Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore how human factors were taken into account in the development of a new type of drilling equipment. This study is part of a larger project on the understanding of human factors in the design and implementation of automated drilling technology. The principal study was a longitudinal study lasting 4 years that involved 43 interviews, offshore and onshore observations, and two surveys. The analysis in this paper is based on seven informants who were either part of the design team or the paramount project team developing new automated drilling technology for an offshore oil- and gas-producing installation in the same development project, in addition to project documents. The informants were interviewed using semi-structured interviews, and grounded theory based on the coding process of Strauss and Corbin (Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, Newbury Park, 1990) was used to analyse the data. The core category was found to be insufficient human factor analyses performed in the development phase due to the two main categories, namely (1) insufficient information coordination and (2) narrow focus in different phases of the project. This was found to contribute to increased costs, low user-friendliness, and end users’ insufficient knowledge of safe usage and potential risks. Our conclusion was that homogenous top competence involving technical aspects contributed to developers’ lack of understanding of the need for sufficient analyses of end user requirements and of the tasks that would be affected by the new technology. Hence, we argue that technological development could benefit from including human factors experts from the project’s outset to bridge the gap between the lack of relevant information and sufficient information on which to base development decisions. In addition, we contend that performing human factors analyses throughout the development of a project would be beneficial due to the potential of hindering cultural aspects such as a non-questioning culture, which is viewed as a hazard in high-risk organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aas AL, Skramstad T (2010) A case study of ISO 11064 in control centre design in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Appl Ergon 42:62–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albrechtsen E, Weltzien A (2013) IO concepts as contributing factors to major accidents and enablers for resilience-based major accident prevention. In Rosendahl T, Hepsø V (eds) Integrated operations in the oil and gas industry: sustainability and capability development. Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA, pp 353–370. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2002-5

  • Armenakis A, Harris SG (2009) Reflections: our journey in organizational change research and practice. J Change Manag 9:127–142

  • Årstad I, Kristiansen V, Vinnem JE, Wagnild BR, Heide B, Nyrønning CA, Karlsen A (2010) Risk level in the petroleum activity: risk of acute discharges. Norwegian continental shelf 2001–2009. Project report. Petroleum Safety Authority Norway

  • Baker J, Levenson N, Bowman F, Priest S, Erwing G, Rosenthal I, Wiegman D (2007) The report of the BP US refineries independent safety review panel. The B.P. U.S. Refineries Independent Safety Review Panel. http://www.csb.gov/assets/1/19/Baker_panel_report1.pdf

  • Boring R (2007) Meeting human reliability requirements through human factors design, testing, and modelling. In: Proceeding of the European safety and reliability conference ESREL 2007—risk, reliability, and societal safety, vol 1, pp 3–8

  • Boring R, Bye A (2009) Bridging human factors and human reliability analysis. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc 2:733–737

    Google Scholar 

  • Boring R, Roth E, Straeter O, Laumann K, Blackman HS, Oxstrand J, Persensky JJ (2009) Is human reliability relevant to human factors? Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 53rd annual meeting

  • Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen LWD (1993) The public inquiry into the Piper Alpha disaster. Drill Contract (United States) 49(4). http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/6208554

  • Cummings TG, Worley CG (2015) Organization development & change. Cengage Learning, Stamford

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaia SJ, Nair SN (2006) Human factors engineering and systems design. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 32–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker S (2011) Drift into failure. From hunting broken components to understanding complex systems. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Farnham

  • Demichaela M, Pirani R, Leva MC (2014) Human factor analysis embedded in risk assessment of industrial machines: effects on the safety integrity level. Int J Perform Eng 10:487–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott R, Fischer C, Rennie D (1999) Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. Br J Clin Psychol 38:215–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst SA, Cable DM (2008) Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. J Appl Psychol 93:453–462. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal S (2005) Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Acad Manag Learn Educ 4:75–91

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon RPE (1996) The contribution of human factors to accidents in the offshore oil industry. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 61:95–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould K, Ringstad AJ, van de Merwe K (2012).Human reliability analysis in major accident risk analyses in the Norwegian petroleum industry. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 2016–2020

  • Graham B et al (2011) Deep water. The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling Report to the President. National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling

  • Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1989) Fourth generation evaluation. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham DH, Yoon WC (2001) Design of information content and layout for process based on goal-means domain analysis. Cogn Technol Work 3:205–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO 11064-1 (2000) Ergonomic design of control centres part 1: principles for the design of control centres. International Organization for Standardization

  • ISO 6385 (2004) Ergonomic principles in the design of work systems. International Organization for Standardization

  • Jernæs S, Åsland JE, Heber H, Morvik R, Leistad G, Enoksen AM, Ellingsen A (2005) Human factors in drill and well operations: challenges, projects, and activities. Retrieved 21 January 2016 from http://www.ptil.no/getfile.php/z%20Konvertert/Health,%20safety%20and%20environment/HSE%20news/Dokumenter/hfrapportengelsk.pdf

  • Johnsen SO, Bjørkli C, Steiro T, Fartum H, Haukenes H, Ramberg J, Skriver J (2008) Criop: a scenario method for crisis intervention and operability analysis. SINTEF Technology and Society, Trondheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter RM, Stein BA, Jick TD (1992) The challenge of organizational change. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan B, Ainsworth LK (1992) A guide to task analysis. Taylor & Francis, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kotter JP (1996) Leading change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvale S (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee JD (2006) Human factors and ergonomics in automation design. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 1570–1596

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leva MC, Naghdali F, Ciarapica Alunni C (2015) Human factors in system design: a roadmap for improvement. Procedia CIRP 38:94–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longo L (2015) A defeasible reasoning framework for human mental workload representation and assessment. Behav Inform Technol 34:205–225

  • Luecke R (2003) Managing change and transition. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoy et al (1999) HAZID, a computer aid for hazard identification 1. The STOPHAZ package and the HAZID code: an overview, the issues and the structure. Trans IChemE 77:317–327

  • McLeod RW (2015) Designing for human reliability: human factors engineering in the oil, gas, and process industries. Gulf Professional Publishing, Elsevier, Waltham

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyrick J (2006) What is good qualitative research? A first step towards a comprehensive approach to judging rigour/quality. J Health Psychol 11:799–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milch V, Laumann K (2016) Interorganizational complexity and organizational accident risk: a literature review. Saf Sci 82:9–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrow SL (2005) Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counselling psychology. J Couns Psychol 52:250–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman D (2013) The design of everyday things. E-book retrieved from: http://proquestcombo.safaribooksonline.com/9780465072996  

  • NORSOK Standard S-002 (2004) Work environment. Retrieved 27 May 2014 from http://www.standard.no/PageFiles/1050/S-002.pdf

  • NS-EN 6140-2 (2008) Safety of machinery. Ergonomic design principles, part 2: interactions between the design of machinery and work tasks. European Standard. Swedish Standards Institute, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • OGP (2013) Offshore safety: getting it right now and for the long term. Retrieved 18 January 2016 from http://www.iogp.org/PapersPDF/Web_Post_GIRG_Final_300113(4).pdf

  • Palanque PA, Koorneef FC, Johnson GS, Szwillus G, Wright PC (2004, April). Safety-critical interaction: usability in incidents and accidents. Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2004 Vienna, Austria, pp 1600–1601. doi:10.1145/985921.986165

  • Pascal A, Thomas C, Romme AGL (2013) Developing a human-centred and science-based approach to design: the knowledge management platform project. Br J Manag 24:264–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paté-Cornell ME (1993) Learning from the piper accident: a postmortem analysis of technical and organizational factors. Risk Anal 13:215–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petroleum Safety Authority (PSA) (2004) Trends in risk levels: Summary report phase 5. Retrieved 29 January 2016 from http://www.psa.no/getfile.php/z%20Konvertert/Health%2C%20safety%20and%20environment/Trends%20in%20risk%20levels/Dokumenter/rnnstrendsinrisklevelssummarynyefigurer1.pdf

  • Petroleum Safety Authority (PSA) (2011) The facilities regulations. Retrieved 9 May 2014 from http://www.ptil.no/facilities/category400.html#_Toc345671502

  • Rasmussen J (1991) Modelling distributed decision making. In: Rasmussen J, Brehmer B, Leplat J (eds) Distributed decision making: cognitive models for cooperative work. Wiley, Chicester

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1997) Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Saf Sci 27:183–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen M, Standal MI, Laumann K (2015) Task complexity as a performance shaping factor: a review and recommendations in standardized plant analysis risk-human reliability analysis (SPAR-H) adaption. Saf Sci 76:228–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reason J (1997) Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate, Surrey

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB, Boff KR (2006) Cost-benefit analysis of human systems investments. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 1133–1149

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sætren GB, Laumann K (2015a) Effects of trust in high-risk organizations during technological changes. Cogn Technol Work 17:131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sætren GB, Laumann K (2015b) Organizational change management theories and safety. A critical review. Manuscript submitted for publication

  • Salas E, Wilson KA, Priest HA, Guthrie JW (2006) Design, delivery, and evaluation of training systems. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 472–512

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Salvendy G (2006) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schröder-Hinrichs J-U, Hollnagel E, Baldauf M (2012) From Titanic to Costa Concordia—a century of lessons not learned. WMU J Marit Aff 11:151–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan TB (2008) Risk, human error, and system resilience: fundamental ideas. Hum Factors 50:418–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shorrock ST, Kirwan B (2002) Development and applications of a human error identification tool for air traffic control. Appl Ergon 33:319–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons DJ, Chabris CF (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained in attentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28(9):1059–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skogdalen JE, Vinnem JE (2011) Quantitative risk analysis offshore – Human and organizational factors. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 96:468–479

  • Sneddon A, Mearns K, Flin R (2013) Stress, fatigue, situation awareness in offshore drilling crews. Saf Sci 56:80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamnes ØN, Zhou J, Kaasa G-O, Aamo OM (2008) Adaptive observer design for the bottomhole pressure of a managed pressure drilling system. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on decision and control, pp 2961–2966

  • Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH, Baber C, Jenkins DP (2013) Human factors methods. A practical guide for engineering and design, 2nd edn. Ashgate, Hampshire

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Strøm S, Balov MK, Kjørholt H, Gaasø R, Vefring E, Rommetveit R (2008) The future drilling scenario. Conference paper presented at Offshore technology conference, Houston, Texas. doi:10.4043/19409-MS

  • Taylor JR (2007) Statistics of design error in the process industries. Saf Sci 45:61–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor JR (2013) Incorporating human error analysis into process plant safety analysis. Chem Eng Trans 31:301–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Trimpop RM (1994) The psychology of risk taking behavior. North Holland, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner (1978) Man made disaster. Wykeham Publications, London

  • van de Merwe K, Øie S, Gould K (2012) The application of the SPAR-H method in managed-pressure drilling operations. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 56th annual meeting, pp 2012–2025

  • Vinnem JE (1998) Evaluation of methodology for QRA in offshore operations. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 61:39–52

  • Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2007) Managing the unexpected: resilient performance in an age of uncertainty. Jossey-Bass, Michigan

  • Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2015) Managing the unexpected: sustained performance in a complex world. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey

  • Wickens CD, Lee JD, Liu Y, Becker GSE (2004) An introduction to human factors engineering. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilpert B (2005) Psychology and design processes. Eur Psychol 10:229–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe CA, Morris SA, Baule A (2009) Enhanced real-time wellbore stability monitoring using high-definition imaging with wired-pipe telemetry. SPE/IADC Drill Conf Exhib Proc 2:1028–1038

    Google Scholar 

  • Yardley L (2000) Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychol Health 15:215–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimolong BM, Elke G (2006) Occupational health and safety management. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 673–707

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to the Norwegian Research Council’s Petromaks Programme (eLAD Grant Number 176018), Statoil ASA, and ConocoPhillips, who funded this research. We would also like to thank our scientific collaborating partners: the Institute for Research in Stavanger (IRIS), Christian Michelsen Research (CMR), and the Institute of Energy Technology (IFE). Additionally, we would like to thank those who participated in this case study. This paper represents the view of the authors and does not necessarily reflect any position or policy of the above-mentioned organizations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education of Driving Instructors, Nord University, 7500, Stjørdal, Norway

    Gunhild B. Sætren

  2. DNV-GL, 1322, Høvik, Norway

    Sandra Hogenboom

  3. Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Karin Laumann

Authors
  1. Gunhild B. Sætren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sandra Hogenboom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karin Laumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gunhild B. Sætren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sætren, G.B., Hogenboom, S. & Laumann, K. A study of a technological development process: Human factors—the forgotten factors?. Cogn Tech Work 18, 595–611 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0379-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0379-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation