Managing Aircraft Maintenance Projects Successfully - Research Proposal Example

of Research: Managing Aircraft Maintenance Projects Successfully Background Aircraft maintenance is an issue of fundamental importance in the aviation industry for two primary reasons. Firstly, aircraft that do not fly provide no service and hence generate no revenue for their owners who are nonetheless financially disadvantaged by the basic cost of ownership of those aircraft (purchase, lease, insurance, certification, etc.). The second, and far more important reason, is that aircraft that cease to function properly on the ground or that cease to fly after taking off carry far more serious consequences and costs associated with maintenance failures. Regulations and common sense both mandate that each aircraft be the subject of a fully documented maintenance protocol towards ensuring the airworthiness and serviceability of the aircraft. Routine preventive maintenance, although well within the purview of common sense, is not a required part of the maintenance protocol. Within the aircraft maintenance protocol, each aircraft and the work required for its service is regarded as an individual project. The reality of aircraft maintenance project management (AMPM) is that several overlapping projects must be managed simultaneously. This presents major obstacles and difficulties for the aircraft maintenance organization in terms of resource management and utilization, budgetary constraints, priority conflicts and lead-time fulfillment. These considerations are compounded by several factors. Greater demands are being placed on aircraft as the number of passenger miles being flown trends upward over time. The number of aircraft being flown also trends upward but at a disproportionate rate. More importantly for the proposed research, the number of aviation maintenance technicians in the industry trends upward at a much lower rate, suggesting that the workload placed on maintenance technicians per capita is becoming ever greater. Air Transport Association of America statistics for the 12-year period from 1983 to 1995 gives these increases as 187%, 70% and 27% respectively, supporting the ‘work overload’ factor of AMPM. As the demands of these disparities are manifested across the aviation industry, project management in aircraft maintenance has become a critical issue for aircraft maintenance organizations. Baron (2009) discusses at some length untoward events that can be attributed directly to the effects of fatigue experienced by aircraft maintenance personnel, and so to the project management practices of their working environments. It is important to note the finding recounted by Baron from a study conducted by Johnson et al in 2002. Based on quantitative and qualitative data, those authors discerned that in general, AMTs and AMEs working in aircraft maintenance services were simply not aware that they were fatigued, having accepted their various workloads and working hours as inherent in the culture of the aircraft maintenance industry. Of more relevance for the proposed research are the diametrically opposed positions taken by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in regard to fatigue as a factor in aircraft maintenance. The stance of the NTSB has been that changes in maintenance regulations aimed at reducing fatigue in aircraft maintenance workers, and hence the associated problems, are long overdue and to be actively pursued. Further, reducing fatigue in aircraft maintenance workers should have a high priority throughout the aircraft maintenance sector. That incidents arising due to fatigue and other human factors continue to be problematic indicate that regulations and project management within those regulations are not effective in addressing the need, especially given the potentially disastrous outcomes. The FAA, on the other hand, has not identified a need to address fatigue and fatigue-related problems outside of the existing regulatory framework, other than to state that their own studies recognize fatigue in aircraft maintenance workers as a problem factor. The FAA stands on its document “Advisory Circular 120-72”, titled “Maintenance Resource Management (MRM) Training”, which, according to baron, contains little or no guidance for employers and project managers regarding the design and management of effective maintenance programs. Training is another area of concern in regard to AMPM, particularly in the area of advanced composite materials that have become so common in modern aircraft. Information offered by Boynton (Renaissance Aeronautics Associates Inc, undocumented) describes an incident in which aircraft assembly personnel were found to be causing structural damage to critical aircraft components of composite structure through the use of improper fastening devices. Such incidents indicate a failure both in the training standards of AMEs and AMTs, and in the project management being carried out on-site. As human activity is the foundation of aircraft maintenance, the role of human factors has become a major component of AMPM. Weick and co-workers (1999) observe that aircraft maintenance workers (AMEs and AMTs, as well as their project managers) “come into contact with the largest number of failures, at earlier stages of development, and have an ongoing sense of” the inter-related aspects of aircraft maintenance issues. Effective AMPM practices must therefore be able to account for any additional necessary maintenance work identified by AMEs and AMTs in the course of carrying out maintenance work that has been scheduled. The proposed research would examine the effectiveness of current AMPM implements and training programs towards identifying improvements to project management practices in the aircraft maintenance sector. 2. Aims and Objectives of the research Various in-house and third-party software applications have been developed in efforts to streamline the AMPM process and to provide ther foundation upon which an effective AMPM program may be built. These include “EM360” from 4Sight Technologies, Boeing’s “Enterprise One”, the “FleetCycle Reliability Manager” from EmpowerMX, “AuRA” from MIRO Technologies Inc., “Maintenix” from Mxi Technologies, Air Canada’s “E-Toolbox System” developed in conjunction with IBM, and the VIPER program employed and developed for use by the Australian Defense Force. Another aspect of the AMPM process that bears investigation as part of a critical analysis is the extent to which AMPM issues are incorporated in the various training programs for aircraft maintenance engineers (AMEs) and aircraft maintenance technicians (AMTs). As the need for trained, qualified AMEs and AMTs has increased, educational facilities around the world, both public and private, have either established new training programmes or enhanced existing ones. Given that AMEs and AMTs are the ‘front line’ workers of aircraft maintenance project managers it is therefore important to determine whether the training being provided ‘meshes’ with effective AMPM practices in the field. In addition, AMEs and AMTs typically progress in their careers to the position of project manager, whether by intention or by accident. It is therefore also important to determine whether appropriate project management training and resources are provided and assimilated prior to undertaking such a position, or whether the appropriate training and resources are obtained as professional development after emplacement. The aim of the proposed research is thus to investigate and identify challenges to the successful implementation of Project Management in the aircraft maintenance environment and the extent to which current Project Management implements being applied to the task are effective in addressing those challenges. The objectives of the research are 1) to investigate and correlate the usage of commercial and proprietary AMPM implements currently available 2) to obtain critical information about the capabilities, suitability and shortcomings of currently available AMPM implements 3) to examine the programmes that are available world-wide for the training of AMEs and AMTs with respect to Project Management, and 4) to determine the pre- and post-positional Project Management training acquired by project managers in the AMPM environment. 3. Proposed research Methodologies Quantitative methods are expected to be used secondarily to qualitative methods in this research, and would in any case be restricted to the statistical analysis of qualitative sources. Literature review and on-line research will provide numerical data relevant to project turnover. In addition, structured questionnaires and interviews will provide more detailed data in regard to specific applications. Literature and Internet research will provide descriptive data for AMPM scenarios and for application software, protocols and training programmes. Structured questionnaires will provide specific data to augment that obtained from literature and Internet research, from front-line project management sources. The questionnaires will be developed and sent to a targeted group consisting of aircraft maintenance project managers, AMEs and AMTs to acquire data relevant to the challenges they face in their positions, the methods they use in project management, and the nature and effectiveness of the AMPM applications and programmes employed to meet those challenges. Another questionnaire will be developed and sent to various training institutes around the world to probe the content and approaches to AMPM being provided as part of the training of AMEs and AMTs. Aircraft maintenance project managers are expected to be primarily AMEs or AMTs who have moved into the position of project manager from the ‘shop floor’ rather than professionally trained Project Managers. Data collected from the questionnaires will be organized and correlated to provide an overview of AMPM procedures and practices. More detailed information will be extracted to provide quantitative data regarding various aspects of AMPM that relate to implement effectiveness. 4. Sources of Information Relevant information for this project will be researched from various sources. The initial AME and AMT training programme contact information will be obtained through a combination of exhaustive Internet search and from aviation journals and trade magazines. These will provide necessary contact information and basic course descriptions. More complete training programme information will be obtained from programme literature and prospecti that will be requested directly from the respective institutions. Internet search will also provide the initial identification and information regarding the various commercial and proprietary applications being used for AMPM. Basic information regarding each application may be had from the corresponding websites and more detailed information will be solicited directly from the source companies. Specific sources include, but are not limited to: a) Internet (commercial websites) (i) 4Sight Technologies http://www.4sighttech.com Example of relevant information: EM360 maintenance planning and scheduling application (ii) Boeing Corporation http://www.boeing.com Example of relevant information: Boeing “Enterprise One” maintenance planning and scheduling application\ (iii) EmpowerMX Inc. http://www.wmpowermx.com Example of relevant information: EmpowerMX FleetCycle Reliability Manager application (iv) Mxi Technologies Inc. http://www.mxi.com Example of relevant information: Maintenix aviation maintenance Application b) Internet (education and training websites) (i) Mosaic http://www,mosaicprojects.com.au Example of relevant information: OPM3 and VIPER (ii) Renaissance Aeronautics Associates Inc. http://www.raacomposites.com Example of relevant information: training course descriptions and contact Information (iii) Canadian Aviation Maintenance Council http://www.camc.ca Example of relevant information: Instructor guides and master training plans for AMEs (iv) City University London http://www.city.ac.uk Example of relevant information: Aircraft Maintenance Management M.Sc. programme (v) Aerospace Training Services http://www.aerots.com.au Example of relevant information: “The Australian Aviation Industry” c) International aircraft maintenance journals Examples: Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering International Journal of Applied Management Science d) e-Journals and articles Examples: www.bizjournals.com www.aviationtoday.com UNC Journals in electronic format (eresources.lib.unc.edu) e) Print periodicals (may also have e-versions on Internet) Examples: Computer World Canada (also at www.itworldcanada.com) f) Government and regulatory authority publications (i) New Zealand Qualification Authority Example document: “10805 Version 3. Plan Aircraft Maintenance Activities Using Project Management techniques” (ii) Transport Canada Example document: “TP 13875SE. Assessment of Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (AMEs) Hours of Work. Phase 1”, October, 2001. g) Dissertation reports Example: “Aircraft maintenance Organizational Structure Changes: An Antecedent Model”, M.Sc. Thesis by Jeffrey M. Durand, Air Force Institute of Technology Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, Graduate School of Engineering and Management. 5. Preliminary Literature Review Introduction The proposed research addresses factors that play a role in the successful management of aircraft maintenance projects and seeks to assess the effectiveness of various implements and strategies employed to that end. It will further examine the training provided through aircraft maintenance management programmes as the foundation principles upon which those project management strategies are built. Preliminary literature review provides a number of promising avenues and directions for such work, as well as a core body of material. 5.1 Issues Related to Aircraft design and Maintenance Complexity In the Boeing 777 “Dreamliner” model, the Boeing Corporation designed a commercial aircraft of unprecedented complexity. The new technology and new material applications place an equally unprecedented burden on maintenance personnel in regard to meeting the maintenance requirements of such an aircraft in service. In essence, the introduction of any new aircraft adds significantly to the workload of the aircraft maintenance workforce, requiring the acquisition of new skills and qualifications in addition to the demands of the existing workload. In recognizing the new demands that would be placed on the aviation maintenance workforce, Boeing sought to address them, at least in part, by the introduction of the new personnel role of Chief Mechanic. As described by Knezevic (1999), the role of Chief mechanic has been a key player in AMPM at Boeing since the inception of the 777 project. Described as essential to the successful management of the 777 project, the Chief Mechanic represents another facet in the hierarchy of organizational development of AMPM. The Chief Mechanic carries the responsibility of ensuring that the technical aspects of a maintenance project, the actual maintenance work, is performed in accordance with specifications and regulations at the shop floor level, while the Project Manager sees to the overall administration of AMPM. Thus the Chief Mechanic is also the manager of a discrete project within a larger managed project. The role provides an extra ‘degree of freedom’ within the context of AMPM at Boeing that can serve to mitigate some of the problems that stand in the way of successful AMPM. 5.2 Issues Related to Fleet Maintenance Fleets typically consist of various aircraft types and models that must be maintained to specific standards. This poses a particular difficulty in regard to AMPM because of the requirement for personnel to maintain qualifications to work on those specific aircraft. This has the effect of increasing the size of the workforce required generally for aircraft maintenance while simultaneously decreasing the proportion of that workforce that is available for specific maintenance work. This applies to both civilian and military fleet maintenance, but is more pronounced in the military where personnel may be assigned as a matter of course to the maintenance duties associated with just one specific aircraft. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) employed a fleet of “Orion” aircraft, as reported by Bowen (1996), whose aging status also continually adds to the maintenance service requirement. In analyzing the RAAF’s methods of maintaining an aging fleet of relatively high-tech aircraft Bowen notes that careful monitoring of personnel at all procedural stages is essential for the successful and timely completion of AMPM operations in that environment. Although it is not specifically stated as a general requirement of fleet maintenance, it is nevertheless a valid assumption that the Project Manager’s role in a fleet environment will include, and should include, a similar monitoring component, and this is discussed in greater depth by other authors (below). In the case of the RAAF’s “Orion” aircraft, Bowen determined that total quality management procedures employed to monitor maintenance personnel play a significant role through five distinct stages of the maintenance procedure. Aircraft are first prepared for maintenance, then inspected to identify problems requiring attention and to determine what maintenance measures are required for their remediation. This is followed by the actual maintenance work, both reparative and preventative. The aircraft is then rebuilt to operating standards and subsequently tested to assure its integrity and air worthiness. This five-stage protocol is common to AMPM procedures, and it is likely that deviation from it has been the basis of various in-flight malfunctions and catastrophic failures. More recently, the Vertically Integrated Programmed Engineering Repair (VIPER) program was developed by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) to build from and supplant the various maintenance systems such as the “Orion” protocol. According to Weaver (2003) the VIPER program was developed over some fifteen years, making it contemporary with many of the predecessor protocols that it was designed to replace, such as the Aircraft Servicing Plannign System (ASPS) and the Hercules Repair and Maintenance Engineering System (HeRMES). VIPER was initially developed for use by the ADF and then as a viable commercial protocol for AMPM. It is a procedural protocol designed to ‘streamline’ the response of aircraft maintenance to the increasing demands being placed upon it by several factors that call for higher return from fewer resources. Weaver cites these driving influences to be workforces that are reduced both in number and skill level, reduced budgets for maintenance and other projects, shorter delivery time expectations for project completions, increased litigation pressures and intolerance of maintenance errors and general inconvenience, and, not least, to the greater complexity of aircraft maintenance projects and systems (as indicated above in regard to Knezevic’s discussion of the Chief Mechanic role at Boeing). Weaver also quickly points out that the changing nature of personnel availability and skill sets in the aircraft maintenance industry has been and continues to be the most fundamental issue facing project managers in AMPM. The basic truth in this is that trained personnel are required to carry out the actual work, and a reduced work force coupled with an even greater increase in work required means that individual workloads for aircraft maintenance personnel must increase accordingly. It thus becomes part of the Project Manager’s task to balance workloads and maintenance requirements with the intent of mitigating and forestalling problems that arise through human factors such as worker fatigue. Other approaches have been instituted or tested by other fleet operators in order to reduce the time required for project completion in AMPM. One facet of this, as reported by Pryma (2002), is the time required for line mechanics to access and refer to standards documentation and to bring the required information back to the shop floor. Air Canada, in conjunction with IBM, developed the “e-Toolbox” system to address this issue, enabling remote access to technical documentation from the point of service. The system at the very least eliminates the need for line mechanics to leave the task at hand in order to retrieve technical standards information from official service documentation. The system also enables ‘on the fly’ maintenance of service records for each individual aircraft. Recent work by Durand (2008) in the context of military fleet maintenance also demonstrates that personnel and budgetary changes are major influences in AMPM within the military complex as well as in civilian service. There is, however, a distinct difference in material requirements between the two in that civilian air service maintenance requirements tend to increase more-or-less continually over time, while those of the military tend to fluctuate, rising with the occurrence of active deployment and falling when hostilities and other actions cease. Durand identifies eight periods in which the organization of U.S. military AMPM methodologies were changed, in preparation for the soon-to-be-implemented Expeditionary Combat Support System approach. This suggests that AMPM itself must be intrinsically adjustable in order to meet the changing demands that accompany changing aircraft technology, air traffic regulations and other maintenance factors. 5.3 Issues Related to Labour Allocation Perhaps the most examined facet of AMPM is the allocation of labour and the associated costs. Since this is directly measurable in terms of man-hours, it is also amenable to mathematical analysis and modeling procedures. Measurement of man-hours in AMPM has been at the heart of most, if not all, AMPM programs, including the VIPER and e-Toolbox systems discussed above. Various case studies by different authors (Alfares 1999; Cheung et al 2005; Yan et al 2008) focus on the allocation of labour in AMPM through the application of optimization algorithms to man-hour data. Their focus invariably appears to be identification of ways and means to maximize the utilization of man-hours while minimizing the costs of AMPM procedures. At the most austere level, this has called for scheduling maintenance operations based on a seven day work-week instead of a five day work-week (Alfares 1999). The more recent case studies are more cognizant of human factors that can affect AMPM success, and look to scheduling models for long-term preventive and predictive maintenance programs (Yan et al 2008). 5.4 Human Factors related to AMPM That human factors are a serious issue related to flight safety has long been recognized. The consideration of human factors in AMPM is of more recent vintage, primarily because it cannot predate the institution of project management practices in the field of aircraft maintenance. The most significant human factors affecting aircraft maintenance and operability are fatigue and training. The International Civil Aviation Organization Secretariat (1996) focuses attention on the untoward effects of fatigue in maintenance workers, placing it as a primary concern of project managers in the allocation of aircraft maintenance resources. It is also the focus of a study carried out by Rhodes and Associates Inc. (2001) on behalf of Transport Canada in examining the hours of work of AMEs in Canada. Based on a survey-interview study of 5,000 AMEs in Canada, the Rhodes group determined that, in general, AMEs have tended to accept extended working hours as an integral part of the aviation maintenance culture and tended as a group to be unaware that they suffered from fatigue as individuals. Several references there-in, dating back as far as 1994, support the view that fatigue and other human factors pose an inordinate obstacle to the effectiveness of AMPM practices. It is a given assumption that aircraft maintenance workers receive proper technical training for the work they are required to carry out. This assumption is reinforced by the requirement that aircraft maintenance workers must maintain professional qualification certifications in order to provide service for specific aircraft types and models. It is not clear, however, whether the training provided to aircraft maintenance workers is universally consistent, or that qualification is universally observed to a common standard. The issue is not addressed in the Rhodes study, nor in any of the other literature that has been examined. One implication of inconsistent technical training of aircraft maintenance personnel is that the lesser trained workers require a greater number of man-hours to carry out the same tasks as highly trained workers. This has an influence in AMPM that must negatively impact the successful completion of aircraft maintenance projects. 5.5 Issues and Strategies for Effective Implements In order to develop and establish effective implements for AMPM it is necessary to identify and understand as many factors as possible that affect aircraft maintenance success. The development of models, as discussed above, may then lead to the development of implements that will facilitate and optimize the entire aircraft maintenance project process. Work by Fogarty (2004) suggests that a key step in the development of effective AMPM implements is the ability of the modeling process to predict human factors as well as material factors in AMPM. Such a model must take into account all of the various organizational and individual pathways by which aircraft maintenance is accomplished. Factors that have negative impacts as well as those that contribute to success must therefore be included. Since aircraft maintenance and AMPM are ultimately human activities, each member of the aircraft maintenance workforce provides a unique set of pathways and influences, so there are in essence as many individual pathways to consider as there are personnel in the aircraft maintenance workforce. A true “all encompassing” model may therefore never be developed. However, since individual aircraft maintenance organizations typically involve a much smaller, limited number of individuals, it should be possible to develop a basic general model that captures and utilizes relevant data ‘on the fly’ to attenuate the model with the actual environment and so enhance the predictive capabilities of the resulting AMPM implement. Kapoor et al (2004) discuss the need for just such a proactive, standardized aircraft maintenance operations audit and surveillance system. The stated aim of such a system would be to collect essential data about the conduct of aircraft maintenance projects in order to identify factors that affect AMPM effectiveness. 5.6 Summary of Literature Review Findings In addition to the twelve documents mentioned, a number of other documents and resources were accessed and reviewed that provide statistical and quantitative data about different factors associated with AMPM such as air traffic volume, flight loadings, servicing schedules, aircraft types, etc. The papers and other documents that have been reviewed however briefly here-in indicate that current project management practices and principles in the aircraft maintenance sector are either not generally being applied effectively or are not innately adequate for AMPM. The role of the project manager in AMPM is crucial to the success and effectiveness of aircraft maintenance procedures. It is essential that project managers in AMPM roles have the technical ability required in the industry, as well as being skillful managers who comprehend the legalities of their role. Part and parcel with these are the ability to be effective communicators and problem solvers. Given the ramifications, the nature of the aircraft maintenance industry sets AMPM apart from other project management roles. Project management in business and services generally risks only economic outcomes. AMPM, however, always carries the additional and very real risk and responsibility of human lives, and as the cited works indicate, AMPM is affected in various ways by factors that are extraordinary to other project management scenarios. It is clear from the cited works and the variety of available AMPM implements that no universal standard of AMPM practices exists, international agreements notwithstanding. In addition, the various approaches and methodologies that have been developed for AMPM by as many different agencies suggests that the standardization of AMPM practices is a necessary step across the aircraft maintenance industry to ensure that those practices are effective and that aircraft maintenance becomes a secure, “zero failure” industry. Based on the works mentioned the fields of aircraft maintenance and AMPM could best be described as in a more-or-less constant state of flux, affected by ongoing internal and external influences. Internal influences include the various human and technical factors involved in aircraft maintenance itself, such as worker fatigue, individual ability and on-site resources. External influences include such factors as organizational hierarchy, government and corporate budgetary restraints, regulations and training programs for aircraft maintenance workers. It is apparent from these sources that implements that achieve effective AMPM have yet to be developed, although some considerable progress has been made toward that goal. There are in fact several commercially available and proprietary implements for AMPM, but this same multiplicity speaks to the absence of a suitably effective model for such implementation. The role of aircraft maintenance worker training programs ins subsequent AMPM endeavours is notable by its absence from any of the papers discussed above and from others that were accessed in preliminary literature review work. Preliminary Literature List. 1. Kenzevic, J., 1999, “Chief Mechanic: The New Approach to Aircraft Maintenance at Boeing”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 314 – 325 2. Bowen, G., 1996, “Taking the Unpredictability Out of Military Aircraft Maintenance”, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 10 – 13 3. Weaver, P. 2003, The VIPER Experience, Fallon Property Management Pty Ltd, viewed July 13, 2009, at http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/Resources_Papers_012.html 4. Pryma, K., 15 Nov 2002, “System Speeds Aircraft Maintenance”, Computer World Canada, viewed July 13, 2009, at http://www.itworldcanada.com/a/ComputerWorld/d2f172e6-ef32-4849-bb51-249c2c6763ba.html 5. Durand, J.M., Air Force Institute of Technology Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, Graduate School of Engineering and Management, M.Sc. Thesis, March, 2008 “Aircraft Maintenance Organizational Structure Changes: An Antecedent Model” 6. Alfares, H.K., 1999, “Aircraft Maintenance Workforce Scheduling: A Case Study”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 78 – 89 7. Shangyao Yan, Chun-Ying Chen, Chun-Ying Yuan, 2008, “Long-term Aircraft Maintenance Scheduling for an Aircraft Maintenance Centre: A Case Study”, International Journal of Applied Management Science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 143 – 159 8. Cheung, Angus, Ip, W.H., Lu, Dawei, 2005, “Expert System for Aircraft Maintenance Services Industry”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 348 – 358 9. Rhodes & Associates Inc., 2001, “Assessment of Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (AMEs) Hours of Work. Phase 1. Prepared for Transportation Development Centre Transport Canada. TP 13875SE”. Available by request to Transport Canada to tdccdt@tc.gc.ca. 10. International Civil Aviation Organization Secretariat, 1996, “Circular 253. Human Factors in Aircraft Maintenance and Inspection” Excerpt “Awareness Grows of Importance of Human Factors Issues in Aircraft Maintenance and Inspection”. Viewed July 13, 2009, at http://www.icao.int/anb/humanfactors/Awareness_grows_1996.pdf 11. Fogarty, G., 2004, “The Role of Organizational and Individual Differences Variables in Aircraft Maintenance Performance”, International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 73 – 90 12. Kapoor, K.m, P. Dharwada, N. Iyengar, J.S. Greenstein and A.K. Gramopadhye, 2004, “Standardized Auditing and Surveillance of Aircraft Maintenance Operations”, Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 171 – 196 13. Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M. and Obstfeld, D., (1999), “Organizing for High Reliability. Processes of Collective Mindfulness”, Research in Organizational Behaviour, vol. 21, pp. 81 - 123 6. Programme of Work A tentative programme for the major research activities of this project is summarized below, in anticipation of a September 30, 2009, delivery date. Activities 2009 July Aug Sept 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1. Literature review 2. Questionnaires and Interviews 3. Data Processing 4. Data Analysis 5. Summary and Report Writing Read More