[meltyness]

This is not untrue, but a more applicable interpretation of this conceptual framework might go as follows:

In an AAR[0] operators explain risks, causes, and limitations of the system. This provides a formal structured language for describing how, precisely, supporting systems can be improved and how they impact all specific aspects of operator interaction.

Since the operator is viewed simply as a networked control-system in this case, the cognitive path from structure, supporting physical system, and then physical quantities needing improvement is unmistakably clear, as is required in successful planning, acquisitions, operations, and maintenance.[1]

Essentially it makes subjective experience concrete, and is prophylactic against bikeshedding/blame-gaming.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After-action_review

[1] https://youtu.be/ir0FAa8P2MU?t=1340