HUMAN FACTORS AUDIT:DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR AUDIT SYSTEMS

By -

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR AUDIT SYSTEMS

Returning to the definition of an audit, the emphasis is on checking, acceptable policies, and consis- tency. The aim is to provide a fair representation of the business for use by third parties. A typical audit by a certified public accountant would comprise the following steps (adapted from Koli 1994):

1. Diagnostic investigation: description of the business and highlighting of areas requiring in- creased care and high risk

2. Test for transaction: trace samples of transactions grouped by major area and evaluate

3. Test of balances: analyze content

4. Formation of opinion: communicate judgment in an audit report

Such a procedure can also form a logical basis for human factors audits. The first step chooses the areas of study, the second samples the system, the third analyzes these samples, and the final step produces an audit report. These define the broad issues in human factors audit design:

1. How to sample the system: how many samples and how these are distributed across the system

2. What to sample: specific factors to be measured, from biomechanical to organizational

3. How to evaluate the sample: what standards, good practices, or ergonomic principles to use for comparison

4. How to communicate the results: techniques for summarizing the findings, how far separate findings can be combined

A suitable audit system needs to address all of these issues (see Section 3), but some overriding design requirements must first be specified.

2.1. Breadth, Depth, and Application Time

Ideally, an audit system would be broad enough to cover any task in any industry, would provide highly detailed analysis and recommendations, and would be applied rapidly. Unfortunately, the three variables of breadth, depth, and application time are likely to trade off in a practical system. Thus a thermal audit (Parsons 1992) sacrifices breadth to provide considerable depth based on the heat balance equation but requires measurement of seven variables. Some can be obtained rapidly (air temperature, relative humidity), but some take longer (clothing insulation value, metabolic rate). Conversely, structured interviews with participants in an ergonomics program (Drury 1990a) can be broad and rapid but quite deficient in depth.

At the level of audit instruments such as questionnaires or checklists, there are comprehensive surveys such as the position analysis questionnaire (McCormick 1979), the Arbeitswissenschaftliche Erhebungsverfahren zur Ta¨tikgkeitsanalyse (AET) (Rohmert and Landau 1989), which takes two to three hours to complete, or the simpler work analysis checklist (Pulat 1992). Alternatively, there are

simple single-page checklists such as the ergonomics—working position—sitting Checklist (SHARE 1990), which can be completed in a few minutes.

Analysis and reporting can range in depth from merely tabulating the number of ergonomic standards violated to expert systems that provide prescriptive interventions (Ayoub and Mital 1989).

Most methodologies fall between the various extremes given above, but the goal of an audit system with an optimum trade-off between breadth, depth and time is probably not realizable. A better practical course would be to select several instruments and use them together to provide the specific breadth and depth required for a particular application.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DUALITY THEORY:THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY

By -
Image
THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY Given our standard form for the primal problem at the left (perhaps after conversion from another form), its dual problem has the form shown to the right. Thus, with the primal problem in maximizatio n form, the dual problem is in minimization form instead. Furthermore, the dual problem uses exactly the same pa r amete r s as the primal problem, but in different locations, as summarized below. 1. The coefficients in the objective function of the primal problem are the right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the dual problem. 2. The right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the primal problem are the coef- ficients in the objective function of the dual problem. 3. The coefficients of a variable in the functional constraints of the primal problem are the coefficients in a functional constraint of the dual problem. To highlight the comparison, now look at these same two problems in matrix notation (as introduced at the beginn...
Read more

NETWORK OPTIMIZATION MODELS:THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM

By -
Image
THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM The minimum spanning tree problem bears some similarities to the main version of the shortest-path problem presented in the preceding section. In both cases, an undi r ecte d and connected network is being considered, where the given information includes some mea- sure of the positive length (distance, cost, time, etc.) associated with each link. Both problems also involve choosing a set of links that have the shortest total length among all sets of links that satisfy a certain property. For the shortest-path problem, this property is that the chosen links must provide a path between the origin and the destination. For the minimum spanning tree problem, the required property is that the chosen links must provide a path between ea c h pair of nodes. The minimum spanning tree problem can be summarized as follows: 1. You are given the nodes of a network but not the links. Instead, you are given the po- tential links and the positive length for each ...
Read more

INTEGER PROGRAMMING:THE BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS

By -
TH E BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS Integer programming has been an especially exciting area of OR since the mid-1980s be- cause of the dramatic progress being made in its solution methodology. Background To place this progress into perspective, consider the historical background. One big break- through had come in the 1960s and early 1970s with the development and refinement of the branch-and-bound approach. But then the state of the art seemed to hit a plateau. Rel- atively small problems (well under 100 variables) could be solved very efficiently, but even a modest increase in problem size might cause an explosion in computation time be- yond feasible limits. Little progress was being made in overcoming this exponential growth in computation time as the problem size was increased. Many important problems arising in practice could not be solved. Then came the next breakthrough in the mid-1980s, with the introduction of the b r an c h- and-cu t approach to sol...
Read more