The Tough Sell of Resilience Engineering

We provide an argument for why current Resilience Engineering (RE) tools are unlikely to see widespread adoption, and recommendations for making more adoptable RE tools. Resilience engineering continuously grows in popularity, and various RE tools have existed for years; however, we have found that convincing technology development teams to use RE tools is a “tough sell” for a variety of reasons. We synthesized insights and lessons learned from interacting with numerous technology development teams and the scholarly literature on RE. We then analyzed a set of RE tools through the lens of these insights, and we developed a cohesive and analysis-driven argument for why RE tools are a tough sell, and, more importantly, we developed recommendations to improve future tools. We found that challenges for adoption of current RE tools by technology development teams include RE tools that 1) require too great a level of effort, 2) have unobvious value, 3) require the technology to already exist, 4) have a scope that exceeds agency of technology developers, and 5) do not readily generate relevant systems engineering artifacts. Different underlying factors shape or constrain the solution space; however, there are several recommendations for developing RE tools that are more likely to achieve widespread adoption by technology developers. This research is directly applicable to RE practitioners seeking to have greater engagement with technology development teams. Further, this work is likely generalizable to develop any kind of participatory tools for human-centered design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society
Published
2024-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/tts.2024.3484176
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Occupational Health and Safety Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.90
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Tough Sell of Resilience Engineering

Stephen L. Dorton, Kelly Neville, Glenn J. Lematta
2 citations
IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society
Occupational Health and Safety Research
0.90
article

The Tough Sell of Resilience Engineering

Stephen L. Dorton, Kelly Neville, Glenn J. Lematta
article en
2 citations

Abstract

We provide an argument for why current Resilience Engineering (RE) tools are unlikely to see widespread adoption, and recommendations for making more adoptable RE tools. Resilience engineering continuously grows in popularity, and various RE tools have existed for years; however, we have found that convincing technology development teams to use RE tools is a “tough sell” for a variety of reasons. We synthesized insights and lessons learned from interacting with numerous technology development teams and the scholarly literature on RE. We then analyzed a set of RE tools through the lens of these insights, and we developed a cohesive and analysis-driven argument for why RE tools are a tough sell, and, more importantly, we developed recommendations to improve future tools. We found that challenges for adoption of current RE tools by technology development teams include RE tools that 1) require too great a level of effort, 2) have unobvious value, 3) require the technology to already exist, 4) have a scope that exceeds agency of technology developers, and 5) do not readily generate relevant systems engineering artifacts. Different underlying factors shape or constrain the solution space; however, there are several recommendations for developing RE tools that are more likely to achieve widespread adoption by technology developers. This research is directly applicable to RE practitioners seeking to have greater engagement with technology development teams. Further, this work is likely generalizable to develop any kind of participatory tools for human-centered design.

IEEE Transactions on Technology and SocietyVol. 6(1)
Mitre (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Occupational Health and Safety Research
0.90
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.