Which Human Performance Tools aren’t Human Performance Tools?

Please share with your community:

question_markWhat am I talking about? Two tools that are commonly referred to in our world of Human Performance Improvement (HPI) to prevent human error are called “Questioning Attitude” and “Stop When Unsure.” I’m challenging you to not consider these as tools in your arsenal against preventing events caused by human error. I have my reasons… keep reading…and find the secret to why Human Performance Tools work so well in the first place.

Does any of this sound familiar?

I was recently (and thankfully) reminded by my PPI buddy, Tim Autrey, that the people we are trying to influence do not need to know about the science behind why the (HPI) tools work, just that they do. I agree and like to simplify and keep concepts easy and tangible, as Tim also advises. With this in mind, how many Human Performance Tools does your program have? Is it simple and easy to explain? Keep it simple, right? A program that is supposed to help workers should not be difficult to remember or employ.

I previously worked with an organization that had many tools and kept them under two headings, “Fundamental” and “Conditional.” Fundamental tools would be used all of the time, like Self-Checking, where conditional tools would be only used given a certain situation like a Post-Job Critique. This created quite a list and more for workers to remember, so job aids were created (pamphlets and badge cards). Confusion set in on whether or not the requirements for workers and management to constantly have their books or badge cards with them to show they are supporting the program. Too many tools causes confusion, as well…

Focus

I’ve also joined an organization where the previous Human Performance training indicated to “use all the Human Performance Tools every day, every job, every minute.” Wait a second… If I focus on everything, I focus on nothing, right? Aren’t these tools supposed to help my accuracy and improve situational awareness? They’re certainly not supposed to get in the way of the work having a successful outcome.

Don’t make my head spin, help me

Some nuclear stations were so inundated with confusion over the program from contractors coming in to support refuel outage work, and from in-house workers not seeing value in a program that is vast and not simplified. In response many of them held meetings with their Human Performance Steering Committees and asked variations on one important question: Which four human performance tools would you think would get the most bang for the buck for our station? I’ve also heard a different approach: Which 4 human performance tools would you want to use to dismantle a live bomb?

The results from these challenges are sometime referred to as the CORE-4 human performance tools – a simplified set of tools everybody employs when it matters: NOT ALL OF THE TIME…. remember again, when you focus on everything, you focus on nothing…

Secret revealed: 

Human Performance Tools help when you are intentional about using them… taking a pause to think about what you’re about to do before doing it is where the value is, and don’t let anyone tell you differently. That is the magic behind why these tools work so well… the work in the moment you take time to think. The bang for the buck is in choosing the tool purposefully and employing it properly. Why? Because it helps us get or maintain Situational Awareness, which is the proper state of mind to be in to reduce errors. Thinking about potential consequences and reviewing your actions prior to performing them is what makes us successful time and again.

So what are the all-important tools?

Most CORE-4 Human Performance Tools programs that I have heard of include Self-Checking, Peer-Checking, Questioning Attitude, and Job Site Review. Wait. Didn’t this post start with me saying that Questioning Attitude should not be a human performance tool? Yes!

A Questioning Attitude should exist at all times, causing you to Stop When Unsure over any concern you may have. Many Human Performance Improvement Programs call these out as separate Human Performance Tools, but that is not necessary. A questioning attitude must be constantly present to use the tools deliberately and not just out of habit or by accident. A questioning attitude gets you to use a Human Performance Tool – I see a definite distinction. Also, Stop When Unsure is really the “S” in STAR. We are unsure because of a questioning attitude, so we use Self-Checking. We are not employing three separate tools here…. just one. Let’s not overcomplicate this any longer.

In case you’re wondering

Self-Checking, Effective Communication, Verification Practices and Job Site Review are my favorites… Remember that Human Performance Tools are used to get and maintain Situational Awareness… use them when they matter the most, and not every second of the day.

So, what do YOU think?

Click some extra tool links:

TVA Toolbox

DOE Standard – Human Performance Toolbox

Independent Double Checks: Undervalued and Misused: Selective Use of This Strategy Can Play an Important Role in Medication Safety

10 thoughts on “Which Human Performance Tools aren’t Human Performance Tools?”

  1. Great point, James. If you shoot for everything, you’ll likely hit nothing. As a new employee (you know where), it is overwhelming being inundated with so many things to remember. So, they give you a card. If I have to consult a card everytime I need a HU tool, is that beneficial?

    1. I suppose if they gave you some training and the card was a job aid reminder, then it could serve a little as a constant reinforcement. Getting a book on human performance tools, and/or a badge card, isn’t really helpful unless it’s used to support training. As with most training, I can usually support the model for face to face initial classes, and then computer-based training for annual follow-ups… I like the badge cards, I really do… but only for reinforcement. Thanks for commenting!

  2. I agree that you can’t use all the tools at once, however if you consider the analogy of a real toolbox, there are many many tools in there. Each one has its own purpose and the user needs to know how to use it and when. The same goes for HPI tools. Our approach has been to introduce about 17 tools to our users just so they are familiar with the tools and when to use them. We don’t expect all the tools to come out at once, only when they are needed. We know that after the initial training session they forgot about the tools when they walked out of the room, so we gave them two resources to help them with the tools. One was a booklet providing details for all the tools. We also provided them badge reference cards for the top 8 tools. After they digested the training and are beginning to use the tools, they are settling in with the top 4 or 5 tools. So, we are now introducing one page HPI tool documents to be presented and reviewed at each safety meeting. Again, just refocusing their attention to ensure they know how to use that special “thing a ma giggy” at the bottom of the tool box. The problem with limiting it to just a few tools, you end up with screw drivers as pry bars and plyers in place of wrenches. And let’s not forget the hammer…and like they say…if you only have a hammer, then the whole world looks like a nail.

  3. Joe, I totally agree. If you look into a carpenter’s tool box, would you say he/she has too many? No, because each tool has a purpose and a function. Same for Hu tools. Each Hu tool has a time, place, purpose, and function. If a tool doesn’t work, then it’s either the user doesn’t understand it, or the tool doesn’t help the user 1) anticipate–know what to expect, 2) monitor–know what to pay attention to; 3) respond–know what to do to maintain positive control; or 4) learn–know a) what has happened, b) what is happening, or c) what to change. I refer to these four elements together as “risk-based thinking,” which is based on research in resilience engineering. Check out http://www.Ashgate.com for books on RE.

  4. James,
    Interesting post. I like your perspective on the ubiquitous nature and use of Questioning Attitude. I like to think of the attribute as a way of life, not a tool to be taken out once in a while.
    I also recognize there is a lot of misunderstanding of what it means, and how we should display it as an attribute.

    I recall getting in a “discussion” with another trades person on an aspect of a job we were both assigned to. He was a millwright, I am a steamfitter. After a few heated words, it turned out we were arguing on the same side of the disagreement without appreciating the fact. A third person standing by who saw the “discussion” said: “I’ve never seen two people agree so disagreeably!”

    1. I believe it was Zig Ziglar who shared this concept…
      When you are in a confrontation, draw a pretend line between you and the other person on the floor/ground, and then move over to their side and continue the discussion, and you may see something change 🙂

  5. Great post! I’m studying all I can on human performance and your perspective makes sense.

    I also wanted to let you know that the three links to extra tools are no longer valid.

  6. It’s like going to the trash can with your banana in one hand and the peel in the other hand; you stop and think about which one you will throw away before taking the action. Even a five year old can do it, right. (from a James Newman interview with his son)
    Great post James.
    Johnny Thumper, Diablo Canyon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*