I was waiting for this to finally occur. I've expected it for some time.
Mike recently wrote
"We are abandoning the acronym "CRM" entirely. The program will be
called the "###### Flight Department Safety Program" or "Flight
Standards Program" or something similar. We are also going to ask
them
to name the program."
It appears that we may have come full circle from "CRM is the savior"
to "CRM has gotten such a bad reputation that is has become the symbol
of everything wrong in our human factors training programs -- the
enemy." The godfathers and godmothers of CRM are moving out of flight
operations at an alarming rate, to bring the gospel of teamwork,
communication, and conflict resoIution to the medical, space, and other
fields. I recently reviewed a journal article for a major publication that
challenges the validity of the entire CRM approach.
Is this the first distant echo of the death knell of CRM as we know it? If
so, where did we go wrong along the way. Over the past year we have
hit some hot button topics that indicate we may have forgotten the
operator along the way. Focusing on "what we teach" and "how we
teach" we may have lost track of "who we teach." The discussion on
"what is professionalism" was trivalized into statements such as
"professionalism to me is the smile of a satisfied customer." If that is
the best we are capable of, no wonder we have lost our way. What about
OUR CUSTOMER, the flight personnel and maintainers we train? How
many smiles do we see on their faces?
I began a project about this time last year to define the "next
generation" of CRM. I got sidetracked into the literature and haven't
moved out as smartly as I should have here, and I apologize to those of
you who signed on for the tiget team for a lack of follow-up. I am more
and more convinced that I posed the wrong question then. Instead of
how will CRM be taught in the future, perhaps the better question is "In
the next ten years, what will be the most effective way to accomplish the
objectives that are currently met by CRM?" Which begs another, more
fundamental question -- what ARE the the objectives of CRM? Safety
certainly, but what about effectiveness, efficiency, job satisfaction,
retention, recruitment? Are these not legitimate human factors
concerns? Is fifth generation CRM the MOST effective method for
accomplishing these goals? Where is the RECENT research on CRM
effectiveness? Not in terms of student satisfaction -- but rather of
performance. Dr Nullmeyer and a few others are pushing this side of the
equation, but more serious performance based criteria and inquiry needs
to be done if CRM is not to crumble faster than the Berlin Wall.
All of these questions need to be answered -- and soon -- if we hope to
reinvigorate CRM into its full potential before more jump ship and move
to "something else" -- whatever that may be. One of the greatest
philoshophers of our age -- the great Mel Brooks -- stated (in History of
the World Part 2) "Gentlemen, we must protect our phoney-baloney
jobs." Let's not have it come down to that.
Tony Kern