-
to
uzalm, Un
Keywords:AssemblyVirtual
opeust
e manueir req
models of the same product share the capacity of one assembly
line
execute action sequences to solve problems (Rittle-Johnson et
al.,2001). This means that an assembly operator knows how andwhen
certain procedures should be performed in order to accom-plish a
given task. By having procedural skill related to a specic
commonly performed on pre-series (prototype) vehicles
(Krammertions such as: highariants are built toeated exposure
to
the use of trainingith several advan-g and exibility inining.
Kraus andl training is costavel expenses for
trainers/trainees as training can be delivered on-site;
minimisingdown-time as training can be exibly undertaken around
trainees'work schedule; and less demanding on personnel resources
astrainees can train independently. Boud et al. (1999) found
thatoperators who have used a virtual training system learned
newprocedures effectively and performed better on real assembly
tasksthan those using solely written instructions. Similar trends
havealso been shown in the application of virtual training in other
areassuch as aircraft maintenance (Barnett et al., 2000),
machine
* Corresponding author. ITRC Building (B03), University Park,
Nottingham NG72RD, UK. Tel.: 44(0)115 951 3808.
Contents lists availab
Applied Erg
els
Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157E-mail address:
[email protected] (S. Hermawati).to support the
competitiveness of automotive manufacturing. As aconsequence,
operators on the nal assembly lines are required toswitch
effortlessly between assembly operations for one model tothe
next.
Nof et al. (1997) dened assembly as the aggregation of
allprocesses by which various parts and subassemblies are built
togetherto form a complete, geometrically designed assembly or
product (suchas a machine or an electronic circuit) either by an
individual, batch orcontinuous process. Assembly operations can be
considered asskill-based operations that require procedural skill
i.e. an ability to
et al., 2011). This approach has substantial limitacost; only a
low number of vehicles and product vkeep the cost down; and parts
wear from repassembly and disassembly operations.
In contrast to training on pre-series vehicles,in virtual
environments has been associated wtages such as a standardised
approach to traininconducting, progressing and evaluating
traGramopadhye (2001) also argued that virtuaeffective for several
reasons: elimination of trand robustness (Hajarnavis, 2012). It is
also common that several new product and its variants are
introduced. Operator training isTraining
1. Introduction
Final assembly lines in automotiva low degree of automation due
to thhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2014.07.0140003-6870/ 2014
Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomicsused to analyse the results of
interviews with various stakeholders (17 and 28 participants at
OPEL andVOLVO, respectively). The results show that there is a
strong case for the implementation of virtualtraining for assembly
tasks. However, it was also revealed that stakeholders would prefer
to use a virtualtraining to complement, rather than replace,
training on pre-series vehicles.
2014 Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomics Society. All rights
reserved.
facturers typically haveuirement for exibility
assembly task, an operator will have a mental representation of
theassembly task details (e.g. the number and order of steps
involved,and detail of what needs to be done in each step).
Therefore,training is crucial in developing operators' procedural
skills when aAvailable online 15 August 2014analysis, timeline
analysis, link analysis, Hierarchical Task Analysis and thematic
content analysis wereAccepted 26 July 2014 conducted at OPEL and
VOLVO Group to identify assembly training needs and a subset of
requirements;and to explore potential features of a hypothetical
game-based virtual training system. StakeholderUnderstanding the
complex needs of auassembly lines
Setia Hermawati a, *, Glyn Lawson a, Mirabelle D'CrLina
Andersson c, Maria Gink Lovgren c, Lennart Ma Human Factors
Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, The University of
Nottinghamb Adam Opel AG e General Motors Company, Rsselsheim,
Germanyc VOLVO Group, Gothenburg, Sweden
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:Received 1 June 2012
a b s t r a c t
Automobile nal assemblywhere multiple variants m
journal homepage: www.Society. All rights reserved.motive
training at nal
a, Frank Arlt b, Judith Apold b,skold c
ited Kingdom
rators must be highly skilled to succeed in a low automation
environmentbe assembled in quick succession. This paper presents
formal user studies
le at ScienceDirect
onomics
evier .com/locate/apergo
-
tor tperconasseifcrdedns w
wor
be tsks?en d
ughhe trroaca
form)
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157
145Table 1List of questions in the semi-structured interview.
Roles andresponsibilities
1.1. Summary of your rolea
1.2. What is your current involvement with opera1.3. Please
provide a task level description of the o1.4. Does the task that
the operators perform vary1.5. What is your production rate? i.e.
how many1.6. Do any of the assembly tasks pose particular d1.7. How
are issues with assembly operations reco1.8. Do you receive
feedback on assembly operatio
Workplace andworkenvironment
2. What are the conditions in which the operatorssocial
environmentb
Training 3.1. What are the tasks that the operators need to3.2.
How are they currently trained to do these ta3.3. What is the
timeframe of the training (i.e. wh3.4. What is your opinion of the
training?a
3.5. What are the key skills or knowledge being ta3.6. What is
good about the current approach to t3.7. What are the difculties
with the current app3.8. Can you suggest how to improve the
training?3.9. What do you consider the most important perHuman: Of
the operators' job (e.g. time, errors, operations (Lin et al.,
2002), surgical operations (Seymour et al.,2002; Larsen et al.,
2009), and the military (Gerbaud et al., 2008).
There have been many virtual training systems which
weredeveloped to aid the acquisition of procedural skills related
to as-sembly tasks. However, most systems are aimed at
supportingtraining of maintenance tasks in which knowledge of both
assem-bly and disassembly are part of what is acquired during the
trainingof the tasks (Webel et al., 2013; Xia et al., 2012; Peniche
et al., 2011;Gutierrez et al., 2010; Abate et al., 2009; Oliveira
et al., 2007; Wangand Li, 2004; Bluemel et al., 2003; Vora et al.,
2002); only a few arededicated solely to support training of
assembly tasks (Lili et al.,2009; Brough et al., 2007; Abe et al.,
1996). On studying thesepublications further we also found an
indication that formal userrequirements elicitation was rarely
conducted prior to the devel-opment of the systems. Failure to
perform user requirementsgathering means that the system is at risk
of being unable toaddress users' real needs and its usability is
reduced (Nielsen, 1993;Maguire and Bevan, 2002). To the extent of
the knowledge of thispaper's authors, there are limited studies
(e.g. Anastassova andBurkhardt, 2009) that focus specically on user
needs and re-quirements for training of assembly tasks in the
context of
Operational: Of the training (e.g. operator must complBusiness:
(e.g. a Timeframe reduction for the training)3.10. What are the
requirements for authoring training3.11. Does training improve
productivity? If so, how?e
Process and workow 4.1. What software tools do you currently use
as part4.2. What is the communication/information ow (i.e.4.3. What
information is required by planners/trainers4.4. Within the vehicle
development lifecycle, what inrequired to specify assembly
instructionsa
Game-basedvirtual training
5.1. What are your initial thoughts about training usin5.2. Do
you think this approach could improve trainin5.3. What problems
would you anticipate?a
5.4. What are your initial thoughts about a game-like5.5. What
are your thought on the capture and feedbasystems engineers?a
5.6. Do you own, use or have been tried an X360, PS3game using a
wireless controller?a
5.7. Would you like to be involved in the VISTRA projedeveloped
technologies?a
a All stakeholders.b Operators.c Operators, engineers,
supervisors.d Engineers.e All stakeholders except
operators.raininga
ators job, i.e. the detail of what they actually dob
siderably, i.e. do they do many different operations, or are
they mostly similar?c
mbly operations are required per hour?b
ulties to the operators? Do any tasks cause frequent
problems?a
?a
hich are difcult or time-consuming? If so, how?d
k? E.g. shift work, noise, lighting, please describe the
physical workplace and
rained for (e.g. tting components on vehicle assembly
lines)?bb
oes it take place in relation to vehicle launch?)c
t?a
aining?a
h of the training, or what problems exist?a
ance measures and goals?aautomotive manufacturers. This paper
aims to ll this gap in thehope that the information could be used
to promote the develop-ment of a virtual training system that
matches the requirements ofassembly task training. This paper's
contribution lies on its wealthof ndings which were gathered from
two different automotivemanufacturers to reect the complex needs of
training in auto-motive manufacturers.
Furthermore, game-based training has received increased
in-terest over the last decade and is applied in a variety of
eldsincluding business (Leger, 2006), education (Jong et al., 2008)
andmilitary (Beal, 2009). This popularity is attributed to the
hypothesisthat it can lead to skill acquisition and retention due
to its ability toengage learners (Colquitt et al., 2000; Prensky,
2001) and is sup-ported by empirical research evidence (Corbeil,
1999; Engel et al.,2009; Garris et al., 2002). There have also been
indications thatskills learned in game-based training environments
transfer toreal-life situations (Gopher et al., 1994; Topolski et
al., 2010).Despite the latest evidence of the effectiveness of
game-basedtraining there has not been any study that investigates
thepossible application of game-based training within
amanufacturing setting in the automotive sector. This paper aims
to
ete task correctly XX% of the time)?sessions (time available,
man-power etc.)?e
of the training process? (e.g. CAD systems or production
planning software?)a
who provides what information to who)?a
?a
formation related to training is required and when? i.e. when
are engineers
g virtual systems?a
g?a
system for training?a
ck of assembly issues to the product designers and
manufacturing
or WII based game console? What is your impression or experience
controlling a
ct? i.e. can we contact you again to obtain your feedback on
the
-
ll this gap by investigating end users' opinions towards
game-based virtual training. While this was necessarily
hypothetical, asno game-based system was available yet for them to
experience,the feedback was gathered in an attempt to identify
potentiallybenecial features for such a system and highlight areas
that couldbe worthy of future investigation.
In summary, the objectives of this paper are as follows: 1)
toinvestigate user needs and requirements for training
assemblytasks in the context of automotive manufacturers; and 2)
toinvestigate users' opinions towards game-based virtual
training.
2. Methods
2.1. Participating companies
This study involved two automotive manufacturers (OPEL andVOLVO
Group), which were chosen to exemplify the complexity ofboth
organisation and assembly tasks in such organisations.
concept of game-based virtual training, the following denition
ofgame-based virtual training was given: a virtual training
systemwhich can be used to train assembly tasks without physical
partsand could be in the form of training software that runs on a
desktopcomputer or uses technology similar to Nintendo Wii; also
thetraining will be game-like and perhaps involve a competition
orcontest.
A total of 45 participants were involved in the interviews,
ofwhich 17 participants were from OPEL and 28 participants werefrom
VOLVO (see Table 2). The semi structured interviews
lastedapproximately 30mine1 h, with between one and four
participantsbeing interviewed together in each session. During the
interviews,participants were encouraged to talk freely. Involvement
from theinterviewer was limited to prompting participants to
provide moredetails or expand on key issues. Due to concerns over
commercialsensitivity and the resources available for analysis,
responses fromparticipants were mainly recorded through
handwriting.
Observations at the nal assembly lines lasted between 45 minand
1 h. Notes regarding nal assembly tasks and the environment
the effectiveness of product/system design and development
invarious elds (Amiri et al., 2012; Atkinson et al., 2001;
Neuman,
osit
er o
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015)
144e1571462.2. Interviewees
The stakeholders were identied through discussion and
liaisonbetween human factors researchers and representatives of
endusers of both automotive manufacturers. During the
discussions,the end user representatives were encouraged to adopt
broaddenitions of stakeholders i.e. anyone in their organisation
who islikely to use or be affected (directly or indirectly) by nal
assemblytraining. The end user representatives were requested to
provide ageneral overview of the demographics and backgrounds for
eachidentied group of stakeholders (see Appendix A).
2.3. The semi-structured interview and observation
A semi-structured interview was developed following a
brain-storming session that involved end user representatives,
humanfactors researchers and system developers. The interview
questionswere organised in ve main sections: 1) roles and
responsibilities;2) workplace and work environment; 3) training; 4)
process andworkow; and 5) game-based virtual training. During the
devel-opment of the interview, feedback from end user
representativeswas obtained and used to improve the questions of
the semi-structured interview. Table 1 shows the list of the
questions ineach category and indicates to whom these questions
weredirected. In order to help interviewees understand and
visualise the
Table 2Stakeholders, number of participants and their average
number of years in current p
Stakeholders Numb
OPEL Manufacturing System Engineer Manager 1Manufacturing System
Engineers 2Virtual Engineers 2System Owner 2Launch Team Manager
1Core Team Manager 1Core Team 2Launch Team 1Supervisors 2Team
Leaders 2Operators 2
VOLVO Design Engineers 2Production/Introduction Engineer
3Virtual Manufacturing Engineers 2Technical Preparation Engineer
1Team Leaders 3Pilot Plant Team 3
Operators/Key Operators 142004; Brooks, 1998; Neary and
Sinclair, 1998). In this study, thestakeholder analysis helped to
identify and examine users thatare likely to be somewhat affected
by implementation of atraining approach. The stakeholder analysis
was based on theresponses from interview questions 1.1 and 1.2.
ion.
f participants Average number of working years in current
position
2012Information not provided1232Information not
provided22241820.524.5
3.53.38187.59.8of assembly lines were taken. Short informal
discussions with op-erators were also performed when required
and/or possible. Theobservation complemented the results of the
semi-structured in-terviews regarding the details of workplace,
work environment andassembly tasks (interview question 1.3 and
2).
2.4. Data analysis
The interview and observation results were analysed with
vequalitative methods. The choice of these methods followed
theguidance provided by Leonard et al. (2006) which considered
fac-tors such as the purpose of the study (explanation driven
orimplementation driven) and availability of resources (time,
expe-rience, funding and previous research). A detailed description
ofthe methods used is given below:
1. Stakeholder analysis has been recognised as important to
ensure2.5
-
1.2
Involvement with current training
) Being trained at pilot line (dedicated training
centre/location)by launch team (OPEL) or pilot plant team
(VOLVO).Being trained at assembly line by Team Leaders (OPEL) orKey
Operator-Teachers (VOLVO).
Train experienced operators at pilot line.) Train operators at
assembly line.
inator (VOLVO) Train experienced operators at pilot
line.Managing training for operators at assembly line.
Rectifying incorrect assembly operations at main assembly
line.
Maintain the system.
ry o
tooeredrs atnoly linraine
Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157 1472. Timeline analysis combines
functions or tasks with time-relatedinformation. It is useful to
create plots that show the temporalrelationship among tasks, their
length and timing (Nemeth,2005) as well as to assess task
allocation and communicationrequirements identication (Kirwan and
Ainsworth, 1992).Timeline analysis was based on the responses from
question 3.3and 3.10.
3. Link analysis is useful to provide descriptions of the
in-terrelationships between elements/components and their
fre-quency (Chapanis, 1959). Although it is traditionally used
to
Table 3Categories of stakeholders that were identied from
responses of questions 1.1 and
Stakeholder category Stakeholders
Trainee Team leaders (OPEL), Key Operators-Teachers (VOLVO
Operators
Trainer Launch team (OPEL), Pilot plant team (VOLVO)Team leaders
(OPEL), Key OperatorseTeachers (VOLVO
Coordinator Launch team manager (OPEL), Pilot Plant Team
CoordSupervisors (OPEL), Team Leaders (VOLVO)
Indirect benefactor Core Team, Manufacturing System Engineers
(OPEL),Production Engineers (VOLVO)
System champion System Owner (OPEL), (VOLVO)
Table 4Summary of responses to questions related to timeline
analysis.
Interview question Summa
3.3. What is the timeframe of the training (i.e. when does it
take placein relation to vehicle launch?)
TrainingA staggoperato
3.10. What are the requirements for authoring training
sessions(time available, man-power etc.)?
There isassembof the t
S. Hermawati et al. / Appliedarrange equipment and individuals
in a workplace and arrangecontrols and displays on a console, it
has also been used forother purposes such as monitoring and
analysing communica-tions in rescue operations (Thorstensson et
al., 2001) andnding information needs (Albinsson et al., 2003).
Link analysiswas based on the responses from questions 1.7, 1.8,
4.1, 4.2, 4.3and 4.4.
4. Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) is a form of task analysis
to studyactions and cognitive processes that are required by an
operatorin order to complete the system goals (Kirwan and
Ainsworth,1992). It can be applied to a variety of applications
(Stanton,2004). The HTA in this study was based on the responses
fromquestions 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2 and observation results.
5. Thematic analysis provides a descriptive presentation of
quali-tative data by identifying common topics and categorising
thequalitative data under suitable themes (Franzosi, 2004). It
hasbeen shown to successfully support development of techno-logical
products (Minocha and Reeves, 2010; Coleman et al.,2010; Artman and
Zallh, 2005; Sawasdchai and Poggenpohl,2002). Because it is guided
by a specic research question orsub questions by making inferences
of an intended population(Lapan et al., 2012) it can be used to
provide answers for designquestions that could not be directly
addressed by the analysesdescribed above. For this study, thematic
analysis helped toselect, focus and transform qualitative data into
manageableinformation segments to show their patterns. Thematic
analysiswas mainly based on the responses of questions that were
notused in other analyses.2.5. Identication of training needs,
training requirements andpotential features of game-based virtual
training
The results of data analysis were used to identify training
needsOn completing the data analysis, the results of the data
analysiswere reported back to, and veried by, end-user
representatives.Any found inconsistencies, especially related to
the timeline anal-ysis and link analysis, were then corrected.
f responses
k place towards the end of vehicle launch at both automotive
manufactures.approach was adopted i.e. train the trainers at pilot
line who then trainassembly line.specic duration of a training
session, especially for a training session ate. A training session
at an assembly line largely depends on the availabilityr. The
pre-series vehicle is required for training at both pilot and
assembly lines.and drafted as a subset of the user requirements.
Features of game-based virtual training that could potentially be
benecial were alsodrafted. These drafts were presented to the end
user representa-tives and the system development experts. The
representative endusers judged the importance (high, medium, low)
of each identieduser requirement/potential feature while the system
developmentexperts judged the technical feasibility (high, medium
and low) ofpotential features. During the renement process, answers
toquestions such as how important are the different
requirements/
Fig. 1. Timeline analysis results of OPEL (top) and VOLVO
(bottom).
-
SIssues related to assembly operations found during training at
the assembly andp(VEIslaCDPaNhBdtoD
Mthey can make adjustments on product design and assembly
operations.TwD
Ergfeatures for the users? and what is the consequences for
users ifwe do not implement a specic requirement/features?
werecontinually assessed. In this process, human factors
researchersacted as independent auditors to provide more
objectiveperspective of stakeholder positions and interests
(Crosby, 1992).
3. Results
For each type of data analysis a summary of the relevant
semi-structured interview results will be presented and is followed
byan account of the analysis results.
3.1. Stakeholder analysis
Table 5Summary of responses to questions related to link
analysis.
Interview question
1.7. How are issues with assembly operations recorded?
1.8. Do you receive feedback on assembly operations which are
difcultor time-consuming? If so, how?
4.1. What software tools do you currently use as part of the
training process?(e.g. CAD systems or production planning
software?)
4.2. What is the communication or information ow (i.e. who
provideswhat information to who)?
4.3. What information is required by plannersa/trainers?
4.5. Within the vehicle development lifecycle, what information
relatedto training is required and when?
a Engineers.
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied148The responses from questions 1.1
and 1.2 are shown in AppendixB, which lists all stakeholders, their
roles and responsibilities andtheir current involvement in
training. We observe that both auto-motive manufacturers follow the
commonly adopted on-the-jobtraining approach which requires a
trainee to work side-by-sidewith a trainer on the assembly line.
Five categories of stake-holders were identied based on their
involvement with trainingi.e. trainee, trainer, coordinator,
indirect benefactor and systemchampion. Table 3 shows the detail
for each category. The stake-holder analysis also revealed that
stakeholders' involvement wasaffected by whether the training takes
place at the pilot line orassembly line.
3.2. Timeline analysis
Responses from questions 3.3 and 3.10 for both
automotivemanufactures are summarised in Table 4. Detailed
informationfrom the responses was used to create timelines (see
Fig. 1) whichshow the succession of events prior to the training of
new productsat both automotive manufacturers.
The timelines show that the succession of events prior to
thecommencement of training of new products at OPEL and VOLVO
aresimilar. Virtual builds, which precede all other events, bring
prod-uct and manufacturing engineers together to identify and
resolveany issues related to the design (at an early stage of
product design)and assembly processes of products (at a later stage
of productdesign). Virtual builds are aided by software that
accommodates 3Dsimulation of parts and assembly processes. This is
followed byphysical builds, where a mock up is created by the
Launch Team(OPEL) or Pilot Plant Team (VOLVO) and used to further
identify andresolve any issues that are missed in the virtual
builds. Virtualbuilds and physical builds are parts of the product
design processand are aimed at rening the design and assembly
planning of anew product. They are part of the current
training.
Training on pre-series vehicles only commences once the
virtualbuild and physical build are completed. This takes place
after acertain time gap and is performed at two different
locations: pilotand main assembly lines. This time gap is required
to provideadequate hardware (training vehicles) and to organise the
trainingsessions. Although the timeline shows that there is a time
period
rainers require information on relevant assembly sequences and
the reasonshy assembly sequences or steps have to be done in
certain ways.etail information is shown in Fig. 2.ilot lines are
recorded and collected by the Launch Team (OPEL)/Pilot Plant
TeamOLVO)/who will then pass them to Manufacturing Engineers
(OPEL)/Productionngineers (VOLVO).sues related to assembly
operations that are found once a product has beenunched are
recorded by Team Leaders (OPEL/VOLVO) and handled byore Team
(OPEL)/Technical Preparation Engineers (VOLVO).uring training at
assembly and pilot lines, Manufacturing Engineers (OPEL)/roduction
Engineers (VOLVO) receive feedback on assembly operations whichre
difcult/time consuming.o further feedback is received by the two
stakeholders above once a productas been launched.oth OPEL and
VOLVO use commercial CAD and production planning softwareuring
virtual builds and production planning. However, no software is
usedsupport training. Assembly sequences are printed and
distributed on paper.etailed information is shown in Fig. 2.
anufacturing engineers require information regarding assembly
issues so thatummary of responses
onomics 46 (2015) 144e157dedicated to train operators for a new
product, the stakeholdersmentioned that due to various factors
(e.g. limited hardware/pre-series vehicle to train, availability of
trainers, and productivitypressure on the lines) assembly line
training is frequentlyshortened.
3.3. Link analysis
Responses from questions 1.7, 1.8, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 are
sum-marised in Table 5. Detailed information from the responses
wasused to create link diagrams (Fig. 2) which show the
informationow and relationships among stakeholders.
Fig. 2 shows that, for a new product, there is already a system
inplace to capture assembly issues that indirectly connect
operatorsand manufacturing engineers (OPEL)/production
engineers(VOLVO). Once a product is launched, a different mechanism
tocapture assembly issues is applied. This mechanism keeps
themanufacturing engineers (OPEL)/production engineers (VOLVO)out
of the loop.
3.4. Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA)
Table 6 shows a summary of the responses from 1.3,1.4,1.5 and
2while the following summarises relevant ndings from
theobservation:
-
or O
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157 1491.
Operators at OPEL are required to perform assembly tasks in
fastmoving assembly lines while operators at VOLVO are required
toperform assembly tasks with an appropriate speed (neither toofast
nor too slow), especially for assembly tasks which involvemore than
one operator.
2. The majority of assembly operations at VOLVO are
collaborativeassembly operations due to the size and weight of
parts thatwere involved in assembly tasks.
3. There is a higher need for assistance tools at VOLVO such
aslifting devices due to the size and weight of assembly parts.
Fig. 2. Link analysis results fCombining the ndings from the
observation results and re-sponses from questions 1.3 and 2, HTAs
were created for bothautomotive manufacturers (see Fig. 3a and
b).
Table 6Summary of responses to questions related to Hierarchical
Task Analysis.
Interview question Summ
1.3. Please provide a task level description of the operators
job,i.e. the detail of what they actually do2
Detail
1.4. Does the task that the operators perform vary
considerably,i.e. do they do many different operations, or are they
mostly similar?3
Operaare limat VOL(up toThe ntheir cat theto undcontaiAn
unassemencou
1.5. What is your production rate? i.e. how many
assemblyoperations are required per hour?2
Cycle
2. What are the conditions in which the operators work?E.g.
shift work, noise, lighting, please describe the physicalworkplace
and social environment2
PlantsresponAt VOof fouup to(16 op3.5. Thematic analysis
Table 7 provides a summary of responses from interviewquestions
that were not used in other analysis. The main themesderived from
all shown responses are described below. Bold font isused to
highlight the theme.
The interview revealed that one of the main drawbacks of
thecurrent approach to training is the fact that actual training
timecan be shorter and less extensive than the initial training
plan,resulting in a lack of training for operators. An example of
a
PEL (left) and VOLVO (right).comment that reected this
circumstance was given by a teamleader: One day for training is
good, but we don't have time. Difcultfor new people to deal with
time stress. Quality is most important. It isright people on right
jobs, because some people nd some operation
ary of responses
information is shown in Fig. 3a and b.
tors are required to work at different stations or work cells.
Rotations at OPELited among work stations (up to 16 assembly
operations), whereas rotationsVO could either be among assembly
cells (up to 24 operations) or stations96 assembly
operations).umber of product variants at VOLVO is larger than OPEL
because VOLVO allowsustomers to custom make their orders; some
variants might appear only onceassembly line. Therefore, operators
at VOLVO are required to have an abilityerstand SPRINT i.e. a
paper-based instruction of assembly procedures whichned technical
terminologies and codes that described assembly
procedures.derstanding of technical terminologies and codes allows
Operators to performbly tasks for a new variant at the main line,
even if they had neverntered it before.time at each work station is
1e2 min at OPEL and up to 14 min at VOLVO.
at OPEL and VOLVO are both bright and noisy. At OPEL, each team
leader issible for up to four work stations, with 1e2 operators at
each work station.LVO, each team leader is responsible for two to
four work stations that consistedr assembly cells with 1e2 people
at each cells. A work station at VOLVO contains16 Operators (4e6
Operators at OPEL) and up to 24 different operationserations at
OPEL).
-
ErgS. Hermawati et al. / Applied150very difcult, so they need to
change when it is possible. Trainingprocedure in theory is good,
but sometimes it is not possible to giveenough time for training e
explaining documentation to workers, whythings are important,
safety issues .
Another drawback of the current training approach,
mainlyidentied by engineers (OPEL-manufacturing system
engineer,VOLVO-production engineer, design engineer) is the lack of
con-trol of what is being delivered in training. This was reected
bythe following comment: Operator is taught by an experienced
Fig. 3. a. HTA diagram of an assembly operation at OPEL.onomics
46 (2015) 144e157operator.....The experienced operator will teach
his ownway. You don'treally know if the operator really understands
how to do the job.Different educators teach in different ways and
maybe the wrong way.There are different ways to do a job from its
technical description butno one does it the same way which can lead
to quality issues. Youshould learn the important stuff. Base
knowledge is not being taughtleading to quality issues.....
Most of the stakeholders (OPEL-manufacturing system
engineer,system owner, virtual engineer, operators, team leader,
core team,
b. HTA diagram of an assembly operation at VOLVO.
-
tated
ErgTable 7Summary of responses to questions related to thematic
analysis. Unless otherwise s
Interview questions
1.6. Do any of the assembly tasks pose particular difculties to
the operators? Doany tasks cause frequent problems?
3.1. What are the tasks that the operators need to be trained
for (e.g. ttingcomponents on vehicle assembly lines)?
3.2. How are they currently trained to do these tasks?
3.4. What is your opinion of the training?
3.5. What are the key skills or knowledge being taught?
3.6. What is good about the current approach to the
training?
3.7. What are the difculties with the current approach of the
training, or whatproblems exist?
3.8. Can you suggest how to improve the training?3.9. What do
you consider the most important performance measures and
goals? i.e. i) Human: of the operators' job e.g. time, errors;
ii) Operational: of
S. Hermawati et al. / Appliedlaunch team; VOLVO-virtual
manufacturing engineer, technicalpreparation engineers, team
leaders, pilot plant Team, operators),irrespective whether or not
they have had experienced with gameconsoles, expressed positive
responses towards game-basedvirtual training by stating that it
would be fun, interactive,engaging and might be a good way to get
acceptance. They alsothought that introducing it in a
competitivemanner would possiblydrive operators' efciency although
they emphasised that thetraining solution should make clear
trainees are not being evalu-ated individually and that the system
should be agreed by workcouncils i.e. the organisations (trade
unions) that represent oper-ators at the assembly lines.
Interestingly, the general initial thought on game-based
virtualtraining was that this approach to training should not
replacetraining on pre-series vehicle as operators need to get a
touchand feel for objects' mass and size. This concernwas mostly
basedon stakeholders' experiences that, while everything looks
perfectand easy on paper and computer, difculties in assembling
partsare likely to occur in real-life situations because of various
factorssuch as restrictions imposed by the parts' weight, lack of t
be-tween parts, lack of exibility of parts (i.e. wiring harnesses).
Thus,the know-how on techniques or ways to remediate the
difcultiescould only be obtained by handling real-parts.
Nonetheless, all ofstakeholders viewed game-based virtual training
as a good
the training e.g. operator must complete task correctly XX% of
the time; iii)Business e.g. a timeframe reduction for the
training.
3.11. Does training improve productivity? If so, how?5.1. What
are your initial thoughts about training using virtual systems?
5.2. Do you think this approach could improve training?
5.3. What problems would you anticipate?5.4. What are your
initial thoughts about a game-like system for training?
5.5. What are your thought on the capture and feedback of
assembly issues tothe product designers and manufacturing systems
engineers?
5.6. Do you own, use or have been tried an X360, PS3 or WII
based gameconsole? What is your impression or experience
controlling a game using awireless controller?
5.7. Would you like to be involved in the VISTRA project? I.e.
can we contact youagain to obtain your feedback on the developed
technologies?, the summary applies to both automotive
manufacturers.
Summary
Assembly operations that involve awkward and non-ergonomic
postures werefrequently cited. Another issue is harness wiring as
the assembly instruction isdifcult to understand, especially
related to the cable behaviour.Assembly operations, assembly
sequences and how to understand paper-basedassembly
instruction.Operators at assembly lines are trained by experienced
operators who had beentrained at pilot line. A trainer gives a
demonstration of the assembly operations/sequences, followed by a
trainee performing the operations/sequences.Theoretical background
is only given when there is enough time.There is no standard method
of training. There is not enough time and resources(hardware and
trainers) to deliver the training.How to read paper-based assembly
instruction, parts recognition (partappearance and number), where
and when the part has to go, assembly time,quality check.The
training is done by experienced operators; there is freedom to
askquestions.Lack of training due to time and resources. A lack of
standard on what is beingtrained. The number of variations that
could be learned through training wasreally limited. Only a few
operators mastered assembly operations other thanthose within their
stations/cell.Provide structured training; allow dedicated time and
resources for training.Human: quality of assembly, errors,
resolving problems independentlyOperational: completing the
assembly sequence within the required time
onomics 46 (2015) 144e157 151additional tool to have for better
preparation in knowing the tools,parts, sequences, etc. prior to
hardware training and real produc-tion. Some of the benets which
were identied by stakeholdersinclude: i) helping operators to learn
assembly operations byenabling parts visualisation in 3D rather
than 2D drawings ahead oftheir training on pre-series vehicle; ii)
providing opportunities totrain on more product variants that
otherwise would not bepossible due to limited hardware provision;
iii) reducing cost andtime for training; and iv) providing an
opportunity to involve op-erators in the development of the car at
an earlier stage.
Stakeholders who have experienced using software as part oftheir
roles (OPEL-System Owner, Manufacturing System EngineerManager,
Virtual Engineers, Launch Team, Core Team; VOLVO-Virtual
Manufacturing Engineer, Technical Preparation Engineer,Pilot Plant
Team, Design Engineers) highlighted the need to link avirtual
training with existing software systems. Stakeholderswho have had
experience in using virtual systems (e.g. OPEL-manufacturing system
engineers, virtual engineers, launch team;VOLVO-design engineers,
production engineers, pilot plant team)also stressed the importance
of a realistic virtual training whichrefers to the ability of a
virtual training to represent conditions thatwere encountered in
real assembly line. Some examples that weregiven included: parts'
behaviour, time pressure, force feedbackduring parts' tting,
tolerance issues, etc.
Business: better training prior to launching the product,
quality.
Yes. It reduces the rework due to poor quality.Most stakeholders
had positive views on training using a virtual system.Stakeholders
that have experienced software and virtual system suggestedfactors
that had to be considered in creating a virtual training system.All
of the stakeholders could foresee the benet of a virtual training
system incomplimenting the current hardware-based approach to
training.Acceptance, ease of use, realism, system maintenance and
updates.Nearly all stakeholders were positive about a game-like
system for training.However, the level and type of competition in
the game should be consideredcarefully.Most stakeholders agreed
that capturing the feedback and assembly issueswould be useful.
There was also a suggestion to extend this to capturingknowledge
and the experience of operators.More than half of the stakeholders
had tried game consoles.
All of stakeholders, except one, gave their consent to be
contacted for furtherinvolvement in VISTRA project.
-
ErgWith regards to anticipated problems of game-based
virtualtraining, most of stakeholders (VOLVO-Virtual Manufacturing
En-gineer, Technical Preparation Engineer, Team Leaders,
Operators,Pilot Plant Team; OPEL-Manufacturing System Engineer
Manager,Virtual Engineers, System Owners, Virtual Engineers,
Operators)cited acceptance of the technology as a potential issue,
with ageand technology afnity as the given causes. Two examples
ofcomments from a team leader and an operator provided a
goodsummary for this view: need to relate training to product.
Mostpeople here don't know what an axle is at rst. Might have use
fortraining of variants, if seen in real life rst. Can't
teachweight of part sohave to learn this in real life. Expect big
individual differences inacceptance. People who worked for many
years are doing things theirway and don't like change (Team
Leader); Old ones would notaccept it. Theyre negative. Theyve been
here long. Don't want tochange. Young people would see it as fun
(Operator). Therefore, theyemphasised that the game-based virtual
training should be easy touse and not required training in order to
use it. If separate trainingwas required to interact with the
virtual training, they wereadamant that virtual training might be
too much work to add on totraining on pre-series vehicle. This was
reected by a comment of ateam leader: May be too much work for us,
may be too much workfor workers too, may be need some time to
understand it.
4. Discussion
The results of the data analyses were used in generatingtraining
needs, requirements and potential features of game-basedvirtual
training. It was revealed there were two needs related toassembly
training. The rst was the need for early deployment oftraining.
This need (identied from the time line and thematicanalyses)
emerged from the fact that the current training systemreliance on
the provision of pre-series vehicles resulted in a lack oftraining
for operators. This was because the training was oftendelivered too
close to the start of real production at the assemblyline. The
second need (identied from the link analysis and the-matic
analysis) was standardised content of assembly training.This need
emerged from the fact that the current training systemrelied
heavily on the autonomy of experienced operators tomanage and
deliver training with limited or no possibilities forstakeholders
who have an overall overview of assembly operations(e.g.
manufacturing engineers (OPEL)/production engineers(VOLVO)) to
contribute to or control the training content. Both ofthese needs
could potentially open an opportunity and present astrong case to
support implementation of virtual training forautomotive
manufactures. Provided that digital informationrelated to part
information and assembly procedure is available,virtual training
can be delivered earlier and easily fulls the needfor a
standardised training content and approach. Based on theinterview
results, a sub set of requirements related to what as-sembly
training should contain and how it should be measuredwas
established (see Appendix C). The interview results were alsoused
to identify potentially benecial features of game-basedvirtual
training that could be worthy of investigations in furtherstudies
(see Appendix D). As a result of OPEL and VOLVO differ-ences in
their products' customisation and assembly arrange-ments, there
were observable variations towards trainingrequirements and
potential features of game-based virtualtraining.
Most stakeholders had positive views towards game-basedvirtual
training. This was likely due to game-based virtualtraining being
viewed as more motivating than traditional form oftraining (Gee,
2003; Prensky, 2001). Research has shown thatgame-based virtual
training can provide players with a continuous
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied152variety of emotional conditions
or psychological stimuli which inthe end inuences motivation (Dondi
et al., 2004). However,game-based virtual training is also known to
be ineffective due tovarious factors such as inappropriate
methods/means to assesslearning outcomes and poor contextualisation
of games into ameaningful learning context (Squire, 2004;
Egeneldt-Nielsen,2005). Another aspect which needs to be considered
when intro-ducing game-based virtual training is the negative
effect ofcompetitiveness on the learning process (e.g.
competitivenessresulting in certain individuals to focus on
performance/score atthe expense of learning (Harviainen et al.,
2012), demotivationwhen losing (Moseley et al., 2009)) and
potential ethical/legal is-sues. Prior to the application of
game-based training withinautomotive manufacturers, it is important
that work councils areinvolved to resolve various issues such as:
are scores of trainingmade explicit among operators?, and is
competition amongoperators allowed? As shown in this study,
competitiveness,which is one of attributes of game-based virtual
training, wouldlikely have to be minimised if the work council
objected to theabove questions.
However, the interview results also showed stakeholders'
res-ervations towards replacing existing training with
game-basedvirtual training. Stakeholders asserted that such
training shouldact as a complement to training sessions on
pre-series vehicles.This nding supports other studies on the
ability of virtual envi-ronment to replace real life encounters
(Zhang et al., 2004; Chi-Wai et al., 2011). The most common reason
given was the need fortactile feedback while handling parts and the
associated assemblysteps. Thus, it is likely that, until virtual
training could providesimilar tactile feedback to those in real
life, the role of virtualtraining in automotive manufacturers will
remain complementaryto training sessions on pre-series vehicles.
While this somewhatlimits the current applicability of game-based
virtual training, inthe meantime, game-based virtual training could
be introduced asa preliminary on-site independent training session
that allowstrainees to recognise parts and learn assembly steps
interactivelywhile pre-series vehicles for training purposes are
built. Further-more, as resources for pre-series vehicles training
are likely to belimited due to the time availability of the
trainers and smallnumber of pre-series vehicles, game-based virtual
training couldalso be used simultaneously during the pre-series
vehiclestraining. Thus, pre-series vehicles training will provide
traineeswith the touch and feel and know-how to remediate
possibledifculties while performing assembly in real-life whereas
thegame-based virtual training will teach trainees the assembly
stepsand part recognition. The Technology Acceptance Model
(TAM),which was proposed by Davis (1989) postulated that the
perceivedlevel of usefulness signicantly affects user acceptance of
infor-mation technology design. Therefore, to increase the level of
po-tential users' acceptance of a virtual training within the
context ofautomotive manufacturers, it is essential that potential
users areclearly informed that the role of virtual training is to
complementexisting training on pre-series vehicles and will only
serve as asole means of training when training on pre-series
vehicles is notavailable.
The interview results also revealed stakeholders'
opinionstowards potential features that could likely improve
game-basedvirtual training system's delity i.e. the ability to
capture andtransfer real life situations to a virtual environment.
Their mostcommonly suggested features were compiled under the
categoryof high realism (Appendix D). A further observation of
thepotential features in Appendix D shows that most of the
sug-gested approaches related to high realism category belong
topsychological delity (the degree to which simulated
tasksreproduce behaviours that are required for the actual,
real-world
onomics 46 (2015) 144e157task) with only a few under the
category of physical delity (how
-
Erga virtual environment and its component objects mimic
theappearance of their real-world counterparts) i.e. simulation
ofappearance of parts, simulation of parts behaviour for
exibleparts. A correct blend between the two is crucial for
successfulvirtual training, bearing in mind that psychological
delity isassociated more with positive transfer of training than
physicaldelity and that the two are not necessarily positively
correlated(Stone, 2008). While the compilation of features that
supportreal-life encounters were obtained under the context of
game-based virtual training; some of them would likely be
applicableon other virtual training related to assembly tasks that
aim totransfer a trainee's recognition of product variants' and
parts'appearances and their behaviour from a virtual
environmentsetting to a real-world setting.
This study also identied that, in addition to training assem-bly
operations, stakeholders viewed game-based virtual trainingas
offering the potential to be used as a platform for
knowledgesharing between stakeholders. Wang and Noe (2010)
denedknowledge sharing as: the provision of task information
andknow-how to help others and collaborate with others to
solveproblems, develop new ideas or implement policies or
pro-cedures. It has been shown to contribute to reduced
productioncosts, faster completion of new product development
projects,improvements in team performance, and innovation
capabilities(Wang and Noe, 2010). Studies have shown that a
functionallysegmented organisational structure likely hinders
knowledgesharing across stakeholders within the various functions
(Lam,1996; Tagliaventi and Mattarelli, 2006). Virtual training
canaddress this issue by allowing experienced operators to
sharetheir best practices not only with other operators but also
withengineers who can then decide whether to exploit their
practicesor modify them. A study has shown that workers with
moreexperience are more likely to share their expertise and
havepositive attitudes towards knowledge sharing (Constant et
al.,1994). Possible exploitation of shared best practices can
rangefrom inclusion of best practices as part of work
standardisationto utilisation of best practices to support future
product andprocess design.
As a consequence of the level of operators' computer
self-efcacy, stakeholders desired game-based virtual training
forassembly tasks that can be used without extensive training.While
this view was obtained under the context of game-basedvirtual
training, this attitude would likely be transferable forother
virtual training which involved low-level computer self-efcacy.
Computer self-efcacy (or perceived computer self-efcacy), which
refers to an individual's judgement of his herability to use a
computer (Compeau and Higgins, 1995), andcomputer anxiety are
important determinants in inuencing anindividual perception of a
technology's ease of use and accep-tance (Agarwal et al., 2000).
Existing virtual environment us-ability criteria (Stanney et al.,
2003; Gavish et al., 2011) could beused to assist decisions
regarding user interface design of virtualtraining. It is also
important to avoid the temptation to integratea novel device simply
because it would become an attractive andattention-grabbing gimmick
(Stone, 2008). Difculties withtechnology or interface in which the
training content is deliveredhave been cited as a key frustration
source and a reason for lowcompletion rates in e-learning programs
(Frankola, 2001).Stedmon and Stone (2001) argued that human-centred
knowl-edge and expertise is required to ensure full utilisation
andexploitation of technology-based training. Therefore, the
choiceof interaction devices should take into account end-users
capa-bilities/limitations and the nature of the task to be trained.
Forassembly operations, alternative input devices such as a
visual
S. Hermawati et al. / Appliedgesture interface (O'Hagan et al.,
2002) which allows a user toperform natural movement to select,
move and grab componentsof virtual objects could be one possible
solution. While this paperhas successfully identied potential
benecial features of virtualtraining, it should be noted that the
stakeholders involved in thisstudy had either little or no
experience in actually using virtualtraining and may not be
accurately predicting their actual us-ability with such a
system.
Involvement of the end user representatives to
identifystakeholders was clearly benecial as they were able to
performthis task with ease and accuracy due to familiarity to their
or-ganisations. The use of semi structured interviews was useful as
itensured that important topics were covered while simulta-neously
enabling stakeholders to have the freedom to explain andexpand
their views. In addition, performing interviews with morethan one
stakeholder of the same job function proved to bebenecial as this
facilitated discussion among them during theinterview. A drawback
of this study is the lack of input frompotential end users during
the renement of the trainingrequirement subset and potential
features of game-based virtualtraining, relying instead on end-user
representatives. There is apossibility that misjudgement occurred
while weighing theimportance of each requirement/potential feature.
This could becaused by conicts of interest, especially in
circumstances whererepresentative end users have stakes towards an
issue, and/or therepresentative end users leaning more towards a
managerial thanend user role. The combination of representative end
users andresearchers within this study provides the opportunity for
re-searchers to draw on the contextual insight of representative
endusers. It also enabled representative end users to gain insight
intohow their assumptions or conicts of interest may cause
bias.This approach is mostly suitable when end-users'
involvementduring the renement process is impractical, as is the
case in thisstudy.
This paper found the usefulness of employing various
dataanalysis methods to identify training needs, generate a subset
oftraining requirements and compile potential features for
game-base virtual training environments. The analyses
complementedeach other by providing different insights into the
work organisa-tion and training approaches at both automotive
industries. Thiseventually allowed the identication and extraction
of trainingneeds and requirements from various perspectives. The
graphicalrepresentation that was adopted in link analysis, timeline
analysis,and HTA was found to be advantageous in supporting
vericationby end-user representatives. Thematic analysis, although
highlyresource-demanding in comparison to other analysis
methods,provided more detailed information regarding views of users
onexisting training approaches or a hypothetical game-based
virtualtraining system.
5. Conclusions
This paper has performed a comprehensive user study to informthe
training needs, a subset of training requirements, as well
aspotential benecial features of game-based virtual training for
as-sembly tasks. This study presented a strong case towards the
needfor an implementation of virtual training for assembly
tasks.However, the preference of stakeholders to adopt virtual
training asa complementary training to the existing training on
pre-seriesvehicles should also be considered. Different approaches
in theorganisation of assembly work and business approaches in
meetingcustomer demands have also been shown to have direct impact
ontraining requirements and how game-based virtual training
shouldbe designed. The study beneted from a team that consisted
ofhuman factors researchers, representatives of end users and
system
onomics 46 (2015) 144e157 153developers.
-
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution to
thiswork from all members of the VISTRA project e
ICT-2011-285176,which is funded by the European Commission's 7th
FrameworkProgramme.
Appendix A. Level of education, technology awareness, language
skills and the likelihood in embracing new technology foridentied
stakeholders.
Stakeholders Level of education Technological levels of skills
and awareness Languageskills
OPEL Operator Trained to skilledworkers
Less or low technical afnity, used to work with hardware
German
Team Leader Skilled workersto technician
As above German
Supervisor As above As above GermanLaunch team As above Middle
to high technical afnity, uses software and hardware for his work
German,
EnglishCore team As above As above As aboveCore team/launch team
manager As above As above As aboveManufacturing systems engineer
Engineer High technical afnity, used to work with computers
naturally As aboveManufacturing Systems EngineerManager
Engineer As above As above
System Owner As above As above As above
VOLVO Operators Primary school/high school/College
Differs depending on age, education and personal interest; no
virtual simulationsexperience
Swedish,English
Key Operator e Teacher As above As above As aboveKey Operator e
Hands On As above As above As aboveKey Operator e Safety As above
As above As aboveGroup Manager As above As above As abovePilot
Plant Team As above As above As aboveTeam Leader As above As above
As aboveDesign engineer College Very good knowledge in computer and
virtual simulations As aboveIntroduction Engineers As above Differs
depending on age, education and personal interest; various
virtual
simulation skill levelsAs above
Production Engineers As above Good computer knowledge; different
skill levels of virtual simulation depending oneducation
As above
Technical Preparation Engineer As above As aboveVirtual
Manufacturing Engineer As above Very good knowledge in computer
virtual simulation As above
Appendix B. Stakeholders' roles, responsibilities and current
involvement to training.
Position Roles and responsibilities Current involvement in
training
OPEL Manufacturing SystemsEngineer Manager
To manage the general assembly of a plant i.e. process planning
and virtual engineering. Coordinating manufacturing
systemengineers
Manufacturing SystemsEngineers
To design and produce assembly procedures. Plan and decide
assembly sequences
Virtual Engineers To prepare and alter virtual build (3D CAD
data) when required. Support planning and decision ofassembly
sequences
System Owner Responsible for the overall IT system and
maintenance of database Support and maintain IT system
anddatabase
Launch Team Manager To lead and coordinate launch team
Coordinating launch teamCore Team Manager To lead and coordinate
core team Coordinating core teamCore Team To optimise the assembly
process in terms of cost, quality, time and efciency at each plant.
Improving assembly sequenceLaunch Team The Launch Team or Pilot
Team is an ad-hoc team that is formed during a launch of a new
product and is responsible to: i) provide feedback during
virtual builds; ii) to assist physicalii) train Team Leaders and
support them in
Train Team Leaders at the early stage ofproduct launching
nd their operators (up to 6 team leaders and Oversee training in
his team
rators for up to 4 stations and is responsiblein assembly line
occur/repairs are required;to operator's illness, etc); iii)
providea Supervisor
Trainee during the early stage ofproduct launching and trainer
duringthe later stage of product launching
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015)
144e157154build at the pilot line and provided feedback; itraining
Operators when required.
Supervisors A Supervisor manages a group of team leaders a30
operators).
Team Leaders A Team Leader manages a group of up to six Opeto:
i) train and assist Operators when problemsii) perform assembly
tasks when required (duefeedback regarding quality and performance
toOperators To perform a set of assembly tasks in one or
moreworkstations with a high quality in a givenperiod of time. Job
rotation is performed by assigning an Operator to different work
stations.
Trainee
-
(continued )
Position Roles and responsibilities Current involvement in
training
VOLVO Design Engineers To design parts of new or modied products
and develop assembly instructions Supporting assembly
sequenceplanning
Production Engineers/Introduction Engineer
To create/modify paper-based assembly instruction when a new
product is developed orchanges in the plant occur (SPRINT) and
identify best practices.
Planning and deciding assemblysequences
Virtual ManufacturingEngineers
To manage, support and provide overview of ways to work with
virtual systems. N/A
Technical PreparationEngineer
To coordinate and steer of all product changes to the
manufacturing line. Improving assembly sequence
Team Leaders A Team Leader manages a group of up to 4 stations
(up to 6 Operators per work station). ATeam Leader appoints a
number of Operators in his team as Key Operators who will
trainoperators in his team and reports any unresolved issues to the
Group Manager whoforwards the information to the Production
Engineer.
Oversee training in his team
Pilot Plant Team To participate in virtual and physical builds
and to provide training for operators fromassembly line on a
new/update vehicle built.
Train key operators at the early stage ofproduct launching (at
the pilot line)
Operators/KeyOperators
Operators: To perform a set of assembly tasks in one or more
work stations with a highquality in a given period of time. There
are up to 4 work cells in each work station. Jobrotation is
performed by assigning Operators to either different work stations
or work cells.Key Operators: An experienced Operator that is
appointed by a Team Leader to assumeadditional roles. There are
three types of Key Operator: i) Teacher e train Operators in
themain line; ii) Hand One to resolve assembly problems at the
Adjustment station; iii) Safety-to enforce safety within their
team.
Key Operators e trainee at the pilot lineand trainer at assembly
lineOperators e Trainee
Appendix C. Rened elicited user requirements for assembly
tasks.
Theme Sub theme(s) Stakeholders Importance Identied from
Key skills/knowledgeincluded
Assembly sequence, parts number andappearance, tools, end
location of parts/tools, critical part of the
assemblyoperations
OPEL-Team Leaders, ManufacturingSystem Engineers, Core Team;
VOLVO-Production Engineers, Pilot Plant Team
High Hierarchical Task Analysis
Self-inspection of own work Medium Hierarchical Task AnalysisHow
to read and understand SPRINT-forVOLVO
Medium Hierarchical Task Analysis
Cause and effect of assembly operation Medium Hierarchical Task
AnalysisStart locations of parts/tools High Hierarchical Task
AnalysisTool and lifting device handling Medium Hierarchical Task
Analysis
Performancemeasures
Cost and time to execute training All High Thematic
AnalysisQuality (number of correct assemblysequence)
High Thematic Analysis
Time (performing correct sequencewithin the time given)
High Thematic Analysis
Appendix D. Suggested potentially benecial or worthy
investigation features for virtual training.
Theme Sub theme(s) Stakeholders Importance Feasibility Identied
from
Capture and Feedback ofassembly issues
Yes All High High Link AnalysisShould also be used to
captureknowledge/experience of Operators
Medium High Link Analysis
Relationship with existing ITsystem
Should allow linkage to enterprise dataof the existing IT
system
All, except Team Leadersand Operators
High High Thematic analysis
User Interface Easy to use All High High Thematic AnalysisNo
additional training is required High High
Access to the system Local (Operators: main line) Team Leaders,
Operators High High Thematic AnalysisGame like approach Yes All
High High Thematic AnalysisRelationship with current
training on pre-series vehicleUsed in conjunction with training
onpre-series vehicle (for new product)
All High High Timeline Analysis
Used to train new variants ormodication of existing
productswithout pre-series vehicle
High High Timeline Analysis
High realism Simulate parts behaviour for exibleparts e.g.
wiring
OPEL (System Owner,Manufacturing SystemEngineers,
DesignEngineers, VirtualEngineers, Launch Team,Core Team), VOLVO
(Virtual
High High Thematic Analysis
Simulate assembly process in differentworkstations or work
cells
High High Thematic Analysis,Hierarchical TaskAnalysis
Simulate appearance of parts High High Thematic Analysis
(continued on next page)
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157
155
-
olde
actutionEngeam
ead
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Erg156References
Abate, A.F., Guida, M.G., Leoncini, P., Nappi, M., Ricciardi,
S., 2009. A haptic basedapproach to virtual training for aerospace
industry. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 20,318e325.
Abe, N., Zheng, J.Y., Tanaka, K., Taki, H., 1996. A training
system using virtual ma-chines for teaching
assembling/disassembling operation to novices. In: Pro-ceedings of
1996 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, andCybernetics,
vol. 3, pp. 2096e2101.
Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., Stair, R.M., 2000. Research
report: the evolvingrelationship between general and specic
computer efcacy-an empiricalassessment. Inform. Syst. Res. 11 (4),
418e430.
Albinsson, P.-A., Morin, M., Fransson, J., 2003. Finding
information needs in militarycommand and control systems using
exploratory tools for communicationanalysis. In: Proceedings of the
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society AnnualMeeting, vol. 47, pp.
1918e1922 (17).
Amiri, Dezfooli, Mortezaei, 2012. Designing and ergonomics
backpack for studentaged 7-9 with user centred design approach.
Work J. Prevent. Assess. Rehabil.41 (1), 1193e1201.
Anastassova, M., Burkhardt, J.-M., 2009. Automotive technicians'
training as acommunity-of-practice: Implications for the design of
an augmented realityteaching aid. Appl. Ergon. 40 (4), 713e721.
Artman, H., Zallh, S., 2005. Finding a way to usability:
procurement of a taxidispatch system. Cogn. Technol. Work 7 (3),
141e155.
Atkinson, C., Eldabi, T., Paulm, R.J., Pouloudi, A., 2001.
Investigating integrated socio-technical approaches to health
informatics. In: Proceedings of the 34th HawaiiInternational
Conference on System Sciences.
Barnett, B., Helbing, K., Hancock, G., Heininger, R., Perrin,
B., 2000. An evaluation ofthe training effectiveness of virtual
environments. In: Proceedings of theInterservice/Industry Training,
Simulation & Education Conference.
Beal, S.A., 2009. Instructor-Facilitated vs. Stand-alone
Tactical Game Training. USArmy Research Institute for the
Behavioural and Social Sciences, Arlington.
Bluemel, E., Hintze, A., Schulz, T., Schumann, M., Stuering, S.,
2003. Virtual envi-ronment for the training of maintenance and
service. In: Proceedings of the2003 Winter Simulation Conference,
pp. 2001e2007.
Boud, A.C., Haniff, D.J., Baber, C., Steiner, S.J., 1999.
Virtual reality and augmentedreality as a training tool for
assembly tasks. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Inter-national
Conference on Information, pp. 32e36.
Brooks, A., 1998. Ergonomics approaches to ofce layout and space
planning. Fa-
(continued )
Theme Sub theme(s) Stakeh
ManufProducDesignPlant T
Simulate multiple Operators (up to 2e6Operators) e for
VOLVOSimulate tolerances
Simulate effect of weight and centre ofgravitySimulate force
feedbackAccommodate feel of the partSimulate time pressure on the
main line(OPEL)
Team L
Simulate moving assembly line duringassembly operations
(OPEL)cilities 16 (3/4), 73e78.Brough, J.E., Schwartz, M., Gupta,
S.K., Anand, D.K., Kavetsky, R., Pettersen, R., 2007.
Towards the development of a virtual environment-based training
system formechanical assembly operations. Virtual Real. 11,
89e206.
Chapanis, A., 1959. Research Techniques in Human Engineering.
John Hopkins Press,Baltimore.
Chi-Wai, R.K., So-Ning, T.M., Wing-Kuen, K.L., Hui, S.S.-C.,
Ka-Shun, P.W., Wong, C.C.-K., 2011. Can mobile virtual tness apps
replace human tness trainer?. In:Proceedings of 5th International
Conference on New Trends in InformationScience and Service Science,
pp. 56e63.
Coleman, G.W., Gibson, L., Hanson, V.L., Bobrowicz, A., McKay,
A., 2010. Engagingthe disengaged: how do we design technology for
digitally excluded olderadults. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM
Conference on Designing InteractiveSystems, pp. 175e178.
Colquitt, J.A., LePine, J.A., Noe, R.A., 2000. Toward an
integrative theory of trainingmotivation: a meta-analytic path
analysis of 20 years of research. J. Appl. Psy-chol. 85,
678e707.
Compeau, D.R., Higgins, C.A., 1995. Computer self-efcacy:
development of ameasure and initial test. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 19,
189e211.
Constant, D., Kiesler, S., Sproul, L., 1994. What's mine is
ours, or is it? A study ofattitudes about information sharing.
Inform. Syst. Res. 5 (4), 400e421.
Corbeil, P., 1999. Learning from the children: practical and
theoretical reections onplaying and learning. Simul. Gaming 30,
163e180.Crosby, B., 1992. Stakeholder Analysis: a Vital Tool for
Strategic Managers. USAID,Washington DC.
Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use
and user acceptance ofinformation technology. MIS Q. 13 (3),
319e339.
Dondi, C., Edvinson, B., Moretti, M., 2004. Why choose a game
for improvinglearning and teaching process? In: Pivec, M., Koubek,
A., Dondi, C. (Eds.),Guidelines for Game-Based Learning. KM-Druck,
Germany, pp. 20e76.
Egeneldt-Nielsen, S., 2005. Beyond Edutainment: Exploring the
Educational Po-tential of Computer Games. Doctoral thesis.
IT-University of Copenhagen,Denmark.
Engel, K., Langkamer, K.L., Estock, J.L., Orvis, K.L., Salas,
E., Bedwell, W., Conkey, C.,2009. Investigating the effectiveness
of game-based approaches to training. In:Proceedings of the 31st
Annual Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation andEducation
Conference.
Frankola, K., 2001. Why online learners drop out. Workforce 80
(10), 52e60.Franzosi, R., 2004. Content analysis. In: Lewis-Beck,
M.S., Bryman, A., Liao, T.F. (Eds.),
The Sage Encyclopaedia of Social Science Research Methods, vol.
1. SAGE Pub-lications, Inc., California, pp. 186e189.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., Driskell, J.E., 2002. Games, motivation
and learning: a researchand practice model. Simul. Gaming 33 (4),
441e467.
Gavish, N., Gutierrez, T., Webel, S., Rodriguez, J., Tecchia,
F., 2011. Design guidelines forthe development of virtual reality
and augmented reality training system formaintenance andassembly
tasks. In:Proceedings ofBIOWebofConferences, vol.1.
Gee, J.P., 2003. What Video Games Have to Teach Us about
Learning and Literacy.Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Gerbaud, S., Mollet, N., Ganier, F., Arnaldi, B., Tisseau, J.,
2008. GVT: a platform tocreate virtual environments for procedural
training. In: Proceedings of 2008IEEE Virtual Reality
Conference.
Gopher, E., Weil, M., Bareket, T., 1994. Transfer of a skill
from a computer gametraining to ight. Hum. Fact. 36 (3),
387e405.
Gutierrez, T., Rodriguez, J., Velaz, Y., Casado, A., Suescun,
A., Sanchez, E.J.,2010. IMA-VR: a multimodal virtual training
system for skills transfer inindustrial maintenance and assembly
tasks. In: Proceedings of 18th IEEInternational Symposium on Robot
and Human Interactive Communica-tion, pp. 428e433.
Hajarnavis, V., 2012. Process automation in the automotive
industry. In: Liptak, B.G.(Ed.), Process Software and Digital
Networks. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL,pp. 809e820.
Harviainen, J.T., Lainema, T., Saarinen, E., June 2012.
Player-reported impediments togame-base learning. In: Proceedings
of 2012 Digra Nordic. University of Tam-
rs Importance Feasibility Identied from
ring Engineers,Engineers,ineers, Pilot)
High Medium Hierarchical TaskAnalysis
Medium (VOLVO), Low(OPEL)
Low Thematic Analysis
High Very low Thematic Analysis
High Very low Thematic AnalysisHigh Very low Thematic
Analysis
ers, Operators High High Thematic Analysis
Medium (OPEL), Low(VOLVO)
Low Thematic Analysis
onomics 46 (2015) 144e157pere, Tampere, Finland. Available at:
http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/12168.02279.pdf
(accessed 10.04.14.).
Jong, M.S.Y., Shang, J., Lee, F., Lee, J.H.M., 2008. Harnessing
computer games ineducation. Int. J. Dist. Educ. Technol. 6,
1e9.
Kirwan, B., Ainsworth, L.K., 1992. A Guide to Task Analysis.
Taylor & Francis, London.Krammer, P., Neef, D., Plapper, P.,
2011. Advanced manufacturing technologies for
general assembly. In: Proceedings of the SAE 2011World Congress
& Exhibition.Kraus, D.C., Gramopadhye, A.K., 2001. Effect of
team training on aircraft mainte-
nance technicians: computer-based training versus
instructor-based training.Int. J. Indust. Ergon. 27, 141e157.
Lam, A., 1996. Engineers, management and work organization: a
comparativeanalysis of engineers' work roles in British and
Japanese electronic rms.J. Manag. Stud. 33 (2), 183e212.
Lapan, S.D., Quartaroli, M.T., Riemer, F.J., 2012. Qualitative
Research: an Introductionto Methods and Designs. Jossey Bass, San
Francisco.
Larsen, C.R., Soerensenm, J.L., Grantcharov, T.P., Dalsgaard,
T.D., Schroeder, T.V.,Ottesen, B.S., 2009. Effect of virtual
training on laparoscopic surgery: rando-mised controlled trial. Br.
Med. J. 338.
Leger, P., 2006. Using a simulation game approach to teach
enterprise resourceplanning concepts. J. Inform. Syst. Educ. 17,
441e447.
Leonard, V.K., Jacko, J.A., Yi, J.S., Saintfort, F., 2006. Human
factors and ergonomicsmethods. In: Salvendy, G. (Ed.), Handbook of
Human Factors and Ergonomics.John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
Jersey, pp. 292e321.
-
Lili, Y., Xueqing, L., Jiayao, C., 2009. Research and
implementation of virtual as-sembly training system. In:
Proceedings of 2009 IEEE International Symposiumon IT in Medicine
& Education, vol. 1, pp. 641e647.
Lin, F., Ye, L., Duffy, V.G., Su, C.-J., 2002. Developing
virtual environments for in-dustrial training. Inf. Sci. 140,
153e170.
Maguire, M., Bevan, N., 2002. User requirements analysis: a
review of supportingmethods. In: Proceedings of IFIP 17th World
Computer Congress, pp. 133e148.
Minocha, S., Reeves, A.J., 2010. Design of learning spaces in 3D
virtual worlds: anempirical investigation of Second Life. Learn.
Media Technol. 35 (2), 111e137.
Moseley, A., Whitton, N., Culver, J., Piatt, K., 2009.
Motivation in alternative realitygaming environments and
implication for education. In: Proceedings of the 3rdEuropean
Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 279e286.
Neary, H.T., Sinclair, M.A., 1998. A case study of job design in
a steel plant. In:Hanson, M.A. (Ed.), Contemporary Ergonomics.
Taylor and Francis, London,pp. 218e222.
Nemeth, C., 2005. Human Factors Methods for Design. CRC Press
LLC, Florida.Neuman, W.P., 2004. Production Ergonomics: Identifying
and Managing Risks in the
Design of High Performance Work System. Doctoral thesis. Lund
TechnicalUniversity, Lund.
Nielsen, J., 1993. Usability Engineering. Academic Press, San
Diego.Nof, S.Y., Wilhelm, W.E., Warnecke, H.J., 1997. Industrial
Assembly, rst ed. Chapman
& Hall, London.O'Hagan, R.G., Zelinsky, A., Rougeaux, S.,
2002. Visual gesture interfaces for virtual
environments. Interact. Comput. 14, 231e250.Oliveira, D.M., Cao,
S.C., Hermida, X.F., Rodrguez, F.M., 2007. Virtual reality
system
for industrial training. In: Proceedings of 2007 IEEE
International Symposiumon Industrial Electronics, pp.
1715e1720.
Peniche, A., Diaz, C., Trefftz, H., Paramo, G., 2011. An
immersive virtual reality trainingsystem for mechanical assembly.
In: Proceedings of the 4th International Con-ference on
Manufacturing Engineering, Quality and Production Systems.
Prensky, M., 2001. Digital Game-based Learning. McGraw-Hill, New
York.Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R., Alibali, M.W., 2001.
Developing conceptual under-
standing and procedural skill in mathematics: an iterative
process. J. Educ.Psychol. 93 (2), 346e362.
Sawasdchai, N., Poggenpohl, S., 2002. User purposes and
information-seeking be-haviours in we-based media: a user centred
approach to information design onwebsites. In: Proceedings of the
DIS'02 Conference on Designing InteractiveSystem: Processes,
Practices, Methods and Techniques, pp. 201e212.
Seymour, N.E., Gallagher, A.G., Roman, S.A., O'Brien, M.K.,
Bansal, V.K.,Andersen, D.K., Satava, R.M., 2002. Virtual reality
training improves operatingroom performance. Annu. Surg. 236 (4),
458e464.
Squire, K., 2004. Replaying History: Learning World History
through Playing Civi-lization III. Doctoral thesis. University of
Indiana, USA.
Stanney, K.M., Mollaghasemi, M., Reeves, L., Breaux, R.,
Graeber, D.A., 2003. Usabilityengineering of virtual environments
(VEs): identifying multiple criteria thatdrive effective VE system
design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 58, 447e481.
Stanton, N.A., 2004. The psychology of task analysis today. In:
Diaper, D.,Stanton, N.A. (Eds.), The Handbook of Task Analysis for
Human-ComputerInteraction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp.
569e584.
Stedmon, A.W., Stone, R.J., 2001. Re-viewing reality: human
factors of synthetictraining environments. Int. J. Hum. Comput.
Stud. 55, 675e698.
Stone, R.J., 2008. Human Factors Guidelines for Interactive 3D
Game-based Training
Sys-temsDesign.UniversityofBirmingham.http://www.hdtc.com/
(accessed23.02.12.).
Tagliaventi, M.R., Mattarelli, E., 2006. The role of networks of
practices, valuesharing and operational proximity in knowledge ows
between professionalgroups. Hum. Relat. 59 (3), 291e319.
Thorstensson, M., Axelsson, M., Morin, M., Jenvald, J., 2001.
Monitoring and analysisof command post communication in rescue
operation. Saf. Sci. 39 (1), 51e60.
Topolski, R., Leibrecht, B., Cooley, S., Rossi, N., Lampton, D.,
Knerr, B., 2010. Impact ofGame-based Training on Classroom Learning
Outcomes. US Army ResearchInstitute for the Behavioural and Social
Sciences, Arlington.
Vora, J., Nair, S., Gramopadhye, A.K., Duchowski, A.T., Melloy,
B.J., Kanki, B., 2002.Using virtual reality technology for aircraft
visual inspection training: presenceand comparison studies. Appl.
Ergon. 33 (6), 559e570.
Wang, Q.H., Li, J.R., 2004. A desktop VR prototype for
industrial training applica-tions. Virtual Real. 7, 187e197.
Wang, S., Noe, R.A., 2010. Knowledge sharing: a review and
directions for futureresearch. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 20,
115e131.
Webel, S., Bockholt, U., Engelke, T., Gavish, N., Olbrich, M.,
Preusche, C., 2013. Anaugmented reality training platform for
assembly and maintenance skills.Robot. Auton. Syst. 61 (4),
398e403.
Xia, P., Lopes, A.M., Restivo, M.T., Yao, Y., 2012. A new type
haptics-based virtualenvironment system for assembly training of
complex products. Int. J. Adv.Manuf. Technol. 58 (1), 379e396.
Zhang, D., Zhao, J.L., Zhou, L., Nunamaker, J.F., 2004. Can
e-learning replace class-room learning? Commun. ACM 47 (5),
75e79.
S. Hermawati et al. / Applied Ergonomics 46 (2015) 144e157
157
Understanding the complex needs of automotive training at final
assembly lines1 Introduction2 Methods2.1 Participating companies2.2
Interviewees2.3 The semi-structured interview and observation2.4
Data analysis2.5 Identification of training needs, training
requirements and potential features of game-based virtual
training
3 Results3.1 Stakeholder analysis3.2 Timeline analysis3.3 Link
analysis3.4 Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA)3.5 Thematic
analysis
4 Discussion5 ConclusionsAcknowledgementsAppendix A Level of
education, technology awareness, language skills and the likelihood
in embracing new technology for ide ...Appendix B Stakeholders'
roles, responsibilities and current involvement to
training.Appendix C Refined elicited user requirements for assembly
tasks.Appendix D Suggested potentially beneficial or worthy
investigation features for virtual training.References