Answer the questions following articles.
Establishing a Total Safety Culture within a Flight Department Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research Volume 8 Number 2 JAAER Winter 1998 Article 3 Winter 1998 Establishing a Total Safety Culture within a Flight Department Willem J. Homan William G. Rantz Blair R. Balden Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ERAU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Aviation/ Aerospace Education & Research by an authorized administrator of ERAU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Scholarly Commons Citation Homan, W. J., Rantz, W. G., & Balden, B. R. (1998). Establishing a Total Safety Culture within a Flight Department. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 8(2). Retrieved from http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer/vol8/iss2/3 http://commons.erau.edu?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer/vol8?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer/vol8/iss2?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer/vol8/iss2/3?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages http://commons.erau.edu/jaaer?utm_source=commons.erau.edu%2Fjaaer%2Fvol8%2Fiss2%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages mailto:
[email protected] Establishing a Total Safety Culture ESTABLISHING A TOTAL SAFETY CULTURE MTHINA FLIGHTDEPARTMENT Willem J. Homan, William G. Rantz, and Blair R Balden This article will present behavior-based principles and procedures that can be successfully applied to change safety attitudes in a Flight Department. First, lirmtations and flaws of the human condition are discussed, and three basic ways employees can learn safe behavior are addressed. Next, Crew Resource Management is proposed as a tool to increase overall safety in Business Aviation. Safety is then reviewed in the context of the overall goals of the corporation and the cost of doing business. Senior Corporate management is identiiied as holding the key to the successful and safe operation of the corporate Flight Department. Finally, critical issues surrounding Corporate Culture and the ultimate goal of a Total Safety Culture are discussed. Recommendations are then made to increase the overall safety level of the Business Aviation environment. INTRODUCTION Business Aviation has grown extensively over the past 20 years, and the industry's safety record has improved along the way. In fact, NBAA (1998) data show that in 1997 companies operated more than 18,300 turbine-powered business aircraft worldwide, or three times as many aircraft as in 1978. Furthermore, the safety statistics of corporate Flight Departments is superior to that of air taxi operators, and comparable to that of major airlines. With an accident rate of .23 per 100,000 hours of operations and a fatality rate of 0.06 per 100,000 hours of operations Business Aviation is indeed very safe (NBAA, 1998). This data campares with an accident rate of 4.2 and a fatality rate of .81 in 1983 (NBAA, 1994). The increased use of two-man flight crews, standardized recurrency training, and more sophisticated flight equipment has contributed sigdicantly to the enhancement of safety in the Business Aviation industry. Does this mean that all is well? Definitively not! With the increase in IraiEc that is expected in the foreseeable future, the only way to keep the accident rate down is to concentrate with a vengeance on safety standards. Until all planes retura safely to their home base, there will be room for improvement. The question is how do we achieve ultimate safety in an error-prone environment? The answer may lie in the prioritization of safety at all levels, making sure the concept permeates the entire organization fiom the Boardroom to the Flight Department and from the maintenance hangar to the cockpit. This daunting task is complex and, contrary to popular belief, not easily accomplished. We will fnst look at safety at the personal level and follow up with a more organizational approach to achieving ultimate safety. Challenges in the areas of personal psychology and Corporate Culture wiU be addressed, along with recommendations to assist Senior Corporate Management in reaching the target of zero accidents at the Flight Department level. HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND SAFETY Most of us like to think of safety as a type of behavior that comes natural to us. Actually, the opposite is true. It is often more common and convenient for people to take risks. Since accidents tend to occur infrequently, it is not surprising that march indicates a natural human tendency for employees to rely on quick and easy shortcuts to accomplish tasks in the workplace. Also, taking chances and living-on-the-edge is fun and exhilaratmg, while pursuing safe behavior can be dull and boring. This is true both on and off the job. Thus, at the individual level, we fight a constant battle between human nature and common sense. Defensive strategies have been developed to help employees cope with this urge to take chances and do things their own way instead of using safety- centered standard operating procedures. More on-the-job training comes to mind. Reducing peer pressure to take risks is another. This is particularly true for the pilot profession where demands by pilots "pushing the envelope" can coerce a cautious colleague into taking risks (Transport Canada, 1996). In the end, an organizational approach is required to make safety a way of life in the worblace. JAAER, Winter 1998 3.5 1 Homan et al.: Establishing a Total Safety Culture within a Flight Department Published by ERAU Scholarly Commons, 1998 Establishing a Total Safety Culture THE BEHAVIOR-BASED SAFETY APPROACH The behavior-based approach to safety focuses on the observable actions of employees and the organizational setting that influence these actions. This safety theory seems quite suitable since 80% of all aviation related accidents result fiom human error. The method focuses on both personal on-the-job behaviors as well as on the orgauizational setting that supports these behaviors. No initial blame is assigned and errors are viewed in the context of a comprehensive analysis (Geller, 1996). This is very different from the more traditional way of handling safety mishaps where investigations by corporate management resulted in assigning blame f?om the start to employees or conditions. The behavior-based safety approach is proactive and preventive in nature. It is a process of iden-g problems and gathering and analpng data to improve conditions in the workplace. Removing barriers to communication and providing feedback is critical in this process. Ultimately7 the goal is to establish a continued level of awareness, leading to a total safety culture that will permeate the organization. IMPROVING PERSONAL SAFETY ATTITUDES Jensen (1989) identified five hazardous attitudes that can jeopardize safety in any aviation environment. Anti-authority or an attitude of "don't tell me!" is found in people who don't like anyone telling them what to do. Clearly, this attitude can affect aviation safety. Impulsivity, or the "do something quickly" attitude, is the thought pattern of people who frequently feel the need to do something, anydung, immediately. They do not stop to think about what they are about to do and feel that it is too late to locate the checklist or repair manual to do the task in a safe and structured fashion. They do the &st thing that comes to mind. Invulnerability, or the "it won't happen to me7' attitude, shows up in people who feel that accidents happen to others but never to them. Pilots or Flight Department technicians who think this way are more likely to take chances and may jeopardize safety for the entire operation. Then there is the Macho attitude, which is exhibited by those who ate always trying to prove that they are better than anyone else. They take risks to "prove7' themselves and impress their coworkers. Fmdly, there is the attitude of Resignation, where employees don't see themselves as making a great deal of Merence. They are along for the ride. Eventually, my of these dangerous attitudes will result in poor and unsafe performance. Awareness of the five dangerous attitudes is the fist step in eljmiuating them fiom our human judgment. Thoughts similar to the ones deskbed above are actually common and normal. When we are able to identlfy these thoughts and feelings, we can then focus on counteracting them. First, learning to examine our own thinking and control our own behavior is critical in this process. Second, it is important that human performance limitations are identified and that everyone accepts the fact that human errors will occur. As long as we are dealing with humans, there is simply no perfection. Change does not come easily and constant striving is required. For example, attitudes of invulnerability are often dBcult to eradicate in aviation personnel even after extensive crew training (Merritt & Helmreich, 1996). On the hangar floor, similar attitudes may prevail when it becomes tedious and inconvenient to follow elaborate safety rules. Nevertheless, the acceptance and awareness of our human condition will go a long way in addressmg serious mistakes before they become catastrophic. CREW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Crew Resource Management (CRM) has traditionally been defined as the effective use of all available resources. The concept was designed to reduce human factor-related accidents and to improve the human-machine interface by enhancing teamwork, decision making, and situational awareness on the flight deck (Cooper, White & Lauber, 1980). Over the years the evohring field of CRM has widened its focus fiom flight crews to cabin crews to maintenance technicians. CRM cmently includes specialized training for most types of aviation personnel. From dispatchers (Dispatch Resource Management) (FAA, 1995) to maintenance personnel (Maintenance Resource Management) (FAA, 1997), CRM has been introdwed just about everywhere in the organization. Along the way, CRM lrahing became synonymous with the creation of a more friendly work emironmat The main objective of reducing potentially fatal ermrs was often overlooked. Recently, aviation psychologists redehed CRM as a critical form of Emor Management. This perspective presupposes that human errors are inevitable, but as long as the resulting situation is managed properly, safety can be maintained. Helmreich (1 996) identified three ways to control and minimize human errors. First, there is the total avoidance of error through proper training. Next, the trapping of errors or eliminating the mistakes is identified. Finally, there is the mitigation of errors or controlling the consequences of the errors that have been made