How’s Your Work-life Balance?

How’s Your Work-life Balance?

FINANCE Do they practise what they preach? CRM training has played a major role in reducing the contribution of human factors to incidents and accidents in our industry, but our expert representatives must be included in the discussions on comprehensive training provision By Captain Martin Chalk, Log Board member he civil air transport industry is only around 100 years old and yet, in that time, it has turned flying a desire man has had ever since he first tried to copy the birds into one of the safest activities weundertake. Today, it is objectively less hazardous than having a bath or walking down the street. Our industry involves taking hundreds of people high into the atmosphere, where there is significantly less air, wind speeds of up to 320km per hour or more and at temperatures of minus 70C for sometimes more than 12 hours at a time; how have wemanaged to make this not just possible, but also one of the safest things we do? Two of the more effective developments over the past few decades have been aviation professionals deploying great communication, leadership, decision-making and teamwork what we call crew resource management (CRM) or human factors training alongside technology such as ACAS (airborne collision avoidance system) and EGPWS (enhanced ground proximity warning system). CRM and human factors skills Aviation is arguably the only industry that has sought to understand our failures fully not just to identify the last link in a chain of events that led to the problem, but also all the links that contributed to the outcome. We seek to design-out repeat failures and especially latent factors that might be part of a future failure. So, given that we dedicate significant resources to understanding how to succeed in the field of safety, why is it that airlines are so often poor financial investments and, as we have sadly seen again recently, are prone to economic failure? Is it that airline managements fail to practise what they preach when it comes to CRM? CRM is such an important part of airline operations that both the ICAO and CAA have written a manual on it ICAO Doc 9683 and CAP 737 Flight Crew Human Factors Handbook (Dec 2016). In the introduction, the UK CAA identifies common areas that it suggests apply much more widely than just on the flight deck: It was apparent that pilots needed to learn more about how best to manage all the resources available to them in the cockpit including other crew-members, procedures, the machine interface, and themselves (ie recognising where they were most vulnerable and what their strengths were). This management of resources was the original essence of CRM training (hence the term). Many of the elements identified as necessary to support pilots in this process were borrowed from the scientific or management domain (eg communication, personality theory, error and leadership). Others came from common aviation practice (eg airmanship and captaincy). CRM and human resource management (HRM) owe much to each other, and certainly scholars of one discipline would recognise much in the other. The Chartered Institute for Personneland Development recently published an article entitled The future of HR is evidence based and behavioural science is not apassing fad and, in the process, gave CRM a fancy new name. So, if airlines are at the forefront of CRM and if CRM and HRM are recognisably similar and overlapping why is the experience of so many pilot representatives that airline managements dontpractise good CRM/HRM, yet simultaneously promote it onthe aircraft? CAP 737 breaks human factors down into a number of categories, and airline operators often go even further. Almost allof these sub groups have direct applicability in the management of people particularly those working in safety-sensitive environments. Leadership and teamwork This is probably one of the most directly applicable categories for both CRM and HRM. The words that describe best CRM practice include inspires and motivates, empowers and values other team members, creates an atmosphere for open communication and considers the suggestions of others and demonstrates empathy, respect and tolerance for others. This also describes the qualities of anyone trying to lead a high performing group, team or company. Problem solving and decision-making The commander of an aircraft has in law both the responsibility for and authority over the operation. Lawful commands of the captain must be followed. However, good CRM advocates usingand allowing enough time for an appropriate decision-making process, using all resources to diagnose and understand the problem. It advocates asking for options and alternatives, and discussing the risks and consequences of each potential course of action. Good problem solvers do not assume that they have the best solution, conducting frequent reviews with all those involved andadapting the plan as required. Pilot representatives across ourcountry, region and globally report that airline managers mostcommonly involve them late, with a plan already set, and react badly when it is not immediately accepted. GOOD CRM ADVOCATES USING AND ALLOWING ENOUGH TIME FOR AN APPROPRIATE DECISION Workload management Good resource management calls for planning and prioritisation, anticipation of high workload situations with early planning, and the appropriate distribution of tasks, using all resources. Signs of stress, fatigue and overload should be recognised early, and workload reduced. Even in our fatigue-prevention work, some managements do not accept fatiguing and overloading practices, so maybe it is not surprising that some airlines do not address difficult financial issues until it is too late. Communication Effective communication should convey information clearly, accurately and in a timely manner, subsequently checking for understanding. Effective communicators listen actively, demonstrate understanding, and resolve any uncertainty andambiguity. It has been a few years since I was a scholar of industrial relations and human resource management, but duringmy course someone suggested that it was simply the professionalisation of common sense. However, if these CRM principles are largely unchallenged in the flight deck, if they are so widely accepted as to have been regulated into the training and checking regime, and if they are common sense, why is it that managers so often ignore them when it comes to resolving pilot management issues? A stark example of a lack of applied CRM is in current training course design. Many airlines that previously augmented training to suit their own requirements or resolved perceived gaps in the basic course now rely much more on the aircraft manufacturers training syllabi. There are many fine people within the manufacturers systems who are very supportive of pilot input to the design of training plans, but it cannot be claimed that the manufacturers primary focus is not on selling aircraft. This requires acompetitive product, not just one that hasa low purchase price, but one with low operating costs. Training can be a significant cost, so how does it help sell aircraft to have comprehensive and therefore time-consuming training requirements? Safety first Manufacturers have designed aircraft to incorporate myriad safety features and know how these should be operated. Airlines are the aircraft operators, though, and normally have access to broad information on what works and what doesnt. However, both are keen to reduce costs, and it is not the training department or the safety department that signs off on aircraft purchases. So unless line pilots are present when training syllabi are designed, there is no opinion to counter the lower cost option at each decision point. As professional line pilots, we fly the aircraft in day-to-day operations. We expect our expert representatives to be included in the discussions on comprehensive training provision. Would that not be the good CRM practice we all support for our deliberations on the flight deck? Would it not be common sense? Manufacturers employ test pilots and airlines send management pilots, not line pilots, to meetings and conferences where training regimes are designed. A number of accident and incident reports have recently cited insufficient training as a contributory factor. If we as an industry dont ask why the training regime is insufficient, we will miss an opportunity to address the problem. CRM training and widespread day-to-day implementation has been a major element in reducing the contribution of human factors to incidents and accidents in our industry. Current CRM knowledge is based on a large body of research and operational data, and it is a basic requirement for professional pilots to have a good working knowledge of and strong day-to-day practice in CRM principles. Pilots are, therefore, much less tolerant of managers who support CRM/HRM practice on the flight deck, but who otherwise fail to practise what they preach.