6.4. Human Systems Integration (HSI) throughout the System Life Cycle
6.4.1. Research and Development (R&D), Studies, and Analyses in Support of Human Systems Integration (HSI)
Continuous application of human-centered research data, methods, and tools will ensure maximum operational and training effectiveness of the system. Continual analysis of system functionality provides data to help determine the best allocation of tasks to personnel, hardware, or software. Results guide human workload predictions, man-machine interface requirements, and procedural, software, and hardware innovations needed to ensure that the human element can fulfill and enhance total system performance. Each military department conducts human centered research. The products of this research form the basis for creating and maintaining military standards, design criteria, methodologies, tools, and data bases used when applying HSI to defense systems acquisition. Within each military department, HSI practitioners support ongoing concepts and studies that identify potential HSI impacts on operational effectiveness and resource needs of alternative solutions. Examples of these activities include field assessments, human performance modeling, simulations, and technology demonstrations.
It is equally important that this research work be rolled into the front end analyses that lead to capability requirements. HSI considerations should be carefully examined during the capabilities-based assessment, and the planning for and execution of the Analyses of Alternatives. Failure to examine the human-centric issues up front may unduly complicate integration in a defined materiel solution.
6.4.2. Human Systems Integration (HSI) in the Capabilities Documents
The Initial Capabilities Document may seek to establish a new capability, improve an existing capability, or exploit an opportunity to reduce costs or enhance performance. The Initial Capabilities Document describes the key boundary conditions and operational environments that impact how the system is employed to satisfy the mission need. Key boundary conditions include critical manpower, personnel, training, environment, safety, occupational health, human factors, habitability, and survivability factors that have a major impact on system performance and life-cycle costs. The Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, or Facilities considerations and implications section of the Initial Capabilities Document should discuss all relevant domains of HSI.
HSI capabilities in the Capability Development Document should be specified in measurable, testable, performance-based language that is specific to the system and mission performance. Analyses and results conducted to determine the HSI requirements should be identified in and governed by other programmatic documentation (e.g., HSI plan, Systems Engineering Plan, Training Systems plan, or Manpower Estimate).
6.4.2.1. Refining Required Capabilities
As plans for the system mature, the capabilities documents should become more specific and reflect the integration of program objectives. The program manager should work with Human Systems Integration (HSI) practitioners and user representatives to translate HSI thresholds and objectives in the capabilities documents into quantifiable and measurable system requirements. The program manager should refine and integrate operational and design requirements so they result in the proper balance between performance and cost, and keep programs affordable. Additionally, system requirements should serve as the basis for developing engineering specifications, and should be reflected in the statement of work, contracts, Test and Evaluation Master Plan, and other program documentation. Over the course of the acquisition process, as trade-offs are made and plans for the system design mature, the capabilities documents should be updated to reflect a more refined and integrated set of parameters.
6.4.3. Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase
The purpose of the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase is to develop a system or an increment of capability; reduce integration and manufacturing risk (technology risk reduction occurs during Technology Development); ensure operational supportability with particular attention to reducing the logistic footprint; implement Human Systems Integration; design for producibility; ensure affordability and protection of critical program information by implementing appropriate techniques such as anti-tamper; and demonstrate system integration, interoperability, safety and utility.
6.4.3.1. Solicitations and Source Selection
Human Systems Integration considerations should be clearly defined and given proper weight in solicitations and proposal evaluation guidelines provided to the government evaluation team. The record of contractors in Human Systems Integration should be an element of bid selection and contract performance criteria.
6.4.3.2. Systems Engineering
Once parameters are established in the Initial Capabilities Document and Capability Development Document, Requirements Definition Package or Capability Drop, it is the program manager's responsibility to ensure that they are addressed during the systems engineering process, included in the Human Systems Integration (HSI) Plan and the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), and properly considered during cost/performance trade-off analyses. Consistent with paragraph E1.1.29 of DoD Directive 5000.01, the program manager applies HSI to optimize total system performance, operational effectiveness, suitability, survivability, safety, and affordability. Program managers should consider supportability, life-cycle costs, performance, and schedule comparable in making program decisions. Each program is required to have a comprehensive plan for HSI. It is important that this plan be included in the SEP or as a stand alone HSI Plan as the program(s) may require. As required by DoD Instruction 5000.02, the program manager should take steps (e.g., contract deliverables and Government/contractor Integrated Product Teams) to ensure human factors engineering/cognitive engineering is employed during systems engineering. These steps should occur from the Materiel Solution Analysis phase through the life of the program to provide for effective human-machine interfaces, meet HSI requirements, and (as appropriate) support a system-of-systems acquisition approach. The program manager should also ensure that HSI requirements are included in performance specifications and test criteria. Manpower, Personnel, and Training functional representatives, as user representatives, participate in the systems engineering process to help produce the proper balance between system performance and cost and to ensure that requirements remain at affordable levels. Manpower, personnel, training, and supportability analyses should be conducted as an integral part of the systems engineering process throughout the acquisition life cycle, beginning with Materiel Solution Analysis and continuing throughout program development.
6.4.3.2.1. System Design
Human Systems Integration (HSI) plays a major role in the design process. Front-end analysis methods, such as those described in MIL-HDBK-46855A, should be pursued to maximize the effectiveness of the new system. Initial emphasis should be placed on "lessons learned" from legacy, predecessor or comparable systems to help identify and eliminate characteristics in the new system that require excessive cognitive, physical, or sensory skills or high aptitudes; involve complex fault location or workload intensive tasks; necessitate excessive training; require proficiency training; or result in frequent or critical errors or safety/health hazards. Placing an emphasis on the "human-in-the-loop" ensures that systems are designed to operate consistent with human performance capabilities and limitations, meet system functional requirements, and fulfill mission goals with the least possible demands on manpower, personnel, and training. Moreover, sound HSI applications can minimize added costs that result when systems have to be modified after they are fielded in order to correct performance and safety issues.
6.4.3.2.2. Allocations
During systems engineering, analyses should be performed iteratively to define successively lower functional and performance requirements, to identify functional interfaces, and to allocate functions to components of the system (e.g., hardware, software, and human). Tasks should be allocated to the human component consistent with human attributes (i.e., capabilities and limitations) of the user population as established in the Target Audience Description. Requirements analysis should be conducted iteratively in conjunction with logical analysis to develop and refine system level performance requirements, identify external interfaces, and provide traceability among user requirements and design requirements. Human-systems interfaces should be identified as an outgrowth of the functional allocation process. Another product of the systems engineering process is a list of job tasks with performance/confidence levels. This information is used to further refine manpower, personnel and training requirements.
6.4.3.2.3. Specifications and Standards
It is primarily the responsibility of the program manager, with the assistance of the Integrated Product Teams, to establish performance specifications, design criteria standards, interface standards, and data specifications in the solicitation and resulting contract. Strong consideration should be given to establishing standards when uniform configuration is necessary for ease of operation, safety, or training purposes. For instance, a control panel or avionics suite may need to be standardized to enhance the ability of the user to access information and to respond quickly in an emergency situation. Standard features preclude the need to teach multiple (or conflicting) responses to similar tasks. Standardization is particularly important when a standard performance is required for safety reasons. For instance, rapid ejection from the cockpit should require standard procedures and tasks. If there are unique health hazard or survivability requirements, such as vibration or shock tolerances, extended temperature range, or noise levels, standardization may be the most efficient way to ensure that the system meets those special requirements. Preference should be given to specifications and standards developed under the Defense Standardization Program. Regulatory occupational exposure standards create performance thresholds. However, use of guidance exposure criteria and ergonomic/Human Systems Integration guidelines should be considered to ensure personnel protection, promote efficiency, and anticipate more stringent standards that are likely to be required during the life cycle of the system.
Performance standards for operators, maintainers, both individual and team, are derived from the performance requirements of the total system. For example, human performance requirements (e.g., completion times or success rates) presumes that in order for the total system to achieve specified performance levels, the human will have to complete tasks or achieve performance objectives within specified confidence levels (usually expressed in terms of per cent of actions completed within a specified time-frame and/or error limit). The training/instructional system should be developed to ensure that operators can meet or exceed the personnel performance levels required to operate/maintain the systems. Additionally, manpower should be determined based on these same performance requirements. Operational tests should also be based on the same criteria.
6.4.4. Production and Deployment
The objective of this phase of the acquisition process is to achieve an operational capability that satisfies mission needs. Operational test and evaluation determines the effectiveness and suitability of the system.
6.4.5. Operations and Support (O&S)
The objective of this phase is the execution of a support program that meets operational support performance requirements and sustains the system in the most cost-effective manner over its life cycle. As required by DoD Directive 5000.01, planning for O&S should begin as early as possible in the acquisition process. Efforts during the O&S phase should be directed towards ensuring that the program meets and has the resources to sustain the threshold values of all support performance requirements. Once the system is fielded or deployed, a follow-on operational testing program, to assess performance, quality, compatibility, and interoperability, and identify deficiencies, should be conducted, as appropriate. Post fielding verification of the manpower, and information resulting from training exercises, readiness reports, and audits can also be used to assess the operational capability of the system. During fielding, deployment, and throughout operational support, the need for modifications to the system should be assessed.
6.5. Manpower Estimates
Manpower Estimates address manpower affordability in terms of military end strength (including force structure and student end strength) and civilian work years beginning at Milestone B. Additionally, the use of contractor workyears support should also be documented, where possible. Consistent with DoD Directive 5000.01, DoD Components should plan programs based on realistic projections of the dollars and manpower likely to be available in future years. When major manpower increases are required to support the program, or major manpower shortfalls exist, they will be identified as risks in the Manpower Estimate, and addressed in the risk assessment section of the Acquisition Strategy. Program risks that result from manpower shortfalls should be addressed in terms of their impact on readiness, operational availability, or reduced combat capability.
DAG Tutorial 
