|•||availability at the site of maintenance|
|•||flexible information detail and complexity, according to user and task|
|•||capability to provide graphical as well as alphanumeric information|
|•||on-line access to parts stores, production records etc.|
|•||robustness, durability and, preferably, portability (mobility)|
|•||systems must provide means for intra-team, inter-team, and inter-shift communication|
|•||systems must be a resource supporting team decision making or collective problem solving|
|•||systems must support teams as production units and in team development|
|•||systems must be a mechanism for collating "notes of good practice"|
Wilson remarks that: regardless technology selected, motivation to use new types of equipment is relying on the devices' ability to "out-perform" old tools, e.g. paper, pencil, logbooks, charts, and dictaphones.
Wilson's findings matches well the findings of Stahre ( 1995a, 1995b) and Johansson ( 1997, 1999) with regards to user requirements among operators and maintainers in advanced manufacturing systems. The authors base their findings on case studies performed in operative CIM environments, mainly in automotive and mechanical industries. The theoretical framework for analysis is based on cognitive sciences, i.e. the three generic levels of cognitive behaviour suggested by Rasmussen ( 1983), and also on situation awareness theories ( Endsley, 1995). Further, Sheridan ( 1987)human supervisory control concept provides a core for development of tools for the manufacturing system operator of the future.