1. Must we get to the conflict stage? When the situation requires
"nastiness" to break an error chain, then it is good that a crewmember have a
nastiness tool, and uses it. I still believe CRM training can produce
effective teamwork, and avoid such a need. In the meantime though, the tool
needs to be there.
2. When I speak favorably of people using the "Time Out" procedure, I am
coming from a history of banging my head against the wall for many years.
That people are FINALLY speaking up, is to me, a sign of progress. I am now
looking for the crews to start reporting they have never been in a situation
where the tool needed to be used.( because of effective teamwork all along)
In all fairness, I do get those indications also. Again, after so many years
of CRM teaching, I can look back and see progress.
3. Part of the past includes dealing with those crewmembers who saw CRM as
a call for hugging; group hugs, "holding hands in the hot tub" and all of
that lovey-dovey stuff. I thought we were progressing past this also.
Unfortunately, just today, a fellow instructor told me some of our C-130
pilots returning for PIC and Instructor upgrade believe CRM is diluting their
power and authority. AC's are afraid to continue a local trainer when one of
the crewmembers complain about fatigue or distress. The complaints seem to be
more common in the "active" forces, vice the guard/reserves. When I asked
why the AC's are so quick to take an ultra-conservative course, the answer is
they are "gun-shy about sticking their neck out--the commanders might not
support them".
Hummm, I wonder if unit culture has something to do with this.
Thanks for the points, Tony.
Greg Deen
HTI-C-130 ATS