Positive Control in Coordinated Crew Tasks

Abstract
This paper defines the term positive control as it exists in the community of small craft high-speed crews. By placing this term within a framework of situational awareness and decision making research, we can establish its relevance to small teams in high risk situations. We will explore the three natural dimensions of positive control and the techniques used to monitor and manage unit control during a mission.

Introduction
Modern Canadian Coast Guard rescue craft set off into the seas at ever increasing speeds, yet most crews are trained in traditional style slow-speed navigation. As propulsion technology and new vessel designs bring our fleet to higher performance levels, the Coast Guard is adapting its training strategies to fit new challenges presented by new equipment. The science of human factors and concepts such as situational awareness (SA) and naturalistic decision making (NDM) now play a vital role in the study of dynamic team environments and crew survival. Studies in situational awareness are numerous, along with several definitions, one of the most common being Mica Endsley’s; ''The perception of the elements in the environment within a volume of space and time, the comprehension of their meaning, the projection of their status into the near future, and the prediction of how various actions will affect the fulfilment of one’s goals. '' When entire teams reach the same wavelength, it is referred to as common ground made up of knowledge, beliefs and assumptions (Perla et al 2000). Once a team has reached common ground they can share situation awareness (SSA). Optimal SSA will cover the team’s immediate situation as well as “their projection of their status in the near future”. Yet the sum of the team’s shared situational awareness does not clearly describe the performance state of the team. The leader’s ability to assess the state of a unit along with the readiness of the team members is a complex challenge (We define unit as: a craft, air, land or sea, in which, a team is lead by a leader on a mission). A team member or leader can be situation aware yet not be ready with a sound decision. If a sound decision is made, then the team readiness or state of equipment may prevent the decision from being carried out. The interpretation of information is directed by mental models that represent a given situation based on one’s experience and perceptual biases. These can interfere with error trapping and situational assessment (Burns, 2000). The Coast Guard needed to define a state where a team leader is in equilibrium with the recent and relevant flow of information and assess the value of that information by judging the shared situational awareness (SSA) of the whole team. This task is easy to chat about in the wet room before a mission but to actually analyze a leader’s method of integral assessment of SSA and study that skill by breaking it down and quantifying it, is at best subjective and at worst ethereal (Nofi, 2000). The actual decision making strategies such as recognition-primed decisions (RPD) will be made by a leader with experience. RPDs are decisions made quickly when a leader recognizes the elements of a situation and matches them with his or her mental model of the causes and factors (Lipshitz et.al,2001). Regardless of the decision making strategies, if the unit is under positive control then the decision made will be based on accurate and well presented information. Situational control is like oxygen, no one is sure how much they have until it disappears. A current flow of information coupled with the SSA enables the team and leader to make effective decisions and these concepts have been well researched. A new term is required, however, relating to the coupling of a unit’s awareness with a unit’s ability to carry out an effective action plan through communications and fluent interface with functional equipment. An airplane, for example, in which all control systems have failed, may be manned by a crew that is situation aware, and making effective decisions, yet the pilot has most certainly lost positive control while the airplane tumbles out of the sky. If the unit is under positive control then the new decisions should be translated into whole unit action. Thus one part of positive control includes the integrity of the mechanical and electronic equipment at the hands of the team, along with the team’s ability to affect an action plan.

Links
Full Article: