Automated vehicles on airports

Automated vehicles on airports - a case study of process challenges and opportunities in developing employee acceptance

Master’s Thesis 30 credits Department of Business Studies Uppsala University Fall Semester of 2020

Date of Submission: 2021-01-08

Jodie Katja Säther Supervisor: Kerstin Sahlin

Jodie Katja Säther Master Thesis Ht 2020

1

Abstract

This study aims to explore the development of employee acceptance and process challenges

and opportunities that surface when new technologies are introduced in a workplace

environment. In the case of the implementation of automated vehicles, this study was conducted

in close relationship with the organisation. In particular, we investigate employee acceptance

and process challenges with an assistance of an analytic model, TAPA, built on the theoretical

framework of trust, practice theory and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which is

supported with trust and practice theory to form a comprehensive framework.

The study stands on the philosophy of engaged scholarship and uses qualitative material from

an exploratory case study, interviewing 22 respondents in order to cover an extensive part of

the processes and practices affected by this implementation. Interestingly, the empirical data

suggests that developing employee acceptance and combating process challenges and

harnessing opportunities are not separate subjects, but streams in the same river. Therefore, to

develop acceptance, the organisation would also need to work through the process challenges

the respondents warrants action.

Keywords: acceptance, legitimate peripheral participation, trust, practice theory, process

challenges, technology acceptance model


2

TABLE OF CONTENT

1 WHEN AUTOMATED VEHICLES INTERACT WITH HUMANS 4

INTRODUCTION 5

PROBLEM STATEMENT 6

RESEARCH QUESTION 7

PURPOSE 7

2 THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE, TRUST, AND PRACTICE THEORY 8

TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL, TAM 8

TRUST 11

PRACTICE THEORY 13

LEGITIMATE PERIPHERAL PARTICIPATION, LPP 15

ANALYTIC MODEL – Theory of Automation Process Acceptance, TAPA 16

3 TO TELL ABOUT ACCEPTANCE AND PROCESS – METHODOLOGICAL CONCERNS 18

INTERPRETIVE SOCIOLOGY AND MICRO MACRO INTEGRATION 18

RESEARCH STRATEGY AND DESIGN 20

DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE 21 The field division 22 The ground handling division 22

DATA COLLECTION 23

DATA ANALYSIS 26

QUALITY OF THE STUDY 26

4 EMPLOYEES PERCEPTION OF AUTOMATED VEHICLES 28

ADJACENT OPERATIONS – SAFETY OFFICERS AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS (G1) 28 Employee acceptance 28 Process challenges and opportunities 29

FIELD OPERATION – ADMINISTRATORS (G2) 32 Employee acceptance 32 Process challenges and opportunities 34

FIELD OPERATION – PSB DRIVERS (G3) 36


3

Employee acceptance 36 Structural challenges and opportunities 37

GROUND HANDLING - ADMINISTRATORS (G4) 37 Employee acceptance 37 Process challenges and opportunities 38

GROUND HANDLING – BAGGAGE HANDLERS (G5) 40 Employee acceptance 40 Process challenges and opportunities 41

SUMMARY OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS 42

5 CREATING ACCEPTANCE AND PROCESS CHALLENGES TO CONSIDER 43

OPPORTUNITIES - TECHNICAL FACTORS 46

OPPORTUNITIES - TECHNICAL AND PRACTICE FACTORS 47

OPPORTUNITIES - PRACTICE FACTORS 48 Cluster 1 48 Cluster 2 49

OTHER ASPECTS 50

6 IMPLICATIONS ON ACCEPTANCE AND FUTURE RESEARCH 51

REFERENCES 53

APPENDIX 1. QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN ALL INTERVIEWS 56


4

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Davis et al., (1989) Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) 9

Figure 2. Davis (1989) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) 10

Figure 3. Pavlou (2003) TAM complemented with the factor trust and perceived risk 11

Figure 4. Initial Theory of Automation Process Acceptance (TAPA) 17

Figure 5. Ritzer (2008) Interactions between different levels 19

Figure 6. Prioritised areas for maintenance on Bromma Airport 22

Figure 7. Revised Theory of Automation Process Acceptance model (TAPA) 44

LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Population sample with work description 25

Table 2. 11 factors from the empirical finding 46

Table 3. The Practice group with factors in two clusters 48

GLOSSARY

PU – Perceived Usefulness

PEU – Perceived Ease of Use

TAPA – Theory of Automation Process Acceptance

LPP – Legitimate Peripheral Participation

GH – Ground handling division

IT – Information Technology

OS – Organisation studies

Artifact – A tangible solution to a real-world problem


5

1 When automated vehicles interact with humans INTRODUCTION What a thrill with new technology! In our history, there is a constant flow of emerging

technology. Currently, we are in a period of movement toward more technologically automated

processes. However, when implementing emerging technical solutions, tension is created

between the old structure and the new technical structure within the institution. In the shift we

are facing towards further automation, actions must be taken on different levels. I say further

automation to emphasise that this process is the present in a continuum, containing past

automation shifts as well as future shifts. Past automation progress in Sweden range from pulp

manufacturing and ore mining to safety match production and textile industry. Automation

creates increased number of activities without human interaction. An automated vehicles

process liberates the driving process of human interaction. This study will consider the

particular case of automated vehicles.

These vehicles create a range of possibilities that is hard to fathom, and even from the first cars

that set off the red flag act in Britain, the technological innovation was curbed for decades

(Judd, 2005). Automated vehicles have the range to facilitate in business as well as public

service. Automated vehicles have been shown to facilitate elderly persons to retain their

independence in travelling and make logistics run effortlessly. However, this study will focus

on the area of airport automation processes.

Autonomous processes for various functions are multiplying daily and paving the way for

opportunities to restructure organisations and seek new vantage points. With an increasing

number of researches done regarding how Industry 4.0 creates new tools and how they can be

used in different areas, airports in particular are stretching the boundaries to increase efficiency

and reduce delays. For example, a new system of baggage trucks connected to the Internet of

Things are able to monitor the vibrations of baggage carts (Koenig et al., 2019). In 2018,

Heathrow airport completed the UK´s first airside vehicle trial with Oxbotica. At Gatwick, the

airport was prepared for a large-scale trial with CargoPod´s autonomous small vehicles, which

are to be used to shuttle staff around the airside area at the airport. At Gatwick, around 300

airside vehicles stand stationary 90 per cent of the time; the trial aims to present a solution to

safely meet the airport’s needs with a smaller pool of autonomous vehicles (“Heathrow airport


6

completes UK’s first autonomous airside vehicle trial.,” 2018). Last year, at Christchurch

airport, the Ohmio LIFT™, a shuttle vehicle, went through its second phase of trials (NZ-made

driverless vehicle joins Christchurch trial, 2018). With the Yeti project in Norway, the airport

operator Avinor collaborated with Swedish technology giant Semcon and the snowplough

specialist Overaasen to use autonomous vehicles for Nordic winter conditions (Radley, 2018).

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Autonomous vehicles are passing over our doorsteps into our homes and our workplaces

voluntarily – and sometimes involuntarily. Often, changes such as these are not by one's own

choice but are instead pushed top-down in the organisation. It begs the question: What will

change, and will it be for the better? and for whom will it be better? Moreover, Brynjolfsson

and McAfee (2016, p. 182) argue that "machines are more likely to complement humans rather

than substitute for them." Humans bring creativity, and it is pertinent to recognise the value

employees in practice hold (McAfee and Brynjolfsson, 2017). With research and development

focusing on new technology, it is crucial to attract attention to the intended users of the

technology. Subsequently, to retain high work performance, user acceptance for new

technology needs to be taken into consideration (Davis et al., 1989). It could be salvaged

through nurturing the dialogue between employees and the technology and in particular, making

inquiries regarding the needs of employees to be able to soundly operate the technology. Speier

and Venkatesh (2002) show that even with a positive attitude towards automation in the early

stage, attitudes can shift after just a couple of months. The individual´s acceptance of

technology plays a central role in explaining this phenomenon.

A substantial amount of the body of research covering automation refers to self-driving cars

and other transport vehicles. This area battles arguments such as “the trolley problem” and

unethical decision making through “biased algorithms” (Garcia, 2016; Goodall, 2017). But

there are other types of automated machines, ones we only experience from the outside, such

as automated lawn mowers and vacuum cleaners. The perception of acceptance and trust may

not be in focus when dealing with a small robot such as a disc-shaped lawn mower that weighs

just under 10 kilos. What if it were a multi-tonne truck, would that change your threshold to

trust the process? Zhang et. al. (2019) emphasise the value of creating initial trust in automated

vehicles, and thereby shaping the user attitude towards them. Furthermore, we need to explore

automated machines in various applications and environments to entertain the nuances.


7

Specifically, what could work as catalysts for trust and acceptance on an individual level, as

well as societal? Following the implementation of new innovation over time to make

adjustments and work interchangeably within the organisation can create a favourable outcome.

Therefore, it becomes of interest to explore what happens when the robot is not a ten-kilo disc

or have clear, isolated areas to their specific purpose. How do we combat issues of acceptance

when the vehicle weighs a couple of tonnes and needs to share the area with employees, has a

semi-structured set of functions, contractors and other support functions? Whenever

innovations are introduced into the workplace and disrupt usual practice, it warrants a closer

look. This study sets out to contribute to the understanding of acceptance and trust for

employees working adjacent to automated vehicles as well as the challenges and opportunities

the organisation are facing.

This case is focused on the future implementation of automated vehicles at a Swedish airport.

Two types of vehicles are investigated snowploughs and baggage trucks. These vehicles are

active in two main processes, field maintenance and ground handling. Further, the study seeks

to surface areas of opportunities to facilitate acceptance within the work stream processes.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What process challenges and opportunities do employees face with the implementation of

automated vehicles? How can the organisation develop employee acceptance?

PURPOSE

The study aims to identify areas of risk, challenges, for the implementation of automated

vehicles. In particular, it analyses attitudes through the concepts of practice, trust, perceived

usefulness and, perceived ease of use. Trust is therefore handled as an antecedent to acceptance.

This study looks at the barriers for implementation of vehicles and adoption of new processes.

Conversely, the study wants to identify aspects around the development of employee

acceptance and challenges within the process. In particular, the study and research method will

use the concept of engaged scholarship as a cornerstone (Van de Ven, 2007).


8

2 The role of technology acceptance, trust, and practice theory First, this chapter presents a selection of research in two fields; organisation studies and

information system. The Technology Acceptance Model, Trust, and Practice are expected to

give the study instruments to understand and engage in the case study. Thus, by exploring

existing research areas and forming a theoretical foundation, it creates the opportunity to

couple the existing research into an analytic model to use in investigation of this case.

Thereafter, the analytic model will be presented last in this chapter.

The research method used entails the ideas and vision of engaged scholarship. Especially for

the emphasizes on the value of using multiple theories to act as a complement to each other for

an enhanced understanding of the context around the problem. By having a research question

that focus on the process and one with a more holistic focus, the need for multiple theories

becomes crucial to not create an oversimplified view of the situation. Multiple frames lend us

the chance to expand the framework and present solutions to the given phenomenon. In theory

building, three activities work as pillars for the process; “conceiving or creating a theory,

constructing or elaborating the theory, and justifying or evaluating the theory” (Van de Ven,

2007, p. 101). In the first step, abductive reasoning is used. For the next stage, logical deduction

is needed for constructing the theory, followed by inductive reasoning to justify the theory

chosen. The theory chosen for the analytic model is hopefully a reliable foundation for the

operational research model to use as tool of choice in this case study. In this study the multiple

frames are essential for a comprehensive view. TAM contribute with a set of important tools

towards understanding how to develop acceptance. However, TAM does not recognise the

dynamic in individuals as carriers and producers of acceptance. Therefore, the framework of

practice is significant for this study. Additionally, trust is an important part of understanding

acceptance, which is also incorporated here in theory towards the analytical model.

TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL, TAM

The technology acceptance model, TAM, was designed in Davis (1989) and Davis et al.,

(1989)’s seminal papers on how perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use predicts user

acceptance towards information technology in a workplace environment. Interestingly, Davis’s

(1989) purpose was to find and uncover a better measurement for predicting and explaining the

use of technology, an aspect this study also seeks to understand. Davis et al., (1989) depicts the

roots TAM have in Fishbein and Ajzen´s Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), presented in the


9

figure 1 below. However, TAM has excluded elements from TRA such as subjective norm

(SN), one of the determinants of behavioural intention (BI). However, in TAM2, Venkatesh

and Davis (2000) revisited the factor; placing subjective norm under the umbrella “social

influence processes.” Thus, if trust is low, the affect the intentions to be harmful for the process.

Figure 1. Davis et al., (1989) Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)

Additionally, Ajzen (1991) continues research on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to

provide further insight into predicting behaviour. Fishbein and Ajzen (1980; 1975) lowered the

barrier towards adoption and usage of the behavioural prediction model within the technology

field. Furthermore, it remains significant to keep in mind that their work bears influence from

psychology and Bailey and Person´s (1983) work on measurements of computer user

satisfaction. Thereby, one needs to keep in mind the heritage and its complexity that builds up

to TRA and TAM. Bailey and Person (1983) measured on 39 factors, spanning from “top

management involvement” to “precision.” All of these factors and attributes funnels down to

the behavioural intentions of the individual.

The development and application continued for TRA and TAM into areas such as the prediction

of product purchase (Warshaw, 2018), internet banking (Alsajjan and Dennis, 2010), software

utilization (Dishaw and Strong, 1999) and electronic commerce (Pavlou, 2003). Broadly

construed, TAM also shows robustness in different cultural contexts (Legris et al., 2003).

However, it still warrants caution towards the prevalence of different values in the organisation

that could influence the study (Hofstede, 2001).


10

Davis et al., (1989) derived that individuals demonstrate a higher willingness to use a

technology they believe will facilitate their job performance. Therefore, if the technology has a

system that is too hard to use, the potential performance benefit can be counteracted. Perceived

usefulness (PU), is defined by Davis (1989, p. 320) as "the degree to which a person believes

that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance." The new technology

must exert a possibility of being used advantageously. Perceived ease of use (PEOU), is defined

by Davis (1989, p. 320) as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system

would be free of effort.” The definition of effort Davis (1989, p.320) uses “is a finite resource

that a person may allocate to the various activities for which he or she is responsible”. This is

an application from Radner and Rothschild´s (1975) research on managerial levels on effort

allocation on various activities. Davis’s (1989) original model illustrates the relationship

between input factors and outcome factors which is presented in figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Davis (1989) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

PU has shown a stronger impact on attitude towards actual using, ergo, Actual system use (AU),

than PEOU. However, PU and PEOU together is emphasised as the most important factors for

determining AU (Legris et al., 2003).

TAMs have been used in a variation of contexts and proven robust, even in different cultural

contexts (Ashraf et al., 2014), this to evaluate individuals’ acceptance of new technology and

system solutions. However, Ashraf et al. (2014) supplemented the model with trust as an

important factor. In this study I intend to complement TAM with trust to initiate an interactive

stance for acceptance of technology in users. In fact, Pavlou (2003) also made alterations to

TAM and tailored the model, used towards researching consumer acceptance within electronic

commerce, instead of the original workplace setting. The model Pavlou (2003) uses is depicted

in figure 3 below. Pavlou´s model includes trust as well as perceived risk as elements and,


11

emphasise the central part uncertainty plays in increasing the transactional cost in institutional

practice Pavlou (2003).

Figure 3. Pavlou (2003) TAM complemented with the factor trust and perceived risk

In this study we will take this one step further and tie the model with not only trust, but also

practice. This study will invite TAM to work in tandem with the factors of trust and practice.

Thereby, engaging the users of technology and empower them with a framework to give input

to redesign the process in this implementation. This study takes the stance that recipients of

technology are active carriers, not passive receivers. We seek to extend TAM to couple with

factors and dimensions that could have favourable outcomes in understanding employee

acceptance and process challenges and opportunities. By extending the analytical model with

trust we reconnect with Bailey and Pearson´s (1983) concept of 39 factors, albeit this research

only entails one additional factor in the same format and level; trust.

TRUST

There has been extensive research and theories covering trust over the decades. The purpose is

to use trust as a conduit for creating acceptance. Frameworks such as formal and legal can be

set into place to solidify trust (Ring and Van de Ven, 1994). However, most scholars agree that

trust is a psychological state. In this study trust is assumed to be the antecedent to acceptance.

The user of new technology need trust in the artifact and process to accept the changes. Artifacts


12

is described by Barley and Orlikowski (2001, p.146) as “a tangible solutions to a real-world

problems.” Broadly construed, trust has been defined in terms of cognitive processes and

thereby the perceived state of vulnerability (Kramer, 1999). Luhmann (2017, pp. 12–18) ignites

some of the dilemmas with trust, time and institutions by stating:

“to trust is to anticipate the future…The problem of trust therefore consists in fact that the future

contains far more possibilities than could ever be realized in the present and transferred into the past.

The uncertainty about what will happen is simply a consequence of the very elementary fact that not

all futures can become the present and hence become the past. The future places an excessive burden

on a person´s ability to represent things to himself…so it is not to be expected that scientific and

technological development of civilization will bring events under control, substituting mastery over

things for trust as a social mechanism and thus making it unnecessary. Instead, one should expect

trust to be increasingly in demand as a means of enduring the complexity of the future which

technology will generate.”

As a consequence, in its broad application, trust has found its way into extensions of TAM for

theoretical explanations of acceptance. Dahlberg et al., (n.d.) use a trust-enhanced technology

acceptance model (TOMI) to study consumer acceptance of different mobile payment solutions.

McKnight and Chervany (2014) dive into the trust typology with dispositional trust,

institutional trust and interpersonal trust to be able to measure the effect in e-commerce

customer relationships. Wu and Chen (2005) have coupled not only trust with TAM, but also

the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to employ a thorough examination of the adoption of

online tax. Also, Gefen et al., (2003) chose to unite trust and TAM to study online shopping

behaviour. However, as similar as these research areas may seem on the surface, there is a clear

distinction between the future process automation of an airport and the online shopping process.

As Gefen et al., (2003) states, a substantial amount of consumers choose to leave their shopping

carts and the process in full, which is not an alternative for an employee within a work process. Further, Luhmann (2007) describes that in the world of today, with an increased number of

interfaces with other people, we have evolved from a holistic trust in the individual to now only

entail the area in which the person should be perceived as trustworthy. For example, within a

job description, expertise for only the job is required for being perceived as trustworthy,

excluding the individual´s other qualities. Additionally, systemic trust is a cornerstone for our

civilization to reduce complexity and increase trust (Luhmann et al., 2017).


13

Kramer (1999) concludes that the presence of distrust in an organization is a common and

recurring conundrum. In particular, both distrust and suspicion are triggered by a perceived lack

of confidence, motives of genuineness or insincerity. Trust´s ability to influence perceived

interactions and processes have warranted its presence into various fields, as both an antecedent

as well as a consequence of behaviour. Morgan and Hunt (2018) underline the value of trust for

marketing theory and practice with reference to the importance of achieving effectiveness in

our social organizations. In particular, they show how trust impacts relationship commitment,

uncertainty, functional conflicts and cooperation.

PRACTICE THEORY

Practice is a living process and constitutes of all the actions that is present in organisations and

institutions. It is used in this study to articulate the stream of actions within a process. Those

actions are carried out actively by employees by their choice. To develop acceptance and

harness the challenges and opportunities they see, we need practice as a framework to

understand the employees empowered position. Institutions are built and reformed by these

actions continuously (Lawrence et al., 2009, p. 284). In fact, Nyiri and Smith (1988) argue that

practice is composed by our endeavours. The interconnection between our practices are the

cornerstones for stability and change. Turner (1996) formulates the notion that practice is a

phenomenon that is not limited to the individual, but rather persists in time. Nicolini (2013)

argues that the actions of actors can have unintentional consequences in the practice. In doing

so, the carried-out practice can have a disordering effect instead of the anticipated reproduction

of actions, thereby further mis-reproducing structure. In this study we want to acknowledge that

the employees have the power to act on their own and reproduce the action they see fit. It should

not be taken for granted that the employees initially accept the new processes without hesitation

and initial resistance. It is at the practice level, micro level, that this system builds and

accumulates what becomes the structural conditions. All practices are interdependent and

persist in relationship of reciprocity; while practices are always inherently unique and situated,

employees are also connected to social life both locally and, potentially, globally.

The contemporary theories of practice constitute multiple theoretical approaches. In this,

Nicolini (2013) argues that practice theories can offer new ways of understanding and

explaining social and organisational phenomena. Moreover, Nicolini (2013) describes that all

practice theories stand on the bedrock of activity, performance and work in the formation of all


14

aspects of social life. Thereby, it encompasses one´s daily work and how one chooses to interact

with colleagues, support functions as well as technical artifacts. Behind the seemingly durable

structure of society, there is always someone’s work and effort.

"The objects are actively participating in both producing and perpetuating the activity of conducting

the activity. Objects thus both participate in the accomplishment of the practice and make this

accomplishment durable over time" (Nicolini, 2013, p. 4).

Practice theory frames the relationship between the individual agency and the agent. The actor

is a carrier of the practice in the sense that one carries the social practice but also carries out

social practices. Nicolini (2013) continues with concluding that all practice theories create

space for the initiative, creativity and individual performance. Performing a practice is seen as

adapting to new circumstances and is neither mindless repetition nor completely new behaviour.

Discourses can become a part of the practice but are not seen as enough to explain the world

one inhabits. In fact, interest is a constituent in practice-based approaches and emphasizes the

importance of power, conflict and politics as constitutive segments of the social reality we

experience (Luhmann et al., 2017; Nicolini, 2009). Practice puts people (and things) in place,

and it gives (or denies) people the power to perform actions.

A practice-based approach suggests the basic unit of analysis for understanding organisational

phenomena are practises, not practitioners. Practice theories do more than describe what people

do. Practices are meaning-making, identity-forming and order-producing activities (Chia and

Holt, 2006; Nicolini, 2009). Material and discursive work practice theory suggests that

organisations and institutions are made and remade (Lawrence et al., 2009).

Practice can be understood through tradition and community and arguing that practice is

understood and sustained by a community and is nothing new. Nyiri and Smith (1988) argue

that practical knowledge cannot be translated into words. It is locked in the process itself. As a

consequence of its pre-verbal and personal nature, it serves as a foundation for much of what

we believe to know. Practical knowledge can be allocated through custom, institutions, and the

processes of handing down a tradition. Tradition can be seen as a routine of actions and practice

within a group or organisation. The locus is the transmission of practice and a process of social

learning. The practice is then reproduced through processes of active engagement and the

inclusion of the actor within a specific community (Nicolini, 2013). As a consequence, practice


15

is what we do, not what we should be doing. Thereby practice does not take into consideration

structural flaws that lead people to act in contrast to regulations or standards.

LEGITIMATE PERIPHERAL PARTICIPATION, LPP A learning process stemming from the apprenticeship tradition is the mechanism of “legitimate

peripheral participation” (LPP) (Nicolini, 2013). LPP argues against the notion of learning as a

socially structured process by which one absorbs practice and is absorbed into practice. The

underlining argument for LPP are the processes by which the learner engages in ongoing

practice and its social process entails partial responsibility of the end product. With this process,

the actor obtains access to expertise in the ongoing practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991). LPP has

an emphasis on the sociality that grows around the ongoing practice and therefore identifies

learning as a social process containing a sense of inclusiveness, engagement and developing

identities. LPP is emphasises in this study due to the implementation of a new practice, which

calls for a learning process, both into adoption of new process as well as understanding the shift

in practice.

LPP emphasise the involvement of new arrivals in the practice as they acquire increased

competencies. Lave and Wenger (1991) argue that for something in practice to reach the status

"legitimate," it needs to become an effective and recognizable part of an activity. For learning

to occur, the actors need to engage in the process and become a stakeholder in the ongoing

practice. Subsequently, LPP argues that learning is both a condition for membership and is itself

an evolving form of membership corollary to the notion that "identity, knowledge and social

membership entails one another" (Lave and Wenger, 1991, p. 53). Nicolini (2013) explains that

LPP has its focus on finding what sort of social engagement provides the proper conditions for

learning and not on the cognitive processes of learning.

With both LPP and practice theory, it creates a framework for connecting TAM and trust to the

employees´, practice and process within an organisation. TAM and trust have focus on the

individual level. By coupling it with practice theory and LPP to emphasise that connection to

the process and organisation. The employees´ acceptance towards automated vehicles does not

exist in a vacuum. On the contrast, it exists in an everchanging active interplay between

individual and organisation.


16

ANALYTIC MODEL – Theory of Automation Process Acceptance, TAPA Engaged scholarship gives the study the opportunity to combines theories and use multiple

methodologies. Orlikowski and Barley (2001) emphasise the need for the exchange between

information technology and organisational studies. In their article, the authors point out that

within organisational studies the technology, the artifact, is often handled as a constant without

any chance of alteration. There is a lack of interest from organisational research to take the

material properties into account and ask, “What works?” and find practical solutions, which is

a driving component in information technology research. Leonardi and Barley (2008) explain

that the oscillate pattern of swinging between the material and the social creates a theory for

technology and organisations. Further, they funnel the argument down to the notion; it is all

about creating an accurate presentation of how people work. There is the palpable intersection

between the social and material for human endeavour, and furthermore is the focus of this

analytic model. Hogarth (1987) describes human judgement and choice as intuitive, and how

the person´s judgement will lead up to the outcome. Predictive judgement holds value for

decision making and this model seeks to adequately capture this process and its potential

impact.

The theory of technology acceptance, trust and practice holds fundamental importance to study

change in work stream processes. TAM creates a core by which trust, and practice is applied as

extensions to support legitimacy for this study. The purpose is to pursue understanding, not

only of the employees, but also what keys the organisation holds to unlock an effective process.

The technology acceptance model displays the cornerstone components for understanding how

actors can perceive new technology and how to reach acceptance. The factors perceived

usefulness and perceived ease of use will be used as an instrument to capture the attitude

towards this system change. Therefore, it will facilitate the process of understanding how to

increase acceptance for future implementation.

Trust is the first extension to TAM in this study. With recurrent active interactions within the

organisation and its processes, there is a great value for its efficacy to secure high levels of trust

for this new process. In doing so, trust could work as a conduit for taking actions to ensure a

strong sense of responsibility for the process, from the employer side. Moreover, trust exhibits

functions to bridge TAM and practice theory. In particular, it is measured on an individual level


17

similar to TAM and then carries that effect into the practice process, thereby extending the

purview to an organisational level.

Practice as tradition and practice theory are used to display the complexity for understanding

what structural changes will be needed for an implementation of automated vehicles to work

seamlessly with the employees in the groups directly concerned. Practice contributes with tools

to understand the human diversity in acting, reacting and interacting with one´s environment

and groups. Conversely, an understanding for how practice is created and re-created within

groups and between individuals is crucial for this exploratory research encounter. Practice holds

the key to what actions the employees will perform in the Theory of Automation Process

Acceptance model (TAPA) used in this study, see figure 4 below.

Figure 4. Initial Theory of Automation Process Acceptance (TAPA)

To investigate acceptance, challenges and opportunities in implementing new technology

there is no simple solution. By creating a framework which holds both the employee´s active

role as well as the process and organisation, we hope to capture an accurate view of the case

with its research questions.


18

3 To tell about acceptance and process – methodological concerns This chapter describes the method chosen for analysis and how engaged scholarship has

supported the process. Interpretive sociology and micro-macro integration are presented first

followed by the research strategy and design. Thereafter followed by a description of the case,

population and sample, and finally data collection.

INTERPRETIVE SOCIOLOGY AND MICRO MACRO INTEGRATION

This study warrants the tools to interpret acceptance for the employees in the five sub-units on

individual level as well as the process on a practice level. Therefore, a section now follows with

a background in interpretive sociology and micro-macro integration to argue for the method

approach needed. With theory spanning from individual to organisational level, the method

chosen will to take that into consideration. One of the most important areas of interpretive

sociology is symbolic interactionism (Marsh, 2006, p. 65). Behind the idea is that what

influences people´s behaviour most is how other people treat them. It is focused on a micro-

level of social life as starting point, moving towards the full societies are the end result.

Interpretive sociology often focuses on everyday life and processes more than meta questions

with aims to find general explanations for a whole society. By understanding how social

interaction occurs, symbolic interactionism tries to understand how social order is maintained

with an emphasis on how individuals interpret their surrounding processes and how they choose

to respond to these interactions. Marsh (2006) posits that interpretive sociology views human

behaviour as voluntarily actions made from conscious decision making. This decision making

is derived from how individuals interpret situations. This idea transcends the study and the

analytic model which uses the same interpretation for the empirical analysis.

Symbolic interactionism emerged in the 1920s and suggests that human interaction is different

from that of other animals due to its use of symbols. These symbols attach meaning to language,

where language is seen as a series of symbols. The “self” is one of the key areas of this

perspective, where the concept of self is only meaningful in reference to other´s selves (Marsh,

2006, p. 66). In this same concept, Goffman (1990) views the world as a stage where all

individuals play roles, and their behaviours are performances put on for others to spectate.

Individuals in different roles carry different expectations and behaviours; parent, child, student,

teacher, employer, employee. The motivation for individuals is to gain as much information

possible about the situations they encounter, and with the absence of this knowledge,


19

individuals need to make assumptions and predictions. In this study the assumptions and

predictions employees make about future practice and process are crucial to discern the

challenges and opportunities presented. Marsh (2006, p.69) approves of this vision of symbolic

interactionism, noting, "the dramaturgical analogy does contribute to our understanding and

analysis of aspects of everyday life.” The interpretation of a situation is crucial for

understanding why individuals exercise thought in a certain way, and their actions and

interactions are the building blocks of groups (Ritzer, 2008, p. 231).

In the 1980s, micro-macro theory aimed to create a linkage between micro and macro theory

within sociology that had been absent (Ritzer, 2008, p. 375). This study aims to take advantage

of that linkage when interpreting the empirical findings on both an employee level as well as

on a practice level. Ritzer (2008) argues for his theory and model of micro-macro integration

by proposing that one cannot study micro-macro issues without the objective-subjective

continuum. With these four levels of social analysis, one can study issues with an inter-

relational approach.

The macro-objective level involves large-scale material realities such as society, bureaucracy, and

technology. The macro-subjective level encompasses large-scale nonmaterial phenomena such as norms

and values. At the micro levels, micro objectivity involves small-scale objective entities such as patterns

of action and interaction, whereas micro subjectivity is concerned with the small-scale mental processes

by which people construct social reality. Each of these four levels is important in itself, but of utmost

importance in the dialectical relationship among and between them. (Ritzer, 2008, p. 377)

The figure 6 below depicts Ritzer´s (2008) model of how the different levels interact with

one another and how the levels impact the other levels in a process, organisation and society.

Figure 5. Ritzer (2008) Interactions between different levels.


20

Actions on a micro level will not have direct consequences on a macro level, but can over time

create public issues if it troubles a larger amount of people. Ritzer (2008) argues that when

micro level issues aggregate it creates public issues for society. Therefore, the TAPA model

would like to keep awareness to the individual´s power to affect the outcome of the

implementation for better and worse. This creates an opportunity to collaborate and engage with

the recipients of the automated processes to create a process with high levels of acceptance.

RESEARCH STRATEGY AND DESIGN

Challenges within the implementation process of an automated vehicle have not received much

attention in research. Limited research has investigated the agent phenomenon and how humans

perceive trust and fairness encountering artificial agents (Dignum, 2018). Therefore, an

abductive research approach is suitable to be able to bridge practice theory and key concepts

such as trust, knowledge transfer and acceptance within the evidence found in the data. It

provides the research tools to analyse the data with the hermeneutic circle at close hand, a

dialogue between the data and understanding (Bryman and Bell, 2015, p. 27). Alvesson and

Kärreman (2007) argue the value of how we perceive relationships between theory and the

empirical material. They highlight the possibility empirical material has to illustrate theory and

facilitate critical thinking. The focal concept is problematisation, which opens up new

possibilities and thereby prompts rethinking and developing the underlying theory. Alvesson

and Kärreman (2007) emphasise the need for mystery-focused research. This research hopes to

explore this phenomenon by letting empirical material inspire the problematisation of a

theoretical idea. This research is exploratory in order to take advantage of “the art of being

curious at the opportune but unexpected moment. It is an art that is as old as the most primitive

science” (Merton et al., 2004, p. 210). Alvesson and Kärreman (2007, p. 1266) emphasise that

the empirical material works as an anchor for the theorisation “in specific claims about the

object under study, thus prohibiting arbitrary ideas from being put into play.” Asplund (1970)

argues that the creation process is enhanced by using empirical data to make an argument rather

than as the absolute result in a debate between various theoretical standpoints. Moreover, the

engaged scholarship methodology has been used to create active interaction between the

research and the organisation (Van de Ven, 2007).

This study on the context for which implementation of automated vehicles is set is constructed

as an exploratory study to successfully be able to identify key areas of challenges for the


21

implementation. The case is defined as the work units in which the vehicles are considered to

replace in the future, with a main focus on the field department and ground handling. The

boundaries of the case are set up to just contain members of the field and ground handling

divisions of the airport. The data collected from other areas adds context and provides

exploratory width. There will be no possibility to draw statistical generalisations from this type

of case study (Yin, 2014, p. 37). However, as Yin argues, an analytic generalisation can be

compelling. By holding an ideographic approach, this case is chosen for its potential to

elucidate, in greater depth, the challenges this technology faces in the eyes of the people

working in the units directly concerned (Bryman and Bell, 2015, p. 68). Subsequently, this case

holds value for possible analytic generalisations.

For this study, an embedded single-case design was chosen to be able to drill down to the

specific revelatory case. The embedded single-case design gives the study the opportunity to

observe and analyse phenomena with attention to units with different sub-units. The two chosen

units are the field division and ground handling, specifically concerning the automated snow

plough vehicle and baggage truck. In total, there are five sub-units following under the two

main units: GH administrative positions, field division administrative positions, snow plough

leaders, snow plough drivers and loadmasters.

DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE The case investigates how the future implementation of automated vehicles at Bromma airport

will affect the airport’s employees and processes. Bromma airport is the developmental airport

in the Swedavia corporation, comprised of 10 airports in Sweden from the north to the south.

Swedavia are investigating the opportunity to replace its vehicle fleet with automated vehicles.

This study is part of a Vinnova project to accelerate technology implementation at the airports.

The two vehicles focused on are PSBs, plough sweep and blower machines, and baggage trucks.

The aims are to focus on how to increase employee acceptance and how process challenges and

opportunities are viewed from an employee’s standpoint. The vehicles are used by different

divisions; PSBs are a part of the field division and baggage trucks are a part of ground handling

(GH). By identifying the challenges and opportunities towards reaching employee acceptance

there is a aspiration to create processes that are satisfying for the employees and to secure future

quality in the processes. High quality is an antecedent for security which is crucial in the airport


22

business where miscommunication or faulty processes can have fatal outcome for employees

as well as travellers.

The field division

The PSBs are driven in a convoy of 8-9 vehicles, with snow leaders in cars assisting them in

the process and keeping contact with the tower. The snow leaders drive friction measuring cars

and operate the equipment which measures contamination on the runway. The Road Weather

Information System, RWIS, is an important support for the snow leaders to monitor runway

conditions and is used as support for deciding when to sweep or plough the runways and also

if any formate is needed. Formate is an alcohol used to lower the freezing point on the runway

and is distributed after snow ploughing to prevent the runway from re-freezing as fast as it

would otherwise. In figure 7 below the area around Bromma airport is visible. The blue area is

the landside and the green area is the apron area, finally the dark grey area is the manoeuvre

area. The manoeuvre area can be referred to as runway or taxiway by the respondents. It is in

total 437000 square meters that is prioritised for maintenance and service from the field

division.

Figure 6. Prioritised areas for maintenance at Bromma Airport.

The ground handling division

The baggage trucks are driven by a ground handling worker, and usually two people will share

one baggage truck in order to service one aircraft. One aircraft is serviced at the time. The

ground handling employees’ wave in the airplane to the stand. They also take care of service of


23

the aircrafts after landing and before take-off. Service includes refurbishing of water tanks,

cargo loading and anti-icing processes to lower the freezing point of water.

DATA COLLECTION

The study builds on one main empirical data source, interviews. These interviews have

subsequently been used to collect data about how the employees perceive different aspects of

the implementation of automated vehicles. This study thus combines data from different work

units and departments to cover as many potential aspects as possible in order to draw

conclusions about the work unit´s variations in perception. This creates a broader qualitative

understanding of opinion, arguments and motivation.

The following section describes the empirical material collected for this thesis. The order in

which the three main focus groups, field, safety and ground handling, are presented represents,

mainly, the order in which interviews have been conducted. All interviews were conducted at

Bromma airport, a Swedavia Airport, in April 2019. A total of 21 interviews were conducted

with 22 representatives, visible in table 1, further below. All the interviews have followed the

same case protocol, focusing on what the representatives do, how they perceive the

implementation of automated machines, and their concerns and objections.

First, I made a pilot study in February 2019 where I visited the different units and made it

possible for employees to be aware of the study. In this setting, I was able to try different angles

and adjust the protocol later used in the case study. This period allowed me to observe the

setting of Bromma airport and learn about the challenges it faces with automated vehicles. I test

drove the snow plough vehicles and observed from inside the snow plough when they were out

on runways. I rode the friction measuring cars with the snow leaders out on runways to

familiarize myself of their procedures. I participated in product presentations in order to observe

the attitudes and comments raised during those sessions. I was given a fundamental

understanding of the new RWIS system, which assists the field department in their work of

controlling the runway temperature and contamination frequency. Additionally, I was given an

overview of the meteorological equipment and the communication channels used by different

units. The aim of the pilot was to facilitate the triangulation of data collection, even though only

one data collection source was used.


24

In the first empirical portion, I conducted interviews with ten representatives from the field

department at Bromma airport. In table 1 below all the respondents are presented with work

description. The first interviews were with one senior snow leader, followed by interviews with

two individuals training to be snow leaders. These interviews were aimed at finding out how

different sub-units perceive the implementation of automated vehicles as well as their own

individual perception. To support the analysis, I continued with conducting three interviews

with representatives from the administrative side of the fields department and one

representative with a mixed background from the fire and snow department. Afterwards, I

conducted three interviews with snow plough drivers. Two of the snow plough drivers had a

ground maintenance task, in which single interviews were not an option.

The second part of the empirical study deals with the safety aspect of the implementation of

automated vehicles. Preliminary results from the first part indicated large complexity regarding

connected units. Thus, to be able to understand the relations between the units, I conducted

three interviews with three representatives from different safety areas. These interviews were

aimed at finding out how the different units, field and ground handling, work from an outside

perspective to be able to increase understanding before the last part of the empirical data

collection.

The third part of the empirical study focused on the ground handling unit, where I conducted

eight interviews with representatives from various positions within administration and with

loadmasters working with the baggage trucks. In contrast to the field unit, which has the three

sub-units (administration, snow leaders and snow plough drivers), ground handling only has

two sub-units, administration and loadmasters.

The population in this study is comprised of different divisions with a variety of processes. This

is meant to encompass all the aspects and risks of implementing new technology from different

angles. In doing so, the study conforms to Van de Ven´s (2007) advocacy for capturing the

process in a holistic sense. Moreover, this method creates interaction and negotiation between

the research and the case. Thereby, a larger net was cast to secure an adequately captured

description of the case. To capture the most viewpoints, this study has chosen as large a set of

interviews as possible given the time frame, thus being able to explore all given angles.


25

Group Occupation

G1 – Adjacent operation

Respondent 1 Air traffic controller

Respondent 2 Safety and regulation controller

Respondent 3 Combined expertise within the safety department

G2 – Field operation, administrators

Respondent 4 Chief of division

Respondent 5 Head of personnel and training

Respondent 6 A snow leader with additional engagements within technology projects

Respondent 7 Chief of daily operations

Respondent 8 Combined position as work leader, fire fighter and snow leader

G3 – Field operation, PSB drivers

Respondent 9 PSB driver, undergoing training to become a snow leader next season

Respondent 10 PSB driver, undergoing training to become a snow leader next season

Respondent 11 PSB driver

Respondent 12 and 13 PSB drivers with clearance for other vehicles and maintenance equipment

G4 – Ground handling, administrators

Respondent 14 Group manager

Respondent 15 Ground handling manager

Respondent 16 OPC operator and coordinator

Respondent 17 Chief of process G5 – Ground handling, baggage truck drivers

Respondent 18 Ramp technician

Respondent 19 Loadmaster



Table 1. Population sample with work description


26

DATA ANALYSIS The analysis has been made within the groups the respondent belongs to. It has a dual purpose,

both to cover the individual´s identity and look for consensus or divides within the group. The

analytical model with its theoretical variables used were used in the interviews and guided the

data analysis. First a primary analysis was made after the pilot study to assess if any adjustments

were needed. When no such reasons were found, the case study continued, and the main data

set was collected. This data set was also analysed by first being divided into groups, and within

groups, divided into the concepts of employee acceptance and structural challenges and

opportunities. These concepts have been analysed within the theoretical framework with a focus

on trust, attitude, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use.

In the empirical findings it will often be described that the respondents feel a need for

something. The word need will be analogue to Turner´s (1996) argument that need implies

necessity. Thus, without one´s need satisfied, displeasure and tension is created.

QUALITY OF THE STUDY

This study strives to have the highest quality within the given means and follows the four ethical

principles emphasised by Bryman and Bell (2015, p.134). Firstly, to do no harm to the

participants. By keeping the interviewees’ responses confidential and making compound

groups, this study has taken precautions to hinder any user of this data to single out a specific

respondent, thereby not putting stress on the respondent concerning career risks. No physical

risks have been involved.

Secondly, no lack of informed consent. Prior to the interviews, the respondents were asked if it

was acceptable to be recorded. They were all verbally given the information that the recording

was a means to capture all that was said, but only used for transcription purposes and would

not be presented to academia nor Swedavia. The respondents then had a chance to negate these

terms and would not have had any sanctions if such negation occurred.

Thirdly, no invasion of privacy. The questionnaire used for data collection was semi-structured

to give the respondents the choice of how detailed they would like to be on their own terms.


27

Fourthly, no deception. This study has no gains by trying to deceive the respondents. The

respondents knew beforehand that this study was going to take place and the motives behind it.

The management was very clear in informing all personnel who I was and what my purpose

was. The questionnaire was also made to cut to the core questions without any risk for

deception.

TAM has been used to measure correlation in a quantitative manner. However, to study

acceptance and process challenges this study have chosen an exploratory method. In doing so,

to within this limited amount of time try to unearth as many dimensions as possible towards the

mechanism of acceptance and practice.


28

4 Employees perception of automated vehicles In this chapter relevant data is presented to adequately capture what develops employee

acceptance and what process challenges employees believe there to be. The data will be

presented clustered within its subgroup and then divided towards “acceptance” and “process”.

ADJACENT OPERATIONS – SAFETY OFFICERS AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS (G1)

The sample from adjacent divisions is comprised of three interviews. These interviews were

completed with one air traffic controller, a safety and regulation controller and one respondent

with a combined area of expertise within the safety department. The respondents work full time

at Bromma airport and interact daily with both the field department and ground handling.

Employee acceptance

All of the respondents are sceptical to the implementation of automated vehicles. They express

a need for increased trust in the vehicles, and the risk generated without a driver directly

responsible for its actions.

“It feels more reliable with a driver driving the vehicle than that it would be travelling alone, what if the technology malfunctions, then there would be no one to catch that if there is no driver.” – Respondent in G1 “It is rather complex. I believe that it will be the hardest to make it happen on the manoeuvre area, to have automated vehicles there because nothing is structured. Then all other must adapt to the automated vehicles.” – Respondent in G1

Acceptance increases when there is proof that the vehicles actually work in the complex

environment the airport encompasses. As a counteractive measure to the lack of control,

respondents point out the need for restructuring to add safety. The respondent’s express

uncertainty with not having employees behind the steering wheel of both the PSBs and the

baggage trucks. They want to know who will be responsible for automated vehicles and catch

errors in performance. However, one usefulness with having automated baggage trucks is that

they would respect the safety regulations and follow the rules set out.

“Inform about it, how the technology works, what safety nets are built into the system, that is also one way to increase the acceptance.” – Respondent in G1


29

“By proving that it is safe to operate, by test running it to the greatest extent without any errors occur, then acceptance would be possible.” – Respondent in G1

One respondent expressed a usefulness that all respondents also mentioned, the reduced risk for

human errors, specifically those that could lead to runway incursions or damage to systems or

structures. Especially for the PSB vehicles, which every winter damage lights on the runways

and a variety of other structures. Trust will come with a process that compensates for the

observation that there will be fewer eyes monitoring the runways and manoeuvre area.

“…yes, one could say that a safety aspect is removed, the human factor is averted, decreased risk for the vehicle to make error. So, there are also benefits.” – Respondent in G1 “It is not waterproof, but there are so many people on the manoeuvre area and foremost on the runway, so other risks have a significant chance of getting caught early, in winter. There are also a lot more FOD on the runway in winter.” – Respondent in G1

Another area of usefulness is that it would be easier to make follow-ups on the vehicle and how

it has been performing. Today, when follow-up is performed on the driving of vehicles, it is

easy for the drivers to deny any damage or misuse of the vehicle. Thereby, the damage can be

salvaged, but not the cause.

“It would be so much simpler and in the same time so much more complex…it will facilitate to handle a vehicle that makes errors than an employee who makes errors and claims there was no mishandling of the vehicle.” – Respondent in G1

The respondents point out that it could be hard to reach acceptance at the ground handling

division due to the challenges ground handling would face with the implementation of

automated baggage trucks to meet their tight time frame. The potential savings in labour

operating the vehicles is mentioned as a motivating factor on both PSBs and baggage trucks.

Process challenges and opportunities

Foreign object debris, FOD, frequently occurs on the runway. To be able to combat the issue,

respondents express a need for complementary structures when there will be fewer employees

with the means to observe and detect FOD. It is crucial that the runway is scanned for FOD

continuously, and there has been no incentive to make a framework for who, where and when

this task should be performed. Up to this point, it has been a shared responsibility.


30

“Everyone understand that it is because of low maintenance, but small objects get loose, products of plastic, bolts, screws, gas caps…Yes and some aircraft components, but that’s not what we are talking about here. And also, larger plastic components such as battery protectors and such.” – Respondent in G1 “It is just a positive side effect I get, it is nothing I specify employees to do. But the fact that there are many eyes out there increases the possibility to detect…The surveillance of the snow maintenance process will have demand for increased safety when there are no humans performing it. Because humans can watch, you and I have not been driving PSB for so long, but when you have some 100 hours, you get pretty bored, and as a consequence you react to everything that stands out quite easily.” – Respondent in G1

With the implementation of automated baggage trucks, the respondents pointed out that the

business model used in ground handling could be threatened. With the baggage handler

responsible for meeting the scheduled time today, leeway is given and safety rules are bent.

Today baggage trucks are in a position to drive faster than the speed limit around aircraft. In

fact, they also drive closer than the regulated distance between themselves and aircraft. In

particular, to be able to meet the tight time frame they therefore not always abide by the rules

to give way for aircraft at crossings and other designated spots. Automated baggage trucks

would be controlled to travel not closer to the aircraft than regulated and not faster than

regulated; subsequently, it will be challenging for ground handling to meet their clients’

demands.

“Yes, the baggage truck process will be affected, I am convinced, it will be hard to describe on paper. The PSB process, in the long run I don´t think it will be influenced overall.” – Respondent in G1 “Regarding this I am very positive, a synergy effect of a project like this, one problem we have is that the baggage trucks are driven to fast. The airport has regulations that states that closer than 15 metres from a parked aircraft one has a speed limit of 15 km/h, which is extremely easy to program a self-driving vehicle. The issue is with employees, they drive too fast and too close to the aircraft. The baggage trucks are bound to the manoeuvre are, the PSB is worse, they are everywhere, and also on the manoeuvre area.” – Respondent in G1

The need for control over the vehicles, the vehicles’ location, and the route should be developed.

Today there are no GPS devices in the vehicles, in contrast to Arlanda airport. When aircraft

land, the air traffic controller will give instructions to which stand the aircraft should be

transported, but the exact route is not predetermined. Therefore, the pilot will take the route

most suited to their needs. In doing so, today´s baggage handlers must predict where the aircraft

is going and which route, and the coordinator and air traffic controller cannot detect the location

of the baggage trucks on the manoeuvre area in absence of visual confirmation. The respondents


31

express a need to have a shared system and protocol between different departments with the air

traffic control operation included.

“The tower does not have any demands for how the aircrafts taxies on the manoeuvre area, it is one´s own responsibility. They just say which stand they should taxi to, stand 30 for example. But how the taxi there is often quite unobstructed. Then, if an aircraft is on its way to turn around, both the PSB and baggage trucks need to hold off, and in the same time you can have an aircraft approaching from taxiway Yngve. Then you need to wait. At the same time, you have the next aircraft waiting to start. How do you solve the situation?” – Respondent in G1 “There will be fewer observers, with some prejudice I believe that one will have poorer check-up frequency on the vehicles. It is also …the part with the positive human factors. For example, if the air traffic controller makes a mistake, there is a chance for a runway incursion scenario. And the PSB convoy ready to enter the runway for a sweep and the people in the tower say PSB convoy ready at Yngve 1, enter the runway and at the same time have they by accident cleared an aircraft on its final. However, the PSB convoy observes this, they know even before they talk to the tower, they have observed the aircraft. It is possible to combat with technical solutions, but it´s harder to handle.” – Respondent in G1

In fact, a shared system facilitates quick information updates. One example is if the weather

shifts and the frequency of the rounds the PSBs are performing changes. Air traffic control

operations, due to the regulatory protocol, must ask for approval every time the PSBs sweep

and/or plough the runways. Another example is the need to be able to act quickly if a mayday

call is coming in and the runway needs to be cleared immediately to prevent runway incursion.

To build trust for the respondents, systems should be built for these types of events.

With the airport built on an old seabed, the foundation is shifting and makes it challenging to

make the runways completely flat. The respondents argue that the automated vehicle needs to

be able to handle an imperfect surface and be able to adjust for that. Additionally, there must

be easy ways to report to the automated vehicle operators which areas of the manoeuvre area

or runway will be closed off for repairs or swift updates. Respondents showed concerns

regarding the uncertainty in how this information will travel between departments and what

happens if there is miscommunication.

“I know that interaction often is necessary between the driver and the vehicle, so it is plausible there are a significant amount of special-made solutions one needs to take into consideration.” – Respondent in G1

Respondents expressed concerns regarding how the counting of luggage will be performed

when the baggage trucks are automated. How will the organisation verify that all the baggage

is loaded on the automated truck? On the baggage trucks used today, one side is open to make


32

it easier to load the trucks. Concerns were raised, such as: who will detect if baggage falls off

the wagon? Some baggage’s plastic surface makes them prone to sliding off the baggage trucks

if it is loaded to its maximum limit.

FIELD OPERATION – ADMINISTRATORS (G2)

The field operation sample from the administrative department is comprised of five interviews.

These were done with the chief of the division, head of personnel and training, a snow leader,

chief of daily operation and one with multiple areas of responsibilities such as snow leader,

firefighter, work leader and PSB driver.

Employee acceptance

The respondents believe the attitude is more positive on the management side than the PSB

driver side. Moreover, respondents express a usefulness in not needing to recruit every year,

thereby saving time in daily operations and increasing reliability. There are strong beliefs that

the quality of the snow removal procedure will be more predictable and efficient in an

automated process than it is with PSB drivers. All of the respondents brought up the human

factor and their relief at its removal, or at least a decrease of it. It was recognised that the human

factor will be present with automated vehicles, but at that point it would move up to the snow

leader level.

“The driving routine will stay the same. However, the start and stop will be awesome, and with the distance between the vehicles constant. In combination with other systems it will be able to curb environmental impact, unnecessary driving. Less idling, everything gets more effective. So from an environmental standpoint and process perspective, decrease in fuel and chemical costs which is positive.” – Respondent in G2

“We will be able to cut a significant amount of time and gain reliability.” – Respondent in G2

The main areas of concern are to what extent the technology is safe in practice. This includes a

question of what will happen if it does not work according to the set instructions, as well as

other issues regarding control. Also, the uncertainty of when this implementation is going to

happen was perceived as an important factor towards creating acceptance.

“There is a general distrust towards these apprehensions such as; how will the vehicle respond to a human jumping out in front of it? Will it be able to stop in time? One is worried. And what if they break down? What will happen then? Will it just take off and drive away? Who will toll it away if there are no people?” – Respondent in G2


33

All of the respondents’ acceptance is contingent on factors of age. In fact, the respondents note

that employees’ willingness to accept the automated PSBs was dependent on the employee’s

age. All of the respondents point out that the employees that express the highest hostility

towards the new technology and automation are in general older, with some exceptions. Some

of the respondents also linked the employees’ interest in technology as a factor to which extent

the employees would be willing to accept and be positive to this implementation.

“I think it has more to do with age than position, also those more involved with the automated programme will contribute to how soon they will trust it.” – Respondent in G2 “Two of my snow leaders barely have a computer at home…He is anti-technology, he is against everything like that. It is a shame when we are a developmental airport. In this position one should aim a little higher and try to broaden our horizon. It is not perfect from the start, but we are a developmental airport and those who do not like it can work somewhere else where there is a lack of development. So there are two camps, those who are interested and can see the progress and those who have decided that; this is not good.” – Respondent in G2 “In general, in all of the organisation I believe that 80-85 percent think it is just an inconvenience. It is our generation that gets it. Why would it not work? I think it is an innate fear of being replaced.” – Respondent in G2

To be able to trust and accept the automated vehicles, the respondents express that a long test

phase and implementation phase is both crucial and necessary. In this process, the employees

need to be familiarised with automated vehicles and understand how they respond and are

controlled.

“That the snow leader can try it out here. It is best to try it out here, maybe it is not good enough to have someone on the outside saying that it works. We have had so much equipment coming in, new, that is not functioning even if we are told it is clear to start using it, but no. There are then three weeks of back and forth between repairs and modifications before it can go in to the process. So, one wants to see, preferably here or at another airport with minimum traffic. For us working here to get to know how it works in snowy conditions.” – Respondent in G2 “I believe trust will increase if one does not observe anything extremely nuts, I think one will find the issues that can occur and attend to those issues before it is time to press the start button.” – Respondent in G2 “And the snow leaders want to know what they are going to do in different situations. What do we do when it all goes wrong, they say; We will have a panic button, you know? We will go to the pub and have a talk about it. It is always going to be a way out in every situation. We just need to come up with every possible scenario where it could go wrong, what do we do to avoid the machine from hitting an aircraft? When it does not answer to our requests. So, there is always a solution.” – Respondent in G2


34


Multiple respondents brought up the need for additional competence within IT to be able to

maintain automated vehicles. Many of the workers need to assist the repair shop with

maintenance tasks due to the shop’s lack of employees. However, with this new technology, it

will become harder for employees without a software background to service the machines.

Therefore, people with competence in software should train personnel to handle the most

common issues or be available on site when the airport is open and malfunctions may occur.

“That´s knowledge we do not have, we would need additional technicians. I know nuts and bolts, to change parts, but maybe in the future the errors and malfunctions will be computer based.” – Respondent in G2 “There is going to be a change in what we want, employees working here who can make small adjustments in the vehicles.” – Respondent in G2 “Definitely to have somebody on the ground with competence in the vehicles we acquire. So, we do not need to take the machines back to workshop and call Scania or Øveraasen or whatever to come here to make a special repair. We need people, knowledgeable people in place, definitively.” – Respondent in G2

Suggestions were made to restructure all other traffic with its timetables around the automated

PSBs’ schedules in order to operate an automated fleet of PSBs successfully in the manoeuvre

area with its multiple layers of traffic and vehicles.

“I believe there will be someone in the tower controlling the PSB convoy.” – Respondent in G2 “I think it will be great, when it is up and running on the runway. However, on the manoeuvre area I am concerned.” – Respondent in G2

All of the respondents emphasise the need for thorough monitoring of the automated vehicles

in the introduction phase, but also when they are up and running. Employees should be allocated

to handle the quality checks and daily maintenance of the vehicles, such as clearing them of

snow, fuelling and changing minor parts. Multiple respondents brought up the challenge to

make that service job of the automated machines interesting for the PSB drivers, who today

have a much more versatile job description.

“We need to monitor the vehicles and check that everything is up to date and correctly adjusted. Re-fuelling, change brushes, plough equipment. We still need to have the service.” – Respondent in G2


35

“Now it is easy to find PSB drivers, it´s quite an exciting job. But maybe somebody who is going to maintain the vehicles, fuel them and such. That is not going to be such an exciting job.” – Respondent in G2

Furthermore, a process should be in place to detect vehicle malfunctions early. The respondents

point out that both the drivers of the PSBs today can detect abnormal vibrations and sounds.

Also, other PSB drivers can detect exterior issues on their adjacent PSB vehicles when they are

driving in convoy. All respondents display an understanding that PSB vehicles break down

often, both due to minor and major issues. Therefore, process changes need to be made to

combat the uncertainty regarding how procedures will be performed and by whom.

“That is an issue. What should we do when such a vehicle breaks down on the runway and there are no people?” – Respondent in G2 “But with the PSBs, like every season. Every single machine has some instances where they need some mechanical help or electronical. I do not know why, maybe they are much more complicated. Maybe they are not, they have not gone through so many years development as cars have.” – Respondent in G2 “Vehicles break down, it will be harder to detect on automated vehicles. First and foremost; what will happen when it breaks down. I feel that is the greatest impact.” – Respondent in G2 “Yes, information about the vehicles, not a day goes by without any vehicle malfunctioning. It does not need to be large defects on the vehicles.” – Respondent in G2

Another structural change pointed out is the need for more personnel in a snow leader position

to be able to handle the additional work of controlling the automated PSB convoy.

“We should control the sweeps, which vehicles is doing what, place formate, check how much formate you dosed out, how the contamination is, make your own assessment, check with RWIS. All this before starting a second lap, two phones, two radios and everyone shouting through all channels. Should one control the automated vehicles also there would be a handful. “– Respondent in G2

A majority of the respondents believe there will be a structural change, not only regarding the

competence needed at the field operation, but also because the total number of employees will

be smaller. The need for training and re-training PSB drivers will shift to only include snow

leaders. The PSB driver training for field operation is performed every year due to the need for

repetition and for the new winter season employees, and it will not be needed in the design and

structure it has today. The quick turnover of PSB drivers is highlighted as an opportunity to

change the competence demand in an organic manner. Also, one respondent pointed out that

the snow leader position will be more coveted with increased complexity in the role description.


36

“We lose on average every season a third of our winter workers because they found other jobs or they retire.

There are good reasons why people leave or do not come back the next winter. It would only take five years

to completely lose the whole workforce.” – Respondent in G2

FIELD OPERATION – PSB DRIVERS (G3)

The sample from field operation with PSB drivers is comprised of four interviews. One of these

interviews is a group interview with two drivers. Two of the drivers are in training to become

snow leaders.

Employee acceptance

The respondents display a mixed attitude towards the new technology.

"I believe that in general, it is a small negative incline, it would have been more positive if it was possible to develop further before testing" – Respondent in G2 "Planes gets delayed among other things, there is a lot of movement, it can work, but I am very much sceptical to it." – Respondent in G2 "It feels too futuristic, too far away…It feels scary, not a hundred per cent" – Respondent in G2 “In general, I would say that it is typical for this time to try to simplify it all. I don´t think it would have surfaced if we had a higher average competence on the machinery, from the driver´s side.” – Respondent in G2

There is a sceptical attitude from all respondents in regard to the safety and security issues this

new process and technology entails. With increased movement at peak time, there is a lot of

different machinery and equipment out in the manoeuvre area. The respondents have a hard

time picturing a future with automated PSBs. In fact, those who are training to take on a snow

leader position are not sympathetic to the vision of them controlling the automated PSBs. Some

of the respondents are soon reaching retirement age. Subsequently, they do not feel threatened

by an implementation of automated PSBs, it will not affect them in their working life.

The low acceptance is depicted as a lack of trust in the usefulness of automated PSBs. Specially,

in regard to the flexibility of the process, depending on the qualities of the snow for example.

Interestingly, depending on the type of snow, the removal is performed differently and the

location where the snow will be gathered varies.


37

Structural challenges and opportunities

“One worries about if the snow leader would control 8-10 machines, it is surrealistic to me I think.” – Respondent in G2 “Only the radio communication with the tower takes up a lot of time.” – Respondent in G2

Respondents display a need for a person to be close to the process and ensure that the vehicle

will not move into territories that could lead to taxiway or runway incursion. One suggestion

was to have two snow leaders in the car and an additional two people controlling the two parts

of the automated PSBs when the formation splits up to cover different areas. In doing so, the

snow leaders are able to keep track of any malfunctioning machinery and are directly able to

spot irregularities that could lead to larger damage on the machinery if not mended.

GROUND HANDLING - ADMINISTRATORS (G4)

The ground handling sample from the administrative division is comprised of four interviews.

These were done with one group manager, a ground handling manager, a combined OPC

operator and coordinator and a chief of processes.

Employee acceptance

All of the respondents are positive to some degree towards using automated baggage trucks. In

fact, they expressed strong beliefs in its usefulness; this would make the baggage handler´s job

function more flexible than it is today. Subsequently, relief was expressed towards not needing

to waste the employees’ time on driving the baggage back and forth over the airport. Instead, it

would increase usefulness by letting the focus be directed towards the service of the aircraft.

All of the respondents point out the release of stress it would be for the baggage handlers to

have those extra minutes, increasing the quality of the work environment.

“The technology must work; the acceptance will be super low if the technology does not work. We bought

four new de-icing cars for this season thorough Fordon, they have been broken all winter. They have had

malfunctions intermittent…there have been extensive software issues that creates mistrust for the technology.

So, if you change from the old technology, where a tube breaks, well then, we change it. But now the display

shows; error 4598. And nothing happens. You are stuck in the middle of a de—icing processes and there is

no liquid coming out.” – Respondent in G4


38

One respondent emphasises that the interface and process for automated vehicles needs to be

simple, so the employees who are not technology-savvy will still be able to understand the

system. The same respondent points out that the framing of the implementation of the

automated baggage trucks is crucial. It is also important to spread information and knowledge

about what it will mean for the division and how employees will be affected to reach

acceptance.

“It is crucial that there are reference group meetings, that the division has to be part of shaping the

implementation.” – Respondent in G4

To be able to reach acceptance with the employees, the respondents express a unanimous need

for testing the system thoroughly to check off all the safety risks. Also, the largest safety risk is

the aspect of judgement when driving close to other vehicles. The baggage handlers exercise

their own judgement, and the respondents are not convinced what rules and judgement the

automated vehicle will follow. For now, there is the risk of human error when the baggage

handlers drive the truck and fail to give way to an aircraft. The testing phase would give the

employees time to familiarise themselves with the machinery and build trust in the process and

system’s use. If possible, the respondents would have higher confidence in this solution if they

could benchmark with some other airport that has been doing similar tests or implementations.

“A thorough test period to make the technology work. At least in 80 percent of the cases.” – Respondent in

G4

“I believe it is important to deeply establish knowledge about the process and inform employees to be able

to change mindsets. Already from the start engage employees.” – Respondent in G4


The respondents display enthusiasm in the allocation of the baggage handler´s time. This

creates an opening in how to schedule works, which has usually been done in pairs of two

workers taking care of one incoming aircraft and assisting it until departure. With this new

structure, the respondent’s express openness to other alternatives.


39

“We have short turn-arounds which is 20 minutes from on-block to off-block with everything included. They

need to connect all the equipment, load off all the baggage, load, collect, load on. There are long driving

routes here at Bromma…it would take six out of twenty minutes only to drive. So, if we had automated vehicles

ready by which we could send baggage to the arrival hall. We would be able to plan in a completely different

manner.” – Respondent in G4

With time liberated, the respondents express an opportunity to release the pressure on the

baggage handlers so they can prioritise the controls on the aircraft. Today that priority is not

as high due to the pressure to complete the baggage transport process. Furthermore, with

increased possibilities to service the aircraft, the respondents also added the opportunity to

perform water replenishment under the peak period. Today it is not always possible due to

limited time. With additional time, Bromma airport has the possibility to increase its capacity

to handle more aircraft without increasing staff.

“The whole structure, how we work becomes much more alive. For example, you would be able to have two

arrivals within a very short time span...we can look over how we work. Today we have a structure where you

have the arrival and departure of the same flight. But if it was possible to tie an employee to a task and not

so many different, it would be possible to have three arrivals just after one another. The employee can walk

from stand to stand and the driving becomes unnecessary.” – Respondent in G4

The structure for handling baggage transfers would be simplified and not take up any additional

personnel with an automated baggage truck process. Other challenges the respondents mention

was the infrastructure at Bromma airport. With automated vehicles, changes would need to be

made to guarantee security. The routes the baggage trucks take today should be redesigned for

the purpose of automated vehicle in order to combat the sceptical attitude regarding to what

extent the automated vehicle will give way for aircrafts.

“We would need to have surveillance over the automated vehicles, someone watching. We need knowledge

transfer so we feel we have trust in the employees handling the automated vehicles.” – Respondent in G4

The monitoring of automated vehicles was also brought up with the need for a coordinator

position. Thereby, the employee would oversee all activity on the automated baggage truck

side. With this new position, an extra layer of protection would mitigate collisions and other

safety issues in reference to automated vehicles. Moreover, with fewer employees observing

and passing the incoming planes, respondents express the need to have built-in flexibility. In


40

fact, today that flexibility makes it possible for a baggage handler who sees a plane waiting to

be "waved in" to stop her activity and wave in the plane herself, even if it is not their designated

work description at the moment.

Furthermore, with increased complexity in technology, also increases the need to look over the

service and contracts with the manufacturers seriously. Today when there are issues with the

equipment and vehicles, there is a risk that the process of repairing the vehicle is too long, so

the employees are making quick fixes instead of doing it properly though the channels. The

correct way of handling malfunctioning machinery is through Swedavia Fordon and the

respondent expressed a stronger need for that process to be sound and reliable.

GROUND HANDLING – BAGGAGE HANDLERS (G5)

The ground handling sample from the baggage handler division is comprised of four interviews.

These were done with four respondents with similar job descriptions, all handling luggage, but

some having specialisations towards guiding aircraft in and out of the stands, working with de-

icing machinery, with some working more as a loadmaster and signalling the clearance of the

luggage.

Employee acceptance

All of the respondents depicted a positive attitude towards the implementation of automated

baggage trucks. “The whole loading process would be smoother.” – Respondent in G5 “One would be able to handle an aircraft or two more at the time, to have more traffic." – Respondent in G5 “It would be a less stressful workplace, that´s always positive. That is usually the way more mistakes are made, under stress and pressure. It would ease the workload.” – Respondent in G5

The respondents describe the future implementation as an opportunity to make the work process

more efficient, cutting time in the trucks transporting the luggage. The respondents express

frustration with the stress included in the transport of luggage within tight time frames and

limited ability to control the time it takes to travel over the manoeuvre area due to extensive

regulations of speed limits and the distance to aircraft the baggage trucks must keep. Further, it

would facilitate the handling of transfer luggage which at this moment is very time-consuming.


41

Also, the respondents emphasise a demand for the automated baggage trucks to work

seamlessly due to the small margins in time the work process entails. It would require people

to cover for the malfunctioning machines with time they do not have today.

“It would be a liability instead of a tool. One must be able to trust that it is working, and be thoroughly tested.” – Respondent in G5 Process challenges and opportunities

The respondents show a positive attitude towards the use of automated baggage trucks, but also

see the potential uncertainties with new systems and want it to be tested at Bromma.

"One can believe it will be fantastic and then a small problem occurs which becomes a large problem because nobody knows how to solve it." – Respondent in G5 “If the truck will drive itself there, I still need to get there.” – Respondent in G5 “You must know exactly where it will travel.” – Respondents in G5 "If the baggage truck drops a package, it will not be able to pick it up. The baggage wagons used must be adapted, it could be a potential risk if packages are dropped and an aircraft is coming and there are no personnel there who can pick it up." – Respondent in G5 “The only negative aspect is that computers crash.” – Respondent in G5 Respondents display a need for testing on site, so the adaptation of the machines fit Bromma

airport and so people feel safe with knowing who is accountable and has knowledge of the

machinery on site. One respondent pointed out that even if the baggage trucks drives itself, the

workers still need to be able to transport themselves to provide service to the aircraft and other

tasks. With automated baggage trucks the respondents perceive that it is harder to know where

the baggage truck will stop and which route it will take. They would prefer some markings on

the ground to increase acceptance for the automated baggage trucks.


42

SUMMARY OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

The empirical findings show that perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU) and

trust influence the willingness to adopt the new technology into practice. The TAPA model´s

consideration for the individual´s power to act within its role continues to receive affirmation

in the empirical data.

Interestingly, some of the factors brought up by the respondents align within all of the three

groups and all the five sub-groups. The respondents brought up the human factor as one of

them. In most cases it was brought up as a way of depicting the process change towards less

risk of negative human factors. However, in some interview’s warnings were raised for the

increased risk of information gaps when there is no window for human flexibly to step in. There

is a lack of trust towards the future quality control of the process. Another frequent topic was

how malfunctioning equipment, machines and vehicles today already make it hard to trust in

even more complex vehicles implemented in the future. Almost half of the respondents brought

up a demand for testing the vehicles and thereby familiarising themselves with the automated

vehicles as a step to acceptance.

A majority of the respondents brought up the need for the organisation to consider activities

and processes that will be altered with an implementation of automated vehicles. The majority

displays uncertainty regarding how these processes will be performed in the future. In fact,

respondents emphasise the importance of being a part of the process design and have

information shared with them in every step of the way to be able to accept these changes.

Another aspect frequently brought up is the shift in the demand for competence in the

maintenance and repair of automated vehicles. The vehicles used today have fewer electronics

and software installed, and most of the problems are visible from the outside, making it easier

for the drivers to understand what the issue is and also to perform basic repairs by themselves.


43

5 Creating acceptance and process challenges to consider First, this chapter presents the empirical findings together with the Theory of Automation

Process Acceptance model (TAPA) and the literature review for analysis. In particular, it

focuses on what develops employee acceptance and what process challenges and opportunities

can be derived from the empirical data. Thereafter, this chapter will provide a detailed analysis

of the 11 factors which poses as opportunities to develop employee acceptance. Last, a couple

of additional aspects of the empirical data will be presented.

The first research questions set out to understand what process challenges and opportunities the

employee face with the implementation of automates vehicles. The second question investigates

how the organisation can develop employee acceptance. A theoretical framework of TAM,

practice theory and trust were merged to form the analytical model TAPA. TAPA has been the

tool and framework to investigate the case of Bromma airports processes. Specifically, the

processes which would have to be altered in the case of automation. While collecting the

empirical data, it became clear that the two research questions this study use had an underlying

connection. The solution to develop acceptance and solutions for the process challenges and

opportunities may have started as two parallel research questions, however ended up as an

intertwined empirical data set. The empirical data shows that; to develop acceptance, challenges

in the process should to be addressed properly and opportunities should to be harvested.

Thus, with the opportunities presented in the empirical findings it suggests that these

opportunities are not only able to assist to find solutions for process challenges, but also vital

for developing acceptance. The two research questions work from different standpoints by

investigating process and acceptance, practice and trust. The process related question is covered

from a micro-level perspective, covering the employee’s role as active carrier and user of the

system with practice theory and TAM as its tools. Additionally, the research question about

acceptance and trust is presented from a cross-level perspective. Acceptance being part of a

multilayer process between employees and employer as well as different processes within the

organisation. The empirical data supports the general notion that acceptance is benefiting from

a thorough understanding of the micro-level perspective and process. With an understanding of

the process and active engagement in the challenges, support can be generated to build towards

acceptance of the implementation of automated vehicles. By using theory focusing on different


44

levels, a foundation in engaged scholarship and two seemingly unrelated questions the study

has created an empirical data supporting both questions simultaneously.

The empirical findings are supporting a relationship between the two research questions. In

fact, the findings suggest that the questions actually are working in tandem and contributing to

each other. Synergies can be made by considering trust and practice in the implementation

process. This was not part of the original model, where only a one-directional relationship

where established between trust and practice, to develop acceptance and functional processes.

Conversely, not including that the practice chosen can affect the level of acceptance and trust

the employees register/perceive to have.

Therefore, the TAPA model needs to be complemented with a two-way interaction between

practice and trust, see figure 7 below. The empirical data suggests that by performing alterations

in practice, the level of trust can be modified. With increased engagement in the process there

is an opportunity for solving challenges employee present such as; lack of GPS monitoring,

service and maintenance of software, and testing. Also, with the new TAPA model, it grants an

opportunity to gain trust by implementing new processes in collaboration with the employees

working in the processes today, creating trust and developing acceptance. With these changes

in the TAPA model, it illustrates the empirical findings; that there is an impact on acceptance

through trust, generated by the practice chosen.

Figure 7. Revised Theory of Automation Process Acceptance model (TAPA)


45

By addressing the challenges and opportunities the respondents brought up the next step is to

engage in an open implementation process. The organisation has a chance to have a transparent

and engaging process, creating space to capture issues as well as develop solutions. A process

which develops acceptance as an effect of the involvement of the employees. A process that

view the employees as receivers as well as active carriers in the practice. TAPA have created a

bridge between the micro and macro perspective to assist in the process of surfacing empirical

findings in a framework that gives the organisation an opportunity to act though engagement.

Subsequently, not only solve for these challenges, but also create learning processes that is

receptive towards its institution´s need. Other changes the organisation need to face can also

be tackled though the deployment of a dynamic learning process. Thereby, a practice can be

established with a mindset for combating the issues with organisational change. With this

practice in place, acceptance towards the change can be moderated closely in a continuous

fashion to facilitate beneficial outcome both in the process alterations but also in employee

acceptance.

In light of the empirical findings’ characteristics, the dynamic between process challenges and

opportunities have with acceptance, the following analysis is not divided between employee

acceptance and process challenges and opportunities. Instead, the factors brought up in the

empirical findings will drive the analysis, and the theory and research questions will follow

suit. These factors are separated into groups depending on the application, if it is having mostly

technical impact or practice impact. The factors are areas the respondents brought up in the

empirical findings, framed as opportunities to solve process challenges and develop acceptance.

However, there are three factors which were prominent in the empirical data and did not fit this

framework of presentation. These aspects are brought to light after the general analysis.

Therefore, we will now explore the 11 factors which were most prominent from the empirical

data, presented in table 2 below. The factors are clustered in three groups on the factor’s trait;

where it falls between being a technical or a practice opportunity to develop acceptance. First

group contains three factors concerning the property of the vehicles. Second group contains two

factors that touch upon both technical as well as organisational opportunities. Third group

contains six factors concerning practice-oriented opportunities. Due to the size and variance of

the last group it has been broken down into two clusters that will be presented in further depth

in the analysis.


46

Factors found in empirical dataset Group Cluster

GPS monitoring Technical

Shared system use Technical

Verification system for baggage trucks Technical

Vehicle reliability Technical & Practice

Service quality checks on vehicles Technical & Practice

Thorough test phase Practice 1

Inclusion in implementation process Practice 1

Create routines and protocols Practice 1

Insufficient IT support Practice 2

Increase in SL staff Practice 2

GH need transport vehicles Practice 2

Table 2. 11 factors from the empirical findings

OPPORTUNITIES - TECHNICAL FACTORS The three technical factors brought up in the empirical findings are: GPS monitoring, shared

system use and verification system for baggage trucks. These three factors have all been

suggested as opportunities to meet challenges in the implementation process of automated

vehicles. Furthermore, these factors have been portrayed as opportunities to decrease the risk

from the employees’ view. The empirical data support the notion of technology and tools as a

supporter of tasks (Dishaw and Strong, 1999). By pushing to alter attributes and complement

the functionality of the artifacts to fit the organisation, one step is taken towards an opportunity

to have cross exchange between IT and OS (Leonardi and Barley, 2008; Orlikowski and Barley,

2001). The study is taking place at a developmental airport and the technology implementation

being fairly new to the organisation and the collective mind of the employees. Therefore, by

elevating the prospect of joining forces with the supplier and develop the artifact and

functionality further to fit the practice and need of the organisation in the spirit of IT research,

encompassing both hardware and software covered in the empirical data. Orlikowski and Barley

(2001, p.147) emphasised the chance for organisational studies to borrow IT research´s

practical solution-oriented mind set. A practice like that would make use of the dual impact


47

between trust and practice in TAPA model. Subsequently, starting from practice and

information technology, thereby developing a higher PU, PEOU and acceptance. With the

process of testing and development of technology for factors such as a shared system use or

GPS monitoring. It will become visible in the organisation and conversely create engagement

and higher LPP. That opportunity comes with all of the three factors, by carving out new

solutions in a collaborative process with evolving technology creates legitimacy. The engaging

learning process would give the employer and the employees active roles in the implementation

as well as in the evolution of the process, its practice and its usefulness.

OPPORTUNITIES - TECHNICAL AND PRACTICE FACTORS

The two factors shown in the empirical data to have potential and compatibility in both´s

practice as well as technical properties and theory are: vehicle reliability and service quality

checks on vehicles. The empirical data shows that the employees exhibit distrust in the vehicles

used today. For example, some distrust is coming from low reliability in the new de-icing

equipment as a result of poor quality. It creates challenges for further technological

advancement in the practice when activities are not supported by trustworthy artifacts. Practice

should be supported by stability in this institution and with its equipment (Lawrence et al.,

2009). This became even more critical when the advancement is in areas where the least

knowledge and expertise is present in the practice today. The uncertainty and lack of

contradictory evidence, as opposed to the malfunctioning vehicles today, creates distrust

(Kramer, 1999). The presence of experts who can assist in the assimilation and information

spread of this technology is low, as well as early engagement in an LPP mindset. By starting

up a learning process one can advance the vehicles reliability as well as how to create

trustworthy service checks. Additionally, together with a dialogue with suppliers regarding the

artifact’s features for continuous improvement (Orlikowski and Barley, 2001). The artifact’s

quality needs to create trust, both in action on the runway and taxiway as well as in daily checks

and maintenance. Daily checks and maintenance, solutions regarding sensors and status updates

from the equipment, was brought up in the empirical finding as key areas. It can be facilitated

by combining it with structural assurances such as guarantees from suppliers and sufficient

competence development. In doing so, the level of trust would have a chance to increase and

give way to acceptance for the changes in practice. Both PU and PEOU are threatened if these

two factors are not being taken into consideration and properly communicated to the employees.

With already tarnished reputation for handling quality in regard to above expressed technical


48

issues, this creates an opportunity to make severe process adjustments. Every factor worked

though, increases the chance for a successful implementation in regard to process and employee

acceptance.

OPPORTUNITIES - PRACTICE FACTORS

The six factors brought up in the empirical findings with coherence to process and practice are:

thorough test phase, inclusion in the implementation process, create routines and protocols,

increase IT support, increase in SL staff, GH needs for transport vehicles, visible in table 3

below.

Factors Cluster

Thorough test phase 1

Inclusion in implementation process 1

Create routines and protocols 1

Increase IT support 2

Increase SL staff 2

GH needs transport vehicles 2

Table 3. The Practice group with factors in two clusters

Cluster 1 In the empirical data three of the factors surfacing were; a thorough testing phase, the demand

for inclusion in the implementation process and creating routines and protocols. All these

factors pivot around inclusion and engagement in the process. The empirical findings show that

to develop acceptance, employees want to be able to test out the new vehicle in proper weather

conditions, either at another Swedavia airport up north or at Bromma. The suggestion of using

another airport was brought up to avoid traffic on runway and being able to test in winter

conditions prior to the same conditions have reached Bromma and the Stockholm area. Kramer

(1999) argues that distrust occur together with a lack of confidence as well as a sense of

suspicion. To test out the vehicles and be invited to engage in the implementation creates a

gateway towards trust. Moreover, the empirical data shows that involvement in the decision-

making process is vital also being actively informed about the future changes. It is supported


49

by Lawrence et al., (2009, p.284) as actions are continuous reforming our practice and every

step count towards the result.

With the process of testing the artifacts, there is also the chance for LPP, which supports the

practice towards inclusiveness and social engagement (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Nicolini,

2013). By engaging in these processes and considering these three factors, there is an increased

chance of developing trust and therethrough acceptance. By co-founding new routines and

protocols together with the individuals who will carry out the practice, there is a higher chance

for the anticipated practice to get reproduced. The reproduction of practice put emphasis on

every step, action as well as inaction with strong potential (Nicolini, 2013). Furthermore, PU

and PEOU would be communicated, debated and eventually accepted with strong information

sharing and early testing and engagement in the process and technology.

Cluster 2 The second cluster of factors showed similarities in how they were described in the empirical

finding: an increased need for IT support, an increase SL staff and GH need transport vehicles.

The factors were described as straightforward process-focused challenges and thereby at the

core for arguing PU. If the new artifacts cannot be implemented without making the practice

easier to perform for the employees, it will receive resistance (Davis, 1989; Davis et al., 1989).

Luhmann (2017) related trust to anticipating the future. The respondents have done just that

and voiced in the empirical data their anticipation of challenges, future roadblocks. This cluster

was strongly advocated in the empirical findings as opportunities to make the implementation

manageable, both to support ease of use as well as usefulness in general. How will the GH team

be able to service the vehicles if there is no means of transport available? Who will the snow

leaders turn to when a vehicle breaks down on the runway with incoming aircraft in 20 minutes?

Close engagement is necessary to monitor progress in the process implementation stage.

Thereby following the acceptance rate and secure that a reliable process is taken into practice.

PU and PEOU has been shown in the empirical data as a shift in staff and support vehicles for

Ground Handling. In fact, the employee would be able to anticipate a working day where

hopefully the artifacts are working well, however if this is not the case, reliable protocols should

be in place and people are held responsible, which has been shown to increase employee trust

in the process


50

OTHER ASPECTS

The first research question´s purpose was to encompass the risks and solutions within the

process by using challenges and opportunities as its framework. However, there are not only

challenges and opportunities to consider developing acceptance. The case studied is not a tabula

rasa, it is a well-established organisation with ideas and values already spreading and evolving.

The empirical findings show areas were processes has already been initiated towards the goal

of acceptance. The empirical data shows that; the human factor, time saving, and additional

possibilities surfaced as reasons for acceptance. These are already taken into consideration by

various employees active in the processes when the empirical data was collected.

However, the empirical data also brought up age and interest as a challenge with no clear

solution. The data suggests that depending on interest and age, the inclination varies to which

extent employees trust automated vehicles. Kramer (1999) confirms that the presence of distrust

is a common factor in organisations. It is challenging to know for certain if engagement in for

example the testing phase and technical advancement to fit the processes will be enough.

Another challenge brought up in the data is the notion that ground handling will not be able to

continue with the contracts they have with the aircraft business. The empirical data shows the

turnaround time for each flight is ingrained in the GH business model. Also, the data reveals

transgressions made today in practice to keep those timeframes. These short cuts will not be as

easily available with automated vehicles. This will affect the PU with automated vehicles for

the GH business model and also the mentality of what is prioritised in the process. Hofstede

(2001) emphasised the weight different values within the organisation hold and impact decision

making. The survival of a business model should be considered a challenge that should be

handled with care. In the empirical findings a majority of the employees in GH described a

relief in being able to focus more time on servicing the aircraft instead of spending time with

the logistics of baggage handling. It was also brought up that this implementation liberates the

structure of how service of aircraft can be done in the future, servicing aircrafts in series was

brought up as an example, instead of one aircraft at the time, which is the process today. The

empirical finding shows that within ground handling there was a more unanimous support for

automation on vehicles than in the field division. However, ground handling also needs to face

a tough shift in their business model.


51

6 Implications on acceptance and future research First, this chapter will give a brief summary of the main findings from the empirical data

together with the gist of the analysis. Last, follows a discussion on the limitations and

generalisability of the study as well as future research.

Developing employee acceptance and facing process challenges and opportunities are not

different narratives, but as the empirical data shows, two streams in the same river. It is not

possible to develop employee acceptance without taking the process into account. The road

towards acceptance is dependent on the practice chosen, both for the implementation phase as

well as for the processes and daily routine following. With the implementation of automated

vehicles, the organisation forms new practices and affect trust in the greater organisation.

Furthermore, for this case study, it is in the organisation’s best interest to use multiple points

of action on different levels, micro as well as macro. Thus, to convey a holistic approach for

the employees. The empirical findings suggest that to develop acceptance the practice should

involve; using engaged and inclusive communication practice, excessive test phases, and

altered processes and protocols. Engaged scholarship has been a central part of the empirical

data gathering. Furthermore, it has inspired towards the need for engagement in practice to

create sustainable processes towards the institutions emerging needs. Also, the organisation

would need to push further regarding technical properties, specifically for connecting the

vehicles to a shared monitoring system for multiple departments as well as GPS functionality.

The technical advancement and properties would be benefited from being incorporated into a

learning process where the practice have the opportunity to grow with the artifacts. The same

conclusion can be drawn for the factors under the practice umbrella, a learning process would

strengthen practice as well as acceptance. A learning process that engages employees, employer

and technical distributors would create favourable conditions for innovative solutions as well

as employee acceptance development.

The limitations in generalisability is connected to this study being a single event study as well

as the specific application of technology. The specific implementation of the artifacts and the

technical advancement employees raise for the benefits of the process is not mean for

generalisation. Also, the case specific processes and factors will not be relevant outside the

airfield business. Furthermore, this case study has only qualitative data and therefore have no


52

quantitative data metrics. By using a multi-method case study in the future, it opens up for

statistically significant analysis as well as a larger data set.

This is an exploratory single case study within organisational studies. Specifically, towards the

field of technology implementation, with theory in trust and practice. Thus, it would increase

understanding to add other values such as risk, and thus explore the power uncertainty hold for

the outcome. This study used a single point in time to collect data from multiple departments.

Thus, to ensure encompassing the phenomenon of implementing automated vehicles as well as

the search for a mystery. A longitudinal study would give the researcher the chance to continue

engaging with the organisation, and thereby observe how the learning process assists the

development of trust and acceptance as well as how well new practice is shaped. It would be

interesting to multiple case studies, with comparisons between different implementation

strategies and monitor possible difference in process as well as acceptance development. By

engaging in learning process with both a practice perspective as well as solution-oriented IT

perspective would be beneficial to further bridge the divide between IT and OS.

As commented in the method section, analytical generalisation can be drawn from this study.

Especially, in regard to those factors’ respondents have brought up regarding inclusion in the

implementation stage and process design and protocol, with strong weight on inclusion and a

thorough implementation process. The sense of being included and having control over ones

working environment makes this area of research highly relevant to continue. This area of

research stands in contrast to technical advancement for customers, within banking and e-

commerce, where the customer carries no accountability and can leave the process without

troubling consequences. For an employee, after a technical shift in the working process the

employee will be accountable, and it is important to make the new process useful and give the

employees a sense of control. Furthermore, the employees will be accountable for the result of

the process. To develop trust and acceptance in the development of new processes for

employees is an area for future research.

With projects formed to bridge the uncertainty of new technology, such as KOMET and WASP-

HS, it is with great interest I hope this research stream will grow. Let us hope this will spark a

sense of curiosity as well as urgency to mould technology towards societal needs in a two-way

communication practice.


53

References Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., 1980. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Alsajjan, B., Dennis, C., 2010. Internet banking acceptance model: Cross-market examination. Journal of business research 63, 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.12.014 Alvesson, M., Kärreman, D., 2007. Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review 32, 1265–1281. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586822 Ashraf, A.R., Thongpapanl, N. (Tek), Auh, S., 2014. The Application of the Technology Acceptance Model under Different Cultural Contexts: The Case of Online Shopping Adoption. Journal of International Marketing 22, 68–93. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.14.0065 Asplund, J., 1970. Sociologiska teorier: studier i sociologins historia, 3., [rev. och utökade] uppl. ed. Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm. Baier, A., 1986. Trust and Antitrust. Ethics 96, 231–260. https://doi.org/10.1086/292745 Bailey, J.E., Pearson, S.W., 1983. Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction. Management Science 29, 530–545. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.5.530 Bryman, A., Bell, E., 2015. Business research methods, Fourth edition. ed. Oxford University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY, United States of America. Brynjolfsson, E., McAfee, A., 2016. The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W.W. Norton & Company, New York London. Chia, R., Holt, R., 2006. Strategy as Practical Coping: A Heideggerian Perspective. Organization Studies 27, 635–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606064102 Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., Öörni, A., n.d. Trust enhanced technology acceptance model-consumer acceptance of mobile payment solutions: Tentative evidence 2003. Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13, 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R., 1989. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science 35, 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 Dignum, V., 2018. Ethics in artificial intelligence: introduction to the special issue. Ethics and information technology 20, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9450-z Dishaw, M.T., Strong, D.M., 1999. Extending the technology acceptance model with task–technology fit constructs. Information & management 36, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(98)00101-3 Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass. Garcia, M., 2016. Racist in the Machine: The Disturbing Implications of Algorithmic Bias. World Policy Journal 33, 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1215/07402775-3813015 Gefen, Karahanna, Straub, 2003. Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model. MIS quarterly 27, 51–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519


54

Genomförandeplan (KOMET) (Statens Offentliga Utredningar No. Komm2019/D18006), 2019. . Regeringskansliet. Goffman, E., 1990. The presentation of self in everyday life, Reprt. ed. Penguin books, London [etc.]. Goodall, N.J., 2017. From Trolleys to Risk: Models for Ethical Autonomous Driving. American Journal of Public Health 107, 496–496. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303672 Heathrow airport completes UK’s first autonomous airside vehicle trial., 2018. . Engineer (Online Edition) 1–1. Hofstede, G., 2001. Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, 2. ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Hogarth, R.M., 1987. Judgement and choice: the psychology of decision, 2. ed. Wiley, Chichester. Judd, A., 2005. Running on empty. Spectator (00386952) 299, 35–38. Koenig, F., Found, P.A., Kumar, M., 2019. Innovative airport 4.0 condition-based maintenance system for baggage handling DCV systems. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 68, 561–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-04-2018-0136 Kramer, R.M., 1999. TRUST AND DISTRUST IN ORGANIZATIONS: Emerging Perspectives, Enduring Questions. Annual review of psychology 50, 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.569 Lave, J., Wenger, E., 1991. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation, Learning in doing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge [England] ; New York. Lawrence, T.B., Suddaby, R., Leca, B., 2009. Institutional work: actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK;New York; https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511596605 Legris, P., Ingham, J., Collerette, P., 2003. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & management 40, 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00143-4 Leonardi, P.M., Barley, S.R., 2008. Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Information and organization 18, 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2008.03.001 Luhmann, N., Morgner, C., King, M., 2017. Trust and power, English. ed. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK;Malden, MA; Marsh, I. (Ed.), 2006. Sociology: making sense of society, 3rd ed. ed. Pearson Education, London ; New York. McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., 2017. Machine, platform, crowd: harnessing our digital future, First edition. ed. W.W. Norton & Company, New York. McKnight, D.H., Chervany, N.L., 2014. What Trust Means in E-Commerce Customer Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Conceptual Typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6, 35–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2001.11044235 Merton, R.K., Barber, E.G., ebrary, I., 2004. The travels and adventures of serendipity: a study in sociological semantics and the sociology of science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D., 2018. The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of marketing 58, 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800302 Nicolini, D., 2013. Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction, First Edition. ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford.


55

Nicolini, D., 2009. Zooming In and Out: Studying Practices by Switching Theoretical Lenses and Trailing Connections. Organization Studies 30, 1391–1418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609349875 Nyíri, J.K., Smith, B. (Eds.), 1988. Practical knowledge: outlines of a theory of traditions and skills. Croom Helm, London ; New York. NZ-made driverless vehicle joins Christchurch trial (Media release), 2018. Christchurch airport. Orlikowski, W.J., Barley, S.R., 2001. Technology and Institutions: What Can Research on Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from Each Other? MIS Quarterly 25, 145–165. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250927 Pavlou, P.A., 2003. Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 7, 101–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2003.11044275 Radley, L., 2018. Clear for take-off: The Yeti project is using autonomous vehicle technology to keep Norway’s airports operating through the winter. Commercial Motor 42–43. Radner, R., Rothschild, M., 1975. On the allocation of effort. Journal of economic theory 10, 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(75)90006-x Ring, P.S., van de Ven, A.H., 1994. Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships. The Academy of Management review 19, 90–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/258836 Ritzer, G., 2008. Modern sociological theory, 7. ed., internat. student ed. ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Boston. Speier, C., Venkatesh, V., 2002. The Hidden Minefields in the Adoption of Sales Force Automation Technologies. Journal of Marketing 66, 98–111. Turner, B.S., 1996. The body and society: explorations in social theory, 2nd ed. ed, Theory, culture & society. Sage Publications, London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif. Van de Ven, A.H., 2007. Engaged scholarship: a guide for organizational and social research. Oxford University Press, Oxford ; New York. Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D., 2000. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science 46, 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 Warshaw, P.R., 2018. A New Model for Predicting Behavioral Intentions: An Alternative to Fishbein. Journal of marketing research 17, 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700201 Wu, I.-L., Chen, J.-L., 2005. An extension of Trust and TAM model with TPB in the initial adoption of on-line tax: An empirical study. International journal of human-computer studies 62, 784–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.03.003 Yin, R.K., 2014. Case study research: design and methods, Fifth edition. ed. SAGE, Los Angeles. Zhang, T., Tao, D., Qu, X., Zhang, X., Lin, R., Zhang, W., 2019. The roles of initial trust and perceived risk in public’s acceptance of automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 98, 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.11.018


56

Appendix 1. Questionnaire used in all interviews Vilka arbetsuppgifter är inkluderade i ditt jobb? What tasks are included in your job?

Hur påverkar automationen av bagagetruckar /PSBs ditt jobb? Direkt och

indirekt. How does the automation of bagage trucks/PSBs impact your job. Direct and indirect.

• Hur skulle du beskriva attityden hos dina kollegor för att använda

autonoma maskiner?How would you describe the attitude among your colleagues towards the

use of autonomous vehicles? • Hur upplever du acceptansen hos dina kollegor för användningen av

autonoma maskiner?How do you perceive the acceptance among your colleagues towards the

use of autonomous vehicles? • Vad tycker du att det finns för nytta med autonoma maskiner? Where do you

think the usefulness of autonomous vehicles lies?

Hur kommunicerar du med de som hanterar bagagetruckar/PSB idag? Vilken

typ av kanaler använder du för kommunikation? How do you communicate with whose who

handle bagage trucks/PSBs today? What type of channels do you use for communication?

• Träffar du dem utanför de direkta processerna (det direkta utförandet av arbetet), i

fikarummet eller på lunchen? Do you meet them outside the direct processes, in the coffee

room or at lunch? • Utbyts information där som har ett värde för processen ni utför

tillsammans? Is there a information exchange of value to the processes you perform together?

Känner du att ditt förtroende och din tillit till processen i sin helhet skulle

förändras i och med implementering av autonoma maskiner? Do you perceive that your

level of trust towards the process would change with the implementation of autonomous vehicles?

• Vad behöver du för att kunna känna högt förtroende och tillit för

autonoma maskiner?What do you need to have high levels of trust towards autonomous

vehicles?

Automated vehicles on airports

Documents

Transcript of Automated vehicles on airports