Developing the HFI Social & Organisational Domain: Final Report

Developing the HFI Social & OrganisationalDomain: Final ReportThe work described in this document has been undertaken by the Human FactorsIntegration Defence Technology Centre, part funded by the Human Capability Domain ofthe U.K. Ministry of Defence Scientific Research Programme.© BAE Systems 2009 The authors of this report have asserted their moral rights underthe Copyright, Designs and Patents act, 1988, to be identified as the authors of this work.Reference ............................................HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version.................................................................................2Date............................................................... 14th May 2009© BAE Systems 2009. Issued by Aerosystems International Ltd on behalf of the HFIDTC consortium. The HFI DTC consortium consists of Aerosystems International Ltd,Cranfield University, Lockheed Martin, MBDA, SEA, Southampton University and theUniversity of Birmingham

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009AuthorsEleanor ForrestGeorgina FletcherSEASEAii

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009Contents1 Executive Summary ................................................................................... 12 Introduction ................................................................................................ 22.1 Purpose of report ................................................................................................................ 22.2 Background ......................................................................................................................... 22.3 Objectives............................................................................................................................ 33 Methodology............................................................................................... 53.1 Overall approach................................................................................................................. 53.2 Previous activity .................................................................................................................. 53.3 Stakeholder review..............................................................................................................63.3.1 Purpose..................................................................................................................... 63.3.2 Participants ............................................................................................................... 63.3.3 Method ...................................................................................................................... 73.3.4 Key findings .............................................................................................................. 74 Development of the Guidance.................................................................. 104.1 The framework .................................................................................................................. 104.2 Revised framework content............................................................................................... 114.3 Revised framework material and proposed processes..................................................... 134.3.1 Short Guide............................................................................................................. 134.3.2 Quick Guide ............................................................................................................ 134.3.3 Living framework tool.............................................................................................. 144.4 IPT Trial............................................................................................................................. 154.4.1 Purpose................................................................................................................... 154.4.2 Participants ............................................................................................................. 154.4.3 Method .................................................................................................................... 154.4.4 Key findings ............................................................................................................ 164.4.5 Pilot trial conclusions .............................................................................................. 175 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................ 186 References............................................................................................... 20iii

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009AcknowledgementsThe authors of this report acknowledge the valuable input provided by various MoD,academic and industry organisations in scoping, developing and reviewing this work onthe HFI Social and Organisational domain. Specific thanks are extended to members ofthe MoD-Industry HFI Working Group for their time and support.iv

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009List of AbbreviationsCACADMIDDCDCDCDS(Pers)DECDE&SDLoDDstlDTCDTICFLCHFHFIHFMHVIPTMODMODAFNATONECNGOPJHQRAFRNSEASMESOFSRLTLCMTLSUORComprehensive ApproachConcept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-Service,DisposalDevelopment, Concepts and Doctrine CentreDeputy Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel)Director of Equipment CapabilityDefence Equipment & SupportDefence Lines of DevelopmentDefence Science and Technology LaboratoryDefence Technology CentreDefence Technology and Innovation CentreFront Line CommandHuman FactorsHuman Factors IntegrationHuman Factors and MedicineHuman ViewsIntegrated Project TeamMinistry of DefenceMOD Architectural FrameworkNorth Atlantic Treaty OrganisationNetwork Enabled CapabilityNon-Governmental OrganisationPermanent Joint HeadquartersRoyal Air ForceRoyal NavySystems Engineering & Assessment LtdSubject Matter ExpertSocial and Organisational FactorsSystem Readiness LevelThrough Life Capability ManagementThrough Life SupportUrgent Operational Requirementv

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20091 Executive SummaryThis report by the HFI DTC for the Defence Technology and Innovation Centre (DTIC)summarises Work Package 2.17/2.18: Incorporating Socio-technical Systems into HumanFactors Integration (HFI). The particular focus of this work, which is part of the overallwork package on Managing HFI in Smart Acquisition and Procurement, was to developguidance for consideration of broader Social and Organisational Factors (SOF) in HFI.The report presents a summary of key activities undertaken in the course of the work todefine the social and organisational domain and provide guidance, primarily for Ministryof Defence (MoD) Integrated Project Teams (IPTs). The methodology used throughoutthe project is described. Information is provided about previous research activities,including stakeholder consultations and a targeted literature review to identify the typesof SOF likely to be relevant. The identified SOF were formed into framework and adefinition of the 7 th domain was proposed:“The process of applying tools and techniques from organisational psychology,management studies, information science and system of systems domains in orderto consider the organisational configuration, social environment and ways ofworking in a capability”.The most recent stakeholder activity to review the prototype SOF framework isdescribed and the key findings from this activity are presented.Following the research activities the SOF framework content has been revised anddeveloped into a range of guidance materials and a proposed process. A short guide toSOF, which contains a generic process for considering SOF, is presented in Annex A; aQuick Sheet for Integrated Project Teams (IPTs) is presented in Annex B and the full‘Living Framework Tool’ containing a more detailed level of information is presented inAnnex C (a separate spreadsheet document).This report provides recommendations for further activities required to develop the SOFframework and proposed follow-on activities to broaden the awareness of thisinformation throughout the defence community.1

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20092 Introduction2.1 Purpose of reportThis report by the HFI DTC for the Defence Technology and Innovation Centre (DTIC)summarises Work Package 2.17/2.18: Incorporating Socio-Technical Systems intoHuman Factors Integration (HFI). The particular focus of this work, which is part of theoverall work package on Managing HFI in Smart Acquisition and Procurement, was todevelop guidance for consideration of broader Social and Organisational Factors (SOF)in HFI.The report presents a summary of key activities undertaken in the course of the work todefine the social and organisational domain and provide guidance. A short guide to SOF,which contains a generic process for considering SOF, is presented in Annex A; a QuickSheet for Integrated Project Teams (IPTs) is presented in Annex B and the full ‘LivingFramework Tool’ containing a more detailed level of information is presented in AnnexC (a separate spreadsheet document).2.2 BackgroundHFI is a systematic process for ensuring human related issues are considered in defenceacquisition. Core areas of human factors considered are: manpower, personnel, training,human factors engineering, health hazards and system safety. In more recent years a 7 thsocial and organisational domain was also added. This was in recognition of theimportance of broader human and organisational issues associated with Network EnabledCapability (NEC) and the Comprehensive Approach (CA). The introduction of ThroughLife Capability Management (TLCM) and focus across all Defence Lines ofDevelopment (DLOD) also encourages consideration of the social and organisationalissues in acquisition. The SOF framework is relevant across most DLOD but is mostrelevant for the Organisation DLOD as previously identified in The MOD HFI ProcessHandbook [3] (see Figure 1).2

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009Figure 1 – SOF linked to DLODsWhile the new HFI social and organisational domain reflects many existing areas ofknowledge in human factors, e.g. macroergonomics, guidance to support designers ofdefence capability was limited. This research by the HFI DTC was established to addressthis issue and to enable socio-technical impact to be assessed at an early stage ofcapability development. The background to this work is discussed further in [1].The aim of the project was to provide definition and guidance for incorporating SOF intoHFI. Based on the content of the SOF framework the following formal definition isproposed for the HFI 7 th domain:“The process of applying tools and techniques from organisational psychology,management studies, information science and system of systems domains in orderto consider the organisational configuration, social environment and ways ofworking in a capability”.This definition could be used in future updates of MOD’s HFI process guidance.This report describes the SOF framework and associated guidance and processinformation. It was recognised during the course of this research that information onSOF could be useful for other areas of defence, e.g. planning for operational activities,and so the information and guidance has been made generic where possible to facilitatebreadth of application.2.3 ObjectivesThe goal of this HFI DTC work was to provide definition and guidance forincorporating Social and Organisational Factors (SOF) into HFI. The objectives ofthe original work plan were:• To conduct a scoping study to define the problem,• To develop a framework of key SOF,3

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009• To identify/develop methods and tools to integrate SOF into design (for bothequipment and soft systems),• To produce guidance for the 7 th domain.4

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20093 Methodology3.1 Overall approachThe overall approach taken to define the social and organisational domain and developguidance is shown in Figure 2.3.2 Previous activityFigure 2 – Development of the SOF domainThe first task for Work Package 2.17/2.18 was to conduct a scoping study, involvingstakeholder discussions, to explore the requirements for the research to supportconsideration of SOF in acquisition.Consultation was conducted with three levels of stakeholders with perspectives from:operations (e.g. a Warfare Centre), design/acquisition (e.g. an industry provider) andconcepts/capability (e.g. Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre - DCDC). Anumber of common issues were identified from across the three levels, such as issues oforganisational practices, the culture associated with information sharing, working timesand timescales.A targeted literature review was then undertaken to establish how much was known aboutthe specific SOF issues within defence. A separate review was also conducted to explore5

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009the background cultural influences that need to be considered in the design of militarycapability. The information obtained from this activity also provided inputs for linkingthe framework to other HFI domains and the DLOD, and provided a range of potentialtools and techniques associated with the sub-domains and elements to populate theframework. Fewer military examples than expected were obtained through the literaturereview.Information generated from these activities was then analysed and reviewed to generatelists of emerging themes and requirements, and some initial outline for the HFI 7 thdomain boundaries. This identified the purpose of the 7 th domain:• To improve organisational performance through the creation of suitableorganisational structures, social environments and processes.• To assist the creation of ‘socio-technical systems’ that integrate the structural andtechnological requirements of an organisation and the needs of the people in theorganisation.The list of SOF identified from the scoping activities was then developed into a prototypeframework to provide a consolidated source of information about 7 th domain issues.More detailed information about the framework can be found in [1]. Based on the subdomainsin the prototype framework the Social and Organisational domain has beendefined as:“The process of applying tools and techniques from organisational psychology,management studies, information science and system of systems domains in order toconsider the organisational configuration, social environment and ways of working in acapability”.3.3 Stakeholder reviewThe next stage in developing guidance for the 7 th domain was to circulate the prototypeSOF framework for stakeholder review. The following sections describe this activity andsummarise the key findings and suggestions for improvements.3.3.1 PurposeThe prototype framework was reviewed with stakeholders and other researchers andpractitioners to confirm the suitability of the content and discuss potential applicationprocesses. Initial presentation of this work suggested that the information contained in theSOF framework could have use beyond the traditional scope of HFI users. Therefore, theframework was reviewed with military stakeholders, other than those with a DefenceEquipment & Support (DE&S) (IPT/industry) perspective, to ensure the content wasrelevant and usable for their various needs.3.3.2 ParticipantsA total of nine organisations were able to review the material and provide feedbackwithin the project timescales. More organisations were invited to participate but were notable to contribute within the project timescales. The military stakeholder review team6

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009comprised land and air representatives from Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) and arange of industry representatives were identified following a presentation at a MoD-Industry HFI Working Group meeting. Other reviews were undertaken by Dstl OAresearchers (DG Scrutiny P&P), DE&S Human Factors Group and representatives fromthe Defence Academy.3.3.3 MethodFollowing the presentation made at the MoD-Industry HFI Working Group meeting,potential participants and interested parties were identified. They were emailed and askedto participate and this was followed up with a telephone call to discuss the type and levelof involvement required. Other MoD participants were identified from earlier stakeholdercontacts and with the support of the HFI DTC military advisor at Dstl. Those who wereable to participate within the project timescales were emailed a briefing pack thatcontained the following documents:• Briefing note• SOF background information• Instructions for SOF framework review• SOF framework slideshow• Participants were also made aware that the full SOF framework was available inExcel formatSuitable times were then arranged for participants to discuss their feedback either byemail report, telephone conference or face-to-face meetings depending on the time theparticipants had available.3.3.4 Key findingsThe findings are divided into two main areas: 1) relating to the technical content of theSOF and 2) related to application and processes for use.3.3.4.1 Content issuesSub-domains and elementsIt was generally agreed that the detailed level of the framework was a useful repositoryfor associated tools and resources. Some suggestions were made relating to the detailedinformation about sub-domains and elements. The main issues raised were:• The heuristics and characteristics should be re-framed as questions or should simplybe headings.7

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009• The change management sub-domain should sit vertically across all elements andprovide a means to address the identified issues in the other elements.• The SOF framework tool that contains the more detailed layer of information is onlylikely to be used by those familiar with HF.• The framework tool will require regular review and updates to information based oncurrent research and thinking.Presentation of SOFThe briefing pack materials provided to stakeholders used a PowerPoint slideshow toallow the participants to work through the information. It was highlighted to participantsthat this would not be the final implementation of the material. However, it is recognisedthat whatever format the final implementation takes it must be accessible to a wide rangeof stakeholders and it must follow good usability principles (e.g. navigable, consistentetc).• Stakeholders agreed that the SOF needs to be layered to provide different levels ofinformation to different users. In the first instance the SOF should be a list of corequestions that can be answered by a non-HF specialist. Fundamentally the SOF needsto be simple and straightforward and appropriate for someone with little backgroundor experience of HF or HFI.• Background information is required up front to explain HFI and how SOF fits withinit.ExamplesIt has always been recognised that examples and case studies would be important toillustrate the key points within the framework. A few examples were provided but mostparticipants felt they contained a degree of sensitive information that would make themunsuitable for release into the public domain.• Further work could be undertaken to turn these potential examples into genericexamples.• Other suggestions from stakeholders included:- Examples could also be provided about how each element links to operationaleffectiveness.- A portfolio of worked examples for different types of scenario could be provided.3.3.4.2 Process and application issuesLinks and hooksFor the SOF to be workable it has to have formal and recognised ‘hooks’ and ‘links’ intoother processes and documents. There are potential ‘hooks’ to integrate the SOF withinthe acquisition process and for other activities a ‘generic’ SOF process is proposed thatcan be customised by each stakeholder group (e.g. IPT, personnel, individualcontractors).8

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009Suggested deliverablesMany potential output deliverables were suggested for the SOF. However, these tended tohave an acquisition perspective. Therefore, it is suggested that a set of generic outputs,relevant to any area, be identified.UsersThe key users of this information are expected to be IPTs/industry. However, it has beenacknowledged that this information is likely to prove useful to a wide range ofstakeholders including Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ), DCDC, the personnel areafrom the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (DCDS (Pers)), Warfare Centres and individualcontractors. A range of further contacts were suggested by the review participants.ApplicationUseful information was obtained about how the SOF might fit with other processes, toolsand activities. However, the potential breadth of application of SOF across all thepotential stakeholder communities is not yet fully understood. (Indeed, it is probably notpossible to do this until it has been launched and real-time feedback can be collectedabout its use.) Therefore, it is proposed that a ‘generic’ process is created that can betailored to suit the individual needs of each stakeholder group. This process should followgood practice of user-centred design processes and should include user involvement asearly as possible.• Following discussions with Dstl, the process developed for the ‘HF in HigherLevel Operational Analysis (HLOA)’ project [2] was considered a possible modelfor the SOF. This could be combined with a format of analysis identified duringthe PJHQ meeting, known as 3-column format estimates. (This format is similarto asking what, so what, now what?).9

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20094.1 The framework4 Development of the GuidanceThe activities described in previous sections contributed to the development of the SOFframework. The goal of the research was to develop a framework and associated guidancethat would allow SOF to be considered systematically, and which would gain maximumadvantage from tools and processes already developed.The aim was to create guidance, primarily for the 7 th domain of HFI, which was a simpletaxonomy of issues that assisted stakeholders to consider SOF. Fundamentally,consideration of SOF will improve organisational performance and operationaleffectiveness through the creation of suitable structures, social environments andprocesses to assist the development of socio-technical systems.The purpose of the framework is to provide:• A means to identify SOF.• A point of entry for stakeholders to information about relevant SOF.• Access to the information required to initiate and to sustain effective change.• A clear signpost (or front-end) of where to go to look for practical guidance,evidence, further information, tools and methods.The framework was designed to allow SOF to be identified at all levels: individual, teamand organisation. It also assists the identification of SOF within organisations andgroups, and between organisations (see Figure 3). It can be applied top down (e.g.designing organisations) or bottom up (e.g. assessing the impact of a technology orcapability on an organisation).Figure 3 – SOF framework levels10

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009The contexts in which the SOF framework is expected to be used include:• Building a new organisation.• Joining organisations that have not worked together before.• Redesigning internal organisations to create a new capability.• Designing a new technical capability.• Identifying which elements of an organisation can be designed or redesigned tobest support and get the best from the capability.• Designing a new information management system.• Supporting technology insertion projects or programmes beyond main gate.• Supporting the understanding of Urgent Operational Requirements (UORs).This is not an exclusive list and it is likely that more potential contexts may be identifiedas the SOF framework is utilised in projects.4.2 Revised framework contentThe framework comprises three top-level sub-domains:The ‘Organisational Configuration’ sub-domain refers to the structural composition ofthe organisation and its associated parts.The ‘Social Environment’ sub-domain describes the factors involved in an organisationthat have an impact on behaviour in a social setting. It describes what motivates peopleto behave in a particular way and provides the social ‘glue’ that bonds people together.The ‘Ways of Working’ sub-domain refers to the processes by which the organisationfunctions. These can be in terms of formal or informal ways of working and are the typesof factors that may be need to be flexible or changeable depending on the circumstances.The impact of ‘change’ is considered across all sub-domains and elements. It is a meansto address the identified issues in the other elements.Each of these sub-domains is broken down into 21 associated ‘elements’ that provide thenext level of detail and description, see Table 1. The information within the framework isstated in terms of a checklist of elements that should be considered when designing ormodifying a capability. Issues are identified by considering the impact of change on eachelement. The information describes what to consider rather than how to implement it.For example: Consider the impact of change on the physical composition of theorganisation.• What will be impacted?• Who will be impacted?• How will they be impacted?11

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009Table 1 – SOF sub-domains and elementsSub‐domains &ElementsOrganisationalConfigurationStructureOrganisational HierarchyAuthority StyleStaffingConnectivityRoles andResponsibilitiesJob DesignSocial EnvironmentTeamsCultureTrustEthosCore ValuesPrideAllegianceInformal StructuresWays of WorkingLeadershipPoliciesProcesses & ProceduresGuidelines & PracticesWorking TimesCapability StressorsMethod ofCommunicationInformation SharingDescriptionStructural composition of the organisation and its associated parts.Physical composition of the organisation.Team and organisation structure as defined by authority.Degree of delegation and supervision.Numbers, mix, and type of personnel involved in the organisation.Links within and between organisations.Roles, responsibilities and tasks undertaken by an individual, team or organisation inrelation to a specific system.Groups of roles and responsibilities allocated to specific posts or jobs as documentedand detailed by a formal job description.Teams or groups who have shared objectives in relation to their work and interactwith each other in order to achieve those shared objectives.Social factors within an organisation which impact behaviour in a social setting. Suchas what motivates people to behave in a particular way and the social ‘glue’ thatbonds people.Ways that groups are defined and how people interact in the social and physicalenvironment.Ways to create a positive, confident, expectation so that the behaviour of an individualor a system encourages mutual trust between interested parties.Culture, values, goals and aspirations of an organisation.Principles and sets of standards that people have within particular contexts.Means that generate a sense of self‐esteem and satisfaction.Means that generate a sense of belonging to a team or organisation and a sense ofownership.The knowledge, skills and attitudes that make up individual habits and personality thatinfluence task performance.Abilities of individuals to influence, motivate and enable others to contribute towardsthe team goals and their effectiveness within an organisation.The processes by which the organisation functions.Convey the general intentions, approach and objectives of an organisation.Series of steps that convert inputs to outputs in a system and the organisation’saccepted working methods and courses of action.Procedures that are non‐mandatory and conventions, customs, habits, traditions thatare learned at work.Timings within which the activities of an organisation are undertaken.Elements of the capability that introduce stress, such as length of operational time,fatigue, illness or injury.Ways by which individuals, teams and organisations relay information, commands andinstructions to each other.Shared information to improve shared situational awareness and mutualunderstanding.Consider the impact of change on each of these sub‐domains and elements12

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20094.3 Revised framework material and proposed processesThe framework material is made up of layers of information, each appropriate for adifferent range of potential stakeholders.4.3.1 Short GuideIt was recognised throughout the course of the research that a wider range of stakeholderswould find this information potentially useful. The Short Guide proposes a genericprocess that can be used for identifying SOF as part of a workshop activity involving keystakeholders relevant for the context. The information is presented as a set of issues withan associated generic process for identifying the issues. The process can be applied acrossdifferent circumstances and has the flexibility to be integrated with customised tools andprocesses within each element required by each stakeholder. The Short Guide (draftversion) is presented in Annex A.4.3.2 Quick GuideThe aim of this work was to develop practical guidance for use within the defenceacquisition community. A summary of the SOF is provided in the form of a Quick Sheetfor IPTs (see Annex B).To maximise the opportunities to identify and manage issues the SOF should beconsidered as early as possible in the CADMID/CADMIT cycle along with all other HFIdomains. Early identification would normally be managed by Director of EquipmentCapability (DEC) staff and detailed analysis conducted by specialists (co-ordinatedthrough the IPT). SOF should be considered at the following minimum points in theacquisition process:• The Capability Working Group should have SOF input from the beginning(before the Key User Requirements (KURs) are decided).• SOF should be considered along with the other domains in the Early HumanFactors Analysis (EHFA) undertaken in the Concept Phase. The SOF input shouldbe reconsidered in the Assessment and Demonstration Phases.• SOF should be part of the Human Factors Integration Plan (HFIP) initiated in theConcept Phase and completed early in the Assessment Phase.• SOF should be fed into the Integrated Test, Evaluation and Acceptance Plan(ITEAP), Capability Integration Plan (CIP) and Through Life Management Plan(TLMP).Identified hooks of most relevance to the IPT community are:• Acquisition Operating Framework (AOF)• Defence Standard 00-25013

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009• Support Solutions Envelope (SSE) Assurance Process 1• HFI DTC Human Issues Identifier Tool (HIIT)• HFI DTC Desktop Support Tool• Updates to the MOD HFI Process Handbook• Process Improvement Cell (PIC) awareness raising events• Defence Academy staff courses and training• Admiral House HFI training• HFI DTC launch activities – awareness to practitioners4.3.3 Living framework toolThe living framework tool is an Excel spreadsheet that contains a more detailed level ofinformation. It represents the information gathered in the course of defining the SOF andit should continue to be populated with information as it becomes available. As thesubject area is vast and complex with many inter-related factors, the framework aims topresent the available information in a practical manner, such that it provides a ‘front-end’with additional access to further information and relevant research. It is recognised thatthe Excel spreadsheet is not particularly easy to navigate and this could affect itsusability. In the future this information could be made more easily accessible and usableby creating a web-based tool with searchable and easily navigable features.In this material each element within the framework is divided into associated examplefactors. This provides key information, rules of thumb and associated theories about thetypes of factors that need to be considered. This information is framed in terms of whatyou need to consider, analyse or identify when designing or modifying a capability.Information is also provided at each element level that provides links to specificdocuments, information or theories and relevant military research. The final sections ofthe framework provide information about tools, methods and techniques that can assistthe measurement or collection of data to analyse or understand how the issues areidentified, and areas of military relevance or examples.Some points to note about the framework tool are:• The content is written for stakeholders who have some HF knowledge and expertise.• The information may not be complete and should be continually updated as moreinformation becomes available. It is likely that the current framework reflects only asmall amount of the overall available information.1 The SOF framework could link to other technical assurance processes and activities, e.g. SystemReadiness Levels, as appropriate.14

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009• The tools and techniques provided are suggestions of what may be useful whenconsidering each element. They are intended as a starting point to obtain moreinformation. They have not been tested to validate their use in this context.• There will be a degree of inconsistency of wording throughout the spreadsheet as it isdocumented as per the original reference to ensure the meaning intended by theauthor is not lost.• Generic HF/HFI tools and techniques are not included as it is assumed they would beundertaken as part of other processes, e.g. HFI or user-centred design.4.4 IPT Trial4.4.1 PurposeWhile the SOF framework was developed through close liaison with potential usergroups, it was important to check that the SOF materials could be used as proposed.Therefore a pilot trial of the material was conducted. Through liaison with DE&S HFG,an IPT, with an interest in the 7 th domain because of the nature of its project, agreed to actas a pilot project for the purposes of validating and verifying the information contained inthe SOF framework and the associated process for identification of issues.4.4.2 ParticipantsWorkshop participants included representatives from the IPT and stakeholder participantsfrom across land and air services. The workshop was facilitated by representatives fromSEA.4.4.3 MethodThe workshop was held at DE&S Abbeywood on 5 th March 2009. Prior to the workshopparticipants were emailed the draft short guide to allow them the opportunity to view thecontent and proposed review process. The workshop began with introductions, asummary describing the HFI DTC and a briefing about the background and drivers forthe SOF framework. The IPT team and stakeholders then provided project backgroundand context information.The remainder of the workshop lasted two hours and involved the SEA team facilitatingthe use of the SOF framework to brainstorm the identification and discussion of issues forproject. The outcome of the workshop was the identification and selection of the top SOFissues for the project. This process is shown in Figure 4.15

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009Figure 4 – IPT workshop process4.4.4 Key findings4.4.4.1 Content issuesThe content was found to be appropriate to enable a lively and useful discussion amongstthe participants. Participants understood the relevance of each factor and element to theirproject and were able to identify and agree on the key factors.The output from the workshop was communicated back to the IPT using a mindmapwhich identified all the issues identified and highlighted the top issues. The mindmapproduced for the IPT (showing only the top issues) is shown in Figure 5. The next stepfor the IPT would be to take these issues and add them to the project issues log and createappropriate mitigation strategies.16

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20094.4.4.2 Process and application issuesFigure 5 – Mindmap of top issuesThe following suggestions are proposed to enhance the ease of implementing the SOFframework:• Project phase: The volunteer IPT were beyond Concept phase. Whilst relevantissues were identified the exercise highlighted the importance of identifying thesetypes of issues in the early stages of the project.• Workshop advice for HFI IPT lead: To enable HFI IPT leads to prepare for andrun the workshop additional ‘how to’ advice should be generated.• Information Sheet: A simple information sheet should be generated for theworkshop leader to send out to attendees prior to the workshop. This shouldcontain information about the purpose of the meeting within the context of theproject, information about the SOF framework and what to expect at theworkshop.• Preparation prior to workshop: It was suggested that participants could spendsome time prior to the workshop considering how the ‘ideal’ situation would lookand what the barriers and enablers are to this being achieved. In additionparticipants could come prepared to discuss their top three issues. This proposalshould be tested prior to being implemented as part of the SOF process.4.4.5 Pilot trial conclusionsWhile the pilot trial provided only a minimum of testing of the SOF materials (SOFframework and short guide), it indicated that they have sufficient applicability, usabilityand utility to be launched for broader use. Recognising the limitations on this trial (timeand resources did not permit further activities on this in the project), it will be importantfor feedback from users to be collected and improvements made as required. This isparticularly so for the quick guide and living tool that were not used in the pilot trialbecause of the level of detail required at the issues identification stage. It is anticipatedthat feedback and comments will be collected by the Joint HFI DTC/HFG team at DE&SAbbeywood, as this group will be the key facilitators in use of the SOF materials withIPTs.17

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20095 Conclusions and RecommendationsUnderstanding SOF and their influence in defence acquisition, and across other defenceareas, is a considerable task. This research has sought to make some practical progresson this task by providing definition of the area in terms of what can be achieved,primarily through HFI. Discussions with stakeholders reinforced the importance ofconsidering broader SOF than have traditionally been included in defence HFI. Withoutthis, new ways of working with increased use of technology and multiple organisationscould be adversely affected. Along with the literature reviewing activities, the reviewswith stakeholders also highlighted the need for practical guidance, both on the technicalcontent and on methods, tools and metrics. It was also found that consideration should begiven to SOF not only in development of front line capability, but also in organisationsand processes involved in acquisition itself. The nature of the social and organisationaldomain is such that it needs to be considered across all stages of acquisition, across allDLOD and across capabilities. This work has also identified the need for other defenceareas to consider these types of issues and has created a mechanism to support this.The aim of this work was always to be on developing practical guidance for use withinthe defence acquisition community. This report provides some indication of how thisrequired shift can be achieved and offers initial practical guidance and associatedprocesses. More work will be needed to raise awareness of the breadth of HF andencourage it to be viewed not just as a set of specialist views in design, but as a providerof macroergonomic management consultancy and organisational change support.The issue of change management is a critical one in considering SOF and it is an areastrongly recommended for further work. It is important because appropriateimplementation of a change can be critical to the success of the desired change. It hasimplications for the introduction of new technology, Urgent Operational Requirements(UORs) and other changes in the delivery of defence capability.Continuing technical research is also needed to explore some of the content of the SOF.For example, very little information could be identified on the meaning of ‘trust’ in thecontext of Network Enabled Capability (NEC); hence at present there is little informationavailable for advising system developers or Front Line Commands (FLC) on how toensure appropriate trust is developed when employing new technology or working withdifferent groups.To further develop the SOF framework the following recommendations are made:• Understand MOD’s management of change processes and integrate with the SOFframework.• Publicise the existence of the SOF framework at the HFI DTC March 2009symposium.• Publicise the SOF framework at PIC awareness events at Abbey Wood and MainBuilding.• Liaise with MOD training providers to discuss inclusion of SOF information intostaff courses and acquisition training.18

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 2009• Ensure the identified ‘hooks’ contain information about and links to the SOFframework.• Identify the ‘hooks’ where SOF information can be integrated for otherstakeholders.• Consider creating an updatable web based tool for the SOF framework at thedetailed level.• The applicability of sub-domains and elements will vary depending on the type ofsystem or capability. Consider developing guidance examples for a range ofdifferent scenarios.• Provide information about the impact and effects of addressing or not addressingeach sub-domain and/or element.• Validate the suggested tools and techniques associated with each element.• Identify what HF/HFI tools are available and most appropriate to investigate eachelement.• Obtain more military examples.While the HFI DTC research of the social and organisational domain ended in March2009, a number of follow on activities will continue to ensure that the results from theresearch conducted to date are made available to the defence community and maximumbenefit is gained. Therefore the following next steps are suggested:• Launch the SOF framework (living framework tool, short guide, quick sheet andguidance for SOF workshop leads) and disseminate around identified stakeholdergroups.• Maintain the living framework and guidance through ‘HFI Architect’mechanisms, e.g. Joint HFI DTC/HFG team at DE&S, the MoD Industry HFIWorking Group. .• Cross-feed social and organisational research findings with HFI DTC Phase 3research activities, e.g. operational support, multi-level/agency interoperability,and the Impact of Technology on Humans programme.• Identify stakeholders in the MOD management of change process and exploreopportunities for further research.Essentially, while this project has reached its aims by providing definition and guidancefor the HFI 7 th domain, this is not the end of the process. Clearly greater understandingof the area will come with application of the SOF material and on-going research in otherprogrammes. However, ensuring consideration of macroergonomic issues in acquisitionis going to require a culture shift as with any other system change, and this highlights thatjust providing information is not enough to support that. Other developments andactivities as part of the TLCM process will be needed to encourage consideration of SOFacross the DLOD.19

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 20096 References[1] Fletcher, G. Forrest, E. Whiteley, I. Bruseberg, A. Smalley, J. and Whitfield, A.Incorporating Social and Organisational Factors into HFI: Initial Report,HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/2, 2008.[2] Lewis, C. Caldeira-Hankey, A. Improving the Representation of Human Factors andSystem Behaviour in OA models – Final summary report and study Technical Highlight.Dstl/CR26945, Version 1.0, February 2008.[3] HFI DTC. The MOD HFI Process Handbook, Edition 1 (Reprinted August 2007).- End of Document -20

HFIDTC/2/WP2.18/3Version 2/14th May 200921