Pilots and vessel traffic services (VTS) operators work to improve the safety of navigation of seagoing vessels. As in many other safety-critical domains, work is increasingly characterized by the integration and dissemination of information between humans and technology, across disciplines, and over multiple geographical locations. Empirical studies of navigational assistance were analyzed with the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) to understand what pilots and VTS operators do and how it contributes toward maritime safety. Successful assistance was found to be dependent on (1) the use of local knowledge, preparation, and foresight to integrate information from a range of sources and (2) communication and trust between the pilot, VTS operator, and the master and crew of the vessel to provide timely assistance to vessels. FRAM was found to be a valuable tool for describing sociotechnical work but was enriched by borrowing from ethnographically inspired work studies traditions, with their strong grounding in empirical studies and themes of “making work visible,” symmetry between human and nonhuman, and work as activity. This approach indicates that bringing ideas from different traditions together to understand a real work practice may bring us closer to describing “work as done” and its contribution to safe everyday operations.
BrunoK.LützhöftM. (2009). Shore-based pilotage: Pilot or autopilot? Piloting as a control problem. Journal of Navigation, 62(3), 427–437.
2.
Cabrera AguileraM. V.Bastos da FonsecaB.FerrisT. K.VidalM. C. R.CarvalhoP. V. R. D. (2016). Modelling performance variabilities in oil spill response to improve system resilience. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 41, 18–30.
3.
CallonM. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc’s Bay. In LawJ. (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? (pp. 196–223). London, UK: Routledge.
4.
CarvalhoP. V. R. D. (2011). The use of functional resonance analysis method (FRAM) in a mid-air collision to understand some characteristics of the air traffic management system resilience. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 96(11), 1482–1498.
5.
CharmazK. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London, UK: SAGE.
6.
ChecklandP. B. (2000). Soft systems methodology: A 30 year retrospective. Systems Research, 17, 11–52.
7.
CzarniawskaB. (2014). Social science research: From field to desk. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
8.
CzarniawskaB. (2017). Actor-network theory. In LangleyA.TsoukasH. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of process organization studies (pp. 160–173). London, UK: SAGE.
9.
DekkerS.HollnagelE. (2004). Human factors and folk models. Cognition, Technology & Work, 6, 79–86.
10.
DenscombeM. (2010). The Good Research Guide: For small-scale social research projects (4th ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
11.
EngeströmY.MiddletonD. (Eds.). (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
HaavikT. K. (2011). On components and relations in sociotechnical systems. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19(2), 99–109.
13.
HaavikT. K. (2014). Sensework: Conceptualising sociotechnical work in safety-critical operations. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 23(3), 269–298.
HadleyM. (1999). Issues in remote pilotage. Journal of Navigation, 52(1), 1–10.
16.
HaleA.BorysD. (2013). Working to rule, or working safely? Part 1: A state of the art review. Safety Science, 55, 207–221.
17.
HeideggerM. (1927). Sein und Zeit [Being and time]. Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
18.
HendrickH.KleinerB. (2001). Macroergonomics: An introduction to work system design. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
19.
HepsøV. (2014). Mediating business process models with an anthropological voice: “Double-level language” in the Norwegian oil industry. In DennyR.SutherlandP. (Eds.), Handbook of anthropology in business. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
20.
HerreraI. A.WoltjerR. (2010). Comparing a multi-linear (STEP) and systemic (FRAM) method for accident analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95, 1269–1275.
21.
HoffmanR. R.LinternG. (2006). Eliciting and representing the knowledge of experts. In EricssonK. A.CharnessN.FeltovichP. J.HoffmanR. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. (pp. 203–222). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
22.
HollnagelE. (1993). Human reliability analysis: Context and control. London, UK: Academic Press.
HollnagelE. (2014). Safety-I and Safety-II: The past and future of safety management. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
25.
HollnagelE.HounsgaardJ.ColliganL. (2014). FRAM—The Functional Resonance Analysis Method: A handbook for the practical use of the method. Middelfart, Denmark: Centre for Quality.
26.
HollnagelE.ParièsJ.WoodsD. D.WreathallJ. (Eds.). (2011). Resilience engineering in practice: A guidebook. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
27.
HollnagelE.WoodsD. D. (2005). Joint cognitive systems: An introduction to cognitive systems engineering. London, UK: CRC Press.
28.
HutchinsE. (1995a). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29.
HutchinsE. (1995b). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 265–288.
30.
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities. (2012). Pilotage Authority Forum (PAF) report on best practice for competent pilotage authorities: Edition 1.1. Saint Germain en Laye, France: Author.
31.
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities. (2016). Vessel traffic services manual: Edition 6. Saint Germain en Laye, France: Author.
32.
International Maritime Organization. (1972). Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS). London, UK: Author.
33.
International Maritime Organization. (1997). IMO Resolution A. 857(20) guidelines for vessel traffic services. London, UK: Author.
International Maritime Pilots’ Association. (2014). IMPA on pilotage. Livingstone, UK: Witherby Seamanship International.
37.
KarlssonM. (1999). A framework for the study of the relation between user and artefact. In HarrisD. (Ed.), Engineering psychology and cognitive ergonomics: Volume 4. Job design product design and human-computer interaction (pp. 379–386). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
38.
KirwanB. (2000). Soft systems, hard lessons. Applied Ergonomics, 31(6), 663–678.
39.
LatourB. (1986). Visualisation and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present, 6, 1–40.
40.
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
Le CozeJ.-C. (2013a). New models for new times: An anti-dualist move. Safety Science, 59, 200–218.
42.
Le CozeJ.-C. (2013b). Outlines of a sensitising model for industrial safety assessment. Safety Science, 51(1), 187–201.
MagnaniL. (2001). Abduction, reason, and science: Processes of discovery and explanation. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Plenum.
45.
MikkersM.HenriqsonE.DekkerS. (2012). Managing multiple and conflicting goals in dynamic and complex situations: Exploring the practical field of maritime pilots. Journal of Maritime Research, 9(2), 13–18.
46.
NaikarN. (2017). Cognitive work analysis: An influential legacy extending beyond human factors and engineering. Applied Ergonomics, 59(Part B), 528–540.
47.
NOAA. (2016). National oceanic and atmospheric administration’s national weather service glossary. Retrieved from http://w1.weather.gov/glossary/.
48.
PerrowC. (1984). Normal accidents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
PraetoriusG.HollnagelE. (2014). Control and resilience within the maritime traffic management domain. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 8(4), 303–317.
50.
PraetoriusG.HollnagelE.DahlmanJ. (2015). Modelling vessel traffic service to understand resilience in everyday operations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 141, 10–21.
51.
RasmussenJ. (1997). Risk management in a dynamic society: A modelling problem. Safety Science, 27(2–3), 183–213.
52.
RasmussenJ.PetjersenA. M.GoodsteinL. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. New York, NY: Wiley.
53.
RosaL. V.HaddadA. N.CarvalhoP. V. R. D. (2015). Assessing risk in sustainable construction using the functional resonance analysis method (FRAM). Cognition Technology & Work, 17, 559–573.
54.
StantonN. A.SalmonP. M.WalkerG. H.BaberC.JenkinsD. P. (2013). Human factors methods: A practical guide for engineering and design (2nd ed.). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
55.
SuchmanL. (1993). Centers of coordination: A case and some themes. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Discourse, tools, and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 41–62). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
56.
SuchmanL. (1995). Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56–64.
57.
SuchmanL. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
58.
Transportation Safety Board of Canada. (1995). A safety study of the operational relationship between ship masters/watchkeeping officers and marine pilots (Report No. SM9501). Richmond Hill, Canada: Author.
59.
van WestrenenF. (1999). The maritime pilot at work: The evaluation and use of a time-to-boundary model of mental workload in human-machine systems (Doctoral dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
60.
van WestrenenF.PraetoriusG. (2012). Maritime traffic management: A need for central coordination?Cognition, Technology & Work, 16(1), 59–70.
61.
WeickK. E. (1987). Organizational culture as a source of high reliability. California Management Review, 16(3), 571–593.
62.
WilsonJ. R. (2014). Fundamentals of systems ergonomics/human factors. Applied Ergonomics, 45(1), 5–13.
