Systems Usability — Promoting Core-Task Oriented Work Practices

  • Paula Savioja
  • Leena Norros
Part of the Human-Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


A new concept of systems usability is introduced. Systems usability provides a holistic activity-oriented perspective to evaluation of the appropriateness of ICT–based smart tools. The concept has been developed in empirical studies of work in complex industrial environments. The nuclear power plant domain is used here to exemplify the systems usability concept and the method developed for evaluating it. In the chapter, we first identify four practical challenges that the current approaches in usability studies face: task analysis, data collection methods, usability measures, and inferences concerning the interface. As a solution to tackle these challenges we, then, introduce our concept of systems usability. To reach the demands of systems usability, work tools must fulfill all three functions of tools: the instrumental, psychological, and communicative. Because systems usability is visible in practices of using the tools we, finally, demonstrate how the developed method labeled contextual assessment of systems usability (CASU) is used for evaluating systems usability.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beguin, P., & Rabardel, P. (2000) Designing for instrument mediated activity. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12, 173–190.Google Scholar
  2. Dreyfus, H. L. (2001) The primacy of phenomenology over logical analysis. Paper presented at the EGOS, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  3. Endsley, M. R. (1995) Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Engeström, Y. (1987) Expansive Learning. Jyväskylä: Orienta.Google Scholar
  5. Engeström, Y. (1999) Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström & R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives in activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Eskola, A. (1999) Laws, logics, and human activity. In Y. Engeström & R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives in activity theory (pp. 107–114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gay, G., & Hembrooke, H. (2004) Activity-centered design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hollnagel, E. (Ed.). (2003) Handbook of cognitive task design. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Hornbæk, K. (2006) Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies(64), 79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hyysalo, S. (2004) Uses of innovation. Unpublished PhD, University of Helsinki, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  12. IAEA (2002) Recruitment, qualification and training of personnel for NPP. Safety Guide (Safety Standard Series NS-G.2.8). Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  13. ISO (1998) ISO 9241-11. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VTDs) – Part 11. Guidance on usability.Google Scholar
  14. Järvilehto, T. (1998) The theory of organism-environment system (I). Description of the theory. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 33(4), 317–330.Google Scholar
  15. Long, J. (1996) Specifying relations between research and the design of human – computer interactions. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 44, 875–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. MacIntyre, A. (1984) After virtue: Study in moral theory (2nd Ed.). Notre Dame, Indianana: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  17. MAUSE (2006) Cost Action 294 Towards the MAturation of Information Technology USability Evaluation. Scholar
  18. Nielsen, J. (1993) Usability engineering. Boston: Academic Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Norros, L. (2004) Acting under uncertainty. The core-task analysis in ecological study of work (Vol. Publications 546). Espoo: VTT, Available also URL: http// Scholar
  20. Norros, L., & Klemola, U-M. (2005) Naturalistic analysis of anaesthetists clinical practice. In Montgomery, H., Lipshitz, R & Brehmer, B. (Eds.), How experts make decision (pp. 395–407). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Norros, L., & Savioja, P. (2005, October 16th–21st). Theoretical justification of performance indicators for integrated validation of complex systems. Paper presented at the Enlarged Halden programme Group meeting, Lillehammer.Google Scholar
  22. Nuutinen, M. (2005) Expert identity construct in analyzing prerequisites for expertise development: A case study in nuclear power plant operators’ on-the-job training. Cognition, Technology and Work, 7(4), 288–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nuutinen, M., & Norros, L. (in press) Core task analysis in accident investigation – analysis of maritime accidents in piloting situations. Cognition, Technology & Work.Google Scholar
  24. Petersen, M., Madsen, K., & Kjær, A. (2002) The usability of everyday technology-emerging and fading opportunities. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 9(2), 74–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rückriem, G. (2003) Tool or medium? The meaning of information and telecommunication technology to human practice. A quest for systemic understanding of activity theory. University of Helsinki, Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research. Retrieved on 19.4.2004 from the World Wide Web.Google Scholar
  26. Savioja, P. & Norros, L. (2004) Evaluation of operator practices as means of integrated system validation. Proceedings of the Fourth American Nuclear Society International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Controls and Human-machine Interface Technologies, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
  27. Thomas, P. (2002) Introduction to the new usability. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 9(2), 69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vicente, K. J. (1999) Cognitive work analysis. Toward a safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paula Savioja
    • 1
  • Leena Norros
    • 1
  1. 1.VTT Technical Research Centre of FinlandFinland

Personalised recommendations