When an Automation Fails in the System, Who Hears? A Response to Skraaning and Jamieson

Abstract

The concept of the “lumberjack effect” addresses important concerns regarding the role of automation (and impact of automation failure) in complex engineering systems such as aviation, power plant control rooms, and others. Conflicts between “narrow” and “broad” definitions of automation failures uncover logical inconsistencies regarding human-automation interactions processes in maintaining system performance. However, the “lumberjack effect” debate obscures essential considerations that automation tools exist as components in complex systems with multiple levels of abstraction hierarchies (Rasmussen). A sole focus on automation failure conflates the automation components with the overall system function. Elaborating operating conditions associated with human-automation interaction conflicts and failures supports an improved approach to failure mode and effects analysis techniques for improving system safety. Detecting system failure modes and operating conditions, poorly quantified in other risk priority determinations, are important contributions at the overall system analysis level, not as an isolated emphasis on the automation itself.