Manprint pp 575-594 | Cite as

Manprint as the Competitive Edge

  • Harold R. Booher
  • William B. Rouse


Many of the chapters of this book identify tragic and costly problems with modern technology that could have been avoided with proper human factors technology application. However, if we survey consumers, designers, managers, and bureaucrats, nearly all will agree that they would like safe and well-performing systems. None wants technology that will maim, poison, or fall out of the sky on the user. None wants systems that cannot be operated, or create demands for such high job skills that the only alternative is unconscionably expensive training programs. As Lieutenant General Allen K. Ono, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel for the U.S. Army, has so succinctly stated, “No one is purposely trying to design equipment that the soldiers can’t use.”


Human Factor Human Performance Competitive Edge Human Factor Technology Army Research Institute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blanchard, R. E. (1989). Conceptual model for assessing MANPRINT’s organizational effectiveness (Report No. BM 106–4). San Diego, CA: Behavior Metrics.Google Scholar
  2. Booher, H. R. (1990a, February 14). Application of MANPRINT to air traffic control. Human factors in air traffic control, Air Traffic Control Association Symposium, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
  3. Booher, H. R. (1990b). MANPRINT implications for product design and manufacture. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, (to appear).Google Scholar
  4. Hendrick, H. W. (1986). Macroergonomics: A conceptual model for integrating human factors with organizational design. In 0. Brown, Jr., & H. W. Hendrick (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Symposium Human Factors in Organizational Design and Management (pp. 467–478). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson, E. M. (1987). The role of man in the system design process: The unresolved dilemma. In W. B. Rouse and K. R. Boff (Eds.), System design. New York: North Holland.Google Scholar
  6. Martin, T., Kivinen, J., Rijnsdorp, J. E., Rodd, M. B., & Rouse, W. B. (1990). Appropriate automation - Integrating technical, human, organizational, economic, and cultural factors. Proceeding of IF AC World Congress.Google Scholar
  7. Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. New York: Basic Books, Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Rouse, W. B. (1990). Human resource issues in system design. In N. P. Moray, W. R. Ferrell, & W. B. Rouse (Eds.), Robotics, control, and society. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  9. Rouse, W. B., & Cacioppo, G. M. (1989). Prospects for modeling the impact of human resource investments on economic return. Washington, DC: Department of the Army, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel.Google Scholar
  10. Singley, G. T. (1990, February 27). Army tech-based master plan, Executive breakfast seminar. Washington, DC: Pentagon.Google Scholar
  11. Yamada, S. (1989, June 1). Paradigm shift in product/service development. Japanese business strategies at turning point. New York: NRI Forum International.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Van Nostrand Reinhold 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold R. Booher
  • William B. Rouse

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations