Error management & CRM
Sakuma_at_BDZ.crane.jal.co.jp
Mon, 20 Apr 98 16:51:37 +0900
> Hello Folks,
> I apologize for being about two topics behind in my response but my 767
> upgrade training has occupied all my attention while these excellent
> discussions have rolled on. I would like to revisit the discussion on
> error management CRM. After reading Professor Reason's work and listening
> to his lectures a couple years ago, I began searching for many of the
> answers that have been expressed in this group's discussions on error
> management. Most quests for answers lead to many more questions. This one
> was no exception. I would like to share with you some of the questions
> that surfaced before addressing some of the answers. How would you answer
> the following questions?
> 1: Does CRM fit into a larger corporate error management program or should
> the entire corporate error management program be built within a CRM
> program?
> 2: Who in the organization would need to be responsible for an error
> management program so that appropriate organizational level issues could be
> adequately addressed?
> 3: Can an error management program that is built in one portion of an
> operation (e.g. flight ops) survive and provide any significant benefit
> without a larger corporate error management support structure?
> 4. Are the CRM training developers the right people to build a corporate
> error management program?
> 5: Will a CRM program stall if it is burdened with the weight of something
> it cannot accomplish logistically or politically within an organization?
> 6: Is it appropriate or prudent to expand the boundaries of CRM programs
> beyond individual and crew skill development to include organizational
> error management responsibilities?
> My conclusion was that CRM and error management were really two separate
> yet complementary programs. Most of the U.S. Military Services have
> tackled these as two separate programs (ORM & CRM). The use of the term
> "Error Management CRM" is like saying ORM/CRM. It's a force fit that
> dilutes the value of both programs.
>
> The guidance offered by Professor Jim Reason provides some basis for
> understanding where CRM fits in the scheme of error management. Professor
> Reason highlights that error management happens at three levels:
> 1: The Task 2: The Workplace 3: The Organization
> CRM is a "TASK" level program that affects the workplace and the
> organization.
> >>>>>>Move this way on the Reason hierarchy>>>>
> Error Management is an "ORGANIZATION" level program that affects the
> workplace and the task.
> <<<<<<Move this way on the Reason hierarchy<<<<
> To build successful error management programs we must recognize these
> distinctly different levels and tailor our approach to each. It is
> critically important for us to recognize that different people within the
> organization make each of these three levels work. While some CRM'ers
> might find a comfortable place at the error management development table,
> the skills for error/risk management development are significantly
> different those for CRM development.
> The U.S. Air Force recognized that CRM is not the appropriate tool to shape
> organizational-level error/risk management so they made ORM (operational
> risk management) and CRM complementary yet separate programs. An esteemed
> Air Force colleague of mine (Maj. Ken Bauer) summed up this complementary
> relationship between the programs when he said "ORM is what happens behind
> the duty desk and CRM is what happens in front of the duty desk." (Duty
> desk is where we sign out to go flying in an Air Force squadron). ORM
> focuses on leadership policies, procedures, and practices that have an
> adverse effect on operational behavior. ORM is designed to address
> "organizational-level" issues. It targets leadership directly. It
> provides tools that leaders can use to shape the organizational.
> CRM is a task-level program. Trying to redefine CRM to address
> "Organizational-Level" error management issues will never work. The
> audiences, needs, and requirements are completely different. That is why
> currently postulated "Error Management CRM" is a force fit that will not
> ever live up to its promises. Error management CRM as it is currently
> postulated is a skill-level program that is trying to be more than it
> really is, or ever will be. In fact, putting the two terms together could
> be seriously detrimental to the progress of viable corporate error
> management programs. CRM has some serious negative baggage associated with
> some of the folly over the past 10-15 years. As a result, management has a
> predefined notion of CRM. They also have a predefined notion of the
> utility of CRM. The utility of organizational-level error management is
> completely different than the utility of skill-level CRM. Attaching the
> baggage of CRM to viable error management programs that target their
> approach and solutions at the leadership and organizational level is a
> mistake.
> Now that the industry has recognized the futility of attitude-centered CRM
> programs and began developing skill-centered CRM, error management at the
> task level is (by default) represented in skill-centered CRM programs
> vis-`-vis the CRM management skill lists. There appears to be no
> disagreement that the CRM skills we would use and teach under the newly
> postulated "Error Management" approach to CRM are no different. I agree
> with the general group consensus that it is old wine in a new bottle.
> I have some tips for how to make the complementary relationship between ORM
> and CRM work but this message is already too long. More to follow....
> I look forward to your comments,
> Vince Mancuso
Dear Vince :
I believe the concept of CRM and human factors can be applied to the corporate
risk management without any change. The word of "organization" comes from
"organ", which means that the function of organization is very similar to that
of human brain( human information process ). Each department of the
organization takes a role of one or more individual processes of a human brain
( e.g. flight safety department mainly acts as "feedback" process in the
airline industry). In my presentation paper for the 4th AAvPA, I have defined
CRM as a kind of human factors training which aims to activating all functions
of the human information process in an integrated manner. In this meaning, CRM
is useful to manage not only individual human errors but organizational errors.
The success of organizational risk management mostly depends upon good
communications between personnels working in the organization. This is the very
reason why joint CRM is essential to airline industries. CRM now stands for
"Corporate Resource Management" or "Campany Resource Management". Your further
comment is requested because I may be wrong.
Hidetake Sakuma/ Corporate Safety, JAL