Crew Resource Management in the US Airline Industry - Research Paper Example

Aviation Safety: Crew Resource Management (CRM) in the U.S. Airline Industry Introduction Knowledge in the aviation industry has continued to grow to reflect current realities, which are characterized by user demand for safety. While the growth in knowledge has led to development of technological devices and tools to improve safety in aviation, these measures have not resulted in total elimination of incidents and accidents that threaten the safety of those onboard airplanes. The need for increased levels of safety has therefore led to the development of CRM as an alternative set of knowledge and skills that seek improve this area. Significant portions of CRM have targeted management of human error, which is perceived as a major factor in safety concerns. This research paper makes a critical analysis of the role played by CRM in enhancing safety in the U.S. aviation industry by focusing safety issues related to reduction human errors, enhanced coordination, creation of systems of behavior modifications, improved risk management and which highlights the importance of CRM to U.S. Airline Industry. Background Crew Resource Management (CRM) is a field in aviation focusing on training procedures for participants in the industry, which is an environment characterized by human errors that can have catastrophic effects. A number of historic accidents such as those involving Boeing 747, EAL 401 and UA 173 necessitated training of crew in this area where human error was deemed to be the main factor for the crashes. Therefore, CRM was introduced to provide knowledge and skills that enable development of flexible general approaches that increases safety by enhancing human performance. To achieve its goals, CRM focuses on intrinsic human factors responsible for errors while being aware that the crew might be reluctant to report some of them without being acquainted with the skills and attitudes to respond to specific human errors. Secondly, CRM is based on the recognition that teams, as opposed to individuals, are the most effective units when dealing with complex, high risk situations (Marshall, 2009). However, CRM is not so much focused on development of technical knowledge and skills necessary in operating an aircraft but instilling a set of interpersonal and cognitive skills capable of equipping the crew to effectively manage flights within an organized aviation system (Reynolds and Blickensderfer, 2009). The development of CRM has provided great insight into the area of aviation safety especially in relation to research leading to introduction of tools such as cockpit voice recorders (CVRs) and flight data recorders (FDRs) into aircrafts. Modern tools such as CVRs and FDRs have played significant roles in tracking the causes of several accidents with results from information generated from the devices confirming technical malfunctions play a minor role majority of reported accidents. Other factors that were also found to have minimal roles in aircraft accidents are the set airplane systems, possession of technical knowledge and adequate aircraft handling skills by the crew. However, poor judgment and subsequent inability of crews to react aptly to situations during emergencies appears to be the main factor in most of the accidents (Dismukes, 2010). Current safety issues in the U.S. Airline Industry A number of safety issues that should be addressed to increase user confidence especially since incidences involving airplanes receive great media attention generating publicity faces the U.S. airline industry. One of the most critical areas in U.S. aviation industry is security. Sharp focus has been directed towards security especially in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 incident when terrorist hijacked two airplanes that were flown into the Twin Towers in New York. Due to the thousands that were killed and other maimed, there has been increased security in both airports and aircrafts (Elias, 2009; Coyle, Novack, Gibson and Bardi, 2010). Continued reporting on disasters involving airplanes both within and outside U.S. borders has also led to increased concern about the safety of those onboard. Since the 1990s, there have been major reports on crashes such as, TWA, ValuJet and US Airways. Safety concerns have also been heightened by reports of near collisions, minor accidents and plane recalls which have increased public awareness about safety related issues surrounding air travel. Crew orientation in terms of state of their mental alertness is also a safety issue. This relates to drug abuse and adequate rests for the crew this has led to introduction of measures such as drug-testing policies and alcohol consumption guidelines. Even with the highlighted safety issues, air travel remains a safer mode of transportation compared to other popular modes such as road travel. Concern about safety has been motivated by the high causality involved in airplane accidents even when there is significantly lower number of accidents compared to those involving automobiles (Coyle, Novack, Gibson and Bardi, 2010). In order to reflect the growing concern over safety, there have been significant transformations in Crew Resource Management. These transformations began with the rebranding away from “cockpit-centered” under Cockpit Resource Management (Davis, Johnson and Stepanek, 2008, p.506). The shift from cockpit to crew resource management has led to empowerment of the crew based on superior training, which enables efficient and effective flow of information to and from the cockpit (Davis, Johnson and Stepanek, 2008, p.506). It is also important to note that during the period of development in CRM, there have been up to six phases with each one having a significant role in increasing the safety standards in aviation industry. The industry is now at its sixth stage which involves emphasis on continual reassessment of threats to safety and is characterized by widespread acknowledgement that occasional human errors are bound to occur making it paramount that safety concerns shift towards trapping and management the errors as well as identifying systemic threats to safety. Based on this approach which focuses on threat and error management, there has been enhanced level of concern over the role of crews as opposed to being limited to pilot errors. Additionally, flight crews have now been equipped with it knowledge and skills necessary to manage issues surrounding threats to safety emanating from the work environment as opposed to being limited to those covered under human error inside the cockpit (Marshall, 2009) Maximizing Crew Coordination One of the areas through which safety has been assured is in maximizing crew coordination by instilling interpersonal skills such as team working and communication in operations within the aviation industry. Effective communication between crewmembers is at the center of CRM training since it serves several functions in overall success of every flight. These functions include enabling members to have a shared mental model of existing problem that should be resolved before successful landing, which contributes to enhancement of situational awareness. The concept of shared mental model is based on belief that effective functioning for a particular team is achieved when members share the same understanding of the task and the team with enhanced level of knowledge shared by team members improving the functioning of group (Reynolds and Blickensderfer, 2009). CRM also emphasizes on communication as an important component in maximizing coordination based on its role in enabling problem sharing. When effective communication has been established, crewmembers have a greater motivation to offer their own perspectives when appropriate and effective contributions are required in the process of decision-making. In imparting intrapersonal skills, CRM is designed to recognize the fact that output of the team is greater than the combined total of effort from individual crewmembers when acting in separately. Therefore, CRM emphasizes the creation of synergies between crewmembers to enable each crew members contribute effectively to overall output by the whole team. Each member of the crew is empowered to offer solutions to different areas of concern based on their roles and the circumstances that require specific actions. Crewmembers are trained to have a comprehensive awareness of their roles and how such roles change based on various circumstances that might affect the operations of airplane. For crew coordination to be enhanced, training in CRM leads to members acquiring effective communications skills especially within a group setting, situational awareness and grasp of decision-making processes by all crewmembers (Wiener, Kanki and Helmreich, 2010). Minimizing crew preventable errors According to LaPoint (2012), CRM works based on the premise that “that human error may never be completely eliminated” but there is room for team members to be instructed on threats and errors management (85). As stated in prior discussion, team working is an essential component of CRM. To achieve effective team working, the crew undergoes rigorous activities covering areas such as interactive group briefings, team training, simulation in addition to exercising various procedures in measurement and improvement of performance output from the crew as a team. These measures have an eventual effect of minimizing occurrence of crew preventable errors. The approach adopted in CRM involves three levels of considerations that must be followed to improve safety. These levels of minimizing crew preventable errors include error avoidance, identification and trapping of potential errors before they are actually committed while the third level covers mitigating the level of consequences of error that will inevitably occur. Additionally, minimizing crew preventable errors involves the crew undergoing a cultural change to perceive success or failure as a team outcome rather than individual (Wiener, Kanki and Helmreich, 2010; Marshall, 2009). Such approach in CRM encourages sharing of responsibilities by crew members who increasingly realize the role every member of the team plays towards overall success of the mission a hand. Emphasis on team working as an important approach in minimizing crew preventable errors is based on the realization that human beings as individuals have inherent limitations in what they can accomplish in particular circumstances. These limitations are of greater concern especially in emergency circumstances where events occurring in rapid succession present limited period for one to make decisions. Consequently, the crew is imparted with knowledge on the limitations of human performances, which also includes instructions on the nature of cognitive errors and effects of stressors such as exhaustion, overwork, and emergencies have in degrading performance (Marshall, 2009; Reynolds and Blickensderfer, 2009). While focusing on the crew is important in minimizing crew preventable errors, CRM also advocates for a change in stance by institutions involved in the aviation industry. The changes advocated by CRM include organizations conceding that errors in the aviation industry are inevitable, therefore, being encouraged to implement non-punitive approach when such errors occur. However, it is generally accepted that willful violations of rules or procedures must result in application of rules and legal procedures governing the industry. Further, data collection and reporting are important components in crew preventable errors as it helps in charting new approaches that will eventually improve measures put in place to minimize errors. This approach in error management led to introduction of new programs such as the 1997 Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP) by the FAA. ASAP has made it possible for aviation organizations to undertake proactive safety measures and increase the level of incident and accident reporting. To increase its effectiveness, ASAP seeks to involve major stakeholders by encouraging negotiations involving FAA, carrier and pilot union to ensure the legal obligations of every group is guaranteed during following up and reporting of errors (Wiener, Kanki and Helmreich, 2010). Behavior modification for crewmembers Introduction of CRM in aviation industry led to implementation of standard training evaluation procedures that depended on opinions of pilots about the quality and significance of the program in assessing the importance and impact of the new approach in aviation safety. However, continued research in the area has led to inclusion of pilots’ attitudes toward accident related behaviors as essential area of concern in CRM especially due to the realization that the set of skills and knowledge that the crew gained were not adequate in improving flight safety and minimizing accident rates. For effective training of crewmembers, CRM has adopted the behavioral marker system in performance assessment to gauge the level of progress in behavior modification whether during simulated or actual flights. Behavior markers are the observable but non-technical aspects of human psychology that leads to superior or substandard employee output. Focus on behavior modification in CRM is based on the need to have crews that have enduring attitudes towards various circumstances presented by the working conditions (OConnor, Campbell, Newon, Melton, Salas and Wilson, 2008). However, it is also accepted that behavior changes do not occur within a short period even with well-designed training procedures. Therefore, trainees in CRM are presented with effective and efficient training approaches with emphasize on awareness, practice and feedback followed by reinforcement of desired behavior. It is important that CRM provide training that will lead to attitudes and behaviors that will endure the test of time and different circumstances. This is because safety will only improve when the crew remains composed even in situations that will normally result in panic. The crew must be able to respond to emergency in a rational manner whenever the situation demands their sobriety. Risk management Aviation is among existing industries that are characterized by high risk for personnel, and equipments due to the environment of operation. Consequently, there is need for effective risk management strategies to ensure incidences and accidents are not catastrophic. CRM has developed a number of approaches that has led to optimization of risk management for those operating in the industry. Firstly, team working is an efficient risk management strategy as it provides an avenue for members to complement each other in decision making. By introducing a working environment that encourages consultations by personnel, CRM has improved decision-making practices in aviation (Reynolds and Blickensderfer, 2009). The pilot and co-pilot are for instance encouraged to communicate with each other and the rest of the crew when making decisions relating to safety of all onboard. Emphasis on communication and coordination of various functions is therefore an important step in minimizing occurrence of error while majority of those that cannot be prevented can be mitigated. Additionally CRM encourages the development of specific set of behaviors that potentially lead to improved operational performance with eventual results being experienced in reduced probability of mishaps occurring at any one given time (Wiener, Kanki and Helmreich, 2010). In optimizing risk management, CRM is perceived both as an operational improvement tool and as a safety program for the aviation industry. As an operational improvement tool, CRM contributes to increased crew awareness about factors that threaten the successful completion of flight mission. Flight crew is trained to be aware and isolate factors that limit the quality of performance by other members and the technologies applied in aviation. As a tool for safety, CRM equips flight crews with the necessary skills to effectively use available resources such as human, hardware, and information systems to ensure the threats and errors are identified and isolated to be dealt with decisively. However, the two perceptions of CRM reflect its importance in facilitating high-level performance and risk reduction (Dismukes, 2010). CRM is therefore important not only in controlling individual actions, but as an important contributor in enhanced aviation safety through emphasis on team coordination for efficient and effective mission accomplishment (Wiener, Kanki and Helmreich, 2010). Additionally, risk management in aviation based on approach provided by CRM is a product of several practices, which includes monitoring each other’s’ performance to ensure they conform to predetermined standards for safety. Crewmembers are in a better position to identify any form of behavior or actions that are not consistent and contributing to successful accomplishment of flight mission. Timely observation of such occurrences might provide effective in prevention of potential safety breach due to human errors and slips. When such behavior, activity or subsequent error is noted, is essential that they are communicated to the rest of team members or if applicable to the superiors. Such approach adopted under CRM ensures the problem is dealt with before escalating into uncontrollable magnitudes (Fischer & Orasanu, 2000) Future development of CRM CRM has undergone significant transformation since its introduction by NASA psychologist John Lauber in 1979. Lauber had initially referred to the discipline as "Cockpit Resource Management" but it has over the years been termed as "Crew Resource Management" to reflect increased area of concern covered by current CRM. The changes that have continued to be introduced in CRM reflect increasingly perception held by scalars who view the training and instruction approach should include more aspects of the aviation industry for it to have greater impact in the industry. Current use of behavior markers to define optimum crew performance is recent entrant in CRM and is expected to continue to be resourceful in provision of knowledge and experience in facilitative training techniques within aviation industry. Further development in the use behavioral markers should aim at generating a set of rules and procedures to define more clearly the cognitive and interpersonal skills required for good CRM, which will contribute to standardization of assessment, creating feedback mechanism and for further training of individual crewmembers (OConnor, Campbell, Newon, Melton, Salas and Wilson, 2008). It is also important to note that CRM training has traditionally developed independent of industry technical training and checking systems. Although there has not been a backlash in this approach, there is need for integration of both technical skills and human factors when training crews. Such approach improves the level of successful application of these concepts especially in situation where there is small margin for error. The outcome will be enhanced further by increasing the level of training that involves the rest of crew members have sessions with pilots and co-pilots. Increased levels of interactions among these groups will be reflected in the level of performance during flight (LeSage, Dyar and Evans, 2010). Apart from development from CRM in terms of technical skills and behavioral aspects of the crew, technological advancement is also one of the areas that have seen increased transformations. While technological advancement has played a significant role in improved safety through introduction of devices and tools such as cockpit voice recorders (CVRs) and flight data recorders (FDRs) it is important that future developments in this area continue to enhance the role of crew members in safety (Dismukes, 2010). Therefore technological advancement should consider impact on crew motivation and satisfaction for them to increase their efforts in safety improvement and error minimization. Conclusion From the foregoing, CRM plays an important role in enhancement of safety in U.S. Aviation Industry. Since its introduction, CRM has led to reduced number of accidents and incidents that threaten the safety of those onboard. This research paper has indicated the importance of CRM based on the role it plays increasing the level of safety generated by current and past safety concerns. Through knowledge and skills developed in areas such as crew preventable errors, coordination, behavior modifications and risk management, CRM has been effective in reducing the rate of accidents and incidents in aviation. The role-played by CRM highlights it importance for the U.S. Airline Industry, which consequently enjoys low rate of safety concerns. However, there is room for improvement in CRM as seen from the analysis of current and future expectations regarding integration of technical skills and behavioral factors and in development of technologies that do not have negative impact on crew motivation and satisfaction. References Coyle, J., Novack, R., Gibson, B., & Bardi, E. (2010). Transportation: A supply chain perspective. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning. Dismukes, R. K. (2010). Understanding and analyzing human error in real-world operations. In Salas, E., Jentsch, F., & Maurino, D. (Eds.). Human factors in aviation. Waltham, Massachusetts: Academic Press. Davis, J. R., Johnson, R., & Stepanek, J. (Eds.). (2008). Fundamentals of aerospace medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Elias, B. (2009). Airport and aviation security: US policy and strategy in the age of global terrorism. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. Fischer, U., & Orasanu, J. (2000, July). Error-challenging strategies: Their role in preventing and correcting errors. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 30-33). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. LaPoint, J. L. (2012). The Effects of Aviation Error Management Training on Perioperative Safety Attitudes. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3, 77-90. LeSage, P., Dyar, J., & Evans, B. (2010). Crew Resource Management: Principles and Practice. Burlington, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Marshall, D. (2009). Crew resource management: from patient safety to high reliability. Denver: Safer Healthcare Partners, LLC. OConnor, P., Campbell, J., Newon, J., Melton, J., Salas, E., & Wilson, K. A. (2008). Crew resource management training effectiveness: a meta-analysis and some critical needs. The international journal of aviation psychology, 18(4), 353-368. Reynolds, R., & Blickensderfer, E. (2009). Crew Resource Management and Shared Mental Models: A Proposal. The Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 19(1), 15-23. Wiener, E. L., Kanki, B. G., & Helmreich, R. L. (Eds.). (2010). Crew resource management. Massachusetts: Academic Press. Read More