The Seven HFI Domains
• Manpower
• Personnel
• Training
• Human Factors Engineering
• System Safety
• Health Hazards
• Social & Organisational
The HFI domains allow for all aspects of
human behaviour, capabilities and limitations
to be addressed e.g. from interactions with the
physical environment to understanding
cultural differences in groups. Importantly
the HFI domains are related to each other
and should not be considered in isolation.
Any decision in one of the domains can
easily impact on another domain. For
example, where the level of automation is
increased there may be a change in
required staffing levels, and vice versa.
At the simplest level asking ‘are there
concerns relating to this domain?’ can help
identify what needs to be considered and
ultimately prioritised as high, medium or
low risk to the overall programme. This
should form a natural part of the project’s
risk management activity, linking in with
the use of standard DE&S risk tools and
categorisation systems. Key considerations
and example questions associated with each
HFI domain are given in the following
pages. These are not exhaustive lists of
topics for each domain but they offer
prompts to illustrate the scope of each
domain. They can also help with scoping the
overall requirements for HFI in a project.
MAPPING THE HFI Domains
TO THE DLOD
People-related factors are a component of
each DLOD and are not confined to the
Training and Personnel LOD. The DLOD
provide a high level structure for the
identification of key aspects of Capability
Planning and delivery. However for
engineering of actual systems the HFI
domains provide an established framework
for addressing human-related
considerations. The HFI domains are
particularly useful in supporting the
detailed design of systems to ensure
effective human performance.
36/37

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Manpower
The number of men and women,
military and civilian, required and
available to operate and maintain,
sustain and provide training for
systems.
Manpower related considerations may, for
example, be identified from the following:
• Will significantly different manpower
levels be required compared to those that
are currently used?
• What staffing levels and mix are needed to
support the system across the full range of
operations?
• Which types of staff will be needed to
support the system/Capability throughout
different phases of its life?
• Can the numbers of skills, ranks and
experience levels needed be delivered and
sustained?
• How will manpower levels and shift
requirements be managed in relation to
workload?
• How will the work introduced by the
system be allocated between branches,
divisions or trade groups?
• Will the system be reliant on scarce skill
sets or ‘pinch-point’ trades?
Troops from 16 Air Assault Brigade load into the rear of a C130 Hercules transport aircraft at the end of their 7 month
operational tour in Afghanistan and start the first leg of their journey home. The Hercules C130 will fly out of Camp
Bastion under the cover of darkness and deliver the transiting troops to Kandahar Air force base ready for the next
part of their journey back to the UK.

A young Iraqi boy hitches a lift on the back of a 2 Royal Welsh soldier’s bicycle during Operation Telic near Basra in 2007.
Personnel
The aptitudes, experiences and other
human characteristics, including
body size and strength, necessary to
achieve optimum system
performance.
Personnel related considerations may, for
example, be identified from the following:
• What cognitive and physical attributes are
required by personnel to support system
operation?
• What levels of skill and education are
necessary for optimal effectiveness?
• Will personnel need to be deployed in
different timescales or for extended
durations?
• Will significantly different types of
expertise and experience be required for
the new system compared with the
current situation?
• What previous training and qualifications
would be advantageous?
• Will personnel be required to work on
their own, as part of a team or to provide
team leadership?
• Will changes to existing personnel/
manpower plans and performance
management systems be required?
• What impact could the new system/
Capability have on staff job satisfaction
and motivation?
38/39

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Training
The specification and evaluation of
the optimum combination of:
instructional systems, education and
on the job training required to
develop the knowledge, skills and
abilities needed by the available
personnel to operate and maintain
systems to the specified level of
effectiveness under the full range of
operating conditions.
Training related considerations may, for
example, be identified from the following:
• Has the range of training requirements
been considered e.g. training media,
establishments and facilities, cost
effectiveness?
• For what range of personnel in different
tasks, roles and system states will training
be required?
• What skill gaps are associated with the
ways of working for the proposed system/
Capability?
• If there is a risk of de-skilling due to
automation, how will this be addressed?
• What will be done to ensure effective
transfer of training?
• Is additional planning and expertise
required to implement new training
programmes and instructional activities?
• What output standards are required from
the training?
• What are the implications on training
schedules for existing and new personnel?
• Will there be any implications for joint/
collective training?
• What instructor training will be required?
Soldiers serving in various army units throughout the UK and overseas are put through their paces on the All Arms
Commando Training Course held at the Commando Training Centre, Lympstone, Devon.

Human Factors Engineering
The comprehensive integration of
human characteristics into system
definition, including all aspects of
workstation and workspace design,
accommodation and habitability
considerations.
Human Factors Engineering related
considerations may, for example, be
identified from the following:
• How will user interfaces, information
systems and control functions be designed
to match the cognitive abilities of
operators and maintainers?
• How will workspaces and equipment be
designed to match the physical
characteristics of operators and maintainers?
• How will decisions be made as to which
tasks should be automated and which
should be performed manually?
• What will be the impact of new technology
on team and individual situation awareness,
decision making and communication?
• How could the design of the system
impact on training requirements?
• Are improvements to information
management required, e.g. combining
information from various sources?
• Do personnel need to be co-located for
effective communication?
• Will work and recreational conditions e.g.
space, comfort, light, heat and humidity
change significantly?
• How are maintenance tasks and through life
support requirements being considered?
• How will COTS components be evaluated
to support effective integration with other
components or parts of the system?
An Aircraft Engineering Technician of 815 Naval Air
Squadron, carries out routine maintenance on the tail of
HMS Argyll’s Lynx helicopter.
40/41

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
System Safety
The process of applying human
factors expertise to minimise safety
risks occurring as a result of the
system being operated or functioning
in a normal or abnormal manner.
System Safety related considerations may,
for example, be identified from the
following:
• How will error sources be identified,
analysed and mitigated?
• To what extent could unintentional errors
impact safety?
• What steps are being taken to influence
the development and maintenance of
safety-related attitudes and behaviours?
• Is there specific Safety legislation that
should be applied?
• Are reversionary modes required for cases
of system failure?
• Will the new system require significantly
higher levels of error tolerance and
‘Human Reliability’?
• Does specific consideration need to be
given to crash-worthiness and protection?
• Will the new system meet the current
survivability criteria?
• How will opportunities for potential misuse
that could impact safety be identified?
• Will safety measures be in place when
moving stores i.e. those that are
cumbersome or contain volatile or
explosive items?
• How could abnormal functioning or
degraded system status affect safety?
• How will human factors considerations be
addressed in the development of the
Safety Case?
A Royal Air Force technician solders
a circuit board at RAF Benson.

A soldier wearing an S10 Respirator is shown exiting a contaminated site and undergoing decontamination by a Trooper
from ‘D’ Squadron of the Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Regiment.
Health Hazard Assessment
The process of identifying and
addressing conditions inherent in the
operation or use of a system (e.g.
vibration, fumes, radiation, noise,
shock, recoil etc.) that can cause
death, injury, illness, disability, or
reduce the performance of personnel.
Health Hazard related considerations may,
for example, be identified from the following:
• How will duty of care responsibilities be
managed?
• Which Health and Safety standards
should be followed?
• Have the range of environmental issues and
risks (e.g. temperature, noise levels etc)
and their impact on human performance
(e.g. fatigue, stress etc) been considered?
• Will personnel be presented with
significantly higher operational risk than
for existing Capability?
• What will be done to minimise the risk of
personnel exposed to electro-magnetic
radiation, lasers, sources of Nuclear,
Biological, Chemical (NBC) or toxic
material?
• Could there be risk of injury through use
or maintenance of equipment?
• What activities will be undertaken to
ensure the design of appropriate personal
protective clothing and equipment?
• Are personnel required to perform
repetitive movements or heavy lifting/
load carriage?
• What medical facilities will be needed to
support personnel in different
environments?
• How will the system be designed to isolate
hazards?
• How will perceptions of risk associated
with potential health hazards be
managed?
• What criteria will be used to balance
trade-offs between health and
performance?
42/43

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Social & Organisational
The process of applying tools and
techniques from organisational
psychology, management studies,
social science, information science and
the system of systems approach in
order to consider the organisational
configuration, social environment and
ways of working in a Capability.
Social and Organisational related
considerations may, for example, be
identified from the following:
• Will the proposed system generate new
tasks or changes to operational procedures?
• How will the command structure be
supported?
• How will working with other groups or
agencies impact the organisation’s
structure?
• How will interoperability and shared
situation awareness be managed and
supported?
• Will the new system or associated ways of
working impact on existing cultural,
ethical or spiritual norms?
• How will gender differences and evolving
social expectations be accommodated?
• How might changes in the mix of militarycivilian
staff affect the organisation?
• What measures are in place to ensure a
common doctrine?
• How will ways of working be affected by
environments that comprise multinational/multi-service
interoperability
in NEC?
• How will issues and risks linked to
distributed team working be addressed,
e.g. information management and
communication, trust?
HERTI XPA-1B on final approach. © BAE SYSTEMS 2009.

How to do HFI
HFI is about mitigating risk, managing
safety, improving performance, and ensuring
the satisfaction and well-being of personnel
to support the delivery of effect. To do this
successfully, it is important to relate human
factors activities to the overall systems
engineering approach used in Capability
acquisition. The diagram in Figure 6
illustrates how key HFI activity stages map
to the Systems Engineering lifecycle and the
Concept, Assessment, Demonstration,
Manufacture, In-Service, Disposal (CADMID)
model. For more information on ‘how to do
HFI’ see the Additional Information and
Resources section.
The HFI process can be divided into
Management and Technical activities, which
should run alongside each other and can be
tailored to suit specific project requirements.
• HFI Management Activities relate to
planning what to do and when – i.e.
ensuring the questions are asked.
• HFI Technical Activities relate to doing
it – i.e. answering the questions.
Together the management and technical
activities of HFI provide a framework for
ensuring that the human element of a
system is considered early in the CADMID
cycle and that the required level of HFI
maturity is reached for Initial and Main
Gates. In order to do this, adequate
resources are needed to ensure that the
necessary HFI activities are budgeted for,
scheduled and managed as part of the
TLCM process. To monitor the progress of
HFI in a project, assurance levels have been
developed to provide a check that critical
activities occur at the appropriate stage in
the project lifecycle.
The remainder of this section discusses the
different management and technical
processes including links to criteria for
technical assurance and links to other
project documentation. Recognising these
links is important because HFI may have
common goals and requirements with other
areas of engineering, e.g. safety; Integrated
Logistics Support (ILS); Availability,
Reliability and Maintainability (ARM).
Aligning activities or sharing information
could reduce effort, e.g. the same task
analysis data could underpin Human
Machine Interface (HMI) design, training
needs analysis and safety assessments.
44/45

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Figure 6 - Key HFI activities mapped to the Systems
Engineering and CADMID Lifecycle Model
(Source: Def Stan 00-250:
Human Factors for the Designers
of Systems, Part 0, Issue 1)

Basic Activities
While the HFI process is flexible and can be adapted to the needs of the project, a number of
activities are key to the overall success of a HFI programme. As such all projects will benefit
from the following HFI components:
Critical success factors
Proactive HFI Management from the onset
Stakeholder buy-in
HFI Risks and Issues identification
and mitigation
Iterative acceptance
Integration with other project activities
Robust assurance and ‘ensurance’
associated activities
Develop a clear HFI strategy and
produce (and update) a Human Factors
Integration Plan (HFIP)
HFI working group with end-user
representation
Conduct an Early Human Factors
Analysis (EHFA)
Detailed designs are resolved with early
human-in-the-loop analysis and
stakeholder input in compliance with
HF standards
Communicate HFI information to other
project disciplines
Adherence to HFI checks as part of the
Technical Assurance process throughout
the project
With these key elements in place, more detailed HFI activities, processes and tools can be
identified to suit specific project needs that meet technical assurance requirements.
46/47

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
HFI Management Activities
The management of HFI needs to be
implemented from very early in a project
lifecycle (see Capability Planning section).
During Capability Delivery, HFI follows a
defined process, with clear activities, inputs
and deliverables for each stage of the
project lifecycle. The size or criticality of
these inputs and deliverables will depend
on the extent and severity of HFI issues and
risks identified for a project.
Engineers from the Depth Aircraft Maintenance
Flight of RAF Lossiemouth at work servicing an
aircraft.
Main HFI Management activities
• HFI Strategy
• HFI Plan
• Early Human Factors Analysis
• HFI Considerations Register
• HFI or ‘People-Related’ Requirements and
Acceptance
• HFI Working Group (HFIWG)
It is important to realise that some of these
HFI management activities will be carried
out concurrently and will be developed in
an iterative process.

HFI Strategy
The HFI Strategy needs to clarify
• the project approach to HFI
• who will manage it
• who will undertake this work
• when it will be done
The aim of the HFI Strategy is to ensure that
the human component of the Capability is
fully considered and given appropriate
prominence when developing the URD and
SRD and thus throughout the Capability
lifecycle. This would normally be done
early on in the project (e.g. by the Project
Team (PT) Requirements Manager) building
on outputs generated during Capability
Planning.
The HFI Strategy shows how the key goals
of the HFI effort help achieve overall project
goals and should be aligned with other
project strategy documents e.g. Training and
Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance
(ITEA) Strategies. It is based on a clarified
and quantified understanding of the main
HFI issues, risks, assumptions and
constraints in the context of the specific
project acquisition strategy.
The Concept of Employment (CONEMP)
document will influence the HFI strategy
and is important because a well-written
CONEMP provides a clear understanding of
the end users’ needs. The HFI Strategy will
have a strong influence over the HFI Plan
(HFIP) and needs to be included in it.
The HFI Strategy should align with the
appropriate technical assurance levels so
that the project approach to HFI allows easy
transition through Initial Gate, Main Gate
and final acceptance.
48/49

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
HFI Plan (HFIP)
The overall project management plan
should include a HFI section for each phase
and typically this will be supported by a
reference out to a more detailed HFIP. The
HFIP is the coordinating document for all
HFI activities within the project.
In particular, it addresses the assessment
stage of the project and includes the
following types of information:
• Key HFI risks, issues, assumptions and
constraints
• HFI studies, actions and mitigation
strategies for each significant risk
• Allocation of roles and responsibilities
between MOD and Industry for required
HFI activities
• Dependencies between organisations and
project activities in conducting HFI activities
• Strategy for integrating HFI with Through
Life Management (TLM) activities, e.g.
development of a safety case
• Key milestones, deliverables and
timescales
• Extent of need for end user (i.e. operator,
maintainer) participation
• Method for including HFI in system level
trade-offs
• Method for monitoring and controlling
progress against the plan.
A Royal Air Force Typhoon aircraft of 29 Squadron, RAF Coningsby is prepared for takeoff at RAF Akrotiri, Cyprus.

HFI must be adequately covered in the
Invitation To Tender (ITT), particularly in
the context of contractual tasking, to define
the requirements. This will also assist the
HFI teams within contractor organisations
to win the budget and prioritisation they
need. The HFI focus should ensure that
other related ITT sections such as ILS, are
consistent with HFI.
Full details of what should be included in an
HFIP can be found in Def Stan 00-250, Part 0.
Early Human Factors
Analysis
Early Human Factors Analysis forms the
basis for the identification of HFI risks,
issues, assumptions and constraints. It
should be considered an integral part of the
Project or Programme’s risk management
activity. It is one of the key activities for
initiating HFI on a project, agreeing its
scope and supporting the HFI business case.
The EHFA should be informed by the initial
set of people-related risks, issues, constraints
and assumptions identified during
Capability Planning.
The outputs of the EHFA should inform the
documentation of the following:
• HFI Considerations – potential humanrelated
considerations are identified with
a range of Stakeholders and analysed to
determine HFI issues, risks, assumptions
and constraints;
• HFI Issues - significant certain occurrences
differentiated from Risk by virtue of their
certainty of occurrence and by the fact
that they should be accounted for in
Planning & Scheduling activities and not
Risk Management [AOF];
• HFI Risks - significant uncertain
occurrences, differentiated from Issues by
virtue of their lack of certainty. A Risk is
defined by the combination of the
probability of an event occurring and its
consequences on objectives [AOF]. Risks
encompass both threats and opportunities;
• HFI Assumptions – statements that will be
taken for granted as fact and upon which
the project business case will be justified
(Association for Project Management);
• HFI Constraints – things that should be
considered as fixed or must happen.
Restrictions that will affect the project
(Association for Project Management).
EHFA should be undertaken as early as
possible (at least during the Concept Phase,
if not before) and should subsequently be
revisited as a part of Project / Programme
Risk Management practices.
50/51

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
The EHFA process comprises the following
three-stage approach:
1. Establish the baseline. This phase
involves the collection of any documents
or known assumptions, e.g. outputs from
Capability Investigations or MODAF HVs
that may have an influence on the human
component of the emerging Capability.
Even in Concept Phase there are likely to
have been options identified and hence
potential user groups and stakeholders.
2. Identify HFI considerations. This phase
typically involves the conduct of a
workshop involving all project
stakeholders together. Potential humanrelated
considerations are identified
during the workshop using a
brainstorming approach. Issues, risks,
opportunities, constraints and
assumptions identified should be grouped
under each HFI domain. It is
acknowledged that at the early stages
there will be a considerable degree of
uncertainty, so a number of assumptions
will need to be made and documented.
3. Analyse the HFI risks identified, plan
mitigation and manage. Once the risks
have been captured they need to be
evaluated and assessed for likelihood and
impact. Using a standard risk
management matrix their relative
importance is determined. Typically, the
top ten risks account for around 80% of the
HFI risk on any particular project. The
risks to be addressed by research/studies/
data collection form the basis of the HFIP.
The EHFA may take place in a Working
Group setting and representatives should
include: Requirements Management, Safety,
Training, Project Management, ILS and
Systems Engineering. Importantly, the
EHFA should incorporate HF/HFI expertise,
Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and End
User Representation.
HMS Cumberland passes across the bow of a pirate vessel at maximum speed in an attempt to stop the small
boat from proceeding in the Gulf of Aden. The pirates were later arrested and their vessel seized after a successful
operation involving the ship and her Royal Marine boarding teams.

HFI or ‘People-Related’ Requirements and Acceptance
People form an important part of a
Capability / System so it is essential that
People-Related Requirements (PRRs) are
defined that hook into the key sources of
requirements for acquisition. PRRs broaden
URDs, SRDs and acquisition specifications
by making requirements relating to people
explicit. PRRs are intended to provide
stronger links into the formal requirements
engineering process. Human Views
developed for MODAF may also be used
early in design specification and should
facilitate development of PRRs in the
context of Systems Engineering.
PRRs describe a set of requirements relating to
the needs, interfaces, constraints and
performance of people that form part of
systems delivering a Capability. Generic
examples of PRR can be found in Def-Stan
00-250, which states that given the importance
of human factors, ignoring PRR is poor practice;
it can also increase acquisition and lifetime
costs and may result in reduced Capability.
PRRs can be usefully organised under three major headings as shown in Table 2.
Table 2 - People-Related Requirements
PRRs Set Type Content examples
Overarching PRRs System requirements that The need to provide adequate
arise because human beings space and environmental
are part of a military system. working conditions for people.
The need to design visual
displays in accordance with
human performance
capabilities and limitations.
Service-Specific System requirements that The need to provide self-
PRRs arise because a particular contained accommodation
group of military personnel spaces on a ship or submarine.
are part of the system
The need to conform to current
(e.g. Army, Navy or Air Force). organisational hierarchies in
the manning solution.
Capability-Specific System requirements that The need for equipment Users
PPRs arise because the particular to locate and identify targets
group of military personnel or achieve a specified rate of
must achieve certain
fire.
functions as part of the system.
52/53

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
HFI Working Group
The most critical check on whether
requirements are appropriate is whether
acceptance criteria can be sufficiently well
defined. The standard means by which a
solution is accepted are based on
established approaches taken from MOD
acquisition best practice. These are Design
Inspection, Functional Demonstration, Task
Walk-through and Operability Trial. The
standard means are augmented by two
additional means: Consensus based on
Evidence and Consensus based on
Judgement. Guidance on complying with
PRRs is given in Def Stan 00-250, Part 0.
Early definition of requirements and
acceptance criteria should ensure that
contractors provide more effective
equipment and systems that meet the
operational requirements fully.
A HFIWG serves as a forum for interchange
of ideas and information and also to help
resolve conflicts between different specialist
requirements. This forum is important for
coordination between HFI stakeholders so it
is important to set it up as soon as possible.
The next steps are to define the terms of
reference, obtain support from the lead
Capability Sponsor and/or PT leader with a
clear line of reporting to them, include user
representatives/other technical areas of the
project, and include stakeholders with an
interest (or interests) in human-related
aspects of the Capability.
Ideally the HFIWGs should run throughout
the project and should retain a reasonably
stable membership. Sustaining the group
during the In-service phase will allow for
co-ordination of feedback from Users, such
as operators and maintainers, on Capability
gaps and opportunities.
Soldiers from the King’s Royal Hussars are shown preparing to extract from Salisbury Plain, after torrential
downpours forced the cancellation of Exercise Druid’s Dance. Military chiefs said that exercise needs had to be
balanced against the preservation of the training area, which is rich in plant and wildlife.

HFI Technical Activities
This section introduces the technical HFI
activities that may be carried out during a
project. Many of these technical tasks will
require specialist HF input. However, it is
also necessary for those managing HFI to
have some understanding of the need for,
function and output of these tasks as part of
the HFI management process. HFI technical
activities ensure “designing for use”
objectives can be met. Figure 7 shows the
types of Technical Activity that should be
considered during different phases of the
project and the associated Management
Activities. The EHFA forms a starting point
for this by allowing key HF/HFI risks,
issues, assumptions and constraints to be
identified. HFI is an integral part of Systems
Engineering and so should support other
specialist technical activities.
Figure 7 - HFI technical activities
and associated management links
(Source: Def Stan 00-250: Human Factors for the Designers of Systems, Part 0, Issue 1)
54/55

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Types of technical activity
HFI technical activities draw upon a range of
specialist methods and tools generally used
by qualified practitioners. It is important
from the HFI Management perspective to be
familiar with the types of design and
evaluation activities that should occur.
These can be broadly described as follows:
• Establish People-Related
Requirements: PRRs broaden the scope
of key requirements documentation and
acquisition specifications by including
people-related information.
• Establish the Context of Use: Clarifies
and communicates characteristics needed
of the Users and their tasks, and the
technical, organisational and physical
environment in which they will operate.
The context of use supports design
decisions and provides a basis for
evaluation.
• Describe User population: Appropriate
data that describe the physiological,
psychological and sociological
characteristics of the expected User
population must be incorporated into
design decisions. These include human
reliability and error, vision and hearing.
This may be captured in the Target
Audience Description (TAD).
• Describe the Task: A clear
understanding of what the users of a
system actually do is fundamental to most
aspects of HFI and feeds into many other
activities, e.g. including Training Needs
Analysis (TNA) and the Safety Case. The
scope of what the operators are required
to do is captured in a Task Description
(which is linked with the operational
requirement). Task Analysis then explores
the implications of these tasks in terms of
the operator’s ability to undertake them
(in relation to the Context of Use).
• Design Jobs, Roles and Tasks: Job
analysis is the process of systematically
investigating and evaluating the attributes
of a job in terms of tasks, procedures,
responsibilities and personal attributes.
Job design involves deciding what tasks
will be performed by which personnel,
how tasks will be grouped together and
allocated and how individuals will relate
to each other so that their work can be
co-ordinated.
• Design Equipment, HMI and
Workspace: This is concerned with the
design of operational equipment
including displays (visual and auditory),
controls, human-computer interfaces,
alarms and warnings, User Manuals and
operational facilities within workspaces.
It also addresses hand tools, work
clothing, and selection of COTS, Military
Off The Shelf (MOTS) or Government Off
The Shelf (GOTS) equipment.

• Design Working Environment: The
design of workspaces should be concerned
with meeting the functional needs of the
system and personnel (e.g. protect, access,
organise and motivate) while minimising
stress and maintaining optimal levels of
performance.
• Develop Training: Training Needs
Analysis assesses training requirements
arising as a result of new equipment
procurement, doctrinal change,
organisational change, or changes to
legislation. It generally includes a
comparison of different training methods
and equipment with a view to
recommending the optimum training
system. Defence Training Policy Standards
provide information on requirements for
TNA activities (see JSP822).
• Evaluate operational use: Activities
undertaken during the In-Service phase
are described in the Through Life
Management Plan and include
Transition, Acceptance, Availability
Management, Reliability and
Maintainability, Safety Management, and
Risk Management. Human performance
related issues and risks, such as error,
situation awareness, workload, and team
co-ordination, should be considered in
operational evaluation and use. HFI
activities such as updating the HFI Risk
and Issues Registers will continue during
the In-Service phase. Maintaining the
HFIWG will facilitate this.
Royal Marines from Lima Company 42 Commando wait for the order to proceed through a muddy field during
Operation Sond Chara in Helmand, Afghanistan.
56/57

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
HFI Input to Key Project Documents
To ensure HFI aspects are fully considered
as part of broader project management and
technical development, it is important to
include a human factors component in other
project activities and their documentation.
Two key examples are the Through Life
Management Plan and the Integrated Test,
Evaluation and Acceptance Plan (ITEAP).
Through Life Management Plan
The TLMP gives a whole life perspective on
project objectives, assumptions, plans and
resources. It draws upon a set of documents
including the following HFI examples:
• HFI Management Plan and Strategy
• Key HFI decisions
• HFIWG constitution and responsibilities
• Division of responsibility for HFI activities
• HFI testing and evaluation plans and results
• Procedures for managing/sharing HFI data
• HFI audit results following introduction to
service
• HFI management strategy for upgrades
• HFI risks, issues, assumptions and constraints
A Hercules C130 Transport Aircraft waits on the tarmac at a Middle Eastern airfield prior to taking off.

Refurbished SA 80 rifle about to be test fired on rig at defence munitions Gosport.
Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance Plan
The ITEAP defines how the project will
ensure that the required Capability is being
produced and then confirm that it has been.
Those aspects of the Capability that relate to
integration between human and equipment
components require HFI input to the ITEAP.
• HFI Management Plan
• HFI acceptance processes and procedures
(including specifying appropriate military/
user participants for trials)
• HFI Testing and evaluation plans and
results
• Outputs from HFIWG meetings
Specific guidance on this aspect of HFI can
be sought from dedicated support cells
within DE&S e.g. Human Factors Group,
Joint Support Chain and TEST Project Team.
58/59

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
HFI Assurance
Assurance (or increasingly, ‘Ensurance’) is a
central part of the MOD Systems
Engineering approach. DE&S has different
tools to support this according to the type
and stage of the project. The Systems
Readiness Levels (SRLs) are used for
technology or systems development projects
and the Support Solutions Envelope (SSE) is
for In-service phase projects and through life
support. HFI can, and should, be considered
as part of either approach.
For each level of maturity (system or
solution), specific HFI goals should be met.
This ensures that the key HFI management
and technical activities are undertaken
throughout the project. Examples of the
top-level requirements for achieving each of
the nine levels of HFI maturity on a project
are shown in Figure 8. Further detailed
requirements for each HFI level are
available on the AOF, or via the Joint HFI
Team at DE&S Abbey Wood (see Resources).
Example HFI Components for SRLs/SSEs
1. Ensure that the Human Factors aspects implicit within the URD have been understood
INITIAL GATE
2. Ensure that the human role in the system has been clearly defined
3. Ensure that the requirements to support the human component of the system
have been clearly defined
4. Ensure that the Human Factors input has been provided to the SRD and
responsibilities for these aligned with other disciplines
MAIN GATE
5. Ensure that the initial evaluation of Human Factors has been conducted and tested
6. Ensure that the sub-systems have been verified in a representative integration environment
Increasing maturity
7. Ensure that the system prototype has been demonstrated in a
representative integration environment
8. Ensure that the project has achieved acceptance of the human-related aspects
of design and function
9. Ensure that the project is capable of monitoring and managing any future issues and
risks related to Human Factors in completing the Through Life Management Plan
Figure 8 - Examples of the top-level requirements for achieving
each of the nine levels of HFI maturity on a project.

Supporting HFI
Appropriate competencies
A set of competencies required by those
engaged in HFI work are included as part of
the MOD Acquisition Competence
Framework. Key headings are:
• Managing HFI Requirements
• Identification and management of key HFI
issues and risks for a project
• Assessment, quantification and resolution
of key HFI issues and risks for a project
• Integration of HFI and information flow
across the project and stakeholders
• Effective planning, monitoring and
delivery of HFI activity
• Possession and maintenance of an
appropriate level of specialist HFI expertise
• Supporting others performing HFI
More information on how to demonstrate
these competencies is available on the AOF.
Training is available to support the
development of HFI skills, abilities and
competencies for those taking on HFI roles.
More information about training courses/
modules and materials is available from
links in the MOD competence framework or
from the Joint HFI Team at Abbey Wood.
Advice
The Joint HFI Team is available to provide
practical advice on HFI to the MOD
Acquisition community (see contacts section).
Based at Abbey Wood its members are from
DE&S, Defence Science and Technology
Laboratory (Dstl) and the Human Factors
Defence Integration Defence Technology
Centre (HFI DTC) and can offer information,
guidance and hands-on support on:
• MOD HFI policy and its interpretation
• Technical assurance requirements
• Domain specific HFI advice, e.g. for land
projects
• HFI training
• HFI management activities
• HFI technical activities
60/61

c a p a b i l i t y D E L I V E R Y
Key Points
• HFI is a systematic process for
addressing people-related
considerations, or human factors, in
capability delivery. It includes
management and technical activities.
• Human capabilities and limitations
need to be considered from the project
outset to ensure development of safe
and effective systems. Not including
HFI can have significant implications
both in terms of costs and operational
performance.
• HFI covers seven inter-related domains
that address the breadth of human
factors aspects: Manpower, Personnel,
Training, Human Factors Engineering,
System Safety, Health Hazards, and
Social and Organisational.
• HFI is an integral part of Systems
Engineering and it should be linked
with other project activities, e.g. ITEA,
ILS, requirements and risk
management. It is relevant across all
project types including: UOR, COTS,
Technology Insertion and
development of support solutions.
• Some HFI activities will be undertaken
by non-specialist staff but others
require professional HFI expertise. A
competence framework is available to
identify appropriate competences for
different activities.
In close formation, a Royal Air Force Chinook (top) and Puma fly together.

62/63

Capability Generation3
This section addresses:
• The importance of capturing User feedback from the
Front Line Commands (FLCs)
• The types of People considerations that are relevant to the FLCs
• Mechanisms that enable FLCs to provide feedback into
Capability planning and delivery
64/65

c a p a b i l i t y g e n e r a t i o n
capability Generation
As the users of in-service systems, the Front
Line Commands (FLCs) are the ultimate
testers of equipment, the assessors of
training, the evaluators of procedures, and
those that suffer the impact of planning and
delivery failings. Working within the MUC,
the FLCs:
• Provide User feedback on Capability Gaps
and Opportunities
• Support the Integration of new and/or
changed Capability (see Figure 9).
The FLCs are the Personnel and Training
DLOD leads at Programme Boards. They are
responsible for the delivery of mature
DLOD at In-Service Date.
Cap Sponsor
DE&S
User
Centre
DST
Industry - Supplier
Unified
Customer
Generation
Capability Integration Groups
• Led by User
• Integrate LODs to generate Force Elements
• Years 1-4 Equipment Support Plan coherence
User feedback on
Capability gaps and
opportunities
Integration of new and/
or changed capability
Capability
Management
Capability Planning Groups
• Led by Capability Sponsor
• Devise plans for capability areas
• Lead Capability Investigations
• Prepare Options
• Drive Options through Planning Rounds
Planning
• Sponsors Programmes
• Programme Initiation
• Acceptance
Programme Boards
• Coordinates constituent projects to
deliver optimum capability outcome
• Three key roles:
3 Senior Responsible Owner =
Capability Sponsor
3 Programme Manager = DE&S
3 Business Change Manager = User
delivery
Figure 9 - Capability Generation Roles and
Responsibilities within Capability Management

The roles of the Front Line Commands in acquisition
All systems, equipment and procedures
should be designed, taking into account all
DLOD in order to achieve effective
operations. The best systems and
equipment are however ineffective if they
are not operable by the end user. With such
a significant impact on the operational
effectiveness of a system or equipment, the
end user becomes a key player in the HFI
process.
FLCs are an integral part of the MOD Unified
Customer Community. Their involvement at
all stages of Capability management is
required to ensure risks are identified and
mitigated at the earliest opportunity. FLC
feedback continues to be a valuable
commodity which can be used in planning
and management to improve through life
Capability. FLCs have recognised this by, for
example, having dedicated trials units to test
and evaluate systems prior to introduction
into service and having a range of User
feedback mechanisms.
People Factors Relevant To FLCs
“Basically if something is going to slow you
down then we try not to bother with it. If it is
light and it works, then you are going to use it
a lot – it’s barely a conscious decision. It’s just
the way you have to operate. You are
continually making security calculations when
you are in a hostile environment trading speed
against safety.” (Former SF Soldier)
People factors affecting FLCs are prevalent
across the breadth of the DLOD, from the
most commonly thought of Equipment and
Training aspects, through to the often
overlooked areas of Logistics and
Infrastructure.
Examples of People Factors of concern to
the FLCs could include:
• Usability of Equipment
• Impact of operational environments on
systems (fitness for purpose)
• Impact of climate extremes
• Accommodation and Habitability
• Tempo of operations and frequency of
deployment
• Personnel being deployed with limited
training
• Impact of new equipment on Branch
Structures
• Health Hazards associated with storage of
munitions
• Appropriateness of Standard Operating
Procedures and ways of working
• Information Accessibility e.g. the distribution
of safety instructions and technical data
• Having insufficient time to recover
between tasks
• Equipment Safety
66/67

c a p a b i l i t y g e n e r a t i o n
People are not just another technological
component, but they are individuals with
their own personal aspirations and concerns,
each existing within their own social context
of family and friends. The demands of
military roles impact not just upon the
serving person, but upon those important to
them. As is often said ‘we recruit the soldier
but must retain the family’.
Mechanisms for capturing
user feedback
Within each Service there are a number of
local mechanisms/processes that allow
personnel to capture issues identified. These
include briefings/meetings/reviews,
Equipment Failure Reports, equipment
critiques, and various Safety/Aviation/
Hazard logs. To complement these local
mechanisms, the MOD has set up a number of
pan-defence mechanisms. These allow the
capture of those issues that require further
analysis (i.e. Operational Lessons Identified),
such that they can be considered in future
Capability planning or procurement.
OPERATIONAL Lessons
Identified
“The further backward you look, the
further forward you can see.”
Sir Winston Churchill
Operational Lessons Identified can be defined
as ‘An issue arising from an event that requires
further analysis.’
Lessons both positive and negative, can be
identified across the DLOD from training and
equipment through to logistics and
infrastructure. The purpose of identifying
lessons is to:
• Highlight Capability or performance
shortfalls
• Contribute to current and future force and
Capability development
• Improve quality of decision making and
issue identification and risk assessment at
all levels
• Capture Best Practice that improves
Capability
A composite image for an article on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which appeared in Soldier Magazine.

Royal Marines from 539 Assault Squadron take an Armoured Raider Craft for a test drive. Raiding Craft are the
‘racing cars’ of the amphibious fleet but protection is also key; to provide Royal Marines with vital protection during
dangerous engagements at sea or on land, the Raiding Craft have increased armour and gunnery. 539 Asslt Sqn RM
was formed on 2 April 1984, giving 3 Commando Brigade an integral amphibious movement Capability. This was in
direct response to lessons learned during the Falklands Conflict in 1982. Today the Sqn consists of over 100 personnel
and is equipped with a variety of Landing Craft including Hovercraft, Rigid Raiding craft, Inflatable raiding craft and
Landing Craft Vehicle/Personnel.
OPERATIONAL Lessons
Learned
“It is the responsibility of all MOD
staff to capture, share and learn
from lessons”.
Learning from Operational Lessons
Identified is a through life process and a key
element of TLCM. An example of how the
MOD uses the collation of Operational
Lessons Identified is through the Joint
Lessons Cell (JLC).
Part of the Development Concepts and
Doctrine Centre (DCDC), this research cell
acts as a focus for MOD lessons and a
repository for Operational Lessons Learned
across the Services. The JLC provides a
range of support services including:
• A Joint Lessons Library ‘24/7’ website of
all military Operational Lessons Learned
from recent UK operations, multination
and coalition operations as well as Non
Government Organisations;
• The Defence Lessons Identified
Management System (DLIMS) to provide
greater transparency to the lessons
staffing process;
• The Defence Information and Research
Cell (DIRC) collects, categorises and
disseminates military papers, post
operations reports and military
commentaries on military subjects;
• The Historical Research Analyst (HRA)
for the detailed analysis of previous
military operations to provide empirical
evidence to support DCDC outputs
(DCDC Website, 2009).
68/69

c a p a b i l i t y g e n e r a t i o n
Dissemination
There are a number of ways in which Lessons
Learned are disseminated throughout the
MOD. These include:
• Corporate Publications (Service Inquiry
Papers, Policy Strategy and Planning, Air
Safety and Aviation Publications, Health
and Safety Publications and Personnel
Publications)
• Joint Service Publications
• Defence Standards
• Lessons Exploitation Centre (LXC)
• Personnel Instructions
• Defence Council Instructions
• Defence Instructions and Notices
• Allied Communications Publications
• MOD published papers
• various boards and working groups, and
• a host of website portals.
Managing Lessons
Identified
The following sections give some examples of
systems that have been implemented to
support the management of lessons identified.
Defence Lessons
Identified Management
System (DLIMS)
DLIMS is a web-based, defence-wide
mechanism for capturing feedback from
operations, exercises and training as well as
routine work. It allows units or individuals to
submit Lessons Identified to relevant Service
Gatekeepers as they occur, facilitating the
prompt staffing of the issue, further analysis
and the exploitation of information in a
timely manner. The output is used to inform
future defence activities encompassing
Capability planning, delivery and generation.
An example of where a lesson was identified
during an operation:
Insurgents’ use of improvised explosives devices
that are remotely detonated was reported as
major cause of loss of life for coalition forces in
operational zones. A UOR was raised and
resulted in the rapid prototyping, development
and deployment of new countermeasures to
theatre. [www.dstl.gov.uk]
Aviation Safety
Information Management
System (ASIMS)
The Directorate of Aviation Regulation and
Safety (DARS) is a pan-Defence policy,
regulatory and auditing body within the
MOD Central Staff, and is the MOD focus
for Aviation Regulation and Safety.
The proactive voluntary reporting of
personal HF-related experiences and
observations, together with the provision of
simple mechanisms for doing so, lies at the
heart of the developing Defence Aviation
Error Management System (DAEMS), from
which real threats to flight safety can be
identified and defences put in place to
protect lives and operational aviation
capability. Such reporting is to be viewed
as a cultural imperative and must be
encouraged. Mechanisms are:
a. The Defence Flight Safety Occurrence
Report (D-FSOR) is the primary report for
all flight safety occurrences in accordance

A soldier of B Company, 2 Royal Anglian Battle
Group, is shown wearing new kit issued to the
Army including knee pads, a rehydration pack
and helmet mounted camera.
70/71

c a p a b i l i t y g e n e r a t i o n
with JSP 551 Volume 1 Section 200. It
identifies the originator and passes it up
the command chain for comment.
b. The Defence Confidential Occurrence
Reporting Scheme (DCORS) is the means
by which an individual can raise an
anonymous report on any flight safety
related experience or observation, which
is forwarded directly to Command Flight
Safety Organisations. MOD civilians and
civilian contractors are to submit the
DCOR directly to DARS.
c. Individuals who submit a D-FSOR or
DCOR shall be treated fairly under the
Just Culture in accordance with JSP 551
Volume 1 Section 100.
ASIMS allows for the real time monitoring
and trend analysis of occurrences, and
employs a wholly HF-based coding
taxonomy for detailed analysis of a HF
main cause and contributory factor(s). It
exploits best practice from the civil aviation
sector and is available to the Pan Defence
Aviation Community (PDAC) 2 .
Other ‘Lesson Capture’ mechanisms
Other examples of these pan-defence ‘Lesson
Capture’ mechanisms include:
• GEMS (the MOD-wide staff suggestion
scheme that is designed to capture
suggestions that improve the design, use
or maintenance of equipment; achieves
greater efficiency/operational
effectiveness; improves safety or quality;
achieves savings for the MOD; provides
greater environmental benefit).
• The Safety, Sustainable Development and
Continuity Division (SSD&CD), a pan-
Service mechanism for capturing, analysing
and disseminating Health and Safety issues.
Risk Management
Risk management should be undertaken
proactively. Throughout this handbook the
importance of managing people-related risks
in TLCM has been emphasised. In addition to
managing operational risks, it is essential that
the FLC perspective be represented in TLCM
risk management processes.
The challenge facing Commanders at all
levels, is to be able to identify risks and to
instigate measures to mitigate their impact.
Risk Processes and Tools:
A number of local mechanisms exist for the
documenting of people-related risks. These
include:
• Fleet Aviation Safety Risk Register
• Health and Safety Risk Register
• Hazard Logs (including Personal risks and
hazards identified in theatre)
• Defence Aviation Safety Risk Register
(used for logging strategic risk)
The MOD is striving towards aligning the
single services risk management processes.
2
Everyone involved directly or indirectly in Defence aviation.

Key Points
• FLCs are an integral part of the MOD
Unified Customer Community.
Appropriate engagement of this
section of the MUC at all stages of
capability management is critical to
address the People Component of
Capability fully.
• A range of People Factors are relevant to
the FLCs encompassing all the DLOD.
• Lessons Identified and Lessons
Learned processes provide an
important mechanism for informing
capability gaps and opportunities.
A Royal Air Force Typhoon aircraft is shown taking off at a display at RAF Waddington Airshow 2007.
72/73

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
Additional Information
and Resources
Title description location
Acquisition Operating Provides detailed guidance on www.aof.mod.uk
Framework
HFI policy and processes.
Association for Project Fifty-two knowledge areas www.apm.org.uk/BOK.asp
Management - Body of required to manage a successful
Knowledge
project.
Through Life Champion for TLCM and www.aof.mod.uk
Capability
innovation within the Capability
Management
Sponsor and across the MOD
Unified Customer.
Directorate of Aviation Pan-Defence policy, regulatory www.mod.uk
Regulation & Safety and auditing body within the
MOD Central Staff and is the
MOD focus for Aviation
Regulation & Safety issues.
Defence Standard UK Defence Standard for all www.dstan.mod.uk
00-250: Human Factors matters related to HF/HFI.
for Designers of It contains example people-
Systems
related Requirements to support
contract development and
detailed guidance on HF issues
across the domains.
HFI DTC Up-to-date research and www.hfidtc.com
guidance on HF/HFI in defence
acquisition.

Title description location
HFI Practical Original HFI guidance for PTs. www.hfidtc.com
Guidance for IPTs This document is not up-to-date
(Issue 1, May 2001) for current DE&S processes or
TLCM but provides useful
information about basic HFI
activities.
JSP536 MOD Research Ethics www.science.mod.uk/
Committee (MoDREC)
engagement/modrec/
modrec.aspx
JSP551 Military Flight Safety www.defenceintranet.di
Regulations
iweb.r.mil.uk
JSP822 The Defence Manual of www.defenceintranet.di
Training Management
iweb.r.mil.uk
JSP892 Risk Management www.defenceintranet.di
iweb.r.mil.uk
MAP-01-010 HFI Specific and more detailed www.hfidtc.com/pdf/
Management Guide guidance for Naval PTs on MAP-01-010.pdf
(formerly STGP 10) HFI Management.
MAP-01-011 HFI Specific and more detailed www.hfidtc.com/pdf/
Technical Guide guidance for Naval PTs on HFI MAP-01-011.pdf
(formerly STGP 11) Technical Activities.
Cost Arguments and Booklet providing examples as www.hfidtc.com
Evidence for Human to why HFI is important for
Factors Integration project success.
The Human View Introduction to the use of www.hfidtc.com
Handbook for MODAF Human Views to support
existing MODAF views.
74/75

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
contacts
Cap JTES - Human science advice to Capability Sponsors
Email: capjtes-humc@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 218 6115
DARS
Email: DARS-OccSO2@northolt.raf.mod.uk
Telephone: 0208 833 8081
Telephone: Mil 95233 8081
DCDS Pers Head TESR - advice on individual Training,
Education, Skills and Resettlement (TESR)
Email: DCDSPERS-TESR-HEAD@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 807 0773
Email: DCDSPERS-TESR-TRGSYSAHD@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 218 9163
DCDS (Pers) Strategy
Email: dcdspers-straprog-stratso1@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 218 7782
DCDS (Pers) Research
Email: dcdspersstrat-researchAD@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 218 7679
DE&S Joint Human Factors Integration Team:
Human Factors Integration Co-ordinator (Air)
Email: DESSESEIG-hfi-air@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 35578
Human Factors Integration Co-ordinator (Land)
Email: DESSESEIG-hfi-land@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 35530
DES SE SEIG Human Factors Policy
Email: DESSESEIG-hfi-pol@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 37553
Sea Systems Group - DES SE Sea-ShipDes
Email: dessesea-shipdes@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 35124

Human Factors Integration (HFI DTC) @ DE&S Abbey Wood
Email: DESSESEIG-hfi-con1@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 37553
Email: DESSESEIG-hfi-con2@mod.uk
Telephone: 030 679 37553
Dstl Human Systems Group
Email: humansystems@dstl.gov.uk
Telephone: 01980 658179
Dstl Programme Office Human Dimension and Medical Sciences Domain
- Domain Strategy
Email: jdhyde@dstl.gov.uk
Telephone: 01980 658181
Dstl Programme Office Human Dimension and Medical Sciences Domain
- Programme Leader
Email: kfgriffin@dstl.gov.uk
Telephone: 01980 658050
Human Factors Integration Defence Technology Centre
Email: admin@hfidtc.com
Telephone: 01935 445324
Overarching Studies and Operational Analysis
Email: kgoodman@dstl.gov.uk
Telephone: 023 9253 2144
Telephone: Mil 96803 2144
PPM CoE Risk Management Policy
Email: DESPTG-COE-Pol-Risk@mod.uk
Telephone: 0117 913 0370
Systems Engineering and Integration Group (SEIG)
Email: DESSESEIG-Hd@mod.uk
Telephone: 0117 913 3020
TLCM - Directorate of Capability Improvement
Email: CapCI-CapDel@mod.uk
Telephone: 0207 218 0732
76/77

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
Glossary of Terms
AOF
ARM
ASIMS
CADMID
CLS
CMG
CMP
CMS
COEIA
CONEMP
COTS
CPAL
CPG
DAEMS
DARS
DCDC
DCORS
DE&S
D-FSOR
Acquisition Operating Framework
Availability, Reliability and Maintainability
Aviation Safety Information Management System
Concept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-Service, Disposal
Contracted Logistics Support
Capability Management Group
Capability Management Plan
Capability Management Strategy
Combined Operational Effectiveness Investment Appraisal
Concept of Employment
Commercial Off The Shelf
Capability Planning and Assumptions List
Capability Planning Group
Defence Aviation Error Management System
Directorate of Aviation Regulation and Safety
Development Concepts and Doctrine Centre
Defence Confidential Occurrence Reporting Scheme
Defence Equipment and Support
Defence Flight Safety Occurrence Report

DIRC
DLIMS
DLOD
DST
Dstl
ECA
ECC
EHFA
EPP
ESP
FE@R/S
FLC
GOTS
HF
HFI
HFI DTC
HFIP
HFIWG
HMI
Defence Information and Research Cell
Defence Lessons Identified Management System
Defence Lines of Development
Defence Science and Technology
Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
Early Comparability Analysis
Equipment Capability Customer
Early Human Factors Analysis
Equipment Procurement Plan
Equipment Support Plan
Force Elements At Readiness/Sustainability
Front Line Command
Government Off The Shelf
Human Factors
Human Factors Integration
Human Factors Integration Defence Technology Centre
Human Factors Integration Plan
Human Factors Integration Working Group
Human Machine Interface
78/79

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
Glossary of Terms
HRA
HSI
HV
ILS
ISTAR
ITEA
ITEAP
ITT
JLC
JSC
JSP
LOD
MOD
MODAF
MoDREC
MOTS
MUC
NBC
NEC
NGO
Historical Research Analyst
Human-System Integration
Human View
Integrated Logistics Support
Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition & Reconnaissance
Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance
Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance Plan
Invitation To Tender
Joint Lessons Cell
Joint Supply Chain
Joint Service Publication
Line of Development
Ministry of Defence
MOD Architectural Framework
MOD Research Ethics Committee
Military Off The Shelf
MOD Unified Customer
Nuclear, Biological and Chemical
Network Enabled Capability
Non Governmental Organisation

OGD
OA
PDAC
PRR
PT
SME
SRD
SRL
SSD&CD
SSE
TAD
TEST
TLCM
TLM
TLMP
TNA
UOR
URD
WLC
Other Government Departments
Operational Analysis
Pan Defence Aviation Community
People-Related Requirements
Project Team
Subject Matter Expert
System Requirements Document
System Readiness Level
Safety, Sustainable Development and Continuity Division
Support Solutions Envelope
Target Audience Description
Trials Evaluation Services and Targets
Through Life Capability Management
Through Life Management
Through Life Management Plan
Training Needs Analysis
Urgent Operational Requirement
User Requirements Document
Whole Life Cost
80/81

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
Annex A - Examples of People
Factors and Definitions
The following People factors have been
derived from a range of MOD/Industry
sources including Def Stan 00-250, MAP
010/011, HFI Guidance for IPTs, HFI DTC
Process Handbook, HFI DTC Social &
Organisational Framework, Personnel
Component of Operational Capability –
Project Impact Assessment Tool and the MoD
ECC Risk Categorisation Model.
People Factors
Resource Allocation
Phasing
Personnel Availability
Manning Levels
Force Structures
Personnel Capabilities
Definitions
The allocation or reallocation of people in light of strategic
trends/changes and programme resource requirements.
The availability of operational, maintenance and support
personnel at introduction and through life.
The availability of the right people to perform the required
tasks at the right time having received the right training.
Consideration should be given to demographic factors and
labour market trends.
The optimisation of manning levels in operational and
emergency scenarios considering workload and any
organisational restructuring and streamlining. Manning levels
must consider the effect on specialisation or branch
sustainability.
The appropriate allocation of tasks between branches, arms
and trade groups. Consideration should be given to, for
example, military/civilian balance and reservists.
Current and required levels of physical and cognitive
capabilities. Encompassing physical strength, stamina, agility,
resilience, auditory and visual performance, mental skills,
knowledge and attitude. Inherent attributes from previous
experience or training which will provide a closer match or
disparity with the requirement, for example, education,
achievement and current trade.

People Factors
Workforce
Competence
Management
Personnel
Expectations
Training Design &
Delivery
Training Organisation
Target Audience
Training Output
Training Resources
Definitions
The development, implementation and monitoring of systems
to ensure workforce competence. Including the development
of competence frameworks, recruitment and selection
methods, identification of training requirements and
performance assessment and management.
Personnel expectations relating to working and living
environments, job satisfaction, terms and conditions of
employment, attitudes towards, for example, risk taking,
health and welfare provision and career development
opportunities. Consider how the demands of military roles
impact not just upon the serving person, but upon those
important to them. As is often said ‘we recruit the soldier but
must retain the family’.
The appropriate design and delivery of training including the
specification of training duration and frequency and the
appropriate use of training methods and media.
The overall management of training provision (including
facilities, personnel, scheduling and training assessment) in
accordance with training policy. Consider also the selection
and management of appropriate training suppliers.
The numbers and characteristics of the target audience to be
trained including prior training, experience and capabilities.
Consider also trainee prerequisites (e.g. prior learning).
The effectiveness of individual, team or collective training
demonstrated in terms of changes in personnel competence
(knowledge, skills, attitudes, performance) and pre-defined
training standards.
The provision of appropriate types of resources (e.g. training
media, instructors, and infrastructure) at the right time to
ensure the delivery of effective training.
82/83

a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n
People Factors
Training Policy
New Technology
Duty of Care
Safety Case
Organisational
Configuration
Social Environment
Ways of Working
Definitions
The overarching requirement to ensure that appropriate
numbers and types of personnel are trained to the required
standard within a specified timescale.
The appropriate use of technology and automation to support
effective human and organisational performance.
Consideration should be given to, for example, the impact of
new technology on workload, situation awareness, decision
making and skill retention.
Consideration of the presence of external ‘physical’ and
‘psychosocial’ factors influencing an individual’s health
including: noise, vibration, toxicity, NBC exposure,
musculoskeletal impact (including repetitive strain),
temperature extremes, optical injury, electro-magnetic
radiation, stress management, Post Traumatic Stress Reaction
and Well-being.
The consideration of People-related factors as an integral part
of the Safety Case including the influence of organisational
change and culture, staffing levels and workload, training and
competence, communications and interfaces, fatigue from shift
work and overtime and human factors in design.
Structural composition of the organisation and its associated
parts.
Social factors within an organisation which impact behaviour
in a social setting such as what motivates people to behave in
a particular way and the social ‘glue’ that bonds people.
The specification of organisational processes and operating
procedures.

MINISTRY OF
DEFENCE