I remain skeptical about the value of HFACS or similar categorization systems. They appear to place incidents / aspects into a box; this reactive approach might prejudice the underlying reasons - at risk from hindsight bias.
A more proactive alternative could be to remove ‘error’ from the investigation. The thread title is ‘human factors incidents’, not errors.
Neverthless, man has been making errors ever since Adam took a bite out of the apple (or leaf depending on your belief system).
'Errare humanum est....'
The real challenge is in managing the errors. Research indicates that a normal, well trained individual will make around 6 'errors' a day.
Increasing automation has done its bit in taking out error but, or it least so it seems to me' there is now a reluctance to look too deeply into the HF side since Du Pont's Dirty Dozen. The commercial aviation industry is certainly pushing at the doors on fatigue.