Abstract
This paper highlights the value of systems theory and its application to human and organizational factors (HOF). HOF specialists consider multiple systems characteristics in their analyses but are often unaware of the relevant theory applied in their analysis. We argue that a structured effort to take key systems characteristics into account in HOF practice would increase the depth and breadth of safety management analyses and help HOF specialists to act more effectively on industrial socio-technical systems. First, the paper identifies the following seven system theory characteristics: constitution, multi-axis representation, limit, emergence, variety, coherence, and causal interaction, which are then illustrated with examples from the HOF field. Finally, we discuss the two main benefits of integrating system thinking in a HOF approach to safety management: (1) an improved understanding of the inner workings of an industrial socio-technical system; and (2) a compendium or a reference to guide for decision-making and the implementation of actions within the industrial socio-technical systems.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In the “Arrêté du 7 février 2012 fixant les règles générales relatives aux installations nucléaires de base”.
Other models may include other types of interactions besides that of coherence. For example, certain actors may be linked together by convergent versus divergent relationships. For example, this expresses the fact that they agree (converge) or disagree (diverge) on the way to solve a problem.
In France, Mr Jourdain is a well-known classic literature character. This expression means that we may carry out many tasks without knowing the principles underlying them.
References
Amalberti R (2013). Navigating safety, necessary compromises and trade-offs—theory and practice, Springer, The Netherlands
Amalberti R, et Mosneron-Dupin F (1997) Facteurs humains et fiabilité: quelles démarches pratiques? OCTARES Editions
Aristotle (1930). Physics, Book II, Chaps. 3 and 7 (trans: Hardie RP, Gaye RK). Oxford Press, Oxford
Aristotle (2008) Metaphysics (The original is in French: Métaphysique). In: Book ∆, Chap. 2, Translation of Marie-Paule Duminil et Annick Jaulin. Editions Garnier Flammarion, Paris
Ashby WR (1956). An introduction to cybernetics, Chapman & Hall, London
Bainbridge L (1983). Ironies of automation, Automatica, 19(6):775–779
Bernard B (2014). Comprendre les facteurs humains et organisationnels - Sûreté nucléaire et organisations à risques, EDP Sciences
Bignell V, Fortune J (1984). Understanding system failures, Manchester University Press, Manchester
CAIB (2003). Report Volume 1, national aeronautics and space administration, Washington DC, available at http://caib.nasa.gov
Cullen WD [Lord] (2000) The Ladbroke grove rail inquiry, Part 1 and Part 2 reports. HSE Books, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Norwich
De Rosnay J (1975) Le macroscope. Seuil, Paris
Dechy N, Rousseau J-M, Llory M (2011). Are organizational audits of safety that different from organizational investigation of accidents? ESREL 2011 Conference, Troyes, France, pp. 18–22
Dechy N, Dien Y, Funnemark E, Roed-Larsen S, Stoop J, Valvisto T, Vetere Arellano A-L, on behalf of ESReDA Accident Investigation Working Group (2012). Results and lessons learned from the ESReDA’s accident investigation working group, Saf Sci, 50(6):1380–1391
Dekker S (2006), The field guide to understanding ‘human error’. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Farnham
Dekker S (2011), Drift into failure: from hunting broken components to understanding complex systems, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Farnham
Descartes R (1637). Discours de la méthode
Dien Y (2006) Les facteurs organisationnels des accidents industriels, dans L. Magne. In: et Vasseur D (eds) Risques industriels – Complexité, incertitude et décision: une approche interdisciplinaire. Éditions TEC & DOC, Lavoisier, pp 133–174
Dien Y, Llory M, Montmayeul R (2004) Organisational accidents investigation: methodology and lessons learned. J Hazard Mater 111(1–3):147–153
Dien Y, Dechy N, Guillaume E (2012) Accident investigation: from searching direct causes to finding in-depth causes. Problem of analysis or/and of analyst? Saf Sci 50(6):1398–1407
Endsley M, Bolte B, Jones D (2003). Designing for situational awareness: An approach to user-centered design. Taylor and Francis, Routledge
ESReDA (2009) Eds., ESReDA working group on accident investigation, Guidelines for safety investigation of accidents, available http://www.esreda.org
Fornette M-P, Jollans J-Y (2016). Former les équipes à la sécurité et à la performance avec le crew resource management. Octares Editions, Toulouse
Garandel S, Périnet R (2013) A daisy to multiply the points of view in analyses of events, Third European Conference for High Reliability Organizations, 5, 6 november 2013, Aix-En-Provence
Grant E, Salmon P, Stevens N, Goode N, Read G (2018) Back to the future: what to accident causation models tell us about accident prediction? J Saf Sci 104:99–109
Haeckel E (1899) Riddle of the Universe at the Close of the Nineteenth Century
Hardy K, et Guarnieri F (2012) Modéliser les accidents et les catastrophes industrielles: la méthode STAMP. Editions Lavoisier, Paris
Hollifield BR, Habibi E (2010) The alarm management handbook, 2 edn. PAS, Houston, TX
Hollnagel E, (2012), FRAM: the functionnal resonance analysis method: modelling complex sociotechnical systems. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Farnham
Hollnagel E, Woods D, Leveson N, (2006), Resilience engineering: concepts and precepts. Ashgate publishing limited, Farnham
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (2013). Human and organizational factors in nuclear safety in the light of the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, International Experts Meeting, 21–24 May 2013, Vienna, Austria
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (2016). Leadership and Management for Safety, GSR Part 2
ISO 9241-210, Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: human-centred design for interactive systems, January 2011
Koffka K (1935) Principles of Gestalt psychology
Le Moigne J-L (1977) La théorie du système général, théorie de la modélisation (2nd edn in1994)
Leveson N (2004) A new accident model for engineering safer systems. J Saf Sci 42:237–270
Lewes G-H (1875) Problem of life and mind
Llory M (1999) L’accident de la centrale nucléaire de Three Mile Island, Éditions L’Harmattan, Paris
Llory M, et Montmayeul R (2010). L’accident et l’organisation, Editions Préventique, Paris
Manna G (2007). Human and organizational factors in nuclear installations: analysis of available models and identification of R&D issues, JRC Scientific and Technical Reports
Mill J-S (1862). A system of logic
Perrow C (1984). Normal accidents, living with high risk-technologies, Princeton University Press, Princeton
Rasmussen J (1997) Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Saf Sci 27(2–3):183–213
Rasmussen J, Svedung I (2000) Proactive risk management in a dynamic society. Swedish Rescue Services Agency, Karlstad
Reason J (1990). Human error, Cambridge University Press, New York
Reason J (1997) Managing the risks of organisational accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot
Reason J, Hollnagel E, Paries J (2006) Revisiting the « swiss cheese » model of accidents. EUROCONTROL
Rousseau J-M, et Largier A (2008). Conduire un diagnostic organisationnel par la recherche de facteurs pathogènes, Techniques de l’Ingénieur AG 1576
Tosello M, et Vautier J-F (2001). Présentation et illustration d’une démonstration de sûreté « facteurs humains », XXXVIth congress of SELF, Montréal, Canada, 3–5
Tosello M, Vautier J-F, Sevestre B (2003). A new study of human factors in the nuclear safety field, XVth Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), August 24–29, 2003, Seoul, Korea, 5, SAFETY V
Turner B (1978). Man-made disasters, Wykeham Publications, London
Underwood P, Waterson P (2013) Systemic accident analysis: Examining the gap between research and practice. J Accid Anal Prev 55:154–164
Vaughan D (1996) The challenger launch decision. Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. The Chicago University Press, Chicago
Vautier J-F (2007) “Art et Systémique” La gouvernance dans les systèmes. Polimetrica, January
Vautier J-F (2008) A systemic approach to question complexity: the systemic scores, 7th Congress of the European Union for Systemics EUS-UES, Lisbon
Vautier J-F (2015) Making a causal contextualization with the four causes of Aristotle. Adv Syst Sci Appl 15(2), 176–187
Vautier J-F, Tosello M, Hernandez G, Dutillieu S, Quiblier S, Sylvestre C, Lévêque F, Barnabé I, Baussart N, Paulus V, Lipart C, Barrière V, Dupont M (2016). A synchro-diachro approach to question the development of a human and organizational factors (HOF) network, International Conference on Human and Organizational Aspects of Assuring Nuclear Safety—Exploring 30 years of safety culture, IAEA, Vienna, Austria, 22–26
Vautier J-F, Dechy N, De Coye Brunélis T, Hernandez G, Launay R (2018). Systemic characteristics of a human and organizational factors (HOF) approach of safety management, in Cybernetics and Systems by Routledge
Von Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory: foundations, development. George Braziller, Canada
Wilpert B, Fahlbruch B (1998). Safety related interventions in inter-organisational fields, In: Hale A, Baram M (eds), Safety management—the challenge of change, Elsevier Science Ltd, Pergamon, pp 235–248
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Gaël Laurans, Ph.D., for his contribution to the language editing of this paper and the two blind authors for their challenging comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vautier, JF., Dechy, N., Coye de Brunélis, T. et al. Benefits of systems thinking for a human and organizational factors approach to safety management. Environ Syst Decis 38, 353–366 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9692-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9692-7