Carl Westin

2-6 Conclusion 35 At the same time, strategic conformance hinges on the assumption that users dif- fer in their preferences and that there are individual differences in problem-solving styles. If users were perfectly homogeneous, strategic conformance would not be in- teresting, as we would not have to acknowledge individual differences. This would make it easier for automation designers as it would be sufficient to develop a “one size” system. In most domains, however, it is more likely that there are in fact in- dividual differences between users that deserve recognition. In order to determine the prerequisites for strategic conformance in specific work environments, it is nec- essary to determine the degree of both consistency and consensus. 2-6 Conclusion In this article we have explained how issues of automation acceptance can be at- tributed to a compatibility mismatch in problem-solving style between human and automation. We examined how researchers have attempted to reduce this compat- ibility gap and mitigate acceptance issues by exploring heuristic forms of decision aiding automation. We argue that, in order to achieve the highest compatibility level, we may need to consider individual-sensitive automation more conformal with indi- vidual problem-solving styles. We presented strategic conformance as a mediating concept, complementary to automation design frameworks, for overcoming resis- tance to accept decision aiding automation. However, we also acknowledge that strategic conformal automation may only be relevant to gain initial acceptance in the introductory phase of new technology. Fur- thermore, conformance may only be relevant for expert users who hold consistent and well-developed decision-making strategies. Finally, given technical advances in areas previously considered unique to human cognitive skills, automation is ex- pected to increasingly assume authority in problem-solving and decision-making tasks. The inevitable trajectory of many work domains will involve more capa- ble automation acting in an intelligent advisory capacity. As such, automation will likely provide support that is more strategic in timescale, less transparent to the op- erator in that decision rationales are concealed, and presented as recommendations. In this context, the issue of acceptance is central. It is reasonable to hypothesize that a recommended solution matching the individual’s problem-solving style would be more readily accepted.