SIST-TP CEN ISO/TR 9241-810:2022

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-julij-2022
Ergonomija medsebojnega vpliva človek-sistem - 810. del: Robotski, inteligentni in
avtonomni sistemi (ISO/TR 9241-810:2020)
Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 810: Robotic, intelligent and autonomous
systems (ISO/TR 9241-810:2020)
Ergonomie de l'interaction homme-système - Partie 810: Titre manque (ISO/TR 9241-
810:2020)
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CEN ISO/TR 9241-810:2022
ICS:
13.180 Ergonomija Ergonomics
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

CEN ISO/TR 9241-810
TECHNICAL REPORT
RAPPORT TECHNIQUE
April 2022
TECHNISCHER BERICHT
ICS 13.180
English Version
Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 810:
Robotic, intelligent and autonomous systems (ISO/TR
9241-810:2020)
Ergonomie de l'interaction homme-système - Partie
810: Titre manque (ISO/TR 9241-810:2020)

This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 13 April 2022. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 122.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and
United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2022 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. CEN ISO/TR 9241-810:2022 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
European foreword . 3

European foreword
The text of ISO/TR 9241-810:2020 has been prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 159
"Ergonomics” of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and has been taken over as
which is held by DIN.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any feedback and questions on this document should be directed to the users’ national standards body.
A complete listing of these bodies can be found on the CEN website.
Endorsement notice
The text of ISO/TR 9241-810:2020 has been approved by CEN as CEN ISO/TR 9241-810:2022 without
any modification.
TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 9241-810
First edition
2020-08
Ergonomics of human-system
interaction —
Part 810:
Robotic, intelligent and autonomous
systems
Reference number
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
©
ISO 2020
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
© ISO 2020
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting
on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .v
Introduction .vi
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms . 2
5 Report contents and structure . 2
6 Concepts . 3
6.1 General . 3
6.2 IT concepts . 4
6.2.1 Intelligent agent . . . 4
6.2.2 Autonomous agent . 4
6.2.3 Machine learning . 4
6.2.4 Autonomous robot . 4
6.2.5 ISO robot . 5
6.3 Ergonomics concepts . 5
6.3.1 Ergonomics concern for RIA systems . 5
6.3.2 Design approaches for RIA systems . 5
6.3.3 Perceived autonomy . 6
6.3.4 Control loop . 6
7 Categories of human-RIA system issues . 7
7.1 General . 7
7.2 RIA system — effects on a human . 7
7.3 Human-RIA system interaction . 8
7.4 Multiple RIA systems interacting — effects on humans . 8
7.5 RIA system — organizational . 8
7.6 Social/cultural/ethical . 8
7.7 Emergent societal . 8
8 Ergonomics and RIA systems . 9
8.1 General . 9
8.2 Benefits of ergonomics applied to RIA systems . 9
8.3 Hazards if ergonomics is not applied to RIA systems.10
9 Areas of RIA systems addressed by ergonomics standards .11
9.1 General .11
9.2 Principles of ergonomics .11
9.3 Human-centred design process .12
9.4 Interaction and interface .12
9.5 Accessibility .13
9.6 Workspace and workload .14
9.7 Context and environment .14
10 Changes in ergonomics standards required to better address RIA system technology .15
10.1 General .15
10.2 Type of guidance needed and for which readerships .15
10.3 Transparent interaction and transparent users .16
10.4 Safety aspects of RIA systems .17
Annex A (informative) Human-RIA system issues .19
Annex B (informative) Examples/case studies of ergonomics issues for RIA systems .25
Annex C (informative) Development of ergonomics .34
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Annex D (informative) Changes required to ergonomics standards .37
Annex E (informative) Approach followed to develop this report .48
Bibliography .50
iv © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www .iso .org/
iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 159, Ergonomics, Subcommittee SC 4,
Ergonomics of human-system interaction.
A list of all parts in the ISO 9241 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www .iso .org/ members .html.
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Introduction
Product development of systems with robot, intelligent and autonomous characteristics is rapidly
progressing. Given the human-system issues of such systems, timely guidance covering these issues
is necessary to help all sectors of industry to design, field and operate first-time quality robotic,
intelligent, autonomous (RIA) systems, and build appropriate trust in products and services that use
these systems.
There is an urgent need for a Technical Report from ISO explaining the existing, emerging and potential
human-system issues and consequences for use and users associated with systems that have robot,
intelligent and autonomous characteristics. This document explains the existing, emerging and
potential human-system issues and consequences for use and users associated with systems that have
RIA characteristics. It identifies the potential risks and priorities for standardization to address these
issues. Solutions will be the subject of future standards.
This document reviews the ergonomics for a range of RIA systems. It describes the human-system
issues that should be considered in the application of these technologies and identification of priorities
for future standardization work. The purpose of this study is to identify and explore the ramifications
of a categories of issues involving RIA systems that suggest a need to reset the boundaries of what is
called ergonomics. The conclusion is that to make an ergonomic RIA system, the practice of ergonomics
will need to do more, working together with new disciplines, and can require new tools, methods and
approaches to support the design and integration of these types of systems into working environments
and organizations. Ergonomics will also need to identify relevant research from a wide variety of
scientific disciplines, as well as conducting our own research to ensure we have a robust evidence base
to guide the development of these systems.
The paradigm behind human-systems interaction standards so far has been that of tool use. The
ISO 9241 series is for interactive tools and the physical environment within which they are used.
RIA systems necessitate a new paradigm. Agents developed using these technologies will be more
connected, complex, probabilistic and non-deterministic, social, and augment human capabilities
well beyond merely replacing physical work. Interaction with these agents can become a relationship,
their interface a personality, and users and agents can form complex human-machine teams, working
together towards a shared goal.
The evolution of RIA systems will significantly alter the nature of tasks users perform. The design of
work will likewise be altered. Applications of RIA systems represent a significantly more complete
and impactful replacement of human activity than has been seen with any other form of technological
labour-saving device. For example, when working with another person on a common task, how do you
diagnose a failure state in your interactions? How are you to interpret the off-nominal behaviour of a
team member? How are you to interpret and predict the behaviour of other people who are operating
within the same environment as you are but are otherwise not directly coordinating activity? What
is the safe state you can fall back on in the event of a failure in your interaction with another person?
Now, replace that person or team member with an RIA system. The changes in the nature of tasks and
the design of work to accommodate the complex, social human-machine interaction of an RIA system is
fundamental for ergonomics, but will require that the ergonomics community adapt its best practices
and expand into areas of psychology and sociology that few ergonomists deal with on a regular basis.
The focus of this document is breadth not depth, and issues not answers. The emphasis is on describing
general issues and the consequences of not addressing them, even though not all will/can be relevant to
all types or applications of RIA systems covered by this document. But be sure that this is the case for
your application, and that you take account of the categories of issue and context that do apply.
vi © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Ergonomics of human-system interaction —
Part 810:
Robotic, intelligent and autonomous systems
1 Scope
This document addresses:
— physically embodied RIA systems, such as robots and autonomous vehicles with which users will
physically interact;
— systems embedded within the physical environment with which users do not consciously interact,
but which collect data and/or modify the environment within which people live or work such as
smart building and, mood-detection;
— intelligent software tools and agents with which users actively interact through some form of user
interface;
— intelligent software agents which act without active user input to modify or tailor the systems to
the user's behaviour, task or some other purpose, including providing context specific content/
information, tailoring adverts to a user based on information about them, user interfaces that adapt
to the cognitive or physiological state, "ambient intelligence";
— the effect on users resulting from the combined interaction of several RIA systems such as conflicting
behaviours between the RIA systems under the same circumstances;
— the complex system-of-systems and sociotechnical impacts of the use of RIA systems, particularly
on society and government.
This document is not an exploration of the philosophical, ethical or political issues surrounding robotics,
artificial intelligence, machine learning, and intelligent machines or environments. For matters of
ethics and political issues, see standards such as BS 8611 and IEC P7000. However, this document does
identify where and why ethical issues need to be taken into account for a wide range of systems and
contexts, and as such it provides information relevant to the broader debate regarding RIA systems.
This document has a broader focus than much of the early work on autonomy that relates to the
automation of control tasks and mechanization of repetitive physical or cognitive tasks, and centres on
levels of automation.
Although this document addresses a wide range of technology applications, and sector and stakeholder
views on the issues, the treatment of each can be incomplete due to the diverse and increasingly varied
applications of RIA systems.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
No terms and definitions are listed in this document.
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at http:// www .electropedia .org/
4 Symbols and abbreviated terms
AI artificial intelligence
CRM crew resource management
DM decision making
GPS global positioning system
HCD human-centred design
HCI human-computer interaction
HCQ human-centred quality (see ISO 9241-220)
HF human factors
IA intelligent agent
ICT information and communications technology
IVR interactive voice response
ML machine learning
OODA observe–orient–decide–act
RIA robotic, intelligent, autonomous
RPA robotic process automation
UxV unmanned (where x = space, air, ground, surface, sub-surface) vehicle
UI user interface
UX user experience
5 Report contents and structure
The target audience for this document is decision-makers, designers and engineers who would benefit
from the consideration of human-systems issues of RIA systems. Futurists, researchers, technology
developers, regulators and legislators can also find this document useful.
The target audience for this document is the standards development community and ergonomists
involved in developing, acquiring and/or commissioning RIA systems.
This document is based on an analysis that projects forwards from current applications of technology
to more connected, complex, probabilistic and non-deterministic, social systems/entities/agents, and
human augmentation. Social in this context also includes physical interaction. Applications considered
include robots, intelligent systems and environments such as smart buildings that control or otherwise
influence an environment, and autonomous agents/systems. The analysis considers views and concerns
of: RIA system users and stakeholders from various industry sectors regarding the impact on future
job roles, human tasks and organizational structures, safety, system trust, rights and culture. The
2 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
limits for ergonomics are considered together with an initial identification of potential areas of change.
A broad range of published sources and expertise was drawn on during the creation of this document. It
includes the futurology literature, regulatory work, input from astute observers and reports of current
and planned products. Extensive discussion and analysis by the project team is also included.
— Clause 6 discusses relevant concepts in AI and ergonomics.
— Clause 7 describes the groups of identified issues.
— Clause 8 describes the hazards and possible harm that can result if Ergonomics is not applied.
— Clause 9 describing how various existing ergonomics standards address the issues.
— Clause 10 describes the changes in ergonomics standards required to better address RIA systems
technology.
Annexes A to E are written for:
— the ergonomics community — to give their input to RIA system projects/discussions face validity,
provide food for thought regarding how ergonomics can be applied/should evolve/needs to be
supported, gives a framework for issues to raise if involved with such projects;
— those developing, acquiring, commissioning or approving RIA systems — providing a set of
considerations and potential issues to think about for those in any executive, project, design or legal
and regulatory role;
— developers and users of standards who need to understand how the ergonomics aspects of RIA
systems affect their activities — alerting those who have not so far included human or ergonomic
requirements in relation to RIA systems in their domains to new or emergent human-system issues
or needs.
Annex A elaborates the human-system issues within each category. Annex B presents examples of RIA
systems, illustrating the issues, hazards, and ergonomics considerations. Annex C provides a two-stage
review of the areas in which ergonomics needs to develop to address these issues. Annex D contains
a more detailed description of the analysis and notes on the necessary extensions to ergonomics and
standards. Annex E describes the analysis on which this document is based.
6 Concepts
6.1 General
There are many technologies used to implement RIA systems, various combinations of which are
employed across a huge range of applications with which humans will interact. This has led to a general
lack of agreement and precision in definitions and terminology, including those within standards
where RIA system technologies and applications are defined in various ways according to specific
requirements of the given context. As it is not possible to fully predict the different ways in which
such technologies will be developed and applied in the future, this document does not refer to existing
definitions from other standards. Instead, this document uses generic and commonly used terms
because, although these can still invoke different individual interpretations and opinions, they are
more generally and widely understood.
This document uses the most common generic terms in the title (robotic, intelligent, autonomous) with
the understanding that they can trigger a range of associations and differences of opinion. These are not
conceptually independent. Furthermore, this document focusses on their use by humans as collective
descriptions for characteristics of types of intelligent agent. These agents are often qualified as to type
or context of use (for example, autonomous car, intelligent building, care robot).
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
6.2 IT concepts
6.2.1 Intelligent agent
An intelligent agent is an entity which observes through sensors and acts on an environment using
actuators. It directs its activity towards achieving goals. Intelligent agents can learn or use knowledge
to achieve these goals. They can be very simple or very complex.
Intelligent agents are often software entities that carry out some set of operations on behalf of a user
or another program with some degree of independence or autonomy, and in so doing, employ some
knowledge or representation of the user's goals or desires. For example, autonomous programs used for
operator assistance or data mining (sometimes referred to as bots) are also called "intelligent agents".
6.2.2 Autonomous agent
An autonomous agent is an intelligent agent operating on an owner's behalf with a high degree of
independence.
Such an agent is a system situated in, and part of, a technical or natural environment, that senses any or
some status of that environment, and acts on it in pursuit of its own agenda. The agenda evolves from
drives (or programmed goals). The agent acts to change part of the environment or of its status and
influences what it sensed.
Non-biological examples include intelligent agents, autonomous robots and various software agents,
including artificial life agents, and many computer viruses. Biological examples are not yet defined
(apart from living organisms).
NOTE Autonomy is a system property; it does not necessarily imply artificial intelligence.
The term machine learning is often used in conjunction with intelligent agents and some definitions of
an autonomous system include the ability to learn as a characteristic of such systems.
6.2.3 Machine learning
Machine learning (ML) is a field of artificial intelligence that uses statistical techniques to give computer
systems the ability to "learn" (e.g. progressively improve performance on a specific task) from data,
without being explicitly programmed.
6.2.4 Autonomous robot
An autonomous robot is a robot that performs behaviours or tasks with a high degree of independence.
This feature is particularly desirable in fields such as spaceflight, household maintenance (such as
cleaning), waste water treatment and delivering goods and services.
Some modern factory robots are autonomous within the strict confines of their direct environment.
It may not be that every degree of freedom exists in their surrounding environment, but the factory
robot's workplace is challenging and can often contain chaotic, unpredicted variables. The exact
orientation and position of the next object of work and (in the more advanced factories) even the type
of object and the required task is determined. This can vary unpredictably (at least from the robot's
point of view).
One important area of robotics research is to enable the robot to cope with its environment whether
this is on land, underwater, in the air, underground or in space.
NOTE An autonomous robot is an embodied intelligent agent.
A fully autonomous robot can:
— gain information about the environment;
4 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
— work for an extended period without human intervention;
— move either all or part of itself throughout its operating environment without human assistance;
— avoid situations that are harmful to people, property or itself unless those are part of its design
specifications;
— an autonomous robot can also learn or gain new knowledge like adjusting for new methods of
accomplishing its tasks or adapting to changing surroundings;
— like other machines, autonomous robots can require regular maintenance.
6.2.5 ISO robot
The use of the term “robot” in this document is intended to include devices covered by the definition
provided in ISO 8373:2012, 2.6.
The broader use of this term in this document is intended to accommodate variations and overlaps in
the conceptualization, design and application of robots/robotics, and to avoid more specific definitions
(like the definition in ISO 8373) that can pertain only to individual models and applications of robot as
capabilities continue to evolve.
6.3 Ergonomics concepts
6.3.1 Ergonomics concern for RIA systems
There is a diverse range of interacting influences to be considered in the design of work involving RIA
systems. Adaptation/evolution of ergonomics and its standards are required to better address RIA
system issues/problems. Some of these topics are presently not within the scope of ergonomics to
address. Ergonomics has traditionally concerned itself with physical and cognitive acts in a physical
world. It is now addressing interactive systems and the digital world that extends to information, both
about the physical world and of itself including science, business information systems, entertainment
and knowledge. With RIA technology, ergonomics can also need to consider social ergonomics in order
to assess and assist user experience, accessibility, usability and avoidance of harm. Ergonomics can
need to extend its scope to take account of the effect of social interaction with and through RIA systems
including social media, human-machine teaming, and adaptive interfaces and environments. Likewise,
ergonomics can need to explore the impact to non-users of RIA systems who are in the environment
in which the RIA systems are operating but are not using the RIA systems. Ergonomics can also need
to take account of legal, regulatory and governance requirements that are being set by other parties,
largely or even completely without ergonomics input.
6.3.2 Design approaches for RIA systems
There is a range of design approaches that can be taken when designing the relationship between an
RIA system and its users, both human and other RIA systems. These are described in Table 1. They
have ergonomic, sociotechnical, ethical and possibly political implications. Ergonomics applied to RIA
systems should consider the most suitable paradigm for an application and the effect on individuals
and society.
Table 1 — Design approaches for RIA systems
Design approach Description Benefit/Caution
Augmentation The system improves human performance (including Extends human performance and capability.
decision aids, exoskeletons, physical and/or cognitive
Possible health and ethical issues regarding elective
prosthetics).
use of augmentation for some advantage either to
individual or society.
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
Table 1 (continued)
Design approach Description Benefit/Caution
Replacement The system replaces human functions and/or entire Good for disliked, hazardous, repetitive or mundane
human jobs. jobs and those where there are skill shortages in the
labour pool and where productivity can be improved.
Unthinking application of replacement for specious
purposes (such as unsupported safety and financial
benefits).
Remoting Allows the user to act on the physical environment at Good for safety, enabling a single user to control or
distance. interact with multiple physically distributed systems.
Also, for use at distance for other reasons than safety,
such as time to gain access, scale, extended observa-
tion or cost (such as extra-terrestrial, microscopic and
marine exploration).
Potential ethical issues of separation of operator from
consequences of action and actions occurring under
different legal regimes.
Teaming The human and machine work together for a common Beneficial goals are facilitated (such as emotional
goal (need be social). components of user experience, efficiency and safety).
Symbiosis The human and the system are closely linked working Mutual benefit provided that both parties are aware
together for mutual benefit such as open, online cours- of the agreements that they are entering into and do
es and games in which the users get excitement and not abuse the relationship.
knowledge, and the system gets training.
Parasitic The human is a source of data collected by the system, Not necessarily harmful but human not necessarily
but with little or no benefit to the human. aware of RIA system action.
This can be an issue that certain financial, political
and organizational preconditions can foster, and that
ergonomics should warn against. For example, design-
ing an informed consent procedure.
Influence Intelligent systems influencing human behaviour such Behaviour can be influenced for the better. For exam-
as social media chatbots. ple, safer.
Regulation and licencing of pervasive, intelligent,
automated propaganda and advertising.
Unknown alternatives As yet undefined paradigms relating to organization- This is where the ergonomists need to cooperate with
al, social/cultural, societal relationships with RIA the experts on developmental psychology, sociology,
systems. business studies, law, etc.
Benevolent governance Humans/humanity passing governance to AI. For safety, collective benefit, reduction of hazards
beyond human action. Agency is benevolent, having
the best interests of society as the guiding principle.
Agency provides governance: monitoring, evaluating,
and directing plans and policies.
Authority and safeguarding.
6.3.3 Perceived autonomy
From a human-centred point of view, apparently autonomous behaviour is a human-system issue and
should be addressed in design. Indeed, from the human-system interaction perspective the degree
to which system behaviour is perceived as autonomous can be a more important measure than the
technical degree of autonomy of a system.
Since 2015, the terms "autonomous" and "autonomous system" have been widely used in marketing
and journalism as synonyms for "automatic", "automation", and to describe systems with perceived
autonomous behaviour. This usage is so widespread that it is not possible to assume any more precise
meaning even in technical literature or regulation. As a result, behaviour that is perceived by a user as
"autonomous" is a more common phenomenon than an autonomous agent.
6.3.4 Control loop
The control loop consists of the fundamental control functions, supporting information, affecters and
effectors necessary for making adjustments in a process. A user, autonomous agent or other component
of a system is said to be in the loop if that user, autonomous agent or component is in the process flow
for making adjustments to the process. With the advent of RIA system agents, finer descriptions of
where in the loop the user is located are emerging. For example, users who are in the loop during the
6 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved

ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
execution of an automatic or autonomous process have interactions of a predominantly supervisory
nature. An example of a less prevalent change in the use of in the loop is users who are before the
loop. Such users have interactions prior to execution of an automatic or autonomous process but have
no responsibilities for monitoring or making adjustments during the execution of the process. For a
discussion of the decision/action cycle (OODA loop), see 10.3.
7 Categories of human-RIA system issues
7.1 General
The identified human-RIA system issues (problems) fall into six categories. These are summarized in
Figure 1 and described in 7.2 to 7.7. Examples of ISO standards that can be related to these categories
can be found in Clause 9.
This clause presents data for analysis, not conclusions. It describes human-system issues that are
specific or particularly relevant to RIA systems rather than those that are common to non-RIA systems.
Figure 1 — The six categories of RIA system issues identified
7.2 RIA system — effects on a human
This first category represents the impact that the characteristics of an RIA system have on individual
humans who are in the environment where it is operating. This includes physical, cognitive, affective,
behavioural and motivational responses.
It should be stressed that the issues in this category are not limited to those experienced by users
(those interacting with the RIA system or for whom its effects are intended). Unless an RIA system is
totally unobtrusive, it impacts non-users as well, who have no vested interest in what it is doing. With
respect to the non-users, an obtrusive RIA system in their environment can alter the way they perceive
their environment, prompt an emotional response and alter their behaviour. For example, the mere
presence of an RIA system can be perceived as a distraction or as an invasion of privacy or personal
space. Therefore, one cannot expect the same effects to occur for users and non-users.
ISO/TR 9241-810:2020(E)
See A.2 for more examples of issues associated with how RIA system designed characteristics affect
humans.
7.3 Human-RIA system interaction
Unless an RIA system is completely autonomous, humans interact with it directly at some level or to
some degree. The humans in this category constitute users of the RIA system. This category is where
most ergonomics resides today. It addresses the nature of tasks and the design of work to ensure that
users are able to accomplish their intended tasks. The issues in the category specifically cover the
consequences and impact of the design of the user interface on user (i.e. individual or team) interactions
with the RIA system.
See A.3 for more examples of issues associated with human-RIA system interaction.
7.4 Multiple RIA systems interacting — effects on humans
One can anticipate that the time will come when multiple RIA systems operate within the same
environment, coordinating activity and interacting without human intervention. Interactions can be
obvious to the user, in the case of a physically embodied RIA system, or hidden, as can be the case
with software agents, where the user only perceives a single system rather than its constituent
elements. Where RIA systems from different suppliers or organizations interact, compatibility and
communication issues between one RIA system and another are foreseeable, as well as with the
humans present in environments where multiple RIA systems are operating. It is difficult to predict
what emergent behaviours will result and their effect on users.
See A.4 for more examples of issues associated with the effects on humans of interacting RIA systems.
7.5 RIA system — organizational
The RIA system is likely to affect the activities such as work that occur in the organization, organizational
processes, and the roles that people in the organization play. These issues raise the question of how we
can optimize the existing organizational structures/working practices, etc., to make best use of a new
RIA system in an existing organization. Although the issues in this category may not arise for every RIA
system, they are likely to arise for any RIA system that is implemented at the level of an organization.
See A.5 for more examples of issues associated with RIA systems at the organizational level.
7.6 Social/cultural/ethical
RIA systems will not opera
...