View in EDS

Systems thinking-based risk assessment methods applied to sports performance: A comparison of STPA, EAST-BL, and Net-HARMS in the context of elite women's road cycling.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Systems thinking-based risk assessment methods applied to sports performance: A comparison of STPA, EAST-BL, and Net-HARMS in the context of elite women's road cycling.
Authors: Hulme, Adam1 (AUTHOR) ahulme@usc.edu.au, McLean, Scott1 (AUTHOR), Dallat, Clare1 (AUTHOR), Walker, Guy H.2 (AUTHOR), Waterson, Patrick3 (AUTHOR), Stanton, Neville A.4 (AUTHOR), Salmon, Paul M.1 (AUTHOR)
Source: Applied Ergonomics. Feb2021, Vol. 91, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subjects: Ergonomics, Cycling, Sports teams, Performance, Elite athletes, Athletes, Risk assessment, System analysis, Athletic ability, Risk management in business
Abstract: There is increasing interest in applying systems Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) methods in sport. Risk assessment (RA) methods can be used identify risks which may impact the performance of individual athletes, teams, and overall sports systems; however, they have not yet been tested in sport. This study sets out to apply and compare three systems thinking-based RA methods in the context of elite sports performance and report on the frequency and types of the risks identified. The Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) method, the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Broken Links (EAST-BL) method, and the Networked Hazard Analysis and Risk Management System (Net-HARMS) method were applied to elite women's road cycling to identify all the credible risks that could degrade optimal team performance. The findings demonstrate that all three methods appear to provide useful results in a context other than safety, and that multiple risks threatening the performance of the cycling team were identified. Whilst the frequency and types of risks differed across the methods applied, there are additional theoretical, methodological, and practical implications to be considered prior to the selection and use of systems thinking-based RA approaches. Recommendations and directions for future HFE and sports science research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Applied Ergonomics is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:There is increasing interest in applying systems Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) methods in sport. Risk assessment (RA) methods can be used identify risks which may impact the performance of individual athletes, teams, and overall sports systems; however, they have not yet been tested in sport. This study sets out to apply and compare three systems thinking-based RA methods in the context of elite sports performance and report on the frequency and types of the risks identified. The Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) method, the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork Broken Links (EAST-BL) method, and the Networked Hazard Analysis and Risk Management System (Net-HARMS) method were applied to elite women's road cycling to identify all the credible risks that could degrade optimal team performance. The findings demonstrate that all three methods appear to provide useful results in a context other than safety, and that multiple risks threatening the performance of the cycling team were identified. Whilst the frequency and types of risks differed across the methods applied, there are additional theoretical, methodological, and practical implications to be considered prior to the selection and use of systems thinking-based RA approaches. Recommendations and directions for future HFE and sports science research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:00036870
DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103297