Human Integration Matrix: An Adaptive Framework to

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET

Human Integration Matrix: An Adaptive Framework to Enhance Human Systems Integration in ew Product Development Ali Haider Rizvi, Lakhwinder Pal Singh, Arvind Bhardwaj Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, Punjab, India Abstract--ew Product Development (PD) is the lifeline of a company for global growth and survival. To a certain extent the human element is also considered in PD, however, a complete human-centric design approach is next to impossible. In this paper we look at how Human Systems Integration, which is a holistic approach to integrating the human element in system design, can be achieved using a practicable framework for designers called the human integration matrix (HIM). The HIM will provide a broad based, human-oriented decision making framework for the creation of new products. In order to successfully deploy the HIM, proper parameters are needed as a basis. To find the unique parameters for each product, a questionnaire is formulated. Both the questionnaire and the HIM can be customised to suit the needs of the PD and the product. A method for deploying this framework is also given.

I. INTRODUCTION Human Factors, ergonomics, and reliability analysis are a few of the engineering techniques that focus on human behaviour in a system. These seek to identify and remove inefficiency in the work of human beings. Each one of these encompasses a wide array of uses, and the techniques may range from a basic method study model [7] to the newer models like PyraMAPs [2]. Most of these approaches have been used in order to accomplish one of the following: a) Study the human in relation with the system[9][4][1][17] b) Identify areas of volatility[2][8] c) Attempt to reduce/remove these volatilities[7][11][21] Human Systems Integration encompasses all the aforesaid fields and tries to bring about a single framework for humanrelated issues. It is uncommon to apply human factors to a product in its development phase [4] and wherever it has been done, the focus has been on reliability issues (or disasters occurring due to human factors)[16]. This proves to be a major drawback for any designer attempting to create a new product around the user, without sacrificing technical ingenuity. Most of the current approaches [2][9][7] are impractical from the viewpoint of Human-systems integration, because the different approaches will infringe on each other, causing more harm than good. e.g. Reliability analysis may require the design of components to be changed, but these will be ergonomically problematic. This paper seeks to give the designer a practical tool with which to design a product that is completely integrated with humans and be devoid of any human related issues.

II. NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT New Product development (NPD) is the art of developing a new product from the idea stage to the market-place. NPD teams are multidisciplinary in nature, involving many different professions, including marketing, production, and the designers.[14] In industries like garments, the design team may consist of a majority of aesthetic designers, along with a few engineers. In these cases, the end product is usually a product for which the sales depend entirely on human perceptions and acceptance. In other industries, where human perceptions play a negligible role, notably defence products and heavy machinery, very little emphasis is placed on the human issues during the design, unless forced to do so by standards fixed by the government as in the case of defence production [13]. The main emphasis of such industries is “Technical ingenuity over helping people” [4]. This means that the company would prefer technically advanced products, rather than products which would boast perfect human system integration. To allow for the removal of this discrepancy, application of the principles of Human Systems Integration (HSI) will prove profitable, as in a properly designed system, the integration begun from the first stage, will manifest itself in the later stages of development. Because the nature of NPD, it is an approach directed towards teamwork. Product development is above all a crossfunctional, inter-company and market oriented process [6]. An observation by Yelkur (1996) as to the nature of this is “Today’s metaphor for new product development is the team sprint: teammates in a sprint can run at the same time, in the same race. Communication is unhindered and unbroken as teammates do not have to wait until the baton pass to see and talk to each other”[20], which also creates an increased need to facilitate information pertaining to HSI to percolate through the team members. The HIM can also be used for this purpose. a) PD Lifecycle NPD is usually divided into conceptualisation, idea generation, initial screening, Preliminary market and technical assessment, marketing strategy, business analysis, product development, market testing and commercialization [14]. There is no fixed boundary between each of these stages, but these represent the point where a Continue/Abandon decision must be taken. Consequently these are used as milestones by NPD teams. In most cases, the product is

1989

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET developed based on marked needs only. This includes the case of NPD with small budgets [19]. In this case, the first step becomes the identification of requirements. The market assessment stage is removed in this type of development. The product development stage also incorporates the stage where the product is made to fit into a regulatory framework. In this stage, changes are made to a product in order for it to meet regulatory guidelines. Thus the product is already designed when human factor (HF) issues are addressed. In some cases, including agile development, new avenues may be encountered during the project, and old ones may be discarded [20]. This creates a problem in the contemporary life cycle model, and consequently raises doubts about the overall validity of the traditional NPD lifecycle. b) Trade-offs in ew Product Development NPD teams must often have to look for trade-offs between various factors in order to give the solution that fulfils the needs of the engineering, marketing and management divisions. In doing so, the items most frequently left out are those which could aid in HSI as they are considered expensive, and will not show on the Technical Specifications data sheet. The HIM aims to make sure the trade-offs of this type are minimized. Any functionality which aids HSI only partially, should be replaced with one that aids it to a higher degree. The main trade-off areas, as described in literature [3][19][20], are shown in the Fig. 1. The end- product will be the compromise that the NPD team finds within the various areas. Nonetheless, it will still come up with certain alternatives. These alternatives are not to be confused with a trade-off because of the following causes: 1) A trade-off refers to a feature that has been deleted due to constraints, whereas an alternative is another form of the product which meets the constraints. 2) A trade off is necessary, while forming alternatives is not.

Figure 1: Trade-offs in NPD

Forming alternatives allows the NPD team flexibility in choosing an end product to meet the requirements at different areas, time domains, etc. These alternatives are usually evaluated for HF issues, and the one with the least issues is chosen. For proper design, the alternative with the best integration should be chosen.

III. HUMAN SYSTEMS INTEGRATION HSI refers to the broad integration of human attributes into system design, development and evaluation in order to optimize the human-machine combinations. It consists of a double integration policy: a) Integrating all human factor domains together, and b) Integration of phase given in (a) into the product development.[3] These can be best visualised as shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2: The double integration process in Human Systems Integration

HSI applies not only to the end user, but also to the intermediaries for the users. This includes the procurement group of the company, the maintenance personnel, etc. It thus provides a holistic approach to the human element in systems design. The following are the major impact factors of Human Systems Integration model as applied to a product: a) Impact of product as such (direct impact)—on functionality and effectiveness of operation, giving rise to task centred approach to refine usability of product, b) Impact due to product functionality, including reliability problems impacting safety, procedures, workarounds etc. c) Impact due to integration into an existing technical and work system (indirect impact), which is usually compatibility and consistency with other supplementary products, which may be necessary for the functioning of the product being studied. These issues encompass most of the major problems that are experienced by users (Some of these are described in [8][15]). The focus of this paper is to generate a practicable solution to allow for HSI at the product development stage. This will ensure that bulk of after-sales issues are removed. HSI, when applied to a product, will also increase its efficiency.

1990

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET The HIM seeks to accomplish this integration by providing practical guidelines for the NPD team. For each stage, the HIM imbibes a system of built in checks and measures to regulate the design process. As such, the designers will not need to be from a human factors background to understand and implement this matrix. IV. DESIGNING THE HIM : PARAMETER SEARCH Parameters refer to the different problems the product could cause to HSI. Searching for parameter proves to be tough task with regard to NPD, as they follow no fixed pattern. The parameters can be varied for different products in a single category. To make this chore easier and more intuitive, a Parameter Search questionnaire is given. This is based on the insights regarding NPD, integration requirements and different categories of people involved in the process. Its structure is based on the questionnaire for “human factors assessment for COTS products” as given by Brusberg[5]. However, Brusberg had suggested this was used as a tool in assessing the COTS readiness of a readymade product and only the positive or negative effect on human factors was considered. This questionnaire, on the other hand seeks to provide an all-inclusive search for parameters which represent potential sources of problems. The darker shaded areas represent that any component or functional group that will fall under these categories needs to be immediately incorporated into the Matrix. The stages refer to the stages as defined §IIa, the stage should be the stage where the review has to be conducted, and usually it should be one stage before the component problem is expected to occur. In some cases, including accelerated NPD, we may make changes in the current stage itself. The search is by no means exhaustive. The parameter named any “other” can be used when a parameter, which is highly specific to the component, needs to be added. The questionnaire is given in Appendix 1. V. MILESTONE DEVELOPMENT INDEX The HIM framework relies heavily on performance and review of the NPD. The boundaries are usually defined by milestones, or vice versa. a milestone is usually the achievement of a stage which marks a major developmental phase in the lifecycle of the project. a) Some of the methods of recording performance data are: 1) Engineering Hours 2) Lead Times 3) Engineering Hours Costs b) Similarly, the development may be recorded based on 1) Time units 2) Milestones 3) Reviews

For the HIM, we will define a Milestone development unit (MDI)as follows: MD= kc  kt

σ೙ ೔సభ ௤௑௧೔ ௑௖೔ ்௑஼

Eqn. 1

Where ti= Estimated Time between milestones ci= Estimated Cost of the milestone, exclusive of the costs of direct effects of the previous milestones q= Defined Quality Limit, in percentages of perfect quality. T= Estimated Total time for the NPD to reach commercialisation C= Estimated Total Cost of NPD kc= correction factor for cost, to be used only when prior data is available. kc=

ா௫௣௘௖௧௘ௗ௖௢௦௧௢௙௔௖௛௜௘௩௜௡௚௔௟௟௠௜௟௘௦௧௢௡௘௦ ஺௖௧௨௔௟஼௢௦௧௢௙௔௖௛௜௘௩௜௡௚௔௟௟௠௜௟௘௦௧௢௡௘௦

kt=correction factor for time, to be used only when a priori knowledge is available. kt=

ா௫௣௘௖௧௘ௗ௧௜௠௘௢௙௔௖௛௜௘௩௜௡௚௔௟௟௠௜௟௘௦௧௢௡௘௦ ஺௖௧௨௔௟௧௜௠௘௢௙௔௖௛௜௘௩௜௡௚௔௟௟௠௜௟௘௦௧௢௡௘௦

This index forms one unit on the X-axis or the timeline for the HIM. Further, one sub-MD is the unit which is given to be used in case the review periods are very short. One sub MD can be given as: ܵ‫ ܦܯ‬ൌ 

‫ܦܯ‬ ܽ

Where a= constant depending upon the choice of the NPD team. The MD is used as a multiplicative scale factor for the required unit, which should be a review time period. The results obtained would be the MD-Adjusted units. For each one of these units, the matrix should be plotted for one MD. c) Basics of fuzzy logic: Fuzzy logic is based on the notion of fuzzy sets as propagated by Zadeh[22]. Every variable has a degree of membership to one or more membership functions defined within a fuzzy set. The relationships between the functions are defined by if then rules. The if-then rules are of the form: Ri; if x is Xi then y is Yi where i = 1; 2; 3 . . . Where: 1) x is the input (antecedent) linguistic variable. 2) Xi is the antecedent linguistic constants (qualitatively defined functions).

1991

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET 3) y is the output (consequent) linguistic variable. 4) Yi are the consequent linguistic constants. These rules provide an excellent platform for abstracting information based on an expert’s knowledge and experience. This will help in setting the parameters of the MD in order to match the requirements of the project team, leading to an increased flexibility in the HIM.

small scale enterprises. It was implemented using a MATLAB based platform.[12] The fig.3 shows a map of the surface created by the time and cost alone, keeping a constant quality of 100 percent.

d) Making the fuzzy inference system The different factors given above were allotted membership functions, in order to fuzzify all the parameters. These were then related by a set of if-then rules, and the required FIS was created. The model used is a Mamdani model, in which, the output is also present as fuzzy sets. This presents the advantage that continuous values will be utilized in order to get a discrete result, allowing for millions of MD options. This approach has also been used in order to carry out systematic failure mode analysis [18]. e) Advantages of Milestone Development Index The MDI allows user subjectivity to be entered into the system, and thus allows inclusion of quality into each MDI. It also supports discovery driven development as in the case of Agile Software projects. It does not require that project accounting and project network schedule management is included in the system. The MD is multi-dimensional, and the aforesaid definition of MD can be expanded to include: 1) Weights to each one of the factors 2) Value of the project, which will allow the implementation team to create a broad based performance measurement rather than just a milestone development index, negating the need for tougher controls including Earned Value Management. 3) MD has a recommended range of [0 10], but this can also be changed based upon the requirements of the project team. MDI is not intended to cover the project scope and scope creep. An example of MDI in use is given below. This was implemented in a simulation of an NPD to create a ladle for

Figure 3: Surface Map. Time vs. Cost vs. MD

The following fig. shows the output when the cost is kept constant, and the quality and the schedule are varying.

Figure 4: Surface Map. Time vs. Quality vs. MD

The following figures show a software realisation of the MDI for the first phase. An arbitrary input has also been added to show the flexibility in the MD. The range for the MD is changed to [0 7.5] in order to obtain a MDI suitable for a small scale NPD project.

1992

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET

Figure 5: Realisation of MD

VI. DESIGNING THE HIM: MAKING THE MATRIX The HIM is given in Appendix 2. This was created in the following steps: a) Identifying main problems The main problems were identified from literature and practitioners (n=23) are: 1) How to increase the number of designs which could be considered while keeping costs down and improving speed to market? 2) How and when, to test alternative designs – and on whom? 3) How often to introduce new products and where to get the ideas from? 4) How to manage the relationship between marketing and design? 5) How to organise the process as a whole and manage the interfaces with several different functional areas? 6) How to integrate the embryonic marketing and design functions within the NPD process, and how to become drivers of this process given the established positions of existing participants? 7) How does the product usage depend on human understanding? 8) Does the product require quantification by a human? 9) What scale of assembly will the product operate in? This is a representative list of potential problems facing an NPD team, and these are compounded by many other problems cropping up at every stage.

b) Developing the factors Based on the insight regarding HSI in NPD provided by the quantification of the processes and problems, we develop factors, keeping the potential product design issues, information exchange requirements and HSI solutions. The matrix is to be used over all the stages of any NPD in order to allow for proper implementation. This will be described in detail in §VII c) Validation of the factors On developing the factors, the matrix and parameter search questionnaire were validated by: 1) Small Scale Industry: The HIM was used in order to create a ladle for SSI in North India, to help reduce Work related MSDs in the workers. 2) Domain Experts: The HIM and Parameter search questionnaire were sent to domain experts (n=11). Based upon the suggestions received, the HIM was altered, and resent to each one. Each expert independently considered the HIM suitable for their domains, which were Graphical User Interface design for software, usability testing, product design, ergonomics and innovation management. d) Interconnecting the HIMs Each HIM is filled for a single period, and needs to be interconnected with 1) da) Other HIMs, from the preceding and succeeding periods 2) db) The Parameter search questionnaire. This can be done using off the shelf spreadsheet tools. Spreadsheets

1993

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET will help interconnect the information to the various places and provide a system to check the ranges of values entered in the system.

affects their performance to a higher degree than previously thought. These factor needs to be understood by the NPD team. HSI should be used only as a tool to improve the performance of the product and not the attitude towards it.

The HIM need to be completed independently of each other, however, solutions for problems may exist across different HIMs. To balance this, the HIM parameters showing below-par performance will be linked if they fall within a single category, and will then be displayed in order to get a common base for all the problems. This leads to a more refined solution, which can encompass a wider range of issues. VII. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HUMAN INTEGRATION MATRIX Proper implementation is essential to the success of the HIM. The first step towards the implementation of the HIM is to document all the ideas generated during the idea generation phase and the conceptualisation phase. If the user needs are already identified, document these as well. After the documentation is ready, validate it with respect to the product idea. If discrepancies are found, return to the first phase, and document everything in a coherent manner. After this is concluded, prepare the chart to find the parameters. This consists of filling out the chart completely and checking the parameters having primary importance to human association and high negative HSI effect. These are the parameters that need to be studied further in the HIM. After completing this, fill in the HIM. The factors will be corelated with the development process and can be incorporated into the NPD. A negative effect is usually not enough to produce a reconceptualization; however, if a primary association function fails heavily in increasing HSI, then the component must be taken backwards in development till the flaw is fixed. If it cannot be done in this manner, re-conceptualization is necessary. Implementation of the HIM can be done directly within a data management solution, which will ease the documentation and data entry requirements. Another way to implement the HIM is using Microsoft Excel ® or on OpenOffice.org Calc platforms. In both these platforms, the spreadsheet solver connects the different HIMs, to each other and the PSQs. VIII. LIMITATIONS AND AREAS FOR FUTURE STUDY A major limitation is the lack of documentation during the idea generation phase. If the documentation is lax, it is impossible to pinpoint the parameters correctly and as a result, the HIM will generate wrong results. Very often, a new concept relating to humans in general has failed because there was no perceived impact on attitudes. For all its returns, HSI cannot change the attitudes of workers. Furthermore, as concluded in [9] the attitude of the workers

Fig. 7: Flowchart for application of HIM in NPD

An effort should be made to integrate the HIM within the NPD itself in such industries to allow greater satisfaction from the first product. This will further the use of NPD within companies. HIM can be, and should be, integrated into any competitive intelligence program, so as to allow companies bidding for defence acquisition, or even to the private sector, gain leverage over their competitors by providing solutions that seem tailor made for the clients. This is a lucrative area of future study. Total quality management (TQM) is also highly affected by the level of HSI prevailing in the system. Thus, use of the HIM on such systems will generate better responses in terms of Human Index (as [10]: This index is a means to evaluate the content of human factors needed for an environment in an organization conducive to TQM. Human aspects in an organization are represented by single numerical value. A higher value of index is an indicator of more conducive

1994

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET environment to TQM). A study on the effects of using HIM has shown an alteration of the human index and thus, improved quality. IX. CONCLUSION

[3] [4]

[5]

[6]

[10]

[11]

[12] [13]

[14] [15]

[16]

[17]

REFERENCES

[2]

[8]

[9]

In this paper, we have described the challenges to NPD teams and found a range of challenges to HSI. These were then put into a parameter search questionnaire to find bottlenecks in the HSI process. A milestone development was also introduced in order to create limits for each HIM. Even though this can be used as a stand-alone solution, it was created to be complementary with other techniques including Earned Value Management. Based on the PSQ, a HIM was made. This is created as an initial solution to help designers seeking to create products with a high integration of humans within the system. The HIM promises to be a powerful tool for designers in all industries. Used along with the MDI, it can be integrated into project management packages negating the need for specialists to be present with it. The increased pressure to ensure worker safety and to improve work conditions will surely make companies to try to design products with better human systems integration.

[1]

[7]

Ayers P.A. and Kleiner B.H. (2002), New Developments Concerning Managing Human Factors for Safety, Managerial Law Vol.44 No. 1/2 pp.112-120 Bellany L.J. et al (2008), Development of a functional model which integrates human factors, safety management systems and wider organisational issues, Safety Science Vol. 46 pp.461-492 Booher H.R. (2003), Handbook of Human Systems Integration, WileyInterscience Brown W.R. (2007), Strategies for engineering development: Advancing technology, Prioritising people, Desalination Vol. 227 pp.313 Brusberg A. (2006), the design of complete system: Providing human factors guidance for COTS acquisition, Reliability Engineering and System Safety Vol.91 pp.1554-1565 Calabrese G. (1999), Managing Information in New Product Development,Logistics Information Management,Vol.12 No.6 pp 439450

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

1995

Carvalho P.V.R. et al (2007), Human factors approach for evaluation and redesign of Human-system interfaces of a nuclear power plant simulator, Displays Vol. 29 pp.273-285 Cullen L. (2007), Human factors integration – Bridging the gap between system designers and end-users: A case study, Safety Science Vol.45 pp.621-629 Fletcher S.R. et al (2008), An investigation of production workers performance variations and the potential impact of attitudes, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Vol. 35 pp.1113-1123 Grover S. et al (2006), Role of human factors in TQM: a graph theoretic approach, Benchmarking: An International Journal Vol. 13 No.4 pp.447-468 Kennedy G.A.L, Siemieniuch C.E., Sinclair M.A., Kirwan B.A. , Gibson W.H., (2007), Proposal for a sustainable framework for the generation, validation, and application of human reliability assessment within the engineering design lifecycle, Reliability Engineering and System Safety No. 92 pp 755-770 Mathwork Inc. (2008) Product Documentation Mathwork R2008b Ministry of Defence, UK (2008), Ministry of Defence Defence Standard 00-250, Human Factors for designers of systems, in: dstan.mod.uk, accessed August 2008 Mockus D. (2006), Ulcer free product development, Handbook of business strategy, pp.121-124 Monnickendam M. (2008), Targeting implementation efforts for maximum satisfaction with new computer systems: Results from four human service agencies, Computers in Human Behaviour Vol. 24 pp.1724–1740 Osorio N.L. and Hurych J. (2006), Literature of disasters from the human factors point of view: a descriptive analysis, Collection Building Vol. 23 No.2 pp.64-72 Rouck Sofie De, Jacobs Anand Leys Mark, 2008, A Methodology for shifting the focus of e-health support design into user needs A case in the homecare field, Intl. Journal of Medical Informatics No. 77 pp 589601 Sharma, R. K., Kumar, D., & Pradeep. (2005). Systematic falure mode effect analysis using fuzzy linguistic modelling. Intl. Jounal of Quality and Relaibility Management Vol 22. No 9 , 986-1004. Wilson Ian (1999), New product development at Pennine Bathrooms, Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, Vol. 5 No. 4 pp. 106-113 Yelkur R. and Herbig P.(1996), Global Markets and the new product development process, Journal of product and Brand Management, Vol. 5 No. 6 pp.38-47 Yeow H.P.P. and Sen R.N.(2005),Productivity and quality improvements, revenue increment, and rejection cost reduction in the manual component insertion lines through the application of ergonomics, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics Vol. 36 pp.367–377 Zadeh, L. (1965), “Fuzzy sets”, IEEE Information and Control, Vol. 8, pp. 338-53

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET APPENDIX 1: PARAMETER SEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

1996

PICMET 2009 Proceedings, August 2-6, Portland, Oregon USA © 2009 PICMET APPENDIX 2: HUMAN INTEGRATION MATRIX FOR ONE MD

1997