Human systems integration

Human Systems Integration

Human Systems Integration (HSI) is an interdisciplinary managerial and technical approach to developing and sustaining systems which focuses on the interfaces between humans and modern technical systems. The domains of HSI include training, manpower (the number of people), personnel (the qualifications of people), human factors engineering, safety, occupational health, survivability and habitability. The objective of HSI is to provide equal weight to human, hardware, and software elements of system design throughout the systems engineering and lifecycle logistics management. The end goal is to optimize total system performance and minimize total ownership costs.

The HSI domains such as human factors engineering and training have been important aspects of systems design for decades. What is new about HSI is the integration of domain activities across systems engineering and logistics support processes. For example, early human-centered decisions in the domains of human factors engineering, usability and systems safety can reduce life cycle costs in the domains of training, personnel and manpower. HSI most effective when it is initiated early in the acquisition process, when the need for a new or modified capability is identified. Application of HSI should continue throughout the lifecycle of the system, integrating HSI processes alongside the evolution of the system.

HSI is an important part of many different systems engineering projects:

• New systems can benefit from early incorporation of HSI practices, analyses and decisions, which is the best time to realize life-cycle cost benefits from HSI.
• Systems upgrades or modernization efforts can benefit from applying HSI upgrades to outstanding issues with the system and leveraging HSI principles to system upgrades.
• For commercial-off-the shelf procurements, HSI principles can be leveraged in analysis of alternatives, request for information, request for proposals and source selection processes.
• Rapid prototyping, accelerated acquisitions and research and development projects can incorporate HSI requirements, design principles, usability and testing in early documentation. HSI continues to be relevant throughout iterative or agile development processes, testing, verification and validation, and acceptance.

Origin and policies

Human Systems Integration in the United States originated in 1986 as a US Army program called the Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) program.  MANPRINT focused on the needs and capabilities of the soldier during the development of military systems.  MANPRINT framed a human-centered focus in six domains: human factors engineering, manpower, personnel, training, health hazards and system safety.

In 1980, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine established the Committee on Human Factors, which was later renamed the Committee on Human Systems Integration. In 2010, the committee transitioned to a board under the division of behavioral and social sciences and education. The Board on Human Systems Integration (BOHSI) issues consensus studies, reports and proceedings on HSI research and application.

DOD 5000.02

HSI was formally integrated into DoD acquisition policy as a distinct focus area in the Operation of the Defense Acquisition System [1](DoD Instruction 5000.02) issued in 2008. Subsequent updates to this policy expanded the domains from five to seven, re-focusing systems safety as safety and occupational health, and adding habitability and survivability to the list [2].  Force protection was added to the survivability domain in the 2013 version of the instruction.  In 2020, the DoD has shifted to an adaptive acquisition framework, which will describe HSI activities tailored to each acquisition pathway, according to the unique characteristics of the capability being required.

Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG)

The DAG devotes an entire chapter to manpower planning and HSI. In addition to focused discussion on each domain, the DAG emphasizes viewing HSI from a total system perspective, viewing the human components of a system as integral to the total system as any other component or subsystem. HSI should be represented in all aspects of programmatic Integrated Product and Process Development, strategic planning and risk management.

SAE 6906

The SAE 6906 Standard Practice for Human Systems Integration is the newest HSI technical standard. It defines standard practices for procurement activities related to HSI. The standard is provided for industry to apply HSI during system design, through disposal and all related activities. This standard includes an overview of HSI and the domains, the domain relationships and tradeoffs, systems development process requirements, and a number of technical standard references.

Other HSI policy, standards and guidance:

Human Systems Integration in the System Acquisition Process Army Regulation (AR) 602-2

United States Air Force Human Systems Integration Handbook

Air Force HSI

NASA Human Systems Integration Practitioners Guide

ASTM F1337-10 Standard Practice for Human Systems Integration Program Requirements for Ships and Marine Systems, Equipment and Facilities

HSI Data Information Descriptions include:

DI-HFAC 81743 Human Systems Integration Program Plan

Domains of HSI

Human Factors Engineering

Human Factors Engineering (HFE) is an engineering discipline that ensures human capabilities and limitations in areas such as perception, cognition, sensory and physical attributes are incorporated into requirements and design. An area of focus for HFE is the relationship between anthropometry of the system user group and the physical dimensions of a system spaces. If the physical dimensions of the system accommodate the users' anthropometry, hazards that result in acute injury or chronic musculo-skeletal disorders are reduced. This represents a tradeoff between HFE and systems safety. Another area of focus for Human Factors Engineers is workload and cognitive capacity. Intuitive design and interfaces that are easy to use will reduce the workload required to use a system. If a system has intuitive design and adheres to usability best practices, workload will be reduced, and the number of people required to operate or maintain the system may be reduced, or the minimum qualification level of the operators and maintainers may be lower. Additionally, training requirements may be reduced. All three of these tradeoffs between HSI domains have the potential to reduce total lifecycle cost.

HFE standards and requirements include:

ASTM F1166-07 Standard Practice for Human Engineering Design for Marine Systems, Equipment and Facilities

HFES-200 Human Factors Engineering of Software User Interfaces

MIL-STD 46855 Human Engineering Requirements for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities

MIL-STD 1472 DoD Design Criteria Standard for Human Engineering

HFE Data Information Descriptions include:

Human Engineering Program Plan (HEPP) DI-HFAC- 81742

Human Engineering Systems Analysis Report (HESAR) DI-HFAC-80745

Human Engineering Design Approach Document (HEDAD-M) DI-HFAC-80747

Human Engineering Design Approach Document (HEDAD-O) DI-HFAC-80746

Human Engineering Test Plan (HETP) DI-HFAC-80743

Human Engineering Test Reports (HETR) DI-HFAC-80744

FAA Human Factors Design Standards (HFDS) HF-STD-001B

Manpower

Manpower focuses on evaluating and defining the number of positions (sometimes referred to as "spaces") for people to operate, maintain and support a system. The number of positions is determined through a manpower requirements analysis (MRA) process, which is a data-driven methodical approach that includes workload considerations (number of tasks and time required to complete tasks), skillset (tied to the personnel domain), working hours and personnel availability for example. Manpower analyses are iterative: early in a system design, they are based on previous data and notional or estimated data about a new system. As the system design develops, manpower analyses become more refined. In a military setting manpower analyses are just the first step to staffing a system. Billet authorizations will dictate how many people are actually assigned to an asset. Manpower estimates are informed by and inform personnel selection, and set the target audience for training.

Personnel

The personnel domain is concerned with the human performance characteristics of the user population (cognitive, sensory and physical skills, knowledge, and abilities) of operators, maintainers and support staff required for a system. This is often referred to as the "faces" of the system, in partnership with manpower's "spaces". Personnel takes into account the organizational structure as well as the system demands. In a hierarchical leadership structure with a workforce development requirement, many military systems must include a pyramid structure with a few leaders, slightly more experienced and highly qualified managers, a broader hands-on workforce, and a number of inexperienced initiates beginning to learn the system and move into the organizational workforce.

Manpower and personnel standards include:

Standard Practice for Manpower and Personnel SAE1010

Training

In the context of HSI, training is developing the knowledge, skills and abilities of a user group to operate, maintain and support a system. Training is one of the most expensive contributors to total lifecycle costs The lifecycle cost of training is reduced by systems design that are intuitive and tailored to the humans who interface with the system. Thus, one of the most important tradeoffs occurs between early systems design informed by human factors engineering, and downstream operator and maintainer training.

Training standards include:

Guidance for the Acquisition of Training Data Products and Services (Part 1 of 5) MIL-HDBK 29612/1

Instructional Systems Development/Systems Approach to Training and Education (Part 2 of 5) MIL-HDBK 29612/2

System Safety and Occupational Health

The safety domain is focused on determining system design characteristics that minimize risks in to human health and physical wellbeing such as acute or chronic illness, disability death, or injury. In a physical system design, systems safety works closely with systems engineers to identify, document, design out, or mitigate system hazards and reduce residual risk from those hazards. Hazards that cannot be designed out of the system or mitigated should be included in personnel training to reduce overall risk. Systems safety also applies environmental and occupational health standards to hazard such as chemical exposure, noise hazards, and thermal exposure. The goal of systems safety is to achieve acceptable risk within the constraints of operational effectiveness and suitability, balancing cost schedule and performance concerns of the program. In DoD programs, program managers must prepare a Programmatic Environmental, Safety and Occupational Health Evaluation (PESHE) which is an overall evaluation of ESOH risks for the program.

Systems safety is grounded in a risk management process but Safety risk management has a unique set of processes and procedures. For example, identified hazards should be designed out of the system whenever possible, either through selecting a different design, or altering the design to eliminate the hazard. If a design change isn't feasible, engineered features or devices should be added to interrupt the hazard and prevent a mishap. Warnings (devices, signs or signals) are the next best mitigation, but are considered to be far less beneficial to preventing mishaps. The last resort is personal protective equipment to protect people from the hazard, and training (knowledge skills and abilities to protect against the hazard and prevent a mishap). HFE review and involvement with design interventions introduced to address hazards is an important connection between the systems safety and HFE domain specialists. Design interventions may have manpower and personnel implications, and training mitigations for hazards must be incorporated into continued operator and maintainer training in order to sustain the training intervention.

Systems safety standards include:

MIL-STD 882 System Safety

Force Protection and Survivability

Survivability is design features that reduce the risk of fratricide, detection and probability of an attack, and enable the crew to continue the mission and avoid acute or chronic illness, severe injury, disability or death in hostile environments. Elements of survivability include reducing susceptibility to a mishap or attack (protection against detection for example) and minimizing potential wounds or injury to personnel operating and maintaining the system. Survivability also includes protection from chemical, biological, radioactive and nuclear (CBRN) threats. and should include requirements to preserve integrity of the crew compartment, rapid egress in case of system destruction, and emergency systems for contingency management, escape, survival and rescue.

Survivability is often categorized in the following topics:

• Reduce Fratricide
• Reduce detectability
• Reduce probability of attack
• Minimize damage if attacked
• Minimize injury
• Minimize mental and physical fatigue
• Survive extreme environments

Habitability

Habitability is the application of human centered design to the physical environment (living areas, personal hygiene facilities, working areas, living areas, and personnel support areas) to sustain and optimize morale, safety, health, comfort and quality of life of personnel. Design aspects such as lighting; space; ventilation and sanitation; noise and temperature control; religious, medical and food services availability; berthing, bathing and personal hygiene are all aspects of habitability, and directly contribute to personnel effectiveness and mission accomplishment.

Habitability Standards Include:

Color Coordination Manual for Habitability DI-MISC 81123

Design Criteria Limits Noise Standards MIL-STD 1474

Further Reading

Boehm-Davis, D., Durso, F. T., & Lee, J. D. (2015). APA handbook of human systems integration. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Booher, H. R. (1990). Manprint: An approach to systems integration. New York, NY: Reinhold.

Hardman, N. S. (2009). An empirical methodology for engineering human systems integration.

Pew, R. W., & Mavor, A. S. (2007). Human-system integration in the system development process: A new look. Washington: National Academies Press.

Rouse, W. B. (2010). The economics of human systems integration valuation of investments in peoples training and education, safety and health, and work productivity. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.