Impact Assessment of Automation Technology: Comments and Methodological Views

Copyright © IFAC Man-Machine Syste ms, Qulu, Finland, 1988

IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF AUTOMATION

TECHNOLOGY: COMMENTS AND METHODOLOGICAL VIEWS J.

Ranta

International Institute f or Applied Systems A nalysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria

Abstract . The main emphasis of the impacts of automation is usually put on employment and the working environment . However, recent trends of technology and applications of automation indicate that impact chains and cause-consequence relations are very complex, and that technology itself does not play a dec isive role regarding impacts and achieved benefits. Kere essential factors behind the impacts seem to be the goals of application, the organization of the implementing project, the management of design and implementation , and the training of personnel . Accordingly, any research strategy to assess impacts, benefits and costs should take into account these complex interactions to make an overall evaluation. This requires a combination of different approaches, such as interviews, questionnaires , acting research, and participatory design in the form of training and design sessions . Equally important is the integration of different professionals in the assessment work, such as psychologists , social s Cientists , economists and engineers. The paper presents the experiences obtained by performing multi-disciplinary and multi-approach tasks. Keywords . Industrial automation, impact assessment , design management, man-machine systems.

design tools and aids , it is necessary , in addition to the respective technology , to understand the whole application process, starting from the goals of design up to the implementation issues and practical design items. Therefore it is also necessary to use different methods and different approaches for an overall assessment .

I liTRODUCT ION The major emphasis of the impacts of automation has so far been on employment effects, work content and work environment . There has been some public debate, usually accompanied by a negative overtone: there are negative employment effects and also pessimistic assessments regarding a changing work environment . In the technological community special emphasis has been put on the interaction of reliability of production processes and quality of man-machine system design (see Yahlstr~m and others, 1985 ) , and recently the so-called skillbased production has been proposed to be a prerequisite for successful manufacturing automation (Br~dner, 1985; Xartin and others , 1987) . Thus the emphasis has been more constructive , pointing out the nec essity of organizational issues for successful applications . At the same time there have been disc ussions about tools and design methods to achieve the planned benefi ts .

BASI C PROBLEXS OF ASSESSXEliT The starting point is to understand the basic mec hanisms of the impact of automation and, for that purpose, the following impact categories c an be used : 1. Ec onomi c impacts on the produc tion level, such a s improved use of raw materials and energy; increased labor produc tivity ; inc reased capital productivity, such as improved availability and use of produc tion mac hinery or capital savings, such as dec reased work in progress and delivery times ; improved quality of products and services , such as more acc urate toleranc es and stabl e product properties.

Recently management science research, and especially engineering management SCience, has regarded manufacturing and production capabilities as the main competitive factor between companies and even between countries (see Cohen and Zysman, 1987; ' Goldhar and Jelinek, 1983, 1985; Jaikumar, 1986) . In this context the existence of a real correlation was shown between organizational, training and management issues and successful applications of industrial automation projects, as well as production advantages in general . Thus manufacturing as well as information technology investments have been regarded as strategiC investment .

2 . Organizational impacts, such as improved safety and availability of mac hinery; changes in the risk fac tors of the production proc esses ; changes in production organization; changes in work content and work environment; reqUirement of new skills and training ; changes in reqUired management methods and management approaches . 3 . Business strategy impacts, such as possibilities for new products ; decreased delivery times and possibilities of new market niches and of satisfying special needs of new customer groups; increased flexibility and the ability to make production variations; increased competitive advantages in general .

Ve can state that, in order to make a reliable assessment of automation and to provide practical

'On leave from the Technical Research Centre of Finland, Electrical Engineering Laboratory, Espoo, Finland

4 . Structural and macro-economic impacts , such as changes in the structures of industries and

433

434

J.R~n~

production changes; changes in the competitive position of companies and countries. It is easy to recognize that the impacts are very complex, interconnected and highly stratified. The investment for automation and information technologies in general should be a goal-oriented action, trying to achieve positive changes with regard to the above impact mechanisms. Xoreover, it can be stated that successful applications always require changes in organization, as, e . g. in skills, training and organizational principles, apart from purely technological changes. The goals of automation are usually different, depending on the respective industrial sectors. In process industries important factors have conventionally been availability, use of raw materials and energy, and product quality. In manufacturing industries important factors are, apart from product quality, a decrease of work-inprogress, delivery times and throughput times. In the service sector more emphasis is put on creating new services, and on operational flexibilities . Xoreover, we can state that an increasing flexibility, the fulfillment of special needs, and short delivery times are emphasized . Therefore managerial and other social issues are more important than before. It can also be stated that Dany assessments made were too heavily determined by the technology: technology is usually the only dependent variable . However, equally essential factors or variables are goals of application, design practice and management practice of design projects, organization principles and general management principles, training content and training methods, and mare generally also the overall dynamics of technologies and industries. Moreover, it is a general trend that information technologies themselves are becoming more flexible and are thus providing more freedom to designers, which, of course, increases application possibilities. Because of the above reasons, there are methodological problems of automation assessment research, which cause problems and conflicts in the interpretation of results (see also Blackler and others, 1986). Ve can classify these problems into the following categories: 1. Problems of value and priority. Automation, as any new production technology in general, invariably entails changes in production organization and working environment . In the process of these changes something disappears and something new is being created. How ahoul4 tAe process and the movement of such changes be interpreted? Vbat is positive and what is negative? How should evaluation criteria be set for the change process? This problem can be expressed in such a way that it is difficult to change general work design criteria into an operative procedure for concrete decision and design situations . Such problems are emphasized when the impacts are studied in absolute terms, fixed only to a preset point in time, without seeing the changes as a process being related to the attempt to solve existing problems and the attempt to fulfill new goals. In many cases there are impacts which are not measurable in relation to each other. 2. It can be easily recognized that the results presented in the literature are dependent on the approaches and methods used . In other words, in the same case or in the assessment of the same change process the results may differ according to the assessment method and approach applied . This problem is clearly visible in the results of the large-scale assessment project funded by ILO (Butera and others. 1983) . This fact further

emphasizes the need for an understanding of change as a process which reqUires different kinds of dynamic approaches, and whose comparative case studies have to be conducted strictly according to the same methodological approach. Otherwise there are only few possibilities to make generalizations and draw correct conclusions . 3 . The same methodological approach gives different results in an identical technological and production environment (see Lang and others, 1983). The same phenomenon can be observed when such impacts as users' attitudes, motivation, work satisfaction, etc., are studied in the different phases of a development project . Usually different impact factors give us different results and the conclusions are thus dependent on the point in time, at which we are looking at the impacts . This emphasizes again the fact that it is basically the dynamiC application process, which has to be studied for an evaluation of the impacts. And it also emphasizes that a direct comparative analysis of industrial sectors without an understanding of the internal dynamics of these sectors can lead to wrong conclusions. 4 . One common problem is that there are very few empirical data on the detailed level of the application process that combine implementation strategies , achieved benefits and existing problems. This has not even been done from the economic point of view, which could support the economic assessment of different system solutions and thus also investment decisions and system planning. Even weaker are the empirical data related to social and organizational questions . Usually the data are inhomogeneous and have been obtained through different methods, which makes it difficult to make generalizations and to develop a unique theoretical view. To conclude the above discussion, the main mechanisms to be studied should be the following items, which are the most essential from the viewpoint of the production level : Vork content, required skills and questions of the working environment. Users' motivations, attitudes and other psycho-social aspects, such as stress factors. Changes in production organization and task division . Changes in training requirements regarding both contents and methods. Changes in system and production safety, production availability, and their impacts on efficiency and achieved benefits. Changes in implementation management and system design organization, and their impacts on benefits and efficiency. The above stated mechanisms are not independent, on the contrary, they are heavily dependent on each other; eg., the content of training always has its impacts on the safety and reliability of the systems. Therefore impact assessment can not only be analYSiS, it also has to be syntheSiS: it has to help us manage the change and to achieve goaloriented impacts. Thus design, i.e . design of the overall system, organization and technology, becomes an integrating factor. Fig . 1 presents this situation.

Impact Assessment of Automatio n Technology

management. and the impacts of training content ana training methods.

CONTROL SYSTElI EXPERIEIiCE

I GOALS~ TEC HBOLOGY~

-TECHBOLOGY -ORGANIZADES IGB PROCESS f----l TIOB -DQCUKEBTAT !OB

~

IlIPACTS

TOOLS RESOURCES Fig. 1.

435

This is why in-depth case studies are needed. which can generalize empirical findings with regard to the theoretical view of impacts and impact mechaniSms . The few comparative case studies carrIed out so far (see e.g . Jaikumar. 1986; FixSterz and others. 1986) 1ndicate that there exists a clear c orrelation between organizational and managerial issues and the acceptability and technolog1cal performance of a system. Therefore they are also key issues behind the prof1tabi11ty of the app11cat10ns . Thus we can. again. emphas1ze that the key focus of the 1mpact research should lie in an understand1ng of why certa1n solutions have been chosen and how the results and benefits of the design can be managed and c ontrolled. and what the key issues 1n different phases of the design process are; in an understanding of what the key factors behind successful applications are and how general goals can be transformed into operative solutions; in an understanding of what new freedom of design is c reated by the technological development.

Dynamic impact assessment .

TOWARDS A CONSTRUCT I VE APP ROACH The two conventional approaches can roughly be classified as objective analysis and acting research . What follows is presented from the des i gner's point of view. The objec tive analysis can also be c alled a measuring approach , because one of the key assumptions is that c hange can be objectively measured and impac t s can be expressed by quantitative indexes . Thus two different solutions can be objectively c ompared . The simplest case may be related to a c ertain appli c ation of questionnaire-oriented researc h in combination with psyc ho-sociologi cal measurements . The results are usually a set of indicators, whi c h describe motivation, attitudes, work load and stress . These indi c ators are then used to int erpret the impacts (Jakozinski, 1986; Ives and others, 1983 ; Dagwell and ot hers, 1983) . When this approac h is applied in a very straightforward manner , it is not able to explain ~ some solutions are proper or improper . and what the driving forces are behind the solutions and impacts . However . we can state that the objective analysis i s a nec essary part of an integrated approach. if it is supported by other methods and approaches (Blac k l er and others. 1986 ) . The acting research is typi ca l ly carried out within a conc rete design or c hange process. By means of interviews, reviews and questionnaires. data are collec ted and their appli cat i on i s analyzed as a dynami C process . Moreover . it is essential that the design process i s inf l uenced by training sessions and supporting guidelines in a c onc rete dec isionmaking situation . Apart from the quantitative indicators. the action research tries to explain the reasons for and backgrounds to the impacts and it also attempts to create dec ision-making aids . The acting researc h is usua l ly c riticized for c hanging the objec t under study and also for relying on subjec tive j udgments ( interviews ). According to critics. such a procedure is not possible in a stri c tly objective research approach . However. we may state that a dynamiC process can not be identified without making c hanges and interfering with it . IIoreover, some aspects. such as acquired skills. internal desc r iptions and cognitive models. whi c h are necessary to control the work. cannot be studied without interviews and active partiCipation . This is necessary to evaluate, e.g .• the efficiency of training . From the design point of view the identifiable key factors are the impacts of design goals . the impacts of design organization and design

In order to find solutions to previous questions. we need to have a multi-method approach. This new approach could be called a constructive assessment. because the aim is not only to explain the change. but at the same time to create new solutions and to develop tools and guidelines for design and training . This approac h necessitates a close involvement with the real design cases and an understanding of the inherent dynamiCS of design . HOW TO CONDUCT A CONSTRUCTIVE ASSESSKEIiT In order to conduct in-depth case studies. the prerequisites are an understanding of the development and dynamiCS of the industrial sector under study . the role of technology, and the different organizational solutions i n this development; the operational aspects of the target from both. the design point of view and the systems management point of view . Thus we can conclude again that the basic problem is the integrative nature of the approach : one can not foc us onl y on one method. but several approac hed have to be used in parallel . I t is necessary to have at least the following approaches : Interviewing personnel. It is possible to reconstruct the des i gn process and its goals by 1.

interviews of management and design management to get an insight into design goals and targets. priorization of goals. and alternatives and principles of resource alloc ation . interviewing design personnel to understand the dynamics of the design process , its different phases. its management principles and the concrete goal setting on the solutions . 2. Analyzing tOday's practice . It is possible to get feedback from problems and to make proposals for improved practice . This is usually achieved by attending design sessions and training sessions .

J. Ranta

436

3. Conducting questionnaires and small-scale interviews. It is possible to analyze the work load, stress, attitudes, motivation and also the knowledge of the personnel about the coming Changes. The questionnaire-type study has to be repeated in different phases, if the process is to be dynamic and reliable; it can also take into account the time aspects of changes, which take place due to the different design stages . 4. A systematic disturbance analyses is a postdesign type of analysis, which provides possibilities to obtain information on design problems, training problems and technical specification problems. The disturbances usually are frequent events; they do, however, reflect the dynamic changes in the system under study, which gives extraordinary good possibilities to identify problems. 5. The pilot scale solutions give possibilities to test new ideas and new solutions with regard to training and design methods as well as to new organization principles. Usually these tests also mean structural changes in the system and the design process. These changes, of course, contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics and ~he various causes and consequences.

6. The technology analysis is always a necessary request. It is the only way to understand the real technological freedom which allows to choose between different alternatives, and to see the immediate economic benefits of different technological solutions. Fig . 2 demonstrates different interactions. The problem is to understand a highly interactive and hierarchical system. But the actual identification will occur in the real, practical cases. Therefore the assessment is a difficult and time-consuming task. It also necessitates a good collaboration between the companies under study and the research teams. EXPER I EIICE KNO't'LEDGE Goals and reqUirements for organization economy technology

GOALS, REUQIREKENTS ENV I ROIiKENT CHANGES

~

FUNCTIONS

----------------: lliTERVIEVS :QUESTIOIiliAIRES : < ..• ) :AIiALYSES :ALTERJATIVES :PILOT SOLUTIOIiS:

System functions: task diVision, training principles, basic technological sol utions

REAL I ZA T 1011

<. .. .)

-Systell - DocWlll!nts -Organization -Skills Fig. 2. Interactions of design.

COIiCLUSIONS Although the approach presented above has its problems, as it is multidisciplinary, timeconsuming and has to do with real practice , it can yield many practical results which present tools to manage the change process. The practical results are described elsewhere (see Ranta and others, 1988; Leppgnen and others, 1988 ; Hy~tyl~inen and others, 1988; Huuhtanen and others, 1988). The approach especially gives possibilities to understand the impacts of general Change of different industrial sectors; the impacts of design problems and design processes; the impacts of the goals and targets of the change; factors behind motivational, safety, stress and man-machine problems. Some general strong conclusions are: It is not only technology which matters . Information technologies are only tools to achieve more general business strategies . The main aspects are to increase the product quality and to increase flexibility in terms of product variations, or to increase capacity with the help of information technologies. The design process is more critical than the technology itself. The goals and the design management have to be connected to organizational design as ~Iell. It is not only the technical automation system, which has to be designed, but also the whole organization . Training seems to be a rather difficult task in terms of content, method and cost allocation . Training should be seen tightly connected to design and as a tool to transfer design knowledge to operative skills and capabil1 ties. There seem to be difficulties to estimate long-term costs and benefits, such as the availability of systems, and to relate them to, e . g., training issues. REFERENCES Blackler, F., Brown, C. (1986). Alternative models to gUide the design and introduc tion of the new information technologies into work organisations. J . of Occup. Psych., 59, pp. 287-313. BrMner, P. (1985). Skill based production - the superior concept to the factory. Proc. Int . Conf. on Factory of Future, Fraunhofer Gesellschaft, Stuttgart , 6 pages. Butera, F. , Thurman, J. (Eds .) (1984). Automation and work design - a study by lLD, IiorthHolland, Amsterdam, 560 p . Cohen, S. S . , Zysman, J. (1987). Jlanufacturing matters - the myth of postindustrial economy . Basic Books, Iiew York, 297 p. Dagwell, R., Veber, R. (1983). System designers ' user models: a comparative study and methodological critique. CODmunications ACK, 26, 11, pp . 987-997 . Fix-Sterz, J . , Lay, K. , Schul tz-Vild, R. (1986). Flexible Fertigungssysteme und Fertigungszellen . VDI-Z, 128, 11, pp. 369-379. Goldhar, J . D., Jel1nek, K. (1983). Plans for economies of scope . Harward Business Review, Iiovember-December 1983, pp. 141-148. Goldhar, H. D., Jel1nek, K. (1985). Computer integrated flexible manufacturing: Organisational, economic and strategic implications. Interfaces, 15, 3, pp. 94-105.

Impact Assessm ent of Automa tion Techno logy Huuhtan en , P. (1988) . Jew informa tion technolo gy and changes in lob content and work organiz ation in custome r serice in banking and insuran ce branc h. 3rd IFAC/ IFIP / IEA/ IFORS Confere nce on Man-Mac hine Systems , Oulu , 14-16 J une, 1988. Hyetyl!l inen , R., Toikka, K., Jorros , L. (1988 ) . Impleme ntation of FMS as a develop mental process in manufac tuirng work . 3rd IFAC/ IFIP/I EA/ IFORS Confere nce on Man-Mac hine Systems , Oulu, 14-16 June, 1988. Ive s, B., Olson, )CH., Barondi , J.J. (1983 ). The measure ment of user informa tion satisfac tion . Commun ications of ACK, 10, pp . 785-793 . J akodzin ski , A. D., Clarke, D. D. (1986). A review of methods for measuri ng and describ ing users attitud es as an essenti al constitu ent of syst em analysi s and design . The Compute r J . , 29 , 2 , pp. 97-102 . Jaikuma r, R. ( 1986 >' Postind ustrial manufac turing . Ha r ward Bus ines s Review, Jovembe r - December 1986, pp . 69-79 . Lang, F., Det j e j aruwat , N., Smith, C. (1 983). Fac tors affectin g soc ial control : The reasons a nd values - part 11 . Sys tems, oblec tives, sol utions , ~, 3, pp . 207-226 . Lepp!lne n, A. , Auvinen , E. (1986 ). Improvem ent of work and workers ' qualifi ca t ions in a highly a utomat ed paper mill . 3rd IFAC/ IFIP/ IEA/I FORS Confere nc e on Man- Mac h i ne Systems , Oulu , 14-16 J une , 1988. Marti n , T., Ul1 c h , E., liarneck e , H. J . (1987). Appropr iate aut omation for flexible manuf ac turing . 10th IFAC liorld Congres s , Muni c h, 27 . - 3 1. 8.87, Vol . 5 , pp . 291-305 . Ranta , J. , Tuomine n, L. (1988 ). Impacts of aut omat i on : importa nce of design process . 3rd IFAC/ I FI P/ IEA/ IFORS Confere nce on Man - Mac hine Systems , Oulu , 14-16 June, 1988. J . , Haarla, J . liahl st r~m, B., Heinone n , R. , Ranta, (1985 ) . The design process and the use of c omputeri zed tools i n control room design the fi na l report from Nordic LIT-3 . 1 project , NKA/ LIT (85 ) 4, Espoo.

437