The purpose of a Human Readiness Level (HRL) scale is to indicate a developing system’s readiness for use by humans, that is, the maturity of human engineering efforts. We explore the factors driving the development of the HRL scale, how the scale enhances systems engineering and program execution, and potential shortcomings. We focus on the American National Standards Institute and Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (ANSI/HFES) 400-2021 standard, which includes an HRL scale and implementation guidance. Utilizing HRLs improves the integration of human systems considerations in the engineering process and results in improved system performance and life cycle concept realization.
American National Standards Institute & Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. (2021). Human Readiness Level scale in the system development process (ANSI/HFES 400-2021). Manuscript in preparation.
Government Accountability Office. (2003, June). Military personnel: Navy actions needed to optimize ship crew size and reduce total ownership costs. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-03-520.pdf
4.
Government Accountability Office. (2010, April). Best practices: DoD can achieve better outcomes by standardizing the way manufacturing risks are managed. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-10-439.pdf
MillerM.ThomasS.RusnockC. (2016). Extending system readiness levels to assess and communicate human readiness. Systems Engineering, 19(2), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21344
OlechowskiA.EppingerS. D.JoglekarN. (2015). Technology readiness levels at 40: A study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities. In 2015 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) (pp. 2084–2094). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.2015.7273196
10.
O’NeilM. P. (2014). Development of a human systems integration framework for Coast Guard acquisition [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Naval Postgraduate School. https://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/42696
11.
PewR. W.MavorA. S. (2007). Human systems integration in the system development process: A new look. National Academies Press.
12.
PhillipsE. L. (2010). The development and initial evaluation of the human readiness level framework [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Naval Postgraduate School. https://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/5255
PromiselD. M.HartelC. R.JonathanK. D.MarcusA.WhittenburgJ. A. (1985, January). Technical Report 659: Reverse Engineering: Human factors, manpower, personnel, and training in the weapon system acquisition process. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
15.
SeeJ. E.CraftR.MorrisJ. D. (2019, March). Human readiness levels in the systems engineering process at Sandia National Laboratories. Albuqyerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1761924
16.
SirettP.SutcliffeJ. (2015). Barriers to successful human factors integration within the military domain. In AndersonM. (Ed.), Contemporary ergonomics and human factors 2010: Proceedings of the International Conference on Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors 2010 (pp. 183–191). Taylor & Francis.
WaldenD. D.RoedlerG. J.ForsbergK. J.HamelinR. D.ShortellT. M. (Eds.). (2015). Systems engineering handbook (4th ed.). International Council on Systems Engineering. Wiley.
