Design and Implementation of High Reliability Organizing Based Performance Metrics in the Context of the EU H2020 Research Project TARGET, Aiming at Developing VR/AR Training Environment for Security Critical Agents

  • Renaud VidalEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)


Training teams to respond to unexpected situations differs from traditional trainings in the sense that it is not just about following prescribed steps or procedures, simply because the situation at hand has never been imagined or has already occurred but is developing in unexpected ways. As a result, a specific solution has been developed to assess teams’ performance, based on the High Reliability Organizing (HRO) theoretical framework, in the context of VR/AR training environment for security critical agents.

Specifically, the solution operationalizes HRO principles such as reluctance to simplify, sensitivity to operations, deference to expertise and commitment to resilience, by providing real time metrics.

Innovative aspects include the fact that the metrics capture systemic phenomenon that would otherwise be missed by a single trainer. Moreover, they provide unobtrusive measures, i.e. they don’t influence the trainees. Real time feedbacks can also help trainers manage scenarios by giving them information to adjust the intensity of the exercise. It is not job or language specific. Finally this enables the assessment of trainees’ progress by comparing the metrics for the same exercise at two different times or trainees’ areas for progress by comparing the metrics of a given team to the best performing team on the same exercise.


Training Performance HRO 


  1. 1.
    Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, Obstfeld D (1999) Organizing for high reliability. Res Organ Behav 21:81–123Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weick KE (2015) Managing the unexpected : sustained performance in a complex world. Manag. UnexpectedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ciavarelli A, Figlock R, Sengupta K, Roberts KH (2001) Assessing organizational safety risk using questionnaire survey methods. In: 11th International symposium on aviation psychology, Columbus, OH (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bea R (2006) Reliability and human factors in geotechnical engineering. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 132(5):631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weick KE (1979) The social psychology of organizing. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., ReadingGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vidal R (2011) La haute fiabilité, comme gestion de la tension entre le contrôle et l’écoute: l’étude empirique des opérations de secours. Aix-MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vidal R, Roberts KH (2014) Observing elite firefighting teams: the triad effect. J Contingencies Cris Manag 22(1):18–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weick KE, Roberts KH (1993) Collective mind in organizations: heedful interrelating on flight decks. Adm Sci Q 38:357–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hollnagel E (2004) Barriers and accident prevention. Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Webb E, Weick KE (1979) Unobtrusive measures in organizational theory: a reminder. Adm Sci Q 24(4):650–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ATRIScKatzenthalFrance

Personalised recommendations