Ironies of Automation
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Ironies of Automation is a human factors thesis that automating an industrial process can expand rather than eliminate the problems of its human operators.
- Context:
- It can typically be summarized as the irony that the more advanced a control system is, the more crucial the human operator's contribution may be.
- ...
- It can often be illustrated by an operator who is left only the tasks the designer could not think how to automate.
- It can often be illustrated by asking an operator to monitor an automatic system that was installed because it does the job better than the operator.
- It can often be illustrated by the decay of manual skills that are not used, so that a formerly experienced operator who takes over may act like an inexperienced one.
- ...
- It can be traced to Lisanne Bainbridge's 1983 paper of the same name, which drew on process control and flight-deck automation.
- It can be applied to later forms of automation, such as robotic process automation in public services.
- It can predict the Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem, in which operators who have only monitored are less able to take over.
- It can motivate keeping operators practiced, for example with hands-on control in each shift or simulator practice.
- ...
- Example(s):
- the irony that designer errors can be a major source of operating problems.
- the irony that by taking away the easy parts of the operator's task, automation can make the difficult parts more difficult.
- the irony that the most successful automated systems, which rarely need manual intervention, may need the greatest investment in operator training.
- the loss of Air France Flight 447 (2009), in which pilots who were not prepared for manual flight had to take over after an automation failure.
- ...
- Counter-Example(s):
- an Automation Bias, which is a cognitive bias of the operator rather than a thesis about the consequences of automation design.
- a Goodhart's Law, which is an adage about measures used as targets rather than about automation and its operators.
- a Worker Deskilling Process, which is an economic process of introducing labor-saving technology rather than a claim about operators of automated control.
- See: Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem, Automation Bias, Automated System, Situation Awareness Process, Neglect Tolerance (Human-Robot Interaction).
References
2026
- (Wikipedia, 2026) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation Retrieved:2026-10-08.
- QUOTE: ... The paradox of automation says that the more efficient the automated system, the more crucial the human contribution of the operators. Humans are less involved, but their involvement becomes more critical. Lisanne Bainbridge, a cognitive psychologist, identified these issues notably in her widely cited paper "Ironies of Automation." If an automated system has an error, it will multiply that error until it is fixed or shut down. This is where human operators come in. A fatal example of this was Air France Flight 447, where a failure of automation put the pilots into a manual situation they were not prepared for.
2023
- (Lindgren, 2023) ⇒ Ida Lindgren. (2023). “Ironies of Public Service Automation – Bainbridge Revisited.” In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research.
- ABSTRACT: ... I follow this call and present four ironies of automation, extracted from Lisanne Bainbridge's iconic work from 1983, and relate these to the public service automation context, using examples of RPA in local government organizations. The ironies concern contradictions in the underlying views on humans and human error in the design of automated systems and human-automation interaction, as well as the consequences of human-automation interaction in terms of new tasks (monitoring and take-over), re-configurations of responsibilities, and de- and re-skilling of humans interacting with automated systems. ...
1983
- (Bainbridge, 1983) ⇒ Lisanne Bainbridge. (1983). “Ironies of Automation.” In: Automatica, 19(6).
- ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the ways in which automation of industrial processes may expand rather than eliminate problems with the human operator. Some comments will be made on methods of alleviating these problems within the "classic' approach of leaving the operator with responsibility for abnormal conditions, and on the potential for continued use of the human operator for on-line decision-making within human-computer collaboration.
- QUOTE: ... This paper suggests that the increased interest in human factors among engineers reflects the irony that the more advanced a control system is, so the more crucial may be the contribution of the human operator. ...
- QUOTE: ... There are two ironies of this attitude. One is that designer errors can be a major source of operating problems. ... The second irony is that the designer who tries to eliminate the operator still leaves the operator to do the tasks which the designer cannot think how to automate. ...
- QUOTE: ... Unfortunately, physical skills deteriorate when they are not used, particularly the refinements of gain and timing. This means that a formerly experienced operator who has been monitoring an automated process may now be an inexperienced one. ...
- QUOTE: ... A more serious irony is that the automatic control system has been put in because it can do the job better than the operator, but yet the operator is being asked to monitor that it is working effectively. ...
- QUOTE: ... Perhaps the final irony is that it is the most successful automated systems, with rare need for manual intervention, which may need the greatest investment in human operator training. ... By taking away the easy parts of his task, automation can make the difficult parts of the human operator's task more difficult. ...