"What are some of the other topics that should be included in "Advanced
Human Factors" training? A second question is, "If we perceive a need to
'return to the basics,' how do we package the basics so they are
different, interesting, and accepted?"
At the risk of sounding a bell once too often, I would like to throw
out the following observation. I don't think "back to basics" is an
accurate term, becuase I don't trully believe we have ever "been" to the
basics. I define the "basics" as a shared definition of what we are as
aviators -- on the most fundamental of levels. Questions like "What does
it mean to be an expert?" and "What does a professional aviator do at the
1-3-5-20 year points to meet where she/he 'should be' on the road to
excellence?" are fundamental to the future of Human Factors training.
In addition, the futurist in me has a hunch that distance learning,
which also goes hand in hand with individuals "pulling" what they need to
them as opposed to the traditional organizational "push" of
training/education, is the wave we should try to paddle up on. Of course,
this brings us back to the original question. If an individual is to
"pull what they need to them" they must first have an organizationally
approved picture of what true airmanship and professionalism is -- in
concrete terms.
I also believe that there is a value in corporate-sponsored degree
programs as opposed to "training." The intrinsic value of a M.A. in
"airmanship" may appeal much more to an adult learner than any number of
improved AQP or CRM programs. Napoleon said "a man will do unbelievable
things for a small piece of ribbon" referring to the need for medals and
decorations in the military. I believe the same can be said for
"sheepskins" in today's environment. As a form of validation, let me ask
you how many of us have our sheepskins prominently displayed on some wall?
I do and it is one of my most prized possessions. Some companies are
already doing this (granting degrees) in an effort to combine education,
training, and codify standards simultaneously. I believe Sony may have
taken the lead in this area a decade or so ago. The University Aviation
Association may cringe at the thought of industry sponsored degree
programs, and it is likely that we would be shunned by the accredidation
organizations, but who cares? If captain X works for airline XYZ and
airline XYZ recognizes value in their corporate degree program, I frankly
see no need to seek approval of the North Central Association of Colleges
and Universities. Of course, the industry would need to self regulate if
we were to ever try to formalize credentialing of such a project but, that
is what this group is for -- is it not?
Tony Kern