ISO/TR 14105:2001

Electronic imaging — Human and organizational issues for successful Electronic Image Management (EIM) implementation

Imagerie électronique — Aspects humains et organisationnels pour la mise en oeuvre réussie de la gestion d'image électronique

General Information

• Status: Withdrawn
• Publication Date: 17-Oct-2001
• Withdrawal Date: 17-Oct-2001
• ICS: 37.080 - Document imaging applications
• Technical Committee: ISO/TC 171/SC 2 - Document file formats, EDMS systems and authenticity of information
• Drafting Committee: ISO/TC 171/SC 2 - Document file formats, EDMS systems and authenticity of information
• Current Stage: 9599 - Withdrawal of International Standard
• Completion Date: 07-Jun-2011

Relations

• Revised: ISO/TR 14105:2011 - Document management — Change management for successful electronic document management system (EDMS) implementation
• Effective Date: 26-Jun-2008

Standards Content (Sample)

TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 14105
First edition
2001-10-15

Electronic imaging — Human and
organizational issues for successful
Electronic Image Management (EIM)
implementation
Imagerie électronique — Aspects humains et organisationnels pour la mise
en œuvre réussie de la gestion d'image électronique




Reference number
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
©
ISO 2001

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
PDF disclaimer
This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with Adobe's licensing policy, this file may be printed or viewed but shall not
be edited unless the typefaces which are embedded are licensed to and installed on the computer performing the editing. In downloading this
file, parties accept therein the responsibility of not infringing Adobe's licensing policy. The ISO Central Secretariat accepts no liability in this
area.
Adobe is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.
Details of the software products used to create this PDF file can be found in the General Info relative to the file; the PDF-creation parameters
were optimized for printing. Every care has been taken to ensure that the file is suitable for use by ISO member bodies. In the unlikely event
that a problem relating to it is found, please inform the Central Secretariat at the address given below.


©  ISO 2001
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from either ISO at the address below or ISO's member body
in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
Case postale 56 • CH-1211 Geneva 20
Tel. + 41 22 749 01 11
Fax + 41 22 749 09 47
E-mail [e-mail]
Web www.iso.ch
Printed in Switzerland

ii © ISO 2001 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
Contents Page
Foreword.iv
Introduction.v
1 Scope .1
2 References .1
3 Terms and definitions .1
4 Usability and Ergonomic Interfaces .2
4.1 General.2
4.2 End-User Analysis and Usability .2
4.3 Ergonomic Criteria for Selection of Electronic Imaging Systems.3
4.4 Software Usability Checklist .4
5 Workplace Ergonomics.6
5.1 General.6
5.2 Image Systems as VDT Workstations: Image System Hardware Requirements .7
5.3 Health Issues.8
5.4 Handicapped User Accessibility.10
6 Designing Forms for Use with Electronic Image Management Systems.11
6.1 General.11
6.2 Creating Field Labels and Instructions .11
6.3 Sequencing Information.12
6.4 The Use of Lines .12
6.5 Defining Individual Fields .13
6.6 Spacing.13
6.7 Additional Considerations.14
7 Recommendations for EIM implementation success .14
7.1 General.14
7.2 Participation and Integration.15
7.3 Strategic Planning: The Organizational Change Strategy.16
7.4 The Organizational Assessment .17
7.5 The Change Management Program .17
7.6 Using Consultants .19
8 Conclusion .20

© ISO 2001 – All rights reserved iii

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(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.
International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 3.
The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards adopted
by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an International
Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.
In exceptional circumstances, when a technical committee has collected data of a different kind from that which is
normally published as an International Standard ("state of the art", for example), it may decide by a simple majority
vote of its participating members to publish a Technical Report. A Technical Report is entirely informative in nature
and does not have to be reviewed until the data it provides are considered to be no longer valid or useful.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this Technical Report may be the subject of patent
rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
ISO/TR 14105 was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 171, Document imaging applications, Subcommittee
SC 2, Application issues.
iv © ISO 2001 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
Introduction
Computer technology has unequivocally contributed to the efficiency and speed of data processing. Automated
systems reduce staffing requirements by eliminating the need for human intervention and facilitating increased
human productivity. Ironically, the intense focus on increased productivity of both systems and operators has
traditionally limited creative methods for sustaining long-term human productivity. However, recent advances in the
understanding and implementation of ergonomic principles have produced a comprehensive framework for human-
engineered computer systems design, implementation, and work practices.
The proliferation of computer technology has impacted a majority of the work force. It is predicted that by 1997,
50 % of workers would be using VDTs (Visual Display Terminals) at work. The significant increase in the use of
VDTs has caused the research community to investigate the impact to humans of working with VDTs. In 1988, in a
collaborative effort with an organization specializing in the area of human factors, a standards organization
published a document for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Workstations. This document, written for
those VDT applications described as text processing, data entry, and data inquiry, “specifies conditions that have
been established as representing acceptable implementation of human factors engineering principles and practices
in the design of VDTs, associated furniture, and the office environment in which they are placed.” More recently,
the International Organization for Standards (ISO) has initiated a 17-part standard (ISO 9241) that identifies
requirements for both hardware (parts 1-9) and software (parts 10-17) associated with VDTs.
This trend in the development of standards and legislation responds to the lack of widely accepted and practical
guidelines associated with the design, implementation, and use of VDTs. These voluntary and legislative guidelines
would provide recommendations and requirements for the selection and operation of VDTs. It should be noted that
the ergonomic requirements associated with electronic image management (EIM) systems do differ somewhat from
those associated with standard VDTs. These differences come primarily from image-initiated re-engineered task
requirements (that is, requirements for tasks in which humans interact with the image workstation with minimal
paper) that create unique implementation and environmental considerations.
A growing body of research points out that the potential of information technology to transform businesses remains
largely untapped not because of technical problems but because of failure to address human and organizational
issues. According to some management experts, “The effective management of people is critical to the successful
implementation and use of new technical systems. Unfortunately, the “human” resource receives only cursory or
after-the-fact attention when technological decisions are considered.” Experts in this area note that “a recent study
of 20 organizations with new office automation systems found that 16 systems had failed in some way. The
reasons: MIS departments missed project deadlines by months. Costs mounted beyond projections. End users
operated systems improperly or not at all or even sabotaged them openly. What variables lay behind these
reasons? Most common were the following human factors: the system didn’t match the organization’s needs;
supervisors didn’t promote use of new systems; senior management didn’t fully understand how systems should be
implemented.”
The issue of implementing new technology was perhaps best summarized by a case study of five office automation
projects: “Implementation: it’s not so much what you do, but how you do it.”
This Technical Report systematically identifies and reviews the ergonomic and organizational issues and
considerations associated with the selection criteria, implementation criteria, and work practice criteria for EIM
systems.
© ISO 2001 – All rights reserved v

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)

Electronic imaging — Human and organizational issues for
successful Electronic Image Management (EIM) implementation
1 Scope
This Technical Report provides a framework for understanding and maximizing the human factors associated with
successful implementation of Electronic Image Management (EIM) systems.
It focuses on cognitive, physical, organizational, and human factors as they apply to usability criteria for imaging
technologies development, selection, and implementation. It provides a fundamental framework for understanding
the basic issues and concepts of organizational factors, human factors, and ergonomics for EIM systems. The
principles of sociotechnical systems theory are applied to the introduction of EIM into an organization. The
principles of human factors and ergonomics are applied to usability criteria for the development and selection of
EIM equipment, to environmental and implementation issues, and to training for long-term productivity benefits.
2 References
ISO 9241-10:1996, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) — Part 10:
Dialogue principles
ISO 9241-11:1998, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) — Part 11:
Guidance on usability
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this Technical Report, the following terms and definitions apply.
3.1
culture
pattern of beliefs and expectations shared by the organization’s members
NOTE These beliefs and expectations produce norms that powerfully shape the behaviour of individuals and groups in the
organization. An organization’s culture defines the ways in which people behave as encouraged by the organization’s values
and beliefs.
3.2
ergonomics
human factors
applied science that studies, designs, and adapts the equipment, the work, and the environment to meet human
capabilities and limitations and to enhance safety and comfort
3.3
flicker
image instability caused by the fading and refreshing of the phosphors that create the characters on a display
screen
NOTE Flicker-free images give the perception of stable images.
© ISO 2001 – All rights reserved 1

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
3.4
glare
visual discomfort, legibility impairment, or both caused by excessive variations in luminance between objects within
the visual field
3.5
invisible grid
specific indents for various levels of information and blank lines or spaces that group related information
3.6
operations
business process used to carry out the objectives of an organization
3.7
readiness
willingness of employees to adapt to changes in their jobs and work environment
3.8
repetitive strain injury
class of medical condition of the joints caused by repetitive motion, which is often rapid, forceful, and/or extreme
motion
EXAMPLE Examples of repetitive strain injuries include tendinitis and carpal tunnel syndrome.
3.9
visual display terminal
VDT
electronic device that consists of an input device (for example, a keyboard or mouse), a monitor unit (for example,
a cathode ray tube), and a connection to the central processing unit of a computer and that visually presents
information communicated to or stored in the computer
4 Usability and Ergonomic Interfaces
4.1 General
This clause provides a framework for evaluating the ergonomics of user interfaces associated with electronic
imaging systems.
4.2 End-User Analysis and Usability
To tailor any image application to fit user behaviour, the developer must understand the general capabilities and
limitations of the human being in the areas of perception, learning, memory, and attention. This analysis is a
fundamental component of the re-engineering process associated with the move from conventional paper
processes to EIM systems implementation. ISO 9241-11 was developed to ensure this understanding as part of the
VDT development protocol. ISO 9241-11 addresses usability requirements specifications, providing a format for the
communication and shared understanding of the factors that determine usability. ISO 9241-11 stresses the
importance of end-user requirements analysis, because the tasks for which a product is used, the characteristics of
the user, and the environmental conditions are as important as the characteristics of the product itself as
determinants of usability.
ISO 9241-11 provides guidance on how to describe the context of use and the measures of usability in an explicit
way. The resulting usability requirements specification typically includes the following sections:
a) name and purpose of the product;
b) context of use, including
2 © ISO 2001 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
1) intended users (skills, knowledge, and physical attributes),
2) environmental requirements, and
3) specification of tasks;
c) usability measures for particular contexts:
1) effectiveness;
2) efficiency;
3) satisfaction.
The consumer of imaging systems technology should carefully review EIM-system vendor proposals to ensure the
inclusion of a system-specific end-user analysis. This analysis should be the basis for conceptual design of the
system’s user-interface as well as the criteria for usability verification testing.
4.3 Ergonomic Criteria for Selection of Electronic Imaging Systems
The principles in this section are based on five fundamental qualities that make application interfaces usable and
easy to learn. These five qualities follow:
 consistency;
 simplicity;
 flexibility;
 user control;
 system responsiveness.
4.3.1 Consistency
To design for consistency means to produce an application that is predictable in appearance and behaviour.
Consistency in user-interface design has two dimensions: internal consistency and external consistency. Internal
consistency refers to consistency of look and of behaviour of screens throughout the application (and even across
applications). External consistency refers to the users’ conceptual model of how an application should work. A
leading computer manufacturer suggests that “the user interface should confirm the conceptual model by providing
the outcome users expect for any action. This occurs only when the application model is the same as the users’
conceptual model.”
Consistency in user interactions
 reduces the memory load on the user,
 reduces the time it takes to learn the application,
 enables the user to perform tasks more quickly and easily, and
 minimizes the confusion of the user who must navigate between multiple applications.
4.3.2 Simplicity
To design for simplicity means to produce an application that the user finds both easy to learn and easy to use. The
fewer concepts, commands, and menus the user must know or traverse to perform an operation, the simpler is the
operation for the user. The substantial variability of image applications and platforms reinforces the requirement of
© ISO 2001 – All rights reserved 3

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
the above end-user analysis. For example, it is often appropriate to hide Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs), with
their multiple access task-swapping capabilities, in image workstations that are dedicated to limited image tasks.
This reduces the learning requirement of operators who do not require the capabilities of GUIs.
4.3.3 Flexibility
Flexibility in an application is reflected in how well the application responds to the needs of different kinds of user
expertise. For example, to perform a given task, a flexible application provides menu-based commands for novice
users to reduce their memory load and equivalent shortcut, keyboard-based commands for expert users to reduce
command input time and increase their task efficiency. Because some imaging tasks are fairly complicated,
requiring operator training and expertise, providing multiple-input or access mechanisms enables the sophisticated
operator to modify interaction styles based on specific task or situational requirements.
4.3.4 User Control
User control is the degree to which the user perceives himself or herself to be directing the interactions within the
application. In general, the more the user feels in control, the more satisfied with the application he or she feels.
Users should be allowed to initiate actions and control the interaction, including terminating any command, easily
reversing or undoing unwanted actions, or setting the pace of interactions. For example, some bank and
remittance-processing image systems allow operators to select the key ahead option. This option increases
operator speed by presenting the next imaged item after the operator has entered only a portion (selectable by
number of key depressions) of the currently displayed item. However, a mandatory requirement for systems
implementing this key ahead option is the ability of the operator to recall an imaged item once it has disappeared;
this provides control for the user, which positively affects satisfaction and performance.
4.3.5 System Responsiveness
System responsiveness is the degree to which the system responds to the user’s input. Whenever a user performs
an action, the system should — at minimum — provide basic feedback acknowledging the user’s command. The
system should never leave the user wondering whether the system has accepted his or her input. This
responsiveness is especially critical when long delays (in excess of two seconds) occur between screen
transmissions. Ergonomic studies have shown that displaying some visual indicator of progress (such as an
hourglass) greatly increases the user’s acceptance of variable length delays.
The impact of system delay varies greatly depending on the task. Imaging applications used for document
management work generally have tolerances for longer delays than image systems dedicated to high-speed data
entry. Image systems dedicated to high-speed data entry should have the ability to display images faster than the
human operator can process them. Exception-based delays should always be accompanied by some visual
acknowledgement or status message.
4.4 Software Usability Checklist
The following software usability checklist provides explicit usability criteria for software development and selection.
Although these usability heuristics are not EIM-specific, they are relevant to EIM applications.
When evaluating EIM software interfaces, ask the following questions to ensure that related criteria are satisfied;
usable interfaces fulfil these criteria.
a) Is display information organized and presented in a clear and useful manner? Criteria include whether
1) information appears in an expected, natural, and logical (task) order,
2) readability is optimized (text is of mixed case, use of abbreviations is minimal, and menus and user-entry
areas are visually distinct from other displayed information),
3) the command names or menu items are meaningful and distinctive,
4) use of colour is appropriate (four or fewer colours are used consistently, and an optimal contrast
combination is used),
4 © ISO 2001 – All rights reserved

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
5) when available, on-line help or documentation is formatted for easy scanning,
6) pull-down menu options are formatted as single column lists and logically grouped, and
7) irrelevant or rarely needed information is displayed on request only.
b) Is the language of menu items, commands, error messages, and on-line help appropriate? Criteria include
whether
1) the language uses task-related terms familiar to the user rather than system-oriented terms, and
2) the language does not use jargon that is difficult to understand and translate.
c) Does the application minimize the amount a user must remember? Criteria include whether
1) information appears in a familiar and directly usable form,
2) the application does not require the user to remember information from one display to another,
3) the application visually maintains the conceptual thread when a procedure requires that the system
display ancillary screens,
4) at the user’s request, the application provides prompts for command syntax, and
5) the application makes available text labels for screen icons.
d) Is the user interface consistent? Criteria include whether
1) the user interface uses the same term for a given item, action, or concept throughout the application,
2) the user interface is consistent in the format and placement of information in the displays,
3) the user interface provides a standard display area for command entry, and
4) the user interface makes the behaviour of objects on the screen consistent with the user’s mental model.
e) Does the application provide sufficient feedback? Criteria include whether
1) the application highlights items that are selected,
2) the application acknowledges processing delays,
3) the application informs the user of the success or failure of a requested action, and
4) when an error does occur, the application provides understandable information that includes both a
statement of cause and a suggested remedy that the user is able to perform.
f) How easy is it to navigate and exit the application? Criteria include whether
1) the application provides a home menu or display,
2) the means of navigation is visually distinct,
3) the structure of the application is optimally organized for the most common or most important user tasks
and reflects a natural sequence (according to experience, cultural norms, and the like),
4) the menu structure does not require the user to transverse more than three levels to perform a task or to
access information,
© ISO 2001 – All rights reserved 5

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/TR 14105:2001(E)
5) the user can return to the next higher level of menu with a single keystroke,
6) the user is able to exit at any point in the application, and
7) the means of exiting is clearly identified.
g) Does the application provide shortcuts for the knowledgeable user? Criteria include whether
1) the application allows the user to abbreviate command names, and
2) the application allows menu selections to be bypassed with command entry or rapidly processed
keystrokes.
h) Is the application robust; does it act to prevent unintended results? Criteria include whether
1) the application requires the user to review and confirm destructive commands,
2) the application requires the user to review and confirm global actions,
3) exiting the application does not result in the loss of data without confirmation from the user, and
4) the application accepts user input no matter what case (upper, lower, or mixed case) the letters are in.
i) Does the application observe human factors principles that make data entry tasks easier to perform? Criteria
include whether
1) the application captures data at first entry (user does not need to re-enter),
2) the application breaks long strings into manageable chunks for data entry,
3) the application does not require the user to enter leading zeros, and
4) when an error is detected, the user needs to rekey only the information that needs correcting.
5 Workplace Ergonomics
5.1 General
By their nature, document image systems represent a significant change in the workers’ environment. Workers who
have primarily used paper-based documents to complete their work have developed certain individual routines for
working with and managing paper documents for completing their work.
While office environmental conditions (such as conditions of lighting, glare, afternoon reflection, seating, and work
surfaces) were adequate or tolerable when work was paper-based, these same conditions may present significant
problems to workers who are stationary in front of a workstation for long periods of time. Workers who had a
workstation with a low-resolution display and used the workstation infrequently may have been able to avoid or
tolerate lighting and physical problems for short periods of use. These same conditions may become intolerable
when a worker uses a workstation as the primary means of completing his or her work.
Cognitive ergonomics plays a major role in the design of electronic imaging systems and in the associated
productivity benefits. Human-engineered systems always consider the cognitive processes associated with use of a
system or completion of a task. Effective and commonly accepted systems development protocols always begin
with an analysis phase. This phase typically incorporates an end-user analysis or task analysis that identifies
cognitive and physical requirements for the existing work practice. Conceptual models are developed that translate
the user’s
...