Aviation Management & Logistics
AMLG 4050 Aviation Safety
Fall 2005
Meets: LOWDR 0111, 1400-1515 TR
Instructor: Dr. R. Johnson/Dr. T. Stobbe
Office: 436
Phone: 844-6822
Email:
Office Hours: TBD
Course Text: Willie Hammer and Dennis Price.
(2001), Occupational Safety Management
and Engineering. Fifth Ed.
James Reason, Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents (1997)
Supplemental References:
Littlejohn, S.W. & Gray, R (1966), Theories of Human Communication. Wadworth: Belmont, CA.
Current FARs, AIM and NTSB 830
http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/helmreich/nasaut.htm
http://www.aviation-safety.net
http://www.ntsb.gov
http://www.ergogero.com
Course Description: This course designed to help the student develop an attitude and philosophy that promotes accident prevention. Aviation and occupational safety management as well as communications, situation awareness and error management theories will be introduced. The application of theory in areas such as personal and organizational safety procedures and goals, safety philosophies, understanding aircraft accident reports, human factors, accident prevention programs and current safety events is an important function of this course.
Prerequisites: Junior Standing
Grading, Assignments and Examination:
1. One Reaction Paper (see page 4) 15
Grading Rubric:
English (Writing style, grammar, spelling) 5
Analysis 4
Conclusion (Based in theory and supporting
Evidence) 6
2. Grading Scale:
A = 90-100 points D = 62-69 points
B = 80-<89 points F = below 62 points
C = 70-<79 points
Assignments and Final Examination: Case studies will be due on the dates indicated in the syllabus. One point will be deducted for each day the paper is late. The Final examination must be taken as scheduled or your grade will be zero.
Problems and Individual Counseling: If you are having problems or if you believe you cannot meet the course requirements please see me.
Cheating/Plagiarism: Don’t! Both are considered academic dishonest and it will be reported to the Academic Honesty Committee. Please see the University’s policy in the Tiger Cub, pp. 129-131.
Disability Accommodations: Students who need accommodations are asked to arrange a meeting during office hours the first week of classes, or as soon as possible if accommodations are needed immediately. If you have a conflict with my office hours, an alternate time can be arranged. To set up this meeting, please contact me by E-mail. Bring a copy of your Accommodation Memo and an Instructor Verification Form to the meeting. If you do not have an Accommodation Memo but need accommodations, make an appointment with the Program for Students with Disabilities, 1244 Haley Center, 844-2096 (V/TT).
“I can’t wait to be an Aviation Safety Manager!”
AMLG 4050 Aviation Safety—Course Schedule
Date
/Topic
/Assignment
Aug 18
/Introduction
Safety, Theory, Philosophy and Definitions
/Chapters 1 & 2 (Reason)
23
/ Library Assignment /25
/Safety, Theory, Philosophy and Definitions (RP Topic Due)
/Library Assignment Due
30
/Systems
/As Assigned
Sep 1
/Latent Systemic Threats (RP Draft Due)
/6
/ Latent Systemic Threats /8
/ Safety Management Reaction Paper Due /TBDWhat is a Reaction Paper?
You will read an article from a current periodical or academic journal (as assigned) about a subject that we are studying in class. After reading the article, you will write a one-page summary of its main points. You will then write a one-to-one-and-a-half-page reaction to the main points the author makes. This reaction must not be just personal opinion, but substantiated by principles explained in the text or other readings. For example, if the author presents a new model or method, you should express your agreement or disagreement with its use, drawing your arguments from concepts learned in class and from other research.
The papers must not be more than two-and-a-half pages in length (10-12 pitch, double-spaced).
SUMMARY
Human error has been targeted as the cause of 60% to 80% of both military and civil aviation accidents (Shappell & Wiegmann, 1997). Unfortunately, in the past twenty years, the reduction of aviation accidents due to human error has not paralleled the steady decline in accidents due to mechanical and environmental factors. Herein lies the immediate need for a greater understanding of human vulnerability to error and the development of more effective countermeasures.
In the article entitled “Error Management,” published in Flying Safely, author J.R. Ragman claims the most basic premise of error management is that human error is universal and inevitable. It is certain that human performance will lead to some form of error. Ragman’s second premise of error management is that error does not cause an accident - the consequences of those errors cause accidents. While error may be inevitable, consequences are most definitely not. Error management, therefore, targets the gap between errors and their consequences – focus lies not on the error itself, but rather how it is managed in order to prevent an adverse consequence (Ragman, 12).
Ragman stated that in order to manage error, humans must accept the fact that they will commit errors regardless of their skill level or technical proficiency. This acknowledgement removes the stigma associated with human error. As a result, the emphasis switches from “my” error to “the” error and the reflection upon the crewmember’s ability disappears.
Ragman also emphasized the organization’s role in error management and how an airline’s philosophy can influence error management. Two ways he indicated that an organization can stimulate effective error management is to first, promote the use of and provide tools to prevent errors and facilitate recovery, and second, adopt an organizational philosophy which focuses not on errors, but the management of errors.
REACTION
Every day, airline crews save the lives of their passengers by effectively identifying errors and competently managing the consequences. Humans have the ability to analyze information from various sources and derive solutions. The catch is that the process that gives humans these unique capabilities also makes them vulnerable to making mistakes.
Through crew resource management training, pilots are trained to operate within
the context of the crew. Within this context, however, the “screw-up” stigma is encountered. Accepting the fact that mistakes will be made tends to make errors less personalized. I agree with the notion that the error is then more likely to become a crew issue rather than an individual’s issue. By de-coupling the pilot from the error, the entire crew will become more apt to work together to manage the situation.
The organization’s role in error management is multifaceted. Key Dismukes and Frank Tulio also believe that it is the organization’s responsibility to provide tools and training for error management. Tools that resist error include checklists, standard operating procedures, flight manuals and crew resource management training (Dismukes & Tulio, 63). Airlines must also provide opportunities for pilots to master other error management tools like teamwork, communication and discipline. All airline policies and procedures should be adopted with the sole purpose of assisting in the detection and correction of error. In class, we discussed five ways in which error can be managed. I believe the organization, more than any other group, has direct control over all of them – process evaluation, elimination, mitigation, isolation and protection. If it chooses, the organization can be very effective and far-reaching.
Continental Airlines is among one of the first airlines to implement their own error management training program. Through the institution of this program, a message has been sent to employees that the organization has acknowledged that errors will occur (Phillips, 62). The airline’s focus now lies not on the errors themselves, but how they are managed. This has provided for the shift of evaluation of crew performance from counting errors and expecting flawless performance, to error detection and effective management of error consequences (Dismukes & Tulio, 63). This is especially important because commission of error is not a reflection of a crewmember. A failure to recognize and resolve error in a timely manner, or a failure to properly employ the tools of error management does, nonetheless, reflect poorly on the pilot (Ragman, 14). Airlines must stress to their pilots that excellent crewmembers are those that are effective error managers, not those that do not make mistakes.
Donald Gunther, manager of Continental Airline’s Human Factors Team, commented that a key aspect of the error management training program’s success has been the “senior management’s willingness to accept and support it proactively” (Phillips, 61). I think it is obvious that the management group is responsible for taking the first steps in minimizing errors and their potential consequences. It is a seemingly small investment compared to the magnitude of the problem.
WORKS CITED
Dismukes, K., Tulio, F. (2000). Aerospace forum: Rethinking crew error. Aviation Week and Space Technology. 63.
Phillips, E.H. (2000). Managing error at center of pilot training program. Aviation
Week and Space Technology. 61.
Ragman, J.T. (1999). Error management: Error management targets the gap between
errors and their consequences. Flying Safety. 12.
Shappell, S.A., & Wiegmann, D.A. (1997). Human factors analysis of postaccident
Data: Applying theoretical taxonomies of human error. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology. 67.
Need Help with Your Writing?
FREE WRITING CONSULTANT FOR BOTH UNDERGRADUATE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS MAJORS AND MBA STUDENTS
CLAIRE T. FEILD
LOWDER COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
OFFICE 442
HOURS AVAILABLE: M/W 9 a.m.-2 p.m., and TU/TH 10 a.m.-3 p.m.
EDITING SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR COLLEGE OF BUSINESS STUDENTS:
1. ROUGH DRAFTS FOR CASES, STATISTICAL REPORTS, INDIVIDUAL PAPERS, TEAM PAPERS, AND RESEARCH OR TERM PAPERS
2. PURPOSE STATEMENTS/ESSAYS FOR GRADUATE SCHOOL AND JOB PLACEMENT
3. RESUMES AND BOTH COVER/FOLLOW UP LETTERS
EMAIL CLAIRE: to make an appointment.
9