<<
Excellence is the individual aviator's ability to RECOGNIZE and RESPOND
appropriately to the flight challenges.
First, I think we all know that individual and organizational excellence
cannot be achieved exclusively through training. However, to the extent
that training programs contribute to shaping behavior, I offer the
following:
Jens Rassmussen's work on "knowledge, rule, and skill" based behavior
provides an excellent strategic theme for building training programs. At
the risk of oversimplification, Skill-Based is when an individual has a
ready and appropriate response to a given set of circumstances.
Rule-Based
is when an individual has a response for a given set of circumstance but
it is not automatic and reflexive. Knowledge-based is when the individual
does not have a ready response for a given set of circumstances and must
do some expensive cognitive processing to formulate a response. If we are
building CRM programs to shape behavior, it seems somewhat intuitive that
our goal should be to develop skill-based responses.
The foundation of a skill-based training program is to teach individuals
how to both RECOGNIZE the conditions, then RESPOND appropriately. This
implies that the training developers and organizational managers have:
1.Identified the adverse conditions that they want their people to
recognize.
2. Identified and trained the appropriate procedural and management skill
responses they expect.
Sadly, however, many CRM programs fall far short. Many programs brief CRM
concepts and expect that it will result in skill-based behavior change.
Many advanced programs teach CRM skills in the simulators but still do not
systematically teach individuals to recognize the conditions that lead to
difficulty. Skill-based programs should systematically build the
individuals' ability to both RECOGNIZE and RESPOND to flight challenges.
When the goal of your training programs matches your definition of
expertise then you have a coherent foundation upon which you can direct
your training development efforts.
Tony Kern responded:
I believe Vince's discussion gets us much closer to the mark, but
I, as both an educator and a trainer from a differency culture (military)
must ask one or two follow on questions.
Q1: If we agree that recognition and response is critical -- and I do --
is that completely a skill-based phenomenon. I am suggesting that there
may be some educational underpinnings that an airline culture might take
for granted (i.e. knowledge of self, team, aircraft, culture, regulations,
environment, etc) that those of us who train 22 year olds from various
backgrouds cannot take for granted. In this case, is there a call for
better early education of prospective flyers, or at least better
screening?
Q2: Does CRM answer the call for better education, if we find that some
elements of knowledge are missing, or does this fall to another entity?
It seems to me that we could easily lose what little focus we have if we
try to do too much here.
>>
One of the problems I think we get into when discussing CRM is focus. What
are the limits of CRM training? For AF training of 22 yr olds (and in some
cases younger than that with 100 flying hours or less) we can teach them how
to employ their weapon systems. They do it better when they work as a team.
That is where CRM comes in. They can better use what they learn in CRM
training if they have a knowledge of self, team, culture, regulations, etc.
But, should those be a part of the CRM course?
CRM is a part of the larger training program whether in commercial or
military aviation. Clearly, the culture, age, experience, etc. of the student
has to be considered. But we have to be careful that we do not put too many
(or too few for that matter) subjects in the CRM bag. Solving that kind of
problem is why we get all this extra money for being CRM developers.
Cheers . . .
Dave Wilson
HTI