A Review of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Methodology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 October 2005 4.6 Discussion of Results The overall acceptance of the methodology can be understood from the last section of the questionnaire. the results are shown as medians in the radar below in Figure 4-10. It can be seen that the only negative response was the time taken to complete the method. This is clearly something that all of the respondents felt strongly about with six of them rating it as 1 and a further three rating it as 2. This view is supported by the rest of the review of the method in this document. Medians Your overall acceptance of the methodology. 5 Please rate the overall ease of use of the methodology. 4 How open you perceive the methodology is to scrutiny 3 How w ell you think you carried out the EAST methodology 2 1 The breadth of coverage and its ability to describe a range of behaviour. How useful do you find the EAST methodology How likely do you think the methodology is to produce consistent results Please rate the amount of resources (time & effort) required to conduct an evaluation. The extent to w hich the methodology has theoretical foundations. Figure 4-10 - Overall rating of the Methodology 95
HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 October 2005 5 Summary This report presents a review of the EAST methodology and its component methods. The following conclusions can be taken from the EAST methods review. 1. The EAST methodology is an exhaustive technique. A number of different analyses are conducted and various perspectives on the scenario(s) under analysis are offered. In its present form, the EAST methodology offers the following analyses of a particular C4i scenario; • A step-by-step (goals, sub-goals, operations and plans) description of the activity in question. • A definition of roles within the scenario. • An analysis of the agent network structure involved (e.g. network type and density). • A rating of co-ordination between agents for each team-based task step and an overall co-ordination rating. • An analysis of the current technology used during communications between agents and also recommendations for novel comms technology. • A description of the task in terms of the flow of information, communications between agents, the activity conducted by each agent involved and a timeline of activity. • An analysis of agent centrality, sociometric status and betweenness within the network involved in the scenario. • A definition of the key agents involved in the scenario. • A cognitive task analysis of operator decision making during the scenario. • A definition of the knowledge objects (information, artefacts etc) required and the knowledge objects used during the scenario. • A definition of shared knowledge or shared situation awareness during the scenario. 2. The EAST methodology is particularly suited to the analysis of team-based or collaborative activity, such as that seen in C4i environments. The method was originally developed for this purpose and applications so far have proved extremely successful, highlighting its suitability for such applications. 3. The EAST methodology is relatively simple to use. The method requires an initial understanding of HF and experience in the application of HF methods. However, 96
Page 1 and 2:
Analysing C4i Activity: A Review of
Page 3 and 4:
HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48: HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 97: HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
Page 113: HFIDTC/WP1.1.3/10 Version 2/ 31 Oct
show all

A Review of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Methodology

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?