Impact Of Cognitive Artifacts On Employee Performance In The Oil And Gas Sector

Demonstrating in-depth knowledge of the major discipline with areas of specialisation

A person’s ability to perform a job in a better way is analyzed based on their approach of accomplishing the work. Tariq et al. (2013) stated that some person know and have clear perception regarding their ob roles; while, some have to struggle to get a work done in a given period of time. Thus, the ability to memorize, visualize and representing all the organizational work is known as cognitive artifacts (Susi 2016). Sellberg and Lindblom (2014) furthermore stated that people with more cognitive artifacts can perform better than the others; while, those who have knowledge of such artifacts have to face difficulty in visualizing their job roles and responsibility. This research will highlight the impact of cognitive artifacts on the workplace performance of the employees from oil and gas sector. Tariq et al. (2013) stated that in oil and gas sector people with different roles and responsibilities have to work with effective knowledge so that no mistake can be occurred. Sellberg and Lindblom (2014) gave an example that an auditor of an oil and gas sector carries out regular and scheduled audits and produces written reports of a particular format. These steps need to be done with accuracy and cognitive artifacts help the auditor to do the similar job with precision. On the other hand, a cementer has to perform preparation of the slurry for the pumping and perform cementing calculations along with equipment pressure testing in a regular manner (Piccolo et al. 2014). Thus, for oil and sector employees it is important to obtain cognitive artifacts.  

KBR is a company that provides solution to different professional services to government services, technologies and oil and gas sectors (https://www.kbr.com/technologies/offshore). The offshore, onshore, photochemical, refining, coal gasification and LNG-FLNG- Terminal project need most to do list of all the job roles and responsibility so that no employee can mislead any project requirements. Thus, cognitive artifacts play a crucial role as it determined how well an employee can visualize their roles and responsibilities. It is also stated by Susi (2016) that an employee, who can list their job roles in oil and gas project effectively, will be able to perform better than other employees, who do their work haphazardly. Thus, this research will highlight the impact of the employee performance due to the successful attainment of cognitive artifacts.

KBR is known for their professional services and technologies globally and works within the Hydrocarbons sectors and Government Services (Kbr.com 2018). This company is providing their services to the customers of more than 80 countries and serves their operations in 40 countries (Kbr.com 2018). In terms of their services for oil and gas sector, KBR is liable to provide ??the role of refinery operators in hydrocarbon sector. They deliver cost effective solutions and leading edge to the oil refining market (Badiru and Osisanya 2016). Moreover, KBR also formulates olefins and chemicals from petroleum, natural gas, biomass and coals (Silva et al. 2017). The concerned organization gives best services at a lower cost and also ensures that these processes does not harm the environment to a greater extent (Kbr.com 2018). The company employed 34,000 people across the world and these employees are selected not only based on their educational qualification but also on their performance through the situational assessments. These situational assessments are evaluated to assess the cognitive ability of the person.

Undertaking critical analysis and evaluating evidence to support conclusions for complex situations

Abdullah (2012) stated that some employees struggle to perform their desired roles and responsibilities. The reason is that they are unable to illustrate their responsibilities through which they can showcase maximum of their competencies. Wong et al. (2012) on the other hand argues that some employees can visualize their roles in a clear way and this help them to accomplished their desired task with more precision. In oil and gas sector, there is not chance to get any process wrongly proceeded as it will impact the environment and the project. Thus, this research will highlight the factors that affect the cognitive artifacts which on the other hand impacts their performance in the project at the workplace.  

The aim of the research is to investigate the affect of the cognitive artifacts on the job performance of the employee in the oil and gas sector.

1.5 Research Hypothesis

H₁: There is an impact of cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance

H₀: There is no impact of cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance

1.6. Research Objectives

• To investigate the various components of the cognitive artifacts
• To evaluate the factors that can impact the employee’s performance
• To assess the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance
• To suggest strategies that can improve the cognitive artifacts for enhancing the performances

1.7. Research Question

• What are the various components of the cognitive artifacts?
• What are the factors that can impact the employee’s performance?
• What is the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance?

2.1 Theories for cognitive artifacts 

Heersmink (2013) depict that most of the scientific understanding is due to unaided mind that comprise of attention, perception, memory, thoughts and actions. Another thing that is required to focus is the way these people interact with the information processing activities. Varela et al. (2017) moreover stated that in order to judge the situation of a person it is necessary to focus on the situation through which these people are going through, nature of other people, artificial environment and culture. According to the theory proposed by Coles, the cultural psychology builds on the two major assumptions- one is to create the artifacts and the second is to acquire the corresponding ability to transmit the knowledge. In present times, the people use different devices that help them to improve their cognitive abilities. However, Reed (2012) argued that, the nature of the “interface” between the person and the machine describes the affect on the task and the use of the artifacts.

Anderson (2014) stated that artifacts are used so that the performance of the human can be improved. Taken for examples, pulley was invented so that it is easier for human to lift objects and cars are invented for travelling to the destination fast enough. In the similar way, artifacts like books, recordings and notes, improves memorizing power. On the other hand, Neisser (2014) stated that artifacts like physics and mathematics, improves the thought process of a person. There are two views of the artifacts- system view and the personal view.

Engaging in self-assessment, reflection, and analysis

It should be noted that artifacts improves the performance of an individual but in order to do so, they also enhance their ability to understand the things in a better way. Thus, when a person uses an artifacts and other persons sees the incident, they are actually witnessing the system view in which one is the performing function, task and the artifacts. However Heersmink (2017) sated that the person, who is liable to accomplish the job is actually witnessing the personal view that is how the artifacts help them to accomplish the work. In recent time, modern organization uses this system view to accomplish their tasks. This is to prepare a to-do list in which all the necessary tools and responsibilities are listed (Reed 2012). This process will help to achieve all the job roles for the organization. This list will help a person to memorize the things in a systematic manner and not to omit anything important.

In terms of personal view, there are no other people to witness the performing person and artifacts. Chandrasekharan and Nersessian (2015) represented that, in this view, the person sees the artifacts or the to-do-list as a task. It is also obvious that if a person does not list all the things, they have to memorize everything and with the list they have to remember or memorize the plan a little. Thus, the three important things that need to obtain are- constructing the list, remembering to consult the list and interpreting the items that is present on the list. Adams and Garrison (2013) also stated that it is better to prepare the list prior starting the work so that the mind will distribute the time and resources for accomplishing the entire work. It is also found that if a person is asked to complete a task with or without the list, they are able to do the task more accurately and reliability in presence of the list.  

2.2.1 Framework the entire job role 

Tollefsen et al. (2013) stated that in order to perform job in a better way, an employee must have to frame all the necessary work responsibility in their mind. This will help them to perceive a clear description of the work that they can memorize the work easily. Cress et al. (2016) thus depict that it is suggested to employee to frame their work in the computer or any paper that can help them to release their responsibilities. This process is highly used in service companies like aviation and oil and gas engineering. Silberstein and Chemero (2012) moreover depicted that it cognitive artifacts tools changes the way one decided to complete the task, Artifacts can distribute the action across the time and it is known as pre-computation distribute the actions among the different people and the action is known as distributed cognition and lastly, to change the action according to the nature of the job (Liang et al. 2013).

Utilizing creative and critical thinking skills to solve problems

Power et al. (2015) stated that in absence of the list to any other artifacts, it is the human, who has to memorize the task that is needed to accomplish the job role. Muntanyola-Saura (2014) argued that it might be the case the performance of the people often deteriorates. Mingers and Willcocks (2014) describes that the activity cycle in accomplishing a task is known as action flow. It is though important for a person has to show the engagement with the task in order to prove their consistency. Thus, Michaelian and Sutton (2013) stated that for cohesive activity flow, the major factors that are responsible are task, artifacts and the environment. However, Gaba (2013) argues that interruption and unexpected outcome might lower the power of memorizing the list that can be improved by keeping a computational artifacts to boosts their memory power.

Human have developed computers so that they can accomplish their work with more accuracy. Stahl (2012) stated that this also represents the personal view of the cognitive artifacts where a person can feel the value that computer have played in order to arrange their desire job roles. Neisser (2014) also stated that automatic behavior is appreciated in any kind of skilled operation, where there is no place of making any mistakes.

2.3 Factors that can influence the employee’s performance 2.3.1 Greater memorizing power 

A person, who is working in a service company, do not have to keep the organizational objectives in the mind, but also have to outperform the things that is required for the job to complete. Shute et al. (2015) stated that in services like oil and gas companies and aircraft industry, the task might sometimes get changed due to critical situation. In such time, the employees have to utilize their cognitive features to solve the situations. Lunenburg (2012) on the other hand argued that if these employees only memorize the things of getting the work completed, there innovativeness might get hampered. However, memorizing through the help of some artifacts might help the employee to achieve their target faster and with greater precision (Shuck and Reio Jr 2014).

Jensen et al. (2012) stated that with time an employee improve their cognitive power to do a certain kind of job in their organization. In such situation they might not have to struggle a lot for doing a job. Thus, it can be said the greater the experience of an employee, the easier it will be for the person to obtain the work. Moreover, experience also helps the employee to identify shortcuts that can be implemented. In this way, they can complete the work faster than others and can give time to other works. Their experience also allow them to frame the work faster by including all the necessary component that helps them to accomplish the desires job roles and responsibilities (Gin Choi et al. 2013).

2.4.1 Improved employee performance 

Working and learning independently and collaboratively

Computerized artifacts and cognitive artifacts help humans to store the desired list of doing the work easily. They can also use these artifacts to make the blueprint of the entire job plan (Heckman and Kautz 2013). This will help them to achieve the organizational goals with greater accuracy. Moreover, due to cognitive artifacts, employees also know how to develop plan for the jobs following which the objectives can be attained. This knowledge of utilization of the artifacts also help them to develop plan for the other task that they will be allocated (Neves and Eisenberger 2012). This will improve their efficiency and ability to understand the job roles.

An employee when started planning to frame the entire work, they are able to find what additional resources and materials are required to complete the desired job role. The framework also allows them to allocate these additional resources in the plan for better outcome of the task (Farh et al. 2012). The employee will know how to connect component and this will also allow them to produce an optimized plan through which the job can be accomplished in an innovative way.

The use of cognitive artifacts to memorize the task responsibility helps an organization to omit erroneous work. Moreover, this will also help the employee to visualize the entire blueprint of the plan for the tasks in their mind (Kautz et al. 2014). This will help the employees not to forget the framework and complete the work according to the plan. The framework drawn also avoids exclusion of important resources so that the project might not face any problem during the completion (Schaufeli and Taris 2014).

This chapter will highlight the research process that is used for obtaining the research objectives. This chapter represents the systematic approach through which the research questions can be addressed. The details of the research philosophy, approach and purpose is discussed with proper justification. The data collection methods, data analysis techniques, sampling technique, sample size, ethical consideration and research timeframe will also be discussed.

Neuman (2013) stated that research philosophy is used to gather observation for the research. Research philosophies are of three types- positivism, realism and interpretivism. In positivism research philosophy, the sample size is greater and the research should be accomplished in a systematic and highly structured manner (Coleman 2013). Novikov and Novikov (2013) moreover stated that in realism philosophy, only the social belief based on the research topic. Lastly, the interpretivism research philosophy is the combination of both the positivism and the realism philosophies.

Communicating ideas and results of work with clarity and concision

Interpretivism philosophy emphasizes on both the numerical data and social belief from the respondents. This will help this research to obtain an unbiased outcome that addresses the research objectives.

There are two types of research approach- deductive and inductive research approaches and it is used for describing the research hypothesis or formulation of new research hypothesis from the collected data. Flick (2015) defines that in deductive research approach, the collected data and obtained literature helps, theories and concepts in deducing the formulated research hypothesis; whereas, in inductive research approach, new theories and concepts are generated.

Mackey and Gass (2013) stated that there are two types of research purpose- exploratory and descriptive. The prime reason for utilizing a research purpose shows how the research questions are answered in order to obtain the research objectives. Exploratory purpose illustrates that the answer obtained from the literature review and data collection demonstrate a new direction (Pierre 201). On the other hand, when the research question is properly described with the formulated literature review and the data collection, descriptive purpose is used.

In this research study, descriptive research purpose is utilized.

The technique to collect the observation or data for the research is data collection technique. Data collection technique is of two types- primary data collection and secondary data collection. Sekaran and Bougie (2016) stated that when data for the research is gathered directly from sources like person of the selected place, it is known as primary data collection technique. On the other hand, data collected from secondary sources like newspaper article, journals, peer review articles, websites and other research papers, it is known as secondary data collection process.

In this research primary data collection technique is occurred from the employees of KBR through questionnaire survey. The survey comprised of 10 questions, out of which first 2 are the demographic questions, next 3 questions on the factors that represents cognitive artifacts, 2 questions n the factors that influences employee’s performances and the last 3 questions represents the impacts of the cognitive artifacts on performance of the employees. Managers are also asked some questions on the cognitive artifacts which is asked through interview process. The interview process is also comprised of three questions.

The outcome that is drawn from the collected data for the respondents through some tools is known as data analysis technique or method. Neuman (2013) stated that there are two different types of data analysis techniques- qualitative method and quantitative method. Whenever, theoretical information is collected with no numerical data, the outcome is generated based on qualitative data analysis technique (Creswell and Creswell 2017). On the other hand, when outcome is found out from numerical data it is known as quantitative analysis technique.

Background of the Study

Quantitative and qualitative data analysis technique will be obtained. The data obtained from the survey is analyzed quantitatively through regression analysis. The regression analysis is carried out using the tool of Microsoft Excel. On the other hand, the interview data will be analyzed qualitatively from the answers that are given by the managers on the research question.

Bernard and Bernard (2012) stated that when respondents for the research are selected with equal priority, the method is known as probability sampling technique, whereas, when the respondents for the research is selected with unequal priority is known as non-probability sampling technique.

Probability sampling technique is used to select the employees of the KBR; whereas, the manager for the interview process will be selected based on the non-probability sampling technique. Thus, both the probability and non-probability sampling technique is used.

Main activities/ stages	Week 1st-2nd	Week 3rd-4th	Week 5th-6th	Week 7th-8th	Week 9th-10th	Week 11th-12th
Topic Selection
Literature review
Formation of the research Plan
Selection of the Appropriate Research Techniques
Primary data collection
Analysis & Interpretation of Data Collection
Conclusion of the Study
Submission of Final Work

Table 1: Timeframe for the capstone project

(Source: Created by Author)

Options	No of respondents	Total No. of respondents
Less than 22 years	18	100
23-35 years	45	100
36-50 years	31	100
Greater than 50 years	6	100

Table 2: Age of the Employees

(Source: Created by Author)

Findings

Total 100 of employees are taken into consideration for the research out of which 18 respondents are less than 22 years old, 45 employees belong to the 23 to 35 years group. Moreover, 31 respondents are from 36 to 50 years old and the remaining 6 respondents are greater than 50 years old.   

Q2. How long you have been employed in this organization?

Options	No of respondents	Total No. of respondents
Less than 2 Year	15	100
2.1-4 Years	41	100
4.1-7 Years	32	100
More than 7 years	12	100

Table 3: Years of employment of the Employees

(Source: Created by Author)

Findings

The findings show that 15 respondents are there, who are working in the organization from less than 2 years; while, 41 respondents are working greater than 2 but less than 4 years. Moreover, 32 respondents participated in the research are those who are working for greater than 4 but less than 7 years in the organization. Lastly, remaining 12 respondents are associated for greater than 7 years with KBR. 

Q3. Do you agree that framing the job roles refers to the cognitive artifacts?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	46	100
Agree	38	100
Neutral	11	100
Disagree	4	100
Strongly Disagree	1	100

Table 4: Response for framing the job roles being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts

It is seen from the above table and chart that 46 and 38 respondents strongly agree and agree that framing the job roles is a crucial factor that represents cognitive artifacts in an individual. 11 respondents give a neutral perception while 5 respondents disagree with the same research question.

The literature review also reveals that if an employee formulates the framework of the task effectively, it is easier for the person to understand the requirement of the task and they can accomplish the same with greater efficiency. Thus, creating the framework of the task is a crucial factor that represents the cognitive artifacts in human.

Background of the Company

Q4. How far do you agree that memorizing the construction of the job demonstrates the cognitive artifact?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	38	100
Agree	48	100
Neutral	12	100
Disagree	2	100
Strongly Disagree	0	100

Table 5: Response for memorizing the construction of the job being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts

Findings

38 and 48 research respondents strongly agree and agree that memorizing the construction of the job represents the cognitive power of an individual. However, 12 respondents have neutral perception and the remaining two respondents show negative view on the same research question.  

Analysis

Thus, it can be said that rather than listing the things or job roles and responsibility, if a person can memorize the entire thing, they can complete the job efficiently. However, from the literature review it is found that listed down the required things, help people not to forget all the necessary tasks. However, memorizing things can lead to forget some points due to unpredictable environment or allocation of other urgent job roles.

Q5. Do you agree that computers interaction illustrates effectiveness of cognitive artifacts?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	41	100
Agree	43	100
Neutral	10	100
Disagree	4	100
Strongly Disagree	2	100

Table 6: Response for computers interaction being a factor that represents cognitive artifacts

It is found that 41 respondents and 43 respondents strongly agree and agree on that fact that computers interaction is an important factor for representing cognitive artifacts respectively. Additionally, 10 respondents remain neutral and the rest of the 6 respondents give negative perception regarding the research question.

Analysis

The literature review also shows that in a personal view, an individual can express the role of a system to help in accomplishing of the task allocated to them. Maximum of the respondents also agree that in presence of computers, the formulation of to-do-list become easier and it is also easy to maintain the list.

Q6. How far do you agree that greater memorizing power can help an employee to perform better?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	49	100
Agree	36	100
Neutral	10	100
Disagree	3	100
Strongly Disagree	2	100

Table 7: Response for greater memorizing power being a factor that impacts employee’s performance

Findings

It is found that a great percentage of 85% of the respondents agrees with the fact that if employees have greater memory power, they can perform better. On the other hand, 10 respondents give a neutral perception; while, the rest of the 5 respondents shows negative view.

Analysis

Thus, it can be said that if an employee can memorize the working procedure, it is easier for them to proceed with their working styles in an effective manner. Especially in Service Company, these employees can easily accomplishing their job roles, if they know or memorize all the procedure step-wise.

Rationale of the Study

Q7. Do you agree that experience of an employee can influence the performance of an employee?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	44	100
Agree	41	100
Neutral	11	100
Disagree	4	100
Strongly Disagree	0	100

Table 8: Response for experience of an employee being a factor that impacts employee’s performance

It is found that, 85% of the total respondents agree with the fact that experience of an employee is a factor that impacts employee’s performance. 11 respondents gives a neutral perception; while, rest of the four respondents disagree with the same research question

Analysis

Thus, it can be said that an employee if great experience, it is easier for them to recognize the working pattern and help them to work with more accuracy compared to others. Computers Moreover, the experience also allow them to frame the work with more effectiveness using system or computers. This ease in framing the work shows their greater cognitive ability that comes with the experience and impacts their performance in a positive manner.

Regression between two research variables- cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance

SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R	0.97947455
R Square	0.959370394
Adjusted R Square	0.958955806
Standard Error	0.149826859
Observations	100
ANOVA
	df	SS	MS	F	Significance F
Regression	1	51.94564	51.94564	2314.034	5.59E-70
Residual	98	2.199913	0.022448
Total	99	54.14556
	Coefficients	Standard Error	t Stat	P-value	Lower 95%	Upper 95%	Lower 95.0%	Upper 95.0%
Intercept	0.167475728	0.036907	4.537752	1.62E-05	0.094235	0.240717	0.094235	0.240717
X Variable 1	0.932485214	0.019385	48.10441	5.59E-70	0.894017	0.970953	0.894017	0.970953

Table 9: Regression analysis between cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance

The main purpose of regression analysis is to show the relation between the research variable and it also helps in rejecting or accepting the formulated research hypothesis. The relation shows that there is impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. In this research, cognitive artifacts is the independent variables; whereas, the employee performance is the dependent variable. Through the regression analysis, it is found that the value of the significance is 5.59E-70 which is lesser than 0.05. This reveals that the null hypothesis is rejected which shows that it is true that there is an impact of cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance. Moreover, the value of the multiple R square is 0.959370394 that represents that 95 of the dependent variable can be explained by the independent variable and the goodness of fit is high. Therefore, most of the points will fall within the regression line. There is random variation of 4.06 % which is normal practical research of this type.

Q8. How far do you agree that due to cognitive artifacts the employee’s performance can be improved?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	46	100
Agree	39	100
Neutral	11	100
Disagree	1	100
Strongly Disagree	3	100

Table 10: Response for improvements in employee’s performance due to cognitive artifacts

It is found that 46 and 39 respondents strongly agrees and agrees on the fact that due to cognitive artifacts the employee’s performance can be improved. 11 respondents have the neutral perception and the remaining 4 respondents show a negative perception.

Aim of the Research

Analysis

Thus, it can be said that cognitive artifacts allow a person to frame the entire job requirement in a list or a visual representation. This will help them to allocate all the necessary resources required for the job. This approach moreover affects the employee’s performance on a positive way as they obtained a clear understanding of the task.

Q9. Do you agree that cognitive artifacts help an employee to formulate innovative strategies for accomplishing the work?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	45	100
Agree	39	100
Neutral	10	100
Disagree	6	100
Strongly Disagree	0	100

Table 11: Response for formulation of innovative strategies for accomplishing the work due to cognitive artifacts

It is seen from the above table and chart that 84% of the respondents agrees with the fact that cognitive artifacts help an employee to formulate innovative strategies for accomplishing the work. While, 10 respondents remained neutral and the rest of the 6 respondents disagree with the same fact.

Analysis

Thus, it is found that when an employee prepares the list of the tasks, they can identify the required resources that are required for accomplishing the job. In making proper planning, they can also find some optimized ideas that can be implanted which require lesser resources but give more effectiveness. In this way, cognitive artifacts helps employee to raise innovation in their working procedure and job completion technique.

Q10. How far do you agree that utilizing cognitive artifacts results in effective outcome for the organizational objectives?

Options	No of respondents	Total respondents
Strongly Agree	38	100
Agree	47	100
Neutral	12	100
Disagree	1	100
Strongly Disagree	2	100

Table 12: Response for effective outcome for the organizational objectives due to cognitive artifacts

Total of 85 respondents agrees with the fact that utilizing cognitive artifacts results in effective outcome for the organizational objectives; whereas, 12 respondents show a neutral perception.  Remaining 3 respondents disagrees with the same fact.

Analysis

Thus it can be said that cognitive artifacts helps people to frame their work. Identify necessary resources and visualizing the entire approach, this will automatically improve the quality of the work as it minimizes the probable faults. Moreover, use of cognitive artifacts also improve the intelligence of the employee that enhances the productivity in them which furthermore beneficial for the profitability of the organization.

Validation of the data findings

SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R	0.991701654
R Square	0.983472171
Adjusted R Square	0.983303519
Standard Error	0.097464038
Observations	100
ANOVA
	df	SS	MS	F	Significance F
Regression	1	55.3938	55.3938	5831.393	3.99338E-89
Residual	98	0.930925	0.009499
Total	99	56.32472
	Coefficients	Standard Error	t Stat	P-value	Lower 95%	Upper 95%	Lower 95.0%	Upper 95.0%
Intercept	0.033353822	0.024682	1.351333	0.1797	-0.015627114	0.082335	-0.01563	0.082335
X Variable 1	0.971016548	0.012716	76.36356	3.99E-89	0.945782645	0.99625	0.945783	0.99625

Table 13: Validation of the research outcome

The validation shows that the regression outcome drawn from the two research variables that are cognitive artifacts and employee’s performance is true. Thus, the means values of the individual research variables are summed up for calculating the average. This average value checked with the means come from the data collected for the questions that shows there is an impact of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance. The cross-checking procedure is done through regression analysis. The regression value shows the significance of 3.99338E-89 and the R square value of 0.983472171. This shows that both the obtained R Square values that are 0.959370394 and 0.983472171 are close to each other and almost equal to 1. This validates the outcome of the regression analysis and proves that there is a relation between two research variables.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Q1. How important for you the cognitive artifact is?

First manager- Cognitive artifact is important for improving the intelligence level of the employee hired for the KBR.

Second Manager- Cognitive artifacts is required to fulfill the need of the organization objectives. Third Manager- Cognitive artifacts is important for personal development and helps all the employees to outperform in effective decision making situations.

Q2. Why do you think that concept of cognitive artifacts is applicable for your industry and help in accomplishing the organizational goals?

First manager- Since, most of our work is relayed with providing technical solutions it is required for all the employees to know their job roles with greater precision. In oil and gas projects, there is no place for any mistakes and the ability to develop a frame work of the work will allow employee to perform extra-ordinarily.

Second Manager- If employee utilizes greater cognitive artifacts they will know how much resource to be used for a project. This will help them to take exact amount of resources to produce an optimized solution for oil and gas projects.

Third Manager- Cognitive artifacts help people to improve their memorizing skills. This skill will help them to take effective decisions for a situation.

Q3. What steps your organization has taken to improve the utilization of cognitive artifacts?

First manager- The organization plans for employee training in which several assessments will be there through which all of them will be directed for using cognitive artifacts. Several professional trainers were also being available to provide training.

Second Manager- Not all employee know how to utilize the cognitive training. So, apart from training, those employee, who utilizes the cognitive artifacts as a part if their job, will be rewarded. This will help them to improve their skills and make everyone in encouraging others to follow the same.

Third Manager- Employee training and regular organizational situational assessments will be conducted, which will allow employee to outperform through framing the work according to the given situation. The training will make them aware of using the cognitive artifacts.

Conclusion 

Objective 1: To investigate the various components of the cognitive artifacts

Through the literature review it has been found that ability to develop a framework for the job, memorizing the construction of the job and ability to form effective computer interaction are the three factors of the cognitive artifacts. Through these factors, employee of the KBR will able to manage their resources with the oil and gas project that they will get. They can easily frame the plan of the project along with identification of the necessary resources. This will help them to develop innovative idea in certain situation where they can allocate lesser resource for accurate project outcome.

System View

Objective 2: To evaluate the factors that can impact the employee’s performance

Greater memorizing power and experience of the employees are the two factors that is identified through this research, It is found that if an employee know how to frame the work r the entire project, he can visualize the entire system an can proceed accordingly. Moreover, this visualization of the development of framework also improves with the experience of the employees. Thus, both the factors that are memorizing power on the procedure if accomplishing the oil and gas project and experience in this field help the employees to omit any faults. All these aspects improve the employee’s performance.

Objective 3: To assess the affect of cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance

The impact of the cognitive artifacts on employee’s performance that is found from the research is improvement in the employee’s performance and productivity, ability of the employees to formulate innovative ideas for accomplishing the tasks and effective outcome for the organizational objectives. Moreover, from the data analysis section, it is seen that the regression analysis reject the null hypothesis which shows that there is an impact of the cognitive artifacts on the employee’s performance. The value of the regression is obtained as 5.58895E-70 which is lesser than 0.05 and rejects the null hypothesis.

Objective 4: To suggest strategies that can improve the cognitive artifacts for enhancing the performances

  Though the interview process, three ways that is identified to improve the utilization of the cognitive artifacts are providing employee training, conducting regular organizational situation assessments and rewarding the effort of the employees, who uses the cognitive artifacts to accomplish the work projects. The employee training will be useful to develop the traits in the employees to make the framework of the entire project align with the allocation of resources required for that project. Moreover, the situational assessments based on the oil and gas management projects help the employees to develop suitable framework. Lastly, the rewarding system will help the organization to recognize those employees, who voluntarily utilizes the cognitive artifacts to fulfill their job goals. This will provide encouragement to the employees to use the same for further projects and also help others to make aware of the benefits for using the cognitive artifacts.  

The entire journey has been great for me as it allows me to learn many things that might not be possible through other ways. I have opted for this course and project as a part of my assignment or academic journey. However, starting from the selection of the research topic for this assessment to the relevant articles from developing content, I have learned about decision making skills. These skills helped me in deciding which research philosophies, research approaches and research purpose to be selected for the research. The skills that I have acquired also helped me to complete this research within the specific time and will also allow me to make effective decision in the future. I have taken help from many people including my mentors, classmates, friends and family members and also gathered relevant ideas that I can incorporate in my research. I have learned that in order to complete a job or a task it is important to work collaboratively. This collaboration enhances the interpersonal skills in me which allow me to develop good relation with other and carry out the best in them. I have asked many questions and theories related to my projects. This interaction with others and mentor helped me to develop my communication skills. I also want to mention that there are also bad times in this journey when I did not get required help that I have asked for. Ultimately the reason I found is the lack of proper communication skills through which the other person could not understand about my problem that I faced. Thus, regular interaction helped me in conveying my message properly to the target audience.

Personal View

I have learned about different methodology styles that I can apply in my research. I have learned about how to carry a research by following all the basic. This will improve my critical analysis traits to select the best out of many methods. The best thing that I think is that this ability to critically analyzing the situations and given aspects helps me in choosing the best suitable option in any phase of the life. Academically, the knowledge I have gather through this research will help me to conduct many more researches in my academic life. I have also got support from my parents, who have tried to help me in every possible manner. I have also learned the procedure of conducting the research. It is important for analyzing the sources first and completes the work in a systematic manner according to the structure. This process improves my skills in developing the framework of the research and then identifying the resources through which the developed research objectives can be addressed. I felt happy that I have personally utilized the main theme of my research work that is to utilize the cognitive artifacts in accomplishing desired job roles. Thus, I can say that I have developed a clear understanding regarding the topic and have the experience to personally utilize the concept.

Reference List and Bibliography

 Abdullah, R., 2012. Oil and gas industry: opportunities and challenges ahead. Halliburton, Malaysia.

Adams, F. and Garrison, R., 2013. The mark of the cognitive. Minds and Machines, 23(3), pp.339-352.

Altmann, U., Bohrn, I.C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W. and Jacobs, A.M., 2012. The power of emotional valence—from cognitive to affective processes in reading. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 6, p.192.

Anderson, N.H., 2014. Contributions to information integration theory: volume 1: cognition. Psychology Press.

Badiru, A.B. and Osisanya, S.O., 2016. Project management for the oil and gas industry: a world system approach. CRC Press.

Bandura, A., 2014. Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In Handbook of moral behavior and development(pp. 69-128). Psychology Press.

Bernard, H.R. and Bernard, H.R., 2012. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.

Bratman, G.N., Hamilton, J.P. and Daily, G.C., 2012. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1249(1), pp.118-136.

Chandrasekharan, S. and Nersessian, N.J., 2015. Building cognition: The construction of computational representations for scientific discovery. Cognitive science, 39(8), pp.1727-1763.

Coleman, R. ed., 2013. Deleuze and research methodologies. Edinburgh University Press.

Various components of the cognitive artifacts

Cress, U., Feinkohl, I., Jirschitzka, J. and Kimmerle, J., 2016. Mass collaboration as coevolution of cognitive and social systems. In Mass collaboration and education (pp. 85-104). Springer, Cham.

Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Farh, C.I., Seo, M.G. and Tesluk, P.E., 2012. Emotional intelligence, teamwork effectiveness, and job performance: The moderating role of job context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4), p.890.

Flick, U., 2015. Introducing research methodology: A beginner’s guide to doing a research project. Sage.

Gaba, D.M., 2013. Perioperative cognitive aids in anesthesia: what, who, how, and why bother?.

Gin Choi, Y., Kwon, J. and Kim, W., 2013. Effects of attitudes vs experience of workplace fun on employee behaviors: Focused on Generation Y in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(3), pp.410-427.

Heckman, J.J. and Kautz, T., 2013. Fostering and measuring skills: Interventions that improve character and cognition (No. w19656). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Heersmink, R., 2013. A taxonomy of cognitive artifacts: function, information, and categories. Review of philosophy and psychology, 4(3), pp.465-481.

Heersmink, R., 2017. Extended mind and cognitive enhancement: Moral aspects of cognitive artifacts. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 16(1), pp.17-32.

Jensen, K., Lahn, L.C. and Nerland, M. eds., 2012. Professional learning in the knowledge society (Vol. 6). Springer Science & Business Media.

Kautz, T., Heckman, J.J., Diris, R., Ter Weel, B. and Borghans, L., 2014. Fostering and measuring skills: Improving cognitive and non-cognitive skills to promote lifetime success (No. w20749). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Kbr.com., 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.kbr.com/technologies/offshore [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].

Kruglanski, A.W., 2013. Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. Springer Science & Business Media.

Kucewicz, M.T., Cimbalnik, J., Matsumoto, J.Y., Brinkmann, B.H., Bower, M.R., Vasoli, V., Sulc, V., Meyer, F., Marsh, W.R., Stead, S.M. and Worrell, G.A., 2014. High frequency oscillations are associated with cognitive processing in human recognition memory. Brain, 137(8), pp.2231-2244.

Liang, C., Hsu, Y., Chang, C.C. and Lin, L.J., 2013. In search of an index of imagination for virtual experience designers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(4), pp.1037-1046.

Lindenberger, U., 2014. Human cognitive aging: Corriger la fortune?. Science, 346(6209), pp.572-578.

Luber, B. and Lisanby, S.H., 2014. Enhancement of human cognitive performance using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Neuroimage, 85, pp.961-970.

Lunenburg, F.C., 2012. Power and leadership: an influence process. International journal of management, business, and administration, 15(1), pp.1-9.

Mackey, A. and Gass, S.M., 2013. Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.

Maxwell, J.A., 2012. Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage publications.

Michaelian, K. and Sutton, J., 2013. Distributed cognition and memory research: History and current directions. Review of philosophy and psychology, 4(1), pp.1-24.

Mingers, J. and Willcocks, L., 2014. An integrative semiotic framework for information systems: The social, personal and material worlds. Information and Organization, 24(1), pp.48-70.

Muntanyola-Saura, D., 2014. A cognitive account of expertise: Why Rational Choice Theory is (often) a fiction. Theory & Psychology, 24(1), pp.19-39.

Neisser, U., 2014. Cognitive psychology: Classic edition. Psychology Press.

Neubert, F.X., Mars, R.B., Thomas, A.G., Sallet, J. and Rushworth, M.F., 2014. Comparison of human ventral frontal cortex areas for cognitive control and language with areas in monkey frontal cortex. Neuron, 81(3), pp.700-713.

Neuman, W.L., 2013. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson education.

Neves, P. and Eisenberger, R., 2012. Management communication and employee performance: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Human Performance, 25(5), pp.452-464.

Novikov, A.M. and Novikov, D.A., 2013. Research methodology: From philosophy of science to research design(Vol. 2). CRC Press.

Perlovsky, L., 2013. A challenge to human evolution—cognitive dissonance. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, p.179.

Piccolo, L.S., Baranauskas, C., Fernandez, M., Alani, H. and De Liddo, A., 2014, October. Energy consumption awareness in the workplace: technical artefacts and practices. In Proceedings of the 13th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 41-50). Sociedade Brasileira de Computação.

Pierre, E.A.S., 2012. Post qualitative research. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials, 3.

Power, D.J., Sharda, R. and Burstein, F., 2015. Decision support systems. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Reed, S.K., 2012. Cognition: Theories and applications. CENGAGE learning.

Schaufeli, W.B. and Taris, T.W., 2014. A critical review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for improving work and health. In Bridging occupational, organizational and public health (pp. 43-68). Springer Netherlands.

Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R., 2016. Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Sellberg, C. and Lindblom, J., 2014. Comparing methods for workplace studies: a theoretical and empirical analysis. Cognition, technology & work, 16(4), pp.467-486.

Shuck, B. and Reio Jr, T.G., 2014. Employee engagement and well-being: A moderation model and implications for practice. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(1), pp.43-58.

Shute, V.J., Ventura, M. and Ke, F., 2015. The power of play: The effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Computers & education, 80, pp.58-67.

Silberstein, M. and Chemero, A., 2012. Complexity and extended phenomenological?cognitive systems. Topics in cognitive science, 4(1), pp.35-50.

Silva, D.C., Silva, A.A., Melo, C.F. and Marques, M.R.C., 2017. Production of oil with potential energetic use by catalytic co-pyrolysis of oil sludge from offshore petroleum industry. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 124, pp.290-297.

Stahl, G., 2012. Cognizing mediating: Unpacking the entanglement of artifacts with collective minds. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), pp.187-191.

Susi, T., 2016. Social cognition, artefacts, and stigmergy revisited: Concepts of coordination. Cognitive Systems Research, 38, pp.41-49.

Tariq, A., Georgiou, A. and Westbrook, J., 2013. Medication errors in residential aged care facilities: A distributed cognition analysis of the information exchange process. International Journal of medical informatics, 82(5), pp.299-312.

Tollefsen, D.P., Dale, R. and Paxton, A., 2013. Alignment, transactive memory, and collective cognitive systems. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4(1), pp.49-64.

Vaesen, K., 2012. The cognitive bases of human tool use. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(4), pp.203-218.

Varela, F.J., Thompson, E. and Rosch, E., 2017. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT press.

Wang, Y., Patel, S. and Patel, D., 2013. The cognitive process and formal models of human attentions. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence (IJSSCI), 5(1), pp.32-50.

Whiten, A. and Erdal, D., 2012. The human socio-cognitive niche and its evolutionary origins. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), pp.2119-2129.

Wong, L.H., Chen, W. and Jan, M., 2012. How artefacts mediate small?group co?creation activities in a mobile?assisted seamless language learning environment?. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), pp.411-424.