A Review of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Methodology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 October 2005 Appropriate SME’s should then rate the extent to which each teamwork behaviour is required during the completion of each teamwork task step. This involves presenting the task step in question and discussing the role of each taxonomy behaviour in the completion of the task step. An appropriate rating scale should be used e.g. low (1), medium (2) and high (3). Step 8: Calculate summary statistics Once all of the teamwork task steps have been rated according to the teamwork taxonomy, the final step is to calculate appropriate summary statistics. In its present usage, a total co-ordination value and mean co-ordination value for each teamwork task step are calculated. The mean co-ordination is simply an average of the ratings for the teamwork behaviours for the task step in question. A mean overall co-ordination value for the entire scenario is also calculated. Example The following example is an extract of a CDA analysis of an energy distribution task (Salmon et al 2004b). The task involved the switching out of three circuits (SGT5 and SGT1A and 1B) at Barking 275Kv, 132Kv and 33Kv Substations. Circuit SGT5 was being switched out for the installation of a new transformer for the nearby channel tunnel rail link and SGT1A and 1B were being switched out for substation maintenance. Observational data from Barking substation and the NOC control room was used to conduct a HTA of the switching scenario. Each bottom level task in the HTA was then defined by the analyst(s) as either taskwork or teamwork. Each teamwork task was then rated using the CDA taxonomy on a scale of 1 (low) to 3 (high). An extract of the HTA for the task is presented in Figure 3-11. An extract of the CDA is presented in Table 17. The overall CDA results are presented in Table 18. NGC Switching operations HTA 0. Co-ordinate and carry out switching operations on circuits SGT5. SGT1A and 1B at Bark s/s (Plan 0. Do 1 then 2 then 3, EXIT) 1. Prepare for switching operations (Plan 1. Do 1.1, then 1.2, then 1.3, then 1.4, then 1.5, then 1.6, then 1.7, then 1.8, then 1.9,then 1.10 EXIT) 1.1. Agree SSC (Plan 1.1. Do 1.1.1, then 1.1.2, then 1.1.3, then 1.1.4, then 1.1.5, EXIT) 1.1.1. (WOK) Use phone to Contact NOC 1.1.2. (WOK + NOC) Exchange identities 1.1.3. (WOK + NOC) Agree SSC documentation 1.1.4. (WOK+NOC) Agree SSC and time (Plan 1.1.4. Do 1.1.4.1, then 1.1.4.2, EXIT) 1.1.4.1. (NOC) Agree SSC with WOK 41
HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 October 2005 1.1.4.2. (NOC) Agree time with WOK 1.1.5. (NOC) Record and enter details (Plan 1.1.5. Do 1.1.5.1, then 1.1.5.2, EXIT) 1.1.5.1. Record details on log sheet 1.1.5.2. Enter details into worksafe 1.2. (NOC) Request remote isolation (Plan 1.2. Do 1.2.1, then 1.2.2, then 1.2.3, then 1.2.4, EXIT) 1.2.1. (NOC) Ask WOK for isolators to be opened remotely 1.2.2. (WOK) Perform remote isolation 1.2.3. (NOC) Check Barking s/s screen 1.2.4. (WOK + NOC) End communications 1.3. Gather information on outage at transformer 5 at Bark s/s (Plan 1.3. Do 1.3.1, then 1.3.2, then 1.3.3, then 1.3.4, EXIT) 1.3.1. (NOC) Use phone to contact SAP at Bark 1.3.2. (NOC + SAP) Exchange identities Figure 3-11 - Extract of HTA for NGT Switching scenario 42
Page 1 and 2: Analysing C4i Activity: A Review of
Page 3 and 4: HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 43: HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 95 and 96:
HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113:
show all

A Review of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Methodology

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?