Project Management Implications and Implementation Roadmap of Human Readiness Levels

Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10293)

Abstract

A human readiness levels (HRL) scale provides a framework to factor in the human dimension during technology development. This framework promotes careful consideration of the human as a part of the system throughout the product lifecycle. Insufficient attention to the human component of the system can lead to added costs, delayed deliverables, system failure, and even the loss of human life in high-consequence systems. We make the economic and technical justification for using an HRL scale by evaluating a reactive case study within a national laboratory. We create a historical technology readiness level (TRL) adoption roadmap to forecast a potential HRL adoption roadmap. We identify characteristics of organizations that are most likely to adopt the scale and conclude by recommending several project management tactics to ensure successful implementation.

Keywords

Human readiness level Technology readiness level Adoption forecast Roadmap Project management 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alexander, D., Holton, L., Sutter, H.: Technology readiness assessment of a large DOE waste processing facility. Presented at Technology Maturation Conference, Virginia Beach, VA (2007)Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, D.: Proceedings from Waste Management 2008 Conference: Technology Readiness Assessment of Department of Energy Waste Processing Facilities: Lessons Learned. Next Steps, Phoenix, AZ (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Endsley, M.: Human system integration: challenges and opportunities. In: Plenary speaker at National Defense Industrial Association Human Systems Conference, Alexandria, VA, February 2015Google Scholar
  4. Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2016. Retrieved from: s:\legcnsl\lexa\dor15\av\bill\tnfaara.3s.xmlGoogle Scholar
  5. Fennell, D.: Investigation into the King’s Cross underground fire. Department of Transport, London, England (1988)Google Scholar
  6. Forrest, J.: The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster: A failure in decision support system and human factors management (1996). http://www.dssresources.com/cases/spaceshuttlechallenger/index.html. Accessed
  7. Graettinger, C., Garcia, S., Siviy, J., Schenk, R., Van Syckle, P.: Using the technology readiness levels scale to support technology management in the DoD’s ATD/STO environments: A findings and recommendations report conducted for Army CECOM (Special Report CMU/SEI-2002-SR-027) (2002)Google Scholar
  9. Hale, K., Fuchs, S., Carpenter A., Stanney, K.: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting: A Scale for Assessing Human Factors Readiness Levels. Las Vegas, Nevada (2011)Google Scholar
  10. IEA. The discipline of ergonomics. International Ergonomics Association (2000). http://www.iea.cc/whats/. Accessed
  11. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  12. Krebs, V.: Social capital: the key to success for the 21st century organization. IHRIM J. 8(5), 38–42 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. Mankins, J.C.: Technology readiness assessments: a retrospective. Acta Astronaut. 65(9–10), 1216–1223 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.058 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moore, G.A.: Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers, 3rd edn. HarperBusiness, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  15. Olechowski, A., Eppinger, E., Joglekar, N.: Proceedings of PICMET ’15: Management of the Technology Age: Technology Readiness Levels at 40: A Study of State-of-the-Art Use, Challenges, and Opportunities, Portland, Oregon (2015)Google Scholar
  16. O’Neil, M., Shattuck, L., Sciarini, L.: A framework for assessing and communicating human systems integration efficacy across the system lifecycle. Procedia Manufact. 3, 3054–3061 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Phillips, E.: The development and initial evaluation of the human readiness level framework (Master’s dissertation). Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA (2010). http://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/5255. Accessed
  18. Reason, J.: Human error: Models and management. Br. Med. J. 320(7237), 768–770 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, Glencoe (2003)Google Scholar
  20. Sanwal, A.: CB Insights trends report. Keynote presentation at CB Insights Innovation Summit 2017, Santa Barbara, CA (2017)Google Scholar
  21. See, J., Morris, J.: Incorporating human readiness levels at Sandia National Laboratories. Paper presented at Resilience Week, Chicago, IL August 2016. Abstract retrieved from https://secureweb.inl.gov/resweek2016/OnlineProceedings/IEEE_1Column/See_SNL_IEEE_1_080316.docx.pdf
  22. Wakabayashi, D.: How Japan lost its electronics crown. Wall Street J. (2012). https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444840104577551972061864692. Accessed
  23. Walsh, S.: Proceedings from the TSensors Summit for Trillion Sensor Roadmap: Current Status of the TSensor Systems Roadmap, La Jolla, CA (2014)Google Scholar
  24. Weiner, B.: A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Sci. 4(67) (2009). doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
  25. Whelan, D.: Presentation to Department of Energy Fusion Energy Science Advisory Committee: Impact of Technology Readiness Levels on Aerospace R&D (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victoria Newton
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alexander Greenberg
    • 2
  • Judi See
    • 1
  1. 1.Sandia National LaboratoriesAlbuquerqueUSA
  2. 2.The University of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations