SITUATIONAL AWARENESS MANAGEMENT
TIGER TEAM MEETING MINUTES
INDEX
May 16, 1996 Email RE: Hello from Atlanta
June 11, 1996 Meeting Minutes from the SA Management Tiger Team
August 20, 1996 RE: Situation Awareness Tiger Team Meeting Minutes
From: Vince Mancuso
Date: Thu, May 16, 1996, 10:22 PM
RE: Hello from Atlanta
Hello Folks,
The Industry Developers Group Tiger Team is progressing very nicely with the development of the SA management module for pilots. We have several folks from the research community who are assisting our tiger team in this effort. We have Judith Orasanu and Carolyn Prince doing funded sim research to include SA Management, we have Sherry Chappell from NASA/ASRS reviewing the incident databases and literature for SA Management (she will probably write a ASRS Directline article to support SA management programs), and we have some folks working on some innovative sim delivery methods. It's coming together nicely. In fact, the problem is going to be deciding what we will have to exclude from the one hour program and the Line Oriented Simulator (LOS) sessions.
I will have a ton of literature that I will bring to MSP for the tiger team. I would like to shoot for a meeting in Atlanta probably on the 11th or 12th of June. Judith and Carolyn will be here that week doing research at Delta. It will be a good time to get the group together and discuss progress and direction. I would like to have everyone review the working theory and the listed behaviors before that meeting so we can come to some closure on these items. The behaviors and the working theory are posted in one of the discussion strings in the CRM developers group in the AWG Compuserve forum.
We have a new member of the tiger team. Chris Hallman is a human factors facilitator and developer at Delta. Chris is very capable and very energetic. He will be the primary developer for Delta's 1997 classroom CRM recurrent for SA Management. You will notice his email address in this message. Please include him in your future industry developer's group emails. Chris will also be joining our group on the evening of the 28th.
See most of you in MSP on the evening of the 28th at 7:30. If you can come with the questionnaires filled out listing of your HF/CRM products, we can get begin to compile the industry HF/CRM product index. I would like to have that completed by Ted's Fall CRM Conference. I will include another copy of the format at the end of this email message. Lloyd Murray from TWA has already filled his out. Lloyd was very succinct with the program descriptions. I would prefer that they are short! It makes them easier for you to compile and easier for everyone to read.
Vince
Meeting Minutes from the June 11, 1996 SA Management Tiger Team
Attached are the meeting notes from the Industry Developers Group Tiger Team focusing on the development of a courseware module for Situation Awareness Management. The development tiger team will be meeting again sometime in August (date to be determined) to continue the group development efforts. Online discussions and coordination continue in the mean time. We expect to have a courseware outline engineered and available to the industry by mid-September.
I want to point out that the contributions from the research scientists (Sherry Chappell, Judith Orasanu, and Caroline Prince) have been tremendously useful for translating the latest science and ASRS findings into airline courseware and products. Each of these individuals is funded through various mechanisms (FAA, NASA, Navy, etc.) to continue this work. I would highly encourage the commercial airline industry managers and developers who are the beneficiaries of their efforts to let them, their supervisors, and the people who fund them know that their contributions are extremely valuable.
The meeting notes follow below:
Best Regards,
Vince
Situation Awareness Management Industry Developers Group Tiger Team Notes From June 11 Meeting In Atlanta
Attendees: Vince Mancuso-Delta Air Lines, Chris Hallman-Delta Air Lines, Sherry Chappell-NASA ASRS, Neil Krey-Hughes Training, Judith Orasanu-NASA Ames Research Center, Carolyn Prince-Naval Air Warfare Center, Tony Sasso-Northwest Airlines, Pete Wolfe-Southwest Airlines Brief Visits From: Kurt Shular-Delta, Ray Justinic-Delta, Alan Price-Delta, Buz Howland-Delta
History of theTiger Team: This was the first formal meeting of the Tiger Team for the Development of SA Management. There have been extensive online discussions between the participants before this meeting. These online discussions allowed the group to come together and address the pertinent issues relating to SA Managment immediately without spending time trying to frame the issues.
Tiger Team Objective: The objective of the SA Management Tiger Team is to create courseware for situation awareness management training module available to anyone in the industry. The meeting attendees are a part of an industry develpers group created to bring together members of the human factors research community with airline currciulum developers. This exchange of experience and ideas is beneficial for both groups. The programs developed by this collaboration provide vital training to airline flight crews.
Meeting Objectives / Agenda:
Review Observable Behaviors Review Working Theories Overview of Instructor Workshop for Developers (Presented by Neil C. Krey Hughes Training) Identify Action Items and Dates Identify Desired Training Program Outcomes
Outcomes and Dates: 1. Courseware Guide (Pilot, F/A, Dispatch) 1 October 1996 2. Presentation on SA Management Courseware ready by 15 September (Presentation at CRM conference in CLT) 3. Awareness package for home study (Delta) 4. Curriculum Outline 15 July 5. Instructor Training Guide (Classroom Instructor) Draft 15 September 6. Simulator Instructor Guide 1 November 7. Line Check Airman Module 1 November
Behaviors and Working Theories: Factors Contributing to Loss of SA: 1. Bad/Misleading Information--Various Sources 2. Expectancy 3. Time Pressure a. Schedule b. Curfews c. Emergency 4. Workload Extremes a. High b. Low 5. Distractions a. External (ATC, Flight Attendants) b. Internal (Pilot Crew) 6. Habit (Positive vs. Negative) 7. Fatigue 8. Automation 9. Complacency 10. Ambiguity 11. Unfamiliarity (Aircraft, Airport, Crew)
Situation Awareness Management:
1. Prevent Loss Of SA Through The Use Of Positive Habits a. Expanded Team (Allocate Attention) (Professional courtesy vs. team objectives) Maintenance ATC Dispatch Flight Attendants b. Recognize/Recover from Loss of SA c. Response to: Surprise Sneaky Failures
2. Maintaining Good SA a. Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Anticipate b. Check Assumptions (best case vs. worse case) (alternate interpretations) c. Challenge d. Anticipate e. Scripts (Generic, Situation Tailored)
3. Interpret Cues a. What's the Real problem? (Check Assumptions) (Update) b. Ambiguity (Vague cues, Conflicting cues, Lack of interpretable cues) ( Multiple problems ( Conflicting cues ( Sneaky failures-Subtle ( Alternate interpretations ( Checking/Diagnosing c. Rehearse Allocate Tasks Anticipate Brief (procedures, approaches, airport etc.)
4. Behaviors a. Create reminders b. Rehearse--Brief Approach Procedures (Unfamiliar)
5. Temporal Component of SA How do I? ( Detect How do I? ( Interpret Do these things first How do I? ( Project (Anticipate)
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Anticipate
Plane, Path, People, Plan
6. What do better crews do? (Ideas to be developed in class) a. Facilitate a class discussion that leads to the model b. Use an exercise to force cognitive examination of concepts
(Table)
__________________________________________________________________________
Initial (Plan Preparation); Detect (Vigilance, Scan); Interpret Anticipate (Projection); Revise Initial Plan
Plane Path People ___________________________________________________________________________
7. Behaviors a. Established for: ( All crew members ( Captains ( F/Os and S/Os b. Attention priorities and attention allocation for all crew members
End of Flip Chart
Notes from 11 June
Other Notes from 11 June
Working Theories
Discussion of "traps" (factors contributing to loss of SA)Yerkes-Dobson Law (Times when you are bored) 1. Boredom/Complacency 2. Busy - High Workload 3. Distractions 4. Habit 5. Fatigue 6. Automation 7. Complacency 8. Ambiguity 9. Familiarity
Prevent Loss of SA Positive habits Expanded team
Recognize/Recover
Maintaining Good SA Positive habits Check assumptions Alternate interpretations Anticipate Expanded team Allocating attention Use resources
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate Plane, Path, People, (Focal points Actions)
Breakdown External situation People "Build a system that 'forgives' error." "Dynamic complexity deals with cause and effect."
( Detect ( Comprehend ( Project Behaviors, Create reminders, Rehearse - Brief
Draft Minutes from the Human Factors/ CRM Industry Developers Group SA Management Tiger Team 20 August 1996
Attendees: Vince Mancuso, Judith Orasanu, Carolyn Prince, Lloyd Murray, Pete Wolfe, Kurt Shular, Chris Hallman, (and an intern from NASA, Eric).
Meeting Goal: The purpose of this meeting was to refine products that airline training managers could use to develop a situation awareness management curricula. Specific topic included:
1. A review of Sherry Chappells article on SA Management 2. A review of current and past research findings on SA Management 3. An delineation of strategies for presenting / delivering this material to the industry 4. A review of the proposed course outline for a one hour classroom session on SA Management for line pilots 5. A review of the proposed course outline for an instructor / evaluator to teach SA Management
Background on the SA Management Tiger Team:
The SA Management Tiger Team is part of the larger Human Factors and CRM Industry Developers Group. The SA Management Tiger team was assembled in response to a nearly universal need for better airline curricula on SA Management. The objective of the SA Management Tiger Team is to do the labor intensive foundation work that must be done to create a good SA Management training curricula. Since all airlines have to do this type of work, this training product need was a perfect candidate for industry collaboration. To complete the foundation work to build an SA management training program, the tiger team focused on creating products that training managers can easily use and adapt to develop a customized SA Management training course at their airline. The efforts of the team are beginning to bear fruit.
Synopsis:
The meeting was tremendously productive and useful. The products that the researchers and developers brought to the meeting were the result of a tremendous amount of effort and focused collaboration. It was generally agreed that the products that this group has created to this point (the SA Management article, the research findings, the literature review, and a course outline) would provide all the resources an airline training developer would need to develop a fairly comprehensive SA Management course.
While there are still some refinements and packaging that need to be completed to the existing products before they are presented, this team has very nearly fulfilled the original objective to create useful products that training developers can use to develop an SA Management course. However, our next challenge is to make these products available so the whole industry can benefit. To that end, we discussed some options for presenting this material at the September CRM Conference in Charlotte and perhaps to assemble a workshop at Ohio State. Also, the group discussed placing these materials on the industry developers HF/CRM web site that is currently being developed.
Action Items:
1. The first order of business for the group was to review a draft of Sherry Chappells Article on SA Management. The group spent about an hour reading and commenting on the article. The group then made a conference call to Sherry in California to give her our input. The group identified and discussed a few refinement points within the article. Sherry agreed to alter the draft in the next couple days and to send the final draft to the group. It was unanimously agreed upon that this article is very well written and is directly on target. Most of the members in the group intended to use the article as a component of their recurrent home study for the SA Management course or to publish it in their airline safety journal.
2. The second order of business was a discussion on how we can present this material. The group discussed some of the challenges that have recently surfaced regarding misguided perceptions about the purpose and objective of the industry developers group. There appears to be a small faction within the industry that perceives this industry developers group as a rebel group that is somehow undermining the other groups in ATA. While this is a completely inaccurate perception, it is one that exists. There is a quote that I am reminded of in these situations: At the crossroads of change stand 10,000 guardians of the past. The objective of our group is to simply identify common industry development needs, assemble the talent, and develop products that meet the need. The industry developers are not interested in engaging in political debates, political agendas, or gathering to simply chat about CRM/HF topics. This is a very action oriented problem solving group. There are some folks who might find this type of productive collaboration threatening. While we need to actively address the misguided perceptions of folks who might be threatened by this groups productive benefit, we should not get drawn into politics that detract from our original objective (to create useful applied human factors and CRM products). If there was any question as to the benefit of this type of group, it was generally agreed that this group could let the products speak for themselves.
The group agreed that we should try to secure a few minutes on the Charlotte CRM agenda. Vince Mancuso then met with Tom Peters to identify the best course of action for securing a spot on the agenda. Tom left a message with Karen Sieffert from Northwest to ask Ted Mallory if there was room for this group to speak. Tom said that if Ted Mallory could not find room on the main program agenda that we could use about 10-15 minutes of Deltas time to present the groups work.
While Vince met with Tom Peters, the SA Management Tiger Team outlined the presentation. It was agreed that the presentation should reinforce not only the products but the process that lead to these products One of the objectives of this team was to see if this type of collaborative effort could work. The group agreed that it would be important to share our insights on how to make a collaborative effort a success with airline managers and developers throughout the industry.
The group then identified the Ohio State conference in April of 1997 as an opportunity to deliver a workshop where airline developers could spend a few hours with the SA Management Tiger Team to assimilate the products and research findings. Pete Wolfe agreed to draft a 300 word abstract that could be submitted for the Ohio State conference. The deadline for submitting abstracts to Ohio State is 15 October so we agreed to circulate a draft in the next month or so.
3. The next order of business was to review the research findings from Judith Orasanu and Carolyn Prince.
The industry developers found the research findings from these two researchers particularly useful for inclusion into training programs. Carolyn Prince did a significant amount of work highlighting the components of SA Management. She provided the group a taxonomy along with some findings from Mica Endsleys research that were particularly useful and easily translated into classroom modules.
Judith and Eric then presented their findings. Judith supervised two interns who analyzed over 150 ASRS reports relating to the loss of SA. The intern, Eric, presented the findings. The categorization of lost SA events was particularly insightful and useful. Each of the industry developers found the graphs to be useful tools that could easily be incorporated and used in the classroom to highlight SA traps. The cross tabulations provided further insight into SA related difficulties.
Judith also did an analysis of a simulator video tape to highlight specific SA Management behaviors. It is important to point out that the video tape was created by management pilots who were validating LOFT/LOS simulator session and was given to the researchers with pilot and airline approval. The tape was not taken from a line training session. We respect the confidential nature of LOFT/ LOS training tapes.
The management pilots who created the tape agreed to allow the researchers to reproduce and distribute this tape and their synopsis if they desire. While there are still a few logistical and legal questions that have to be addressed before the tape can be released, the tape and the corresponding synopsis should prove useful to industry developers.
4. The last order of business was unrelated to SA Management. Vince Mancuso asked the group if they would like to collaborate on a very quick survey of line pilots (perhaps 100 surveys from each airline) regarding the line pilots basic understanding of human factors and CRM. It was generally agreed among the participants of the group that there is not a clear understanding within the pilot population of the difference between human factors and CRM nor is there a clear understanding as to why the airlines engage in these activities. It is believed that the pilots often find CRM and Human Factors synonymous and that they are both oriented toward improving cockpit relationships. It is also believed that these prevailing perceptions can be altered. The survey findings would provide insights into what pilot perceptions of CRM and Human Factors.
It is envisioned that the survey would have only 3 or 4 open-ended questions asking the line pilots definition of CRM, the line pilots definition of human factors, and the line pilots perception of why the airline engages in CRM and Human Factors. The purpose of collecting these findings is to provide a baseline for the industry and the individual airlines on CRM and Human Factors perceptions. Vince Mancuso mentioned that it is Deltas intention to build a better understanding on the definition and purpose of human factors with their line pilots with next years training. It is envisioned that a follow-up survey will be delivered after next years training to identify whether there was any change in line pilot perceptions as a result of the independent variable (the training).
Vince Mancuso agreed to create a draft survey form and distribute it to the group. Once the group agreed upon the few short questions and the demographics, we would distribute it to our pilots attending recurrent or initial training. Carolyn Prince mentioned that she would have an intern that could compile these findings. It is very likely that the survey findings would be sent directly to Carolyn so she could compile and analyze them.
A couple meeting objectives were not addressed due to time constraints to include: The review of the course outlines for both the line pilot class and the instructor / evaluator session
The group adjourned at approximately 4:30.
Copyright © 1996-2005 by Neil C. Krey unless otherwise indicated.
Non-commercial reproduction rights granted if the following notice is included:
"Source: Neil Krey's CRM Developers Forum, http://www.crm-devel.org"