Crew Resource Management Training Program - Assignment Example

CRM Your name:   Course name:         Professors’ name: Date: Part 1 Recent there have been some criticism on CRM (Crew Resource Management) training. In Australia, the impact of CRM has never been validated. The lack of generality of CRM training program has become a problem (Sexton, Thomas and Helmreich 2000). CRM training program has not been received well in Australian aviation industry, for example, the concept that junior crew should be keen and question action and decision by the Captain has been met with resistance in Australian culture where tradition dictates that junior crew in a flight do not question their captain or superior (Sexton, Thomas and Helmreich 2000). Crew Resource Management (CRM) remains a success story of aviation and improvements in airplane crew member’s effectiveness and attitudes as a result of training have been documented (Halamek et el 2000). However, it is also true that incidents and accidents have continued to plague the Australian aviation system (Schenkel, 2000). Pilots and other flight crew members are human beings, and human beings are imperfect organisms and are prone to making errors, particularly under conditions of stress, overload and fatigue (Dynamics Research Corporation, 2001). Additionally, most aviations accidents are system accidents with multiple causes (Salas, Rhodenizera and Bowers, 2001). As Reason (2003; 2005) has pointed out, the organisational context allows the development of latent failures that can combine to produce disaster. Therefore, to say that a training program that is centered on flight crew can prevent accidents from occurring is completely unwarranted (Salas, Rhodenizera and Bowers, 2001). In other words, advocates of Crew Resource Management (CRM) must take the responsibility (Dynamics Research Corporation, 2001). There is no evidence that Crew Resource Management (CRM) training will led to a zero- accident aviation system (Halamek et el 2000). The end result of CRM training program is that the original goal of increasing safety and reducing pilot error has become lost to many. In fact, the reason why CRM training program was introduced was to make pilots and flight crew to work better as a team (Halamek et el 2000). In sum, CRM training program is an effective, but imperfect, training tool in the services of operational effectiveness and safety. Thus improving crew team skills is a means toward preventing flight disasters, but not an end in itself (Halamek et el 2000). Despite its evolutionary change, acceptance of Crew Resource Management (CRM) program remained imperfect. It has been noted, some model/concepts, such as more open communication between superiors/pilots and subordinates (such as air hostess etc), are difficult to implement in a culture where hierarchical power is normative. Globally, professional culture of pilots has acted as a barrier for acceptance of CRM program- the true professional and invulnerable pilot is self-sufficient and CRM program is fine for inept and weak (Schenkel, 2000). Safety is a global or universal value, though its practice is not. To this end many companies have proposed a 5th Generation CRM program that its main goal is to manage human error. Of course (Salas, Rhodenizera and Bowers, 2001), CRM program was developed in response to human error, especially those that are associated with decision making and ineffective teamwork (Schenkel, 2000). However, for many years, the main goal of CRM program have been lost or at least clouded. In the past, these have been verified by pilots when they were asked why CRM program was part of their training (Schenkel, 2000). The pilot response was “to enhance coordination and teamwork” (Salas, Rhodenizera and Bowers, 2001). Fifth Generation of Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program is based on the fact that error is inevitable and ubiquitous. This program to be effective, CRM program must communicate the limits of human performance with regard to ability to function under stress and mental capacity of crews (Sexton, Thomas and Helmreich 2000). It is known that 50-90 per cent of mishaps and accidents occurring in aviation are as a result of human error. Many of these accidents and incidents are as a result of failures in coordination among crews in an airplane. For example, faulty CRM and poor pilot performance have been noted to be contributing factors for many accidents and incidents and this have been reported by major airlines in the last 20 years. In addition, Crew Resource Management (CRM) program deficiencies (such as lack of effective crew supervision, lack coordination among cockpit crews) were contributing cause to almost half of the accidents reported by major airlines (Kayten, 1993). Helmreich (2000) has notes some of the drawbacks that are associated with Crew Resource Management (CRM). At this point in time, the connecting approach that CRM improves passenger safety does not exist, notwithstanding the face validity of the approach (Halamek et el 2000). At a minimum, the implementation of the CRM training program in airlines will require customization of techniques and tools for each specific program venue (Salas, Rhodenizera and Bowers, 2001). This customization of CRM tools and techniques comes at considerable cost and is not expected that the airline can immediately reap safety benefits in the aircrafts (Dynamics Research Corporation, 2001). Helmreich and Merritt (1996) noted that approximate costs for developing and implementing CRM training program ranged from 100,000- 500,000 dollars annually (Sexton, Thomas and Helmreich 2000), with additional costs for ongoing activities (such as re-training and continuing training) that ranged from 50,000- 250,000 dollars annually (Sexton, Thomas and Helmreich 2000). Similarly, the marginal cost that is associated with CRM training program is estimated at 800-2000 dollars per participant per day. These costs do not factor in expenses that will be used for starting up a CRM program (such as training instructors, simulator investment). There must be a cultural shift if CRM program should take root (Dynamics Research Corporation, 2001). CRM applications are relatively new concept in airlines training programs, a field in which education and professional training have traditionally focused on developing technical proficiency rather than facilitating human interaction (Barker, Clothier, Woody, McKinney and Brown 1996). Meanwhile, the attachment to hierarchy is the reasons why majority of cabin crew reject CRM training program (Dynamics Research Corporation, 2001). Part 2 Crew Resource Management (CRM) program was developed as a response to many accidents which were occurring as a results of human errors. Since the introduction of cockpit voice recorder and flight recorder into modern aircrafts, information gathered from these devices suggest that many accidents and incidents results not from engine malfunction or systems of the aircraft, nor from lack of technical knowledge or a failure of airplane handling skills on the part of the aircraft crew; it appears instead most of these accidents and incidents are caused by inability of aircraft crew members to respond effectively to situation in which they find themselves in (Kayten, 1993). For example, lack of communication between pilots and other crew members could lead to a loss of situational awareness, a breakdown in teamwork, and ultimately pilots making wrong decisions or series of bad decisions that could led to a fatal accident or serious incidents (Kayten, 1993). Aviation industry has a complex, safety-critical environment in which slight error can lead to a major accident or consequences. Currently, human errors in all aircraft accidents contribute to approximately 80 per cent of accidents and incidents, and thus CRM training program is important part of a training program that is available to prevent or reduce the chances of accidents and thereby improve safety of passengers in airlines. Aviation industry is largely a global endeavor in which it involves many participants from different background to interact successfully if accidents or incidents in this sector to be minimized (Kayten, 1993). The mix of ethnicities, nationalities and cultures in aviation industry can lead to conditions in which miscommunication and misunderstanding can easily occur. Although often harmless, miscommunication and failure as a team to function in an airline can lead to a real threat to the safety of passengers or crew members themselves if the duty at hand demands a coordinated response (Perezgonzalez, 2005). Crew Resource Management (CRM) was designed to encourage coordination within flight crew team and to overcome differences in “style”, expectations, background that might otherwise tend to prevent effective teamwork within a flight crew. In every country, aviation authorities have mandated CRM training program for flight crews (Perezgonzalez, 2005). Even in areas that do not need CRM training program, many of airlines have introduced CRM training programs as part of their training curriculum. It is widely known that a good CRM program has the ability to prevent miscommunication and misunderstanding that are detrimental to safety of passengers or flight crew themselves. Additionally, good CRM skills has the ability to improve productivity by promoting better understanding among flight crew members, increased motivation in crew members to do the job correctly and a more amicable workplace. Modern airline Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program are often held jointly among cabin crew and pilots and sometimes even include ground staff such as engineers and dispatchers. This is a results of the realization that safety for passengers and flight crew themselves will depend on the coordination different people that are found in the entire system and not just on the actions of flight crew members. It also stem from many evidences that a joint CRM program for cabin crew and flight crews can improve the level of cooperation and understanding across the entire team. This, in turn, has been known to be beneficial in incidents in which assistance emanating from cabin crew to flight crew can help prevent major incident or accident from occurring (Bowers, Edens, and Salas, 2001). In an effort to prevent accidents and incidents, and to manage some of the problems emanating from aircraft crew and the resulting safety issues, CRM was introduced into the aviation industry to help solve these problems. In other words, it was introduced to help train crew in aircraft in the usage of all available resources- people, equipment, and information- by coordinating and communicating as a team. Today’s cabin and flight crews are different than they were during early years of commercial aviation. During the early years pilots were once considered “god” and their decisions were not questioned; there decisions were final. As a result, there was little or no input from the other crew members because they assumed pilots knew what they were doing (Bowers, Edens, and Salas, 2001). In addition, it was also considered somewhat rude and disrespectful to question the authority and decision of a pilot or superior. It is believed part of this thinking had its origin from the army. At one time most of pilots came from the military and their military training came with ego, machismo, and autocratic decision making process- many fighting jets had single crew and therefore lacked the decision inputs, and redundancy of, from another crew member or pilot. This behavior in pilots who had military background did not transform well into civilian cockpits. Problems began to manifest in pilot errors related to numerous airline accidents and incidents which claimed thousands and thousands of lives (Bowers, Edens, and Salas, 2001). Human error was the reason for the development of 1st generation of CRM, the communication and realization of this was imperfect. While using the 5th generation of CRM premise that human error is inevitable and ubiquitous. Therefore if human error is inevitable and ubiquitous, then CRM can be used as a set of error countermeasures that has three line of defense. The first is the preventing incipient errors before they occur. The second is the avoidance of error. The third is the mitigating the consequences of those human errors which may occur but are not trapped. The CRM countermeasures have noted to apply to each situation, but the difference is the time of detection. Airline have realized that to gain acceptance of the CRM training approach, they must communicate to their crew members that errors do occur, but these airline must adopt a non-punitive approach to error (this does not mean airlines should accept willful violation of its procedures and rules that have been put in place). Additionally, for CRM training program to work, airlines need to normalize their errors. In other words, airlines need to take steps to identify the sources and nature of errors in their operations. In early 80’s, one major airline took notice of major accidents and incidents that had happened in the previous years and began implementing “people skills” training as part of technical flight training skills. It was known as CRM (Crew Resource Management), formerly known as Cockpit Resource Management. Crew Resource Management has its roots at United Airlines; the airline started a formal training program that focused on the human factors in the aircraft cockpit (Perezgonzalez, 2005). The reason why CRM was changed from ‘pilots” to “flight crew” was because training eventually branched out to include not only the pilots but also flights mechanics, attendants, management personnel, dispatchers, or to any person who are responsible for the safe completion of a flight. CRM (Crew Resource Management) program amongst other things, teaches pilots how to prioritize tasks, improve communication, delegate authority, and monitor automated equipments. In the U.S. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the government agency that is in charge of investigating accidents, made their recommendation to the FAA that CRM (Crew Resource Management) program should be included in charter operator training (Perezgonzalez, 2005). Since the implementation of CRM the role of flight attendants has changed significantly. In the past, airline focused on passenger service, rather than safety of the passengers or crew themselves, and this is the primary reason why airlines hired “airborne bellboys” in their aircrafts. In early 30’s, when air transportation experienced rapid expansion, the role of stewardess slowly started to evolve into comfort and safety for the travelers. Today, flight attendants role have changed even further. Safety in the aircraft has been made a number one priority for all airlines, while travelers service is second on the list, and flight attendants are not required to be registered as nurses nor have age restrictions. Gender issues aviation industry have also been solved. In fact, approximately 30 per cent of flight attendants in today aviation environment are male. In conclusion, by not implementing CRM training program, the airline will put both the life of passengers and flight crew at risk. Part 3 Natural limitations on human complexity and performance of the environment make error unavoidable (Boeing Corporation, 2009). As we know it safety in aviation industry is the utmost priority although airline can justifiably how much safer it is to travel by air than other means such as road (Perezgonzalez, 2005). Since early days human factor has been a great concern in commercial aviation. Implementation of CRM training program has been among the most outstanding developments in aviation industry for the past 20 years (Perezgonzalez, 2005). CRM training program was implemented so as to increase efficient and effectiveness in crew’s teamwork as well as flight-deck management (Boeing Corporation, 2009). CRM training program was first introduced in early 80’s when many investigators concluded that many aircraft accidents and incidents were as a result of lack of coordination and team-communication rather than flight crew ‘stick and rudder’ skills proficiency (Boeing Corporation, 2009). Crew resource management (CRM) training program in airlines aims to develop effective performance which consists of interpersonal and team skills and technical proficiency (Wickens and Hollands, 2000). The primary of CRM training program is to direct team attitudes, coordination and behavior of flight crew members (UK Civil Aviation Authority, 2012). and the course that can be found in the program have been desgned to address behavior in pilot and other flight crew, which is a product of thought and knowledge process, attitude, background and personality (Perezgonzalez, 2005). But this CRM training program is not designed to change an individual personality (Perezgonzalez, 2005). Awareness, Crew Resource Management, Decision-Making skills and Cockpit Efficiency & Safety Communications are some of the areas covered in CRM training program (Wickens and Hollands, 2000). These skills are the primary core factor in good Crew Resource Management (CRM) because they help flight crew members to build up interpersonal skills in which it ensure there is optimal performance flight operations (Boeing Corporation, 2009). Additionally, CRM training program has been found to provide communication styles for flight crew that is used by others for interpretation as well to determine the proper emphasis for a response (Wickens and Hollands, 2000). With poor information as a result of poor communication will contribute to insufficient data or information which will subsequently affect the crew decision-making process. Within the aviation industry, lack of teamwork are not only highly publicized and embarrassing, in some situation it has led to tragic accidents or incidents (Kayten, 1993). For example, in 1972, Eastern Airlines Flight 401 crashed, because the flight crew allowed Lockheed L-1011 to fly into the surface (Kayten, 1993). What the flight crew did not know is that altitudes hold feature of the autopilot was malfunctioning (Kayten, 1993). Result of the investigation into the accident found that the flight crews were pre-occupied with landing gear light that has failed to indicate at the time of the crash. Another example involves Avianca Flight 052 which crashed when trying to land at JFK International Airport (Bowers, Edens and Salas, 2001). According to the crash investigators, flight crews never communicate an emergency fuel situation to the ATC before the aircraft ran out of fuel (Bowers, Edens and Salas, 2001). Additionally, communication between the captain and first officer was also reported as not to be clear. It was reported that the first officers was asked to turn the starboard but instead turned the port. The effect of this made the aircraft to fly a longer loop which burned a lot of fuel (Bowers, Edens and Salas, 2001). Both accidents clearly show lack of communication on the part of flight crew members. Therefore, in an effort to prevent accidents, enhance teamwork and resulting safety issues, CRM training programs was introduced as a way of training pilots and other crew members to use all resources at their disposal- information, equipment and people- by coordinating and communication as a team (Boeing Corporation, 2009). At this point in time, CRM training program has saved many lives. Since early 80’s CRM training program has evolved in the aviation industry, and has been widely been applied in the past 20 years (Boeing Corporation, 2009). Although there are no data that can link Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program to decreased aviation accidents or incidents per se, aviation industry has accepted the face validity of the program, and it is now an important part of training flight crew members. A lot of data from thousands and thousands of military and civilian participants in U.S and in other countries have been accruing. These data indicate that most pilots and other crew members accept Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program, and fit it both useful and relevant (Boeing Corporation, 2009).Edens and Salas, 2001). Both accidents clearly show lack of communication on the part of flight crew members. Therefore, in an effort to prevent accidents, enhance teamwork and resulting safety issues, CRM training programs was introduced as a way of training pilots and other crew members to use all resources at their disposal- information, equipment and people- by coordinating and communication as a team (Boeing Corporation, 2009). At this point in time, CRM training program has saved many lives. Since early 80’s CRM training program has evolved in the aviation industry, and has been widely been applied in the past 20 years (Boeing Corporation, 2009). Although there are no data that can link Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program to decreased aviation accidents or incidents per se, aviation industry has accepted the face validity of the program, and it is now an important part of training flight crew members. A lot of data from thousands and thousands of military and civilian participants in U.S and in other countries have been accruing. These data indicate that most pilots and other crew members accept Crew Resource Management (CRM) training program, and fit it both useful and relevant (Boeing Corporation, 2009). References Barker JM, Clothier CC, Woody JR, McKinney EH, Jr., Brown JL. Crew resource management: a simulator study comparing fixed versus formed aircrews. Aviat Space Environ Med 1996; 67:3-7. Boeing Corporation (2009) Boeing Commercial Airplanes – Airliner Safety – How Safe is Flying? Retrieved September 8, 2009 from http://www.boeing.com/commercial/safety/howsafe.html Bowers, C. C., Edens, E. E. & Salas, E. (2001) // Improving Teamwork in Organizations: Applications of Resource Management Training.// Lawrence Earlbaum & Associates Inc. Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey. Dynamics Research Corporation. Training analysis and delivery. Available at: http://www.drc.com/TrainingAnalysis/medteams.htm. Accessed June, 2001. Federal Aviation Authority. Human Factors Research and Engineering Group. Coordinating human factors considerations in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) programs and activities to enhance aviation safety, capability, efficiency, and productivity. Retrieved Jan 2012 from www2.hf.faa.gov Halamek LP, Kaegi DM, Gaba DM, Sowb YA, Smith BC, Smith BE, et al. Time for a new paradigm in pediatric medical education: teaching neonatal resuscitation in a simulated delivery room environment. Pediatrics 2000; 106:E45. Helmreich RL. On error management: lessons from aviation. BMJ 2000; 320:781-5. Helmreich RL, Merritt AC. Cultural issues in crew resource management. Conference presentation at the ICAO Global Human Factors Seminar; April, 1996; Auckland, New Zealand. Kayten, P. J. (1993). The accident investigator’s perspective. In E. L. Wiener, B. G. Kanki, & R. L. Helmreich (Eds.), Cockpit resource management (pp. 283-314). CA: Academic Press. Reason, J. (2003). Human error. New York: Cambridge University Press. Reason, J. (2005). Managing the risks of organisational accidents. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Ashgate. Perezgonzalez, J. (2005) An alternative way of managing health and safety (knowledge management edition). Lulu Inc, USA. Salas E, Rhodenizer L, Bowers CA. The design and delivery of crew resource management training: exploiting available resources. Hum Factors 2000;42:490-511. Schenkel S. Promoting patient safety and preventing medical error in emergency departments. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:1204-22. Sexton JB, Thomas EJ, Helmreich RL. Error, stress, and teamwork in medicine and aviation: cross sectional surveys. BMJ 2000; 320:745-9. UK Civil Aviation Authority. Safety Regulation Group. CAP737 Crew Resource Management Guidance for Flight Crew and CRM Instructors. UK Civil Aviation Authority 2006. Retrieved Jan 2012 from www.globalairtraining.com Wickens, C. D. & Hollands, J. G. (2000). Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. USA Prentice- Hall Inc. pp. 480-492 Read More