ISO 9241-221:2023
(Main)Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 221: Human-centred design process assessment model
Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 221: Human-centred design process assessment model
This document specifies the process references model (PRM) for human-centred design (HCD) according to ISO 9241-220, as well as the process assessment model (PAM) for assessing these processes, based on ISO/IEC 33020 and in accordance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 33004. This HCD PAM contains a set of indicators to be considered while interpreting the intent of the HCD PRM defined in ISO 9241-220. These indicators can also be applied when implementing a process improvement programme post an assessment. NOTE 1 The PRM in this document focuses on assessing HCD processes rather than system life cycle, for example as in ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, or software life cycle, as in ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207. NOTE 2 If processes beyond the scope of ISO 9241-220 are required, appropriate processes from other PRMs, such as ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207, ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 or ISO/TS 18152, can be added based on the business needs of the organization. The intended application of this document is computer-based interactive systems. While the processes apply to interactive systems that deliver services, they do not cover the design of those services. The relevant aspects of the processes can also be applied to simple or non-computer-based interactive systems. NOTE 3 HCD concentrates on the human-centred aspects of design and not on other aspects of design, such as mechanical construction, programming or the basic design of services. The process descriptions in this document provide the basis for a rigorous assessment of an enterprise’s capability to carry out human-centred processes in conformity with the ISO/IEC 33004 and ISO/IEC 33020. This document is intended for use by organizations that want to address and improve their treatment of human-centred design of either their internal systems or the products and services they provide, and the procurement of systems and parts of systems. The processes can be applied by small- and medium-sized enterprises as well as by large organizations. NOTE 4 The scope of application of the PAM is the same as that of the PRM, which is described in ISO 9241-220:2019, Clause 1.
Ergonomie de l'interaction homme/système — Partie 221: Modèle d'évaluation de processus de conception centrée sur l'opérateur
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
INTERNATIONAL ISO
STANDARD 9241-221
First edition
2023-08
Ergonomics of human-system
interaction —
Part 221:
Human-centred design process
assessment model
Ergonomie de l'interaction homme/système —
Partie 221: Modèle d'évaluation de processus de conception centrée
sur l'opérateur
Reference number
© ISO 2023
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
Contents Page
Foreword .v
Introduction . vi
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms . 2
3.1 Terms and definitions . 2
3.2 Abbreviated terms . 2
4 Conformity . . 2
5 PAM and capability determination . 3
5.1 General . 3
5.2 Process capability levels and process attributes . 3
5.3 Process performance indicators . 4
5.4 Process capability indicators. 5
5.5 Process attribute rating . 5
5.6 Process capability level model . 6
6 Process reference model (PRM) and process performance indicators (PPIs) (Level
1) . 8
6.1 General . 8
6.2 HCP.1 process group: ensure enterprise focus on human-centred quality . 10
6.2.1 Purpose and outcomes of HCP.1 . . 10
6.2.2 HCP.1.1 – Incorporate human-centred quality in business strategy . 11
6.2.3 HCP.1.2 – Institutionalize human-centred quality .12
6.3 HCP.2 process group: enable human-centred design across projects and systems.13
6.3.1 Purpose and outcomes of HCP.2 . 13
6.3.2 HCP.2.1 – Integration of human-centred design . 14
6.3.3 HCP.2.2 – Resources for human-centred design . 16
6.3.4 HCP.2.3 – Authorization and control of human-centred quality . 17
6.4 HCP.3 process group: execute human-centred design within a project . 19
6.4.1 Purpose and outcomes of HCP.3 . 19
6.4.2 HCP.3.1 process sub-group: plan and manage human-centred design for
the project . 19
6.4.3 HCP.3.2 process sub-group: identify the context of use . 27
6.4.4 HCP.3.3 process sub-group: establish the user requirements .30
6.4.5 HCP.3.4 process sub-group: design solutions that meet user requirements .36
6.4.6 HCP.3.5 process sub-group: user-centred evaluation .40
6.5 HCP.4 process group: introduction, operation and end of life of a system . 45
6.5.1 Purpose and outcomes of HCP.4. 45
6.5.2 HCP.4.1 – Introducing the system .46
6.5.3 HCP.4.2 – Human-centred quality in operation .48
6.5.4 HCP.4.3 – Human-centred quality during upgrades .50
6.5.5 HCP.4.4 – Human-centred quality at the end of life of a system . 52
7 Process capability levels and process attributes (Levels 0 to 5) .53
7.1 General .53
7.2 Process capability level 0: Incomplete process .54
7.3 Process capability level 1: Performed process .54
7.3.1 General .54
7.3.2 PA 1.1 – Process performance process attribute .54
7.4 Process capability level 2: Managed process .54
7.4.1 General .54
7.4.2 PA 2.1 – Performance management process attribute .54
7.4.3 PA 2.2 – Documented information management process attribute .56
7.5 Process capability level 3: Established process .58
iii
7.5.1 General .58
7.5.2 PA 3.1 – Process definition process attribute .58
7.5.3 PA 3.2 – Process deployment process attribute . 59
7.5.4 PA 3.3 – Process assurance process attribute .60
7.6 Process capability level 4: Predictable process . 61
7.6.1 General . 61
7.6.2 PA 4.1 – Quantitative analysis process attribute . 62
7.6.3 PA 4.2 – Quantitative control process attribute .63
7.7 Process capability level 5: Innovating process .64
7.7.1 General .64
7.7.2 PA 5.1 – Process innovation process attribute .64
Annex A (informative) Explanation of the process reference and PAMs .67
Annex B (informative) Conformity of the process assessment and reference models with
ISO/IEC 33004 .70
Annex C (informative) Attributes to look for in work products as part of an assessment .72
Bibliography . 101
iv
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 document 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).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use
of (a) patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed
patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received
notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are
cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent
database available at www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all
such patent rights.
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.
v
Introduction
This document focuses on the capability of human-centred design (HCD) processes and the maturity of
organizations in implementing HCD.
The primary intended users of this document are internal and external assessors or well-trained UX
professionals (such as HCD process managers or HCD quality managers) responsible for assessing HCD
processes in organizations that need to specify, assess and improve their HCD processes, according
to the process reference model (PRM) described in ISO 9241-220. The professionals responsible for
institutionalizing HCD in organizations, the primary intended users of ISO 9241-220, are also important
users of this document since this document intends to assess their work.
This document incorporates the processes from ISO 9241-220, as well as the process assessment model
(PAM) according to the process measurement framework for the assessment of process capability in
ISO/IEC 33020. The full titles of these standards are listed in the Bibliography.
vi
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 9241-221:2023(E)
Ergonomics of human-system interaction —
Part 221:
Human-centred design process assessment model
1 Scope
This document specifies the process references model (PRM) for human-centred design (HCD) according
to ISO 9241-220, as well as the process assessment model (PAM) for assessing these processes, based on
ISO/IEC 33020 and in accordance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 33004.
This HCD PAM contains a set of indicators to be considered while interpreting the intent of the HCD
PRM defined in ISO 9241-220. These indicators can also be applied when implementing a process
improvement programme post an assessment.
NOTE 1 The PRM in this document focuses on assessing HCD processes rather than system life cycle, for
example as in ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, or software life cycle, as in ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207.
NOTE 2 If processes beyond the scope of ISO 9241-220 are required, appropriate processes from other PRMs,
such as ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207, ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 or ISO/TS 18152, can be added based on the business needs of
the organization.
The intended application of this document is computer-based interactive systems. While the processes
apply to interactive systems that deliver services, they do not cover the design of those services. The
relevant aspects of the processes can also be applied to simple or non-computer-based interactive
systems.
NOTE 3 HCD concentrates on the human-centred aspects of design and not on other aspects of design, such as
mechanical construction, programming or the basic design of services.
The process descriptions in this document provide the basis for a rigorous assessment of an
enterprise’s capability to carry out human-centred processes in conformity with the ISO/IEC 33004
and ISO/IEC 33020.
This document is intended for use by organizations that want to address and improve their treatment
of human-centred design of either their internal systems or the products and services they provide, and
the procurement of systems and parts of systems. The processes can be applied by small- and medium-
sized enterprises as well as by large organizations.
NOTE 4 The scope of application of the PAM is the same as that of the PRM, which is described in
ISO 9241-220:2019, Clause 1.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 9241-220:2019, Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 220: Processes for enabling, executing
and assessing human-centred design within organizations
ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765, Systems and software engineering — Vocabulary
ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-1, Software and systems engineering — Software testing — Part 1: General concepts
ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3, Software and systems engineering — Software testing — Part 3: Test
documentation
ISO/IEC 33001, Information technology — Process assessment — Concepts and terminology
ISO/IEC 33020:2019, Information technology — Process assessment — Process measurement framework
for assessment of process capability
3 Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms
3.1 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO 9241-220, ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765,
ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-1, ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3 and ISO/IEC 33001 and the following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1.1
work product
documented information
artefact produced by a process
EXAMPLE Project plan, requirements specification, design documentation, source code, test plan, test
meeting minutes, schedules, budgets and incident reports.
Note 1 to entry: Work products are evidence of the achievement of process outcomes and of the performance of
the relevant activities.
[SOURCE: 9241-220:2019, 3.49, modified — Additional preferred term, "documented information",
added.]
3.2 Abbreviated terms
BP base practice
GP generic practice
HCD human-centred design
HCP human-centred process
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
PA process attribute
PAM process assessment model
PCI process capability indicator
PPI process performance indicator
PRM process reference model
WP work product
WPC work product characteristic
4 Conformity
The HCD PAM and PRM conform with ISO/IEC 33004 and can be used as the basis for assessing process
capability.
ISO/IEC 33020 is used as an ISO/IEC 33003-conforming measurement framework. A statement of
conformity of the PAM and PRM with the requirements of ISO/IEC 33004 is provided in Annex B.
Tailoring shall conform with ISO 9241-220:2019, Clause 6 and Annex B.
5 PAM and capability determination
5.1 General
To determine the capability of human-centredness as part of the PAM, all processes defined by
ISO 9241-220 are chosen as the PRM and ISO/IEC 33020 is used as measurement framework.
The measurement framework provides the necessary requirements and rules for the capability
dimension (see also ISO/IEC 33020 and/or Annex A). It defines a schema which enables an assessor to
determine the capability level of a given process.
5.2 Process capability levels and process attributes
A process capability level is a set of process attributes (PAs) that work together to provide a major
enhancement in the capability to perform a process. PAs are features of a process that can be evaluated
on a scale of achievement, as a means to measure the capability of the process. PAs are applicable to all
processes. Each PA addresses a specific aspect of the capability level. The levels constitute a rational
way of progressing through improvement of the capability of any process. These capability levels are
defined as part of the measurement framework.
Process capability levels (Table 1) and PAs (Table 2) are identical to those defined in the process
measurement framework in ISO/IEC 33020:2019, 5.2.
Table 1 — Process capability levels according to ISO/IEC 33020
Level 0: The process is not implemented or fails to achieve its process purpose.
Incomplete process purpose
Level 1: The implemented process achieves its process purpose.
Performed process
Level 2: The performed process is implemented in a managed fashion (planned,
Managed process monitored and adjusted) and its documented information is appropri-
ately established, controlled and maintained.
Level 3: The managed process is implemented using a defined process which is
Established process assured and continually improved.
Level 4: The established process is performed predictively. Quantitative man-
Predictable process agement needs are identified and measurement data are collected and
analysed to identify assignable causes of variation. Corrective action is
taken to address assignable causes of variation.
Level 5: The predictable process is continually improved to respond to changes
Innovating process through identified innovative approaches for process innovation.
Within the PAM of this document, the determination of capability is based upon the nine PAs defined in
ISO/IEC 33020:2019, Table 2.
Table 2 — Process attributes according to ISO/IEC 33020
Attribute ID Process attributes
Level 0: Incomplete process
Level 1: Performed process
PA 1.1 Process performance
Level 2: Managed process
PA 2.1 Performance management
PA 2.2 Documented information management
Level 3: Established process
PA 3.1 Process definition
PA 3.2 Process deployment
PA 3.3 Process assurance
Level 4: Predicted process
PA 4.1 Quantitative analysis
PA 4.2 Quantitative control
Level 5: Innovative process
PA 5.1 Process innovation
Assessment indicators are used to identify whether the process outcomes and the process attribute
outcomes (achievements) are given in processes of projects in organizational units.
In this document, there are two types of assessment indicators:
— Process performance indicators (PPIs), which apply exclusively to capability level 1. They provide
an indication of the extent of fulfilment of the process outcomes.
— Process capability indicators (PCIs), which apply to capability levels 1 to 5. They provide an
indication of the extent of fulfilment of the process attribute achievements.
NOTE Assessment indicators are used to confirm that certain practices were performed, as shown by
evidence collected during an assessment. All such evidence comes either from the examination of work products
of the processes assessed or from statements made by the performers and managers of the processes. The
existence of base practices and work products provide evidence of the performance of the processes associated
with them. Similarly, the existence of process capability indicators provides evidence of process capability.
The evidence obtained should be recorded in a form that clearly relates to the associated assessment
indicator to support the assessor’s judgement that can be confirmed or verified as required by
ISO/IEC 33002.
5.3 Process performance indicators
Types of PPI are:
— base practices (BPs);
— work products (WPs) [in combination with work product characteristics (WPCs)].
Both BPs and WPs relate to one or more process outcomes. Consequently, BPs and WPs are always
process-specific and not generic. BPs represent activity-oriented indicators. WPs represent result-
oriented indicators. Both BPs and WPs are used for judging the objective evidence that an assessor is to
collect and accumulate in the performance of an assessment.
NOTE The HCD PAM offers a set of WPCs (see Annex C) for each WP. These are meant to offer a good practice
and state-of-the-art knowledge guide for the assessor.
5.4 Process capability indicators
There is one type of PCI relevant for this document: generic practices (GPs).
GPs are activity-oriented indicators relating to one or more process attribute achievements. In contrast
to PPIs, they are of generic type, i.e. they apply to any process.
The corresponding process capability levels and PAs for levels 0 to 5 are detailed in Clause 7.
NOTE An assessor collects and accumulates evidence supporting PCI during an assessment. In that respect,
GPs are alternative indicator sets the assessor can use.
5.5 Process attribute rating
To enable the rating, the measurement framework provides PAs defining a measurable property of
process capability. Each PA is assigned to a specific capability level. The extent of achievement of a
certain PA is represented by means of a rating based on a defined rating scale. The rules from which an
assessor can derive a final capability level for a given process are represented by a process capability
level model. The HCD PAM uses the measurement framework defined in ISO/IEC 33020.
NOTE It can be seen as good practice that at least two assessors conduct a representative HCD process
assessment: a lead assessor leading the assessment and a co-assessor supporting. It is useful if at least one of the
assessors has experience in mapping the HCD processes of the HCD PRM to organizations.
To support the rating of PAs, the ISO/IEC 33020 measurement framework provides a defined rating
scale with an option for refinement, different rating methods and different aggregation methods
depending on the class of the assessment (e.g. required for organizational maturity assessments). For
the rating scale within the process measurement framework, a PA is a measurable property of process
capability. A PA rating is a judgement of the degree of achievement of the PA for the assessed process.
The rating scale is defined by ISO/IEC 33020, as shown in Table 3.
Table 3 — Rating scale according to ISO/IEC 33020
N Not achieved There is little or no evidence of achievement of the defined PA in the assessed
process.
P Partially achieved There is some evidence of an approach to, and some achievement of, the defined
PA in the assessed process. Some aspects of achievement of the PA can be un-
predictable.
L Largely achieved There is evidence of a systematic approach to, and significant achievement of, the
defined PA in the assessed process. Some weaknesses related to this PA can exist
in the assessed process.
F Fully achieved There is evidence of a complete and systematic approach to, and full achieve-
ment of, the defined PA in the assessed process. No significant weaknesses
related to this PA exist in the assessed process.
For the rating of the degree of achievement of each process attribute, the rating scale of ISO/IEC 33020
is used: not achieved, partially achieved, largely achieved, fully achieved. This ordinal scale shall be
understood in terms of percentage achievement of a process attribute (shown in Table 4).
Table 4 — Rating scale percentage values according to ISO/IEC 33020
N Not achieved 0 to ≤ 15 % achievement
P Partially achieved > 15 % to ≤ 50 % achievement
L Largely achieved > 50 % to ≤ 85 % achievement
F Fully achieved > 85 % to ≤ 100 % achievement
The ordinal scale may be further refined for the measures P and L as defined in ISO/IEC 33020:2019,
Table 5.
The rating shall follow the rating defined in Table 5.
Table 5 — Refinement of rating scale and rating criteria according to ISO/IEC 33020
N Not achieved 0 to ≤ 15 % There is little or no evidence of achievement of the defined PA in the
achievement assessed process.
P− Partially > 15 % There is some evidence of an approach to, and some achievement of, the
achieved to ≤ 32,5 % defined PA in the assessed process. Many aspects of achievement of the
achievement PA can be unpredictable.
P+ Partially > 32,5 % There is some evidence of an approach to, and some achievement of, the
achieved to ≤ 50 % defined PA in the assessed process. Some aspects of achievement of the
achievement PA can be unpredictable.
L− Largely > 50 % to ≤ 67,5 % There is evidence of a systematic approach to, and significant achievement
achieved achievement of, the defined PA in the assessed process. Many weaknesses related to this
PA can exist in the assessed process.
L+ Largely > 6 7 , 5 % There is evidence of a systematic approach to, and significant achievement
achieved t o ≤ 8 5 % of, the defined PA in the assessed process. Some weaknesses related to this
achievement PA can exist in the assessed process.
F Fully achieved > 85 % There is evidence of a complete and systematic approach to, and full
to ≤ 100 % achievement of, the defined PA in the assessed process. No significant
achievement weaknesses related to this PA exist in the assessed process.
Rating and aggregation methods follow ISO/IEC 33020. A process outcome is the observable result of
successful achievement of the process purpose. A process attribute outcome is the observable result of
achievement of a specified process attribute. Process outcomes and process attribute outcomes may be
characterized as an intermediate step to providing a process attribute rating. When performing rating,
the rating method employed shall be specified relevant to the class of assessment. The selected rating
method(s) shall be specified in the assessment input and referenced in the assessment report.
ISO/IEC 33020 provides three rating methods. Depending on the class, scope and context of the
assessment, an aggregation within one process (one-dimensional, vertical aggregation), across
multiple process instances (one-dimensional, horizontal aggregation) or both (two-dimensional,
matrix aggregation) is performed. When performing an assessment, ratings may be summarized across
one or two dimensions. The process attributes and outcomes may be attributed to be mandatory or
recommended based on the cross-reference between ISO 9241-210 and ISO 9241-220 as shown in
ISO 9241-220:2019, Table C.2.
For further information regarding rating methods, see ISO/IEC 33020.
5.6 Process capability level model
The process capability level model defines the rules for how the achievement of each level depends on
the rating of the PAs for the assessed and all lower process capability levels. The process capability
levels are defined in detail in Clause 7.
The process capability level achieved by a process shall be derived from the PA ratings for that process
according to the process capability level model defined in Table 6.
Table 6 — Detailed process capability level model according to ISO/IEC 33020
Scale Process attribute Rating
Level 1 PA 1.1: Process Performance Largely or fully
Level 2 PA 1.1: Process Performance Fully
PA 2.1: Performance Management Largely or fully
PA 2.2: Documented Information Management Largely or fully
TTaabbllee 66 ((ccoonnttiinnueuedd))
Scale Process attribute Rating
Level 3 PA 1.1: Process Performance Fully
PA 2.1: Performance Management Fully
PA 2.2: Documented Information Management Fully
PA 3.1: Process Definition Largely or fully
PA 3.2: Process Deployment Largely or fully
PA 3.3: Process Assurance Largely or fully
Level 4 PA 1.1: Process Performance Fully
PA 2.1: Performance Management Fully
PA 2.2: Documented Information Management Fully
PA 3.1: Process Definition Fully
PA 3.2: Process Deployment Fully
PA 3.3: Process Assurance Fully
PA 4.1 Quantitative Analysis Largely or fully
PA 4.2: Quantitative Control Largely or fully
Level 5 PA 1.1: Process Performance Fully
PA 2.1: Performance Management Fully
PA 2.2: Documented Information Management Fully
PA 3.1: Process Definition Fully
PA 3.2: Process Deployment Fully
PA 3.3: Process Assurance Fully
PA 4.1: Quantitative Analysis Fully
PA 4.2: Quantitative Control Fully
PA 5.1: Process Innovation Largely or fully
As indicated in Table 6, to reach the next capability level all prior PAs of the former capability levels
shall be achieved fully.
As a general rule, the achievement of a given level requires a large achievement of the corresponding
PAs and a full achievement of any lower-lying PA.
A process assessment is a disciplined evaluation of an organizational unit’s processes against a PAM.
The PAM offers process indicators that provide guidance for assessors in accumulating the necessary
objective evidence to support judgements of the capability of the processes. They are not intended to be
regarded as a mandatory set of checklists to be followed. To judge the presence or absence of process
outcomes and process achievements, an assessment obtains objective evidence. All such evidence
comes from the examination of work products and repository content of the assessed processes, and
from testimony provided by the performers and managers of the assessed processes. This evidence
is mapped to the process indicators to allow the establishment of the correspondence to the relevant
process outcomes and PA achievements.
Although Level 1 capability of a process is only characterized by the measure of the extent to which the
process outcomes are achieved, the measurement framework requires each level to reveal a PA, and
thus requires the PAM to introduce at least one PCI for each capability level. Therefore, the only PCI for
capability Level 1 (PA.1.1) has a single generic practice (GP 1.1.1) pointing as an editorial reference to
the respective PPIs (see Figure A.1 in Annex A).
Detailed information about performing an assessment can be found in ISO/IEC 33002 regarding
assessment activities, roles, responsibilities and competences, assessment types and assessment
documentation. An example of how an assessment for information technology works in detail can be
found in ISO/IEC TS 33030. ISO/IEC TS 33060 contains a process assessment model for general system
life cycle processes.
The terminology used to plan, perform and document an assessment can be found in the following
sources:
a) ISO/IEC 33001 for assessment-related terminology;
b) ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765 and ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119 terminology (contained in Annex C);
c) terms introduced by ISO/TC 159/SC 4 (contained in Annex C).
6 Process reference model (PRM) and process performance indicators (PPIs)
(Level 1)
6.1 General
Figure 1 summarizes the HCD process categories and illustrates the different levels in an organization
and their responsibilities for human-centred quality.
Figure 1 — HCD processes
It is a responsibility of the top management in an organization to set vision and policies for how human-
centred quality can be addressed by HCD (HCP.1). HCD across projects and systems is enabled by
those responsible for (project) programme management and/or the operation of systems (HCP.2). The
execution of HCD within projects and the introduction, operation and end of life of systems is carried out
by people with the necessary competence within each project (HCP.3 and HCP.4). It is possible that each
process category is carried out by a different organizational entity or by a combination of entities. The
HCD PRM from ISO 9241-220 contains HCD processes for the process groups HCP.1 to HCP.4 (Table 7).
Table 7 — HCD process reference model from ISO 9241-220
Unique Process name Primary
identifier audiences
HCP.1 Ensure enterprise focus on human-centred quality Executive
responsible for
HCP.1.1 Incorporate human-centred quality in business strategy
human-centred
quality
HCP.1.2 Institutionalize human-centred quality
Ensures: execu-
tive management
HCP.2 Enable human-centred design across projects and systems Those respon-
sible for (HCD)
HCP.2.1 Integration of human-centred design
processes used
by the organiza-
HCP.2.2 Resources for human-centred design
tion
HCP.2.3 Authorization and control of human-centred quality
Ensures: project,
product and us-
ability manage-
ment
HCP.3 Execute human-centred design within a project Technical leader-
ship responsible
HCP.3.1 Plan and manage human-centred design for the project
for HCD
HCP.3.1.1 Establish human-centred quality objectives Ensures: project
and product man-
HCP.3.1.2 Manage threats and opportunities that can arise from use of the interactive
agement
system
HCP.3.1.3 Define extent of human-centred design in the project
HCP.3.1.4 Plan each HCD process activity
HCP.3.1.5 Manage HCD process activities within the project
HCP.3.2 Identify the context of use
HCP.3.2.1 Identify the intended user population and differentiate groups of users
HCP.3.2.2 Identify other aspects of the context of use and reported issues
HCP.3.3 Establish the user requirements
HCP.3.3.1 Identify the user needs
HCP.3.3.2 Specify the user requirements
HCP.3.3.3 Negotiate the user requirements in the context of a project
HCP.3.4 Design solution that meets user requirements
HCP.3.4.1 Specify the user-system interaction
HCP.3.4.2 Produce and refine user interface design solutions
HCP.3.5 User-centred evaluation
HCP.3.5.1 Plan for evaluation throughout the project
HCP.3.5.2 Plan each evaluation (what to evaluate and how)
HCP.3.5.3 Carry out each evaluation
HCP.4 Introduction, operation and end of life of a system Technical leader-
ship responsible
HCP.4.1 Introducing the system
for HCD
HCP.4.2 Human-centred quality in operation Ensures: service
and support man-
HCP.4.3 Human-centred quality during upgrades
agement
HCP.4.4 Human-centred quality at the end of life of a system
Each table related to one process in the process dimension contains the PRM and the PPIs necessary
to define the PAM (Table 8). The PPIs consist of base practices, input work products and output work
products.
NOTE 1 The processes in the process dimension (Table 7) are taken from the HCD PRM in ISO 9241-220. These
are reproduced in Tables 9 to 32.
NOTE 2 Table 7 also lists the primary audiences for each process category.
NOTE 3 Work product characteristics and types are defined in Annex C. The work product ID is not related
to the process ID. Indicators in brackets after the output work product name in Tables 9 to 32 refer to process
outcome.
Table 8 — Template for the process description
PRM Process ID The individual processes are described in terms of process name,
process purpose, process benefit and process outcomes to define
Process name
the human-centred PRM. Additionally, a process identifier is pro-
Process purpose
vided.
Process benefit
Process outcomes
PPIs BPs A set of BPs for the process, providing a definition of the tasks and
activities needed to accomplish the process purpose and fulfil the
process outcomes.
Input WPs A number of input WPs associated with each process.
See Annex C for the characteristics associated with each WP.
Output WPs A number of output WPs associated with each process.
See Annex C for the characteristics associated with each WP.
6.2 HCP.1 process group: ensure enterprise focus on human-centred quality
6.2.1 Purpose and outcomes of HCP.1
The main audience for this set of processes is executives and management who understand that human-
centred quality provides opportunities and addresses risks related to organizational or business
success, corporate image or society, customer confidence, staff motivation and human-system issues in
governance and services.
NOTE The content of this set of processes is likely to be communicated to executives and management by
specialists who are familiar with the content of this document.
The purpose of this set of processes is to establish and maintain awareness and sensitivity to satisfying
stakeholder and user needs for human-centred quality across the organization and make these needs
an inherent element in an organization's business strategy.
The outcomes achieved by this set of processes are as follows:
— human-centred quality of interactive systems is treated as a corporate asset across the organization;
— policies for achieving required levels of human-centred quality are set (demonstrating senior
management support for the improvement of infrastructure related to human-centred quality);
— institutionalization of human-centred design in the organization is managed;
— the organization employs HCD activities to maintain an appropriate level of human-centred quality:
— across systems, products and services;
— over time;
— in the market and workplace;
— human effectiveness, cost and risk analysis results are taken into account in investment decisions.
These outcomes are achieved by performance of the processes addressed in Tables 9 and 10.
6.2.2 HCP.1.1 – Incorporate human-centred quality in business strategy
Table 9 describes the purpose, benefits, outcomes, base practices, input work products and output work
products associated with HCP.1.1.
Table 9 — Purpose, benefits, outcomes, base practices, input work products and output work
products of HCP.1.1
Process ID HCP.1.1
a
Process name Incorporate human-centred quality in business strategy
Process purpose Explicitly take account of the human-centred quality of interactive systems in an
organization’s business strategy.
Process benefit The organization and affected stakeholders benefit from improved human-centred quality.
Process outcomes As a result of successful implementation of this process:
a) Analysis is carried out of opportunities for the organization related to human-
centred quality, including the understanding and mitigation of risks.
b) A corporate vision of human-centred quality as a corporate asset is created.
c) Strategic objectives for the human-centred quality of the organization's
interactive systems in the market or workplace are set.
d) Objectives for human-centred quality are included in the organization’s business
operational targets.
e) Investment in interactive systems takes account of the contribution of human-
centred design to business effectiveness, cost benefits and risk analysis.
f) Necessary resources for addressing human-cen
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...