Feedback from tasks

Following is a questionnaire format developed by a divisional PSM Task Force to elicit feedback from a plant s employees about the PSM pilot test. The Task Force designed it to be adaptable to a range of activities and plans to use it at the conclusion of each one. At the request of the plant manager, responses are sent directly to the Task Force rather than directed to him. 

The basic premise of the SLIM technique is that the probability of error associated with a task, subtask, task step, or individual error is a function of the PIFs in the situation. As indicated in Chapter 3, an extremely large number of PIFs could potentially impact on the likelihood of error. Normally the PIFs that are considered in SLIM analyses are the direct influences on error such as levels of training, quality of procedures, distraction level, degree of feedback from the task, level of motivation, etc. However, in principle, there is no reason why higher level influences such as management policies should not also be incorporated in SLIM analyses. 

The people most knowledgeable about a particular task are the people who perform it every day. Their help is essential for reducing the associated risks. Continuous feedback from the worker will provide the framework for improvements to the job. This feedback can only be fostered in an atmosphere of trust. If an incident occurs in which human error is a suspected cause, man-... 

The first step is consensus building, where the EWG keep working at the task until they reach a scientific consensus and produce a draft document. Drafting of the document is left to a single rapporteur , who adjusts the document based on the comments and feedback from the parties. 

Of course, I can only speak for myself with regard to the amount of time that is required to develop, test, deploy, and maintain chemometric models for on-line analytical applications. However, it should be apparent that there are several tasks involved in this process, and many of them have nothing to do with building models. I am tempted to provide my estimate of the fraction of time that is typically spent on each of these steps, but I feel obligated to retreat, so that I do not report too biased an assessment (even though I have received feedback from several colleagues on this matter). Instead, I will simply list the tasks and supply a general indicator of the relative level of time spent on each one. 

In critical cases it may well be worthwhile to make a complete analysis of stability. In many cases, however, enough can be learned by studying what Bilous and Amundson (B7) called parametric sensitivity. These authors derived formulas for calculating the amplification or attenuation of disturbances imposed on an unpacked tubular reactor originally in a steady state, with the idea that if the disturbances grow unduly the performance of the reactor is too sensitive to the conditions imposed on it, that is, to the parameters of the system. The effect of feedback from a control system was not considered. As pointed out by the authors, it would be a much more complicated task to apply their procedure to a packed reactor, but it still would entail far less computation than a study of the transient response. 

Task 5 Solicit feedback from PGM industry and automotive OEMs... 

Another factor that complicates the scheduling and estimation tasks is that requirements for a software system can rarely be specified precisely and completely at the start of a project. The product is often built for an incompletely known environment, possibly for a new market, or to control a novel device. Thus, it is typical for requirements to change throughout the software life cycle. One of the ways to deal with this challenge is to use a flexible process model that requires frequent reviews and incremental delivery cycles for the product. Feedback from the delivered increments can help focus and complete the requirements. 

In some instances, human resource personnel are tasked with the role of safety director without the benefit of spending time on the plant floor and learning about the various processes. These individuals often rely on hand protection products selected by their predecessors without gaining feedback from workers as to whether the products... 

Low-fidelity simulators are generaUy focused on single skiUs that allow learners practice in isolation, on their own time, without much required feedback. Medium-fidelity simulators are more realistic in their representation of the task, but lack sufficient cues for the learner to be fuUy immersed in the situation. High-fidelity simulators provide adequate cues and feedback to aUow for fuU immersion and response to treatment interventions. Feedback can be objective measures built in to the simulator itself, or offer cues for feedback from an instructor [43]. 

The process of identifying people and the value of a school s assets begins with interviews of the people who are most familiar with the schools policies and facilities. Feedback from school personnel such as those listed previously in Table 1.1, as well as any others who can help identify the most valuable assets, provides the necessary information to conduct a thorough assessment. One recommended approach to structuring these interviews is to develop a list of questions or topics that need to be addressed prior to the interviews. Although any member of the assessment team could potentially conduct the assessment, it is reconunended that the tasks are assigned to team members (such as the school resource officer) who can then report back to the team and inform the final report. 

People have their own unique experience of specific tasks and the hazards which those tasks present. The experiences of accident victims, frequently recorded in accident reports, are an important source of information. Feedback from accidents is crucial in order to prevent repetition of them. 

A work order describes a job package and can normally be divided into subtasks that can be carried out in sequence. Before any of these can be performed, the personnel that shall execute a task must apply for a work permit. The work permit system is established to ensure scrutiny of factors related to HSE (Health, Safety and Environment) before job execution. The work permit for each task is discussed between representatives from the various disciplines in plenum and the job description and related safety measures are evaluated. Examples of such are safety equipment needed to perform the job safely. A general work permit flow is described in (NOG, 2006). After job execution, the job responsible logs feedback from the execution and closes the job in the maintenance management system. 

For the construction industry, maintenance of working plant and equipment is a priority. The need for maintenance of any piece of equipment should have been anticipated in its design. Lubrication and cleaning will still be required for machinery, but the tasks can be made safer by consideration of maintenance requirements at an early stage of design, with feedback from users. 

The S T Plan, first published in September 2014, consists of nearly 350 potential tasks. We have published it now in response to feedback from industry and academia. We are keen to involve as many interested parties as possible, including the waste producers themselves but also universities, learned societies and the Research Councils. By setting out a forward work programme, researchers can see the extent of our interests and this should help them tailor their research to areas where impact will be greatest. 

When assigning a world product mandate to the subsidiary in the lead marklead market. The lead market subsidiary has a clear world market task while concentrating all functions on the feedback from the local market. The disadvantage of a world product mandate of the subsidiary in the lead market is the risk that the lead market was erroneously selected. If the host country turns out to be an idiosyncratic market rather than a lead... 

Task analysis is a method to evaluate a task performed by one or more personnel from a safety standpoint in order to identify undetected hazards, develop notes/cautions/warnings for integration in order into procedures, and receive feedback from operating personnel (Tarrents, 1980). 

The R D function itself will be organized from company to company in very different ways. In some firms, the responsibiUty for innovation will be broadly shared and a distinct R D unit may cease to exist. In others, technical developments from an R D lab will be the principal source of innovation for the business. In still others, the primary task of the R D or technology group will be to obtain technology from outside the firm. Those involved in R D will need to make certain that their knowledge and talents impact the business irrespective of their precise function. The innovation process will become less linear (Fig. 8) as more feedback loops, technology transfer, and cooperative efforts are involved. 

Advocates of the global approach would argue that human activities are essentially goal-directed (the cognitive view expressed in Chapter 2), and that this cannot be captured by a simple decomposition of a task into its elements. They also state that if an intention is correct (on the basis of an appropriate diagnosis of a situation), then errors of omission in skill-based actions are imlikely, because feedback will constantly provide a comparison between the expected and actual results of the task. From this perspective, the focus would be on the reliability of the cognitive rather than the action elements of the task. 

---