Human performance in Rail Transport
<p> Automated and assistive technologies are being introduced to the rail industry to support the tasks of drivers and signallers. As rail tasks become less physical and more cognitive, measurement of human performance and evaluation of the impact of these new technologies needs to evolve. As pressure to achieve high performance increases, the importance of understanding human performance limits also increases. This paper on human performance in rail is based on semi- structured interviews with operational and human factors specialists. </p><p><img src="/d486bea5-419c-5a68-98d6-5d7aef006a1c.jpg"></p><p>If incidents occur a more detailed data analysis is completed. This fits with the Safety I approach (Hollnagel 2014), which tends to be reactive and can lack the awareness to predict incidents. As one participant said rail has “no way of knowing how close to the limits of ability staff are” (P5). Adopting a Safety II approach in future would focus on identifying what factors contribute to good human performance and result in successful operational performance. These factors include the individual attributes of skills and knowledge, as well as how an individual applies them.
</p><p>The paper builds a ‘where are we now’ picture of current staff performance assessment in rail. It considers in addition ‘where could we go next?’ using developments in measurement technologies, such as physiological measures, and research in both Air Traffic Control (ATC) and automotive industries. A thematic analysis of interviews identified three key themes: people, time and attributes. <p></p><p>Firstly, the performance of a wide range of people can impact rail operations, which highlights how complex a socio-technical system rail is. </p><p></p><p>Secondly, staff assessment occurs at certain times in rail (recruitment selection, routine competency assessment and following an incident). </p><p></p><p>Thirdly, beyond task competency, individual attributes can indicate good or poor human performance. Future opportunities include the increased use of logged data, physiological measures, and simulators, to improve our understanding of human performance in rail. An important consideration is how the data will be used and combined with wider competence and performance assessment processes.</p><p></p><p>Demand for rail travel has been increasing, with passenger journeys in 2017-2018 up 28% compared to 2007-2008 (Office of Rail and Road (ORR) 2018). To meet this increase in demand, the rail industry is increasing the capacity of the rail network by allowing more trains to use the tracks at any one time. To achieve this, automated and assistive technologies are being introduced to support staff performing safety critical tasks. These staff have responsibility for the safety of themselves, colleagues, passengers and the public. Their tasks are increasingly cognitive rather than physical, as more automation is introduced, making the effort required more difficult to assess through physical measures or observation (Sharples, Millen, Golightly and Balfe 2011). The challenge is how to measure human performance and assess the impact of these new technologies.</p><p>The term ‘human performance’ refers here to the act of performing and achieving a task, as distinct from performance shaping factors such as fatigue, task load, health or wellbeing, that can impact the task performance. This paper focuses on three research questions: how is human performance currently measured in rail?; how is human performance measured in other transport industries?; and how could human performance be measured in future to assess the impact of new technologies? The paper initially considers the broad range of people who impact rail operations, then concentrates on drivers and signallers. These roles were chosen as examples of front-line staff making time critical safety decisions, whose tasks are increasingly cognitive, less physical and more sedentary.</p><p></p><p></p>
</p>