The cognitive work analysis framework continues to attract increasing attention from the human factors and ergonomics community. Conversely, hierarchical task analysis has been, and remains, the most popular of all human factors and ergonomics methods. This article compares the two approaches in terms of their theoretical underpinning, methodological approach and potential contributions to system design and evaluation. To do this, recent analyses, involving both approaches, of a military rotary wing mission planning software tool are compared and contrasted in terms of their methodological procedure and analysis outputs. The findings indicate that, despite the very different theoretical and methodological nature of the two approaches, and also the entirely different analyses derived, the two methods provide highly complementary outputs. In conclusion, it is argued that there is benefit in applying both approaches to inform the design and/or evaluation of the same product or system.Keywords: cognitive work analysis; hierarchical task analysis; mission planning; human factors methods
IntroductionOut of the abundance of human factors and cognitive engineering methods available, hierarchical task analysis (HTA; Annett et al. 1971) and cognitive work analysis (CWA; Vicente 1999a) are arguably the most popular. The former represents the traditional task analytic approach; the latter represents the more modern system design framework. Both approaches have distinct theoretical underpinnings and approach the analysis of systems in quite different ways, yet they are often discussed in the same breath. It is important to clarify what the theoretical and methodological differences between the two are and, even more so, to identify if, and how, the two approaches can be used in tandem during complex system design and evaluation efforts (Hajdukiewicz and Vicente 2004). This article presents a comparison of the two approaches in terms of their theoretical underpinning, methodological procedure and contribution to the system design life cycle. To do this the methods are first discussed in terms of their theoretical underpinning and methodological nature, following which recent HTA and CWA analyses of a military rotary wing mission planning system (MPS) software tool are compared and contrasted.