HMI Systems: The Horrific Crash from the Perspective of a Manager - Coursework Example

HMI Systems Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 0Introduction 3 2.0Antecedent events and final details of the March 27, 1977 crash of KLM 4805 and Pan Am 1736 at Tenerife in the Canary Islands 4 3.0Horrific crash acts as a metaphor for leadership in the turbulent modern economic marketplace 6 4.0Eight forms of impedance that hindered the decision-making of those directly involved in the crash 6 5.0The actions the pilots of both aircraft should have taken to avoid the crash and loss of life 8 6.0How these proposed actions might be translated into the daily actions of a successful corporate leader 9 7.0Appropriate lessons that might be learned relative to the effective management of technology and how those lessons should be applied to modern-day organizations 9 8.0Conclusion 10 References 11 1.0 Introduction Operating and monitoring systems that work consistently have become very useful tools in many industries including aviation, manufacturing, banking and other technology dependent areas. These human machine interface systems do give people ability to control operations, a system or processes. They incorporate all the necessary features enabling a user to touch, hear, see, or even use them to do certain control operations while receiving instant feedback at the same time. An environment of harmonious and efficient process is created. Communication with these machines is achieved in various ways and the most dominant ones are through hard wired connections, wireless or Wi-Fi connections or even serial bus connections. The technologies used in these connections to link the applications to HMI would be of greater impact on the operator and the whole system. Most of the time, it is required that these HMI machines are given the right instructions in order to ensure effective performance and avoid disasters. They work on the simple analogy of ‘garbage in garbage out’ where if bad data is fed in, bad information is processed and disseminated. Communication is an important tool and if not well used, it could be the source of serious problems in any operation1. Tenerife airport disaster of 1977 involving two Boeing 747 passenger aircrafts could mainly be attributed to poor communication and other leadership issues that were not addressed in time. This paper takes a look at the horrific crash from the perspective of a manager and tries to establish its metaphorical aspect in terms of leadership during turbulent times; considers the barriers to effective decision-making process; actions the pilots of both aircraft should have taken to avoid the crash; translation of these actions to successful corporate leadership; and derives certain fundamental lessons that should be learnt from this incidence. Leadership is a simple term but its effects are very great and might define failure or success of any business or operation. The effects of poor leadership are always very detrimental. 2.0 Antecedent events and final details of the March 27, 1977 crash of KLM 4805 and Pan Am 1736 at Tenerife in the Canary Islands These two aircrafts had been diverted from Gran Canaria Airport following a bomb explosion. The fear of further bombings led to many aircrafts being parked along the taxiway and thus blocking it. A very dense fog developed and these added problems to the already worse situation since visibility was highly reduced and the aircrafts could not locate each other and the controller normally at the tower also failed to see the taxiway and there was no radar on the ground. Only voice reports via could be used to communicate with pilots. There was total miscommunication during takeoff and the pilot of KLM tried taking off. The runway was also obstructed by the refueling vehicle and the KLM aircraft which made it hard for the Pan Am aircraft to get around the fueling point. Routine procedures for takeoff were done by the KLM captain and the co-pilot did advice the captain that they had not been given the ATC clearance after he witnessed the maneuver and he was told to go ahead and seek clearance. They received instructions indicating the route for takeoff but did not instruct them to takeoff. The pilot interpreted the instructions as having been cleared for takeoff and replied they were going neglecting the co-pilot’s reply of “we are now at takeoff”. The issue of superiority played out and the co-pilot avoided embarrassing the captain and kept quiet at the second time even though he knew well they had not been cleared. The controller also gave back a wrong signal of ‘OK’. There was mutual interference of the frequency from the Pan Am crew and this blocked the message of its taxiing from reaching the KLM clearly. Both aircrafts were headed for a collision and the two pilots tried to avoid it when they realized leading to the KLM flight to leave the ground steeply to give way for Pan Am while Pan Am was turning towards the grass side away from the taxiway. The rear part of KLM struck the fuselage of Pan Am and ripped it apart leading to crashes of its engines and the impact made the KLM pilot lose control, stalling the aircraft and rolled then crashed on the ground. The destruction of both aircrafts left KLM’s 14 crew members and 234 passengers dead, while 9 crew members and 326 passengers of Pan Am flight died instantly. Firefighters tried to rescue the passengers in KLM flight that had crashed by putting off the flames but had no idea that this was a double tragedy and so did not know that Pan Am flight had also crashed a short distance away. The running engines of Pan Am made it hard for some of its survivors escaping death and ended up killing more due to the disintegration that threw engine parts away. The cause of this accident was attributed to the fact that captain Van Zanten decided to take off without having been cleared since he really wanted to leave immediately to stick to the time schedules of his company and the regulations. The poor weather that reduced visibility also contributed highly to this problem. The simultaneous transmissions of the radio between the two aircrafts resulted into poor reception and failure to communicate effectively. The other causes were the poor and non-standard language signals and phrases that were used between the KLM co-pilot and the controller. The Pan Am aircraft was still on the taxiway at C-3; and that the airport had been forced into accommodating more flights beyond its capacity which disrupted the use of taxiways. The reliance of the co-pilot on his senior and trying to avoid insubordination by giving him instructions might also have been a major contributor2. 3.0 Horrific crash acts as a metaphor for leadership in the turbulent modern economic marketplace There are numerous challenges that are faced by leaders in the current economic market place which is very turbulent due to the ever-changing global business environment. Information is overloaded and the pace at which change is taking place is faster and peaking. Today’s business leaders could brace turbulence by taking advantage of its positive force which does open doors for greater opportunities. In this environment, cross-collaboration among leaders is important. Leaders could become more innovative and seek solutions that are environmental friendly in order to transform the management of business3. Failure to exercise leadership in modern marketplace would definitely lead to losses of greater magnitude. Leaders in these turbulent times need to radically change their point of view and listen to the advice of others. Being a leader that listens to subordinates is a sure way of managing these changes. Leaders need to ask questions in order to seek clarification and should be able to foster new knowledge. Changing the speed at which attention is given is necessary. The pilot was so much in a hurry to leave and did not take time to follow the required routine. The current leaders need to leverage their differences and use them as platforms for innovation4. 4.0 Eight forms of impedance that hindered the decision-making of those directly involved in the crash One of the main hindrances to decision-making of the people in the crashed aircrafts was breakdown in communication. This is because of the distortion of the radio frequencies which caused poor reception and thus the pilots and crew could not understand each other or communicate well; The other impedance was the power distance between the pilot and the co-pilot. Given that the co-pilot feared insubordination of his captain, he chose to keep quiet the second time he noted anomalies in the clearance instructions leading to the pilot taking off; The weather was poor and this hindered visibility and thus the pilots made decisions that could not have been made if the weather was good and they sight was clear; Poor use of language phrases which deviated from the standardized forms of communication between the pilots and the controller. This resulted in different interpretations hence poor decision-making process; The environment was not conducive following the bomb incidence and thus the pilots were disrupted. There was pressure on all parties which led to making decisions under pressure. Divergence of attention on the side of the controller which meant that he was not paying attention that was required to the pilots. This is because the information gathered by the Dutch indicated that he was watching football at the time when the incidence occurred. Panic to avoid the collision by both pilots might have contributed to making poor decision since the steep flight was a major cause of the crash.5 5.0 The actions the pilots of both aircraft should have taken to avoid the crash and loss of life The pilot in KLM flight should have listened to his co-pilot and avoided making rushed decisions. This is because their miscommunication was a major contributor to the crash. If they had communicated well, they would have been able to avert the crisis; The co-pilot should have exercised accountability by stressing upon the pilot to stop and listen when he realized that there was a problem in the instructions given and that they were incomplete; Sticking to the standards of communication within a certain profession such as aviation is important. The parties should have used the right language for seeking clearance and taking off. The phrases used were ambiguous, incomplete and unclear; The pilots should have tried to compose themselves and think before rushing to avoid collision since this decision was made under panic; Carelessness was perceived on the part of the KLM pilot given that he was in a hurry to leave as soon as possible. The pilot should have tried to understand the situation at hand and bend the rules for the company since the incidence that led to him delaying was out of his control; and finally, Good leadership entails collaborating with your juniors in order to find a solution rather than believing in yourself and sticking to individual decisions. The pilot of KLM failed to exercise this concept and thus assumed his co-pilot.6 6.0 How these proposed actions might be translated into the daily actions of a successful corporate leader Success in leadership entails various actions most of which have been addressed above based on the crash. The actions might be translated into daily corporate leadership actions by ensuring that there is clear communication from the leader to his subordinates or from the subordinates to the leader. They also need to ensure that amicable environment is created where each person is free to air his or her view in spite of the position held. The other way this could be done is by taking time to compose one in times of problems in order to find a solution that is useful. Panic situations that lead to decision-making under pressure should be avoided at all costs. Leaders in the corporate arena must be able to always seek a path that is creative while making decisions and give room for innovative approaches to issues by avoiding being rigid. As such, personal interests also need to be avoided. Finally, it is important that leaders exercise some degree of tolerance when faced with issues beyond their control. Corporate scenes are clogged with many issues which require a sober approach to problem solving processes. Ensuring that the sight is clear for any decision being made could be a necessary strategy at all times in the corporate leadership environment.7 7.0 Appropriate lessons that might be learned relative to the effective management of technology and how those lessons should be applied to modern-day organizations Technological mishaps do happen if proper management is not taken into consideration. It is important that all necessary equipment are put in place to ensure successful operation and dealing with emergencies. As it could be seen, the radars on the ground at airports were not present at the airport during the accident. The radio frequency was also not in order. This presents problems of lack of maintenance and sensitivity to machines that are vital for operations. This presents modern organization with a vital lesson of always making sure that the HMI machines are in place as needed and that thorough maintenance is given to them so as to ensure that they operate effectively and are prepared for emergencies.8 Technology is only good and useful if put in place and well maintained. Modern-day organizations should learn to manage and maintain technologies in a risk management manner. this would ensure that such problems that relate to technology are avoided or solved when they arise.9 8.0 Conclusion The crash that occurred was very disastrous. The most damning thing was the revelation that sheer human error contributed immensely to what happened. This shows how issues related to corporate leadership and management could spell doom for an organization if not well handled. The HMI machines are important resources if only they are well managed or maintained and used appropriately. Organizations need to seek more creative and innovative ways of dealing with problems in a proactive manner rather than reactive. If all measures were taken, it might have been possible to avoid the crash that led to a serious loss of passenger lives. Airlines also need to train their employees on risk management issues and also make them understand that situations far from their control are allowed if saving lives and planes is to be done. References EAO, Interface Technology Considerations for HMI Systems, EAO Interface Technology Article, (2010), 1-8 Gryskiewicz, Stan & Taylor, Sylvester, Making Creativity Practical: Innovation That Gets Results, (Greensboro, North Carolina: Center for Creative Leadership, 2003), 2-23 Martin, Andre, with Cindy McCauley, Phil Wilburn, Allan Calarco and Chris Ernst, The Changing Nature of Leadership, (a CCL Research Report, Brussels, Belgium: The Center for Creative Leadership, 2005), 56-78 Palus, Charles J. & Horth, David M., , The Leader’s Edge: Six Creative Competencies for Navigating Complex Challenges, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass and The Center for Creative Leadership. 2002), 124-131 PIA CRM Islamabad, KLM Pan Am Disaster 2006, Slate, October 25th 2011 http://www.theairlinepilots.com/flight/klmpanamdisaster.htm Read More