Re: November CRM Topic
Gary Heartsill (gheart_at_flash.net)
Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:01:07 -0800
V. Mancuso wrote:
>
> Hello Gary,
>
> You mentioned that you measure the pilot's attitudes and are trying to see if
> their is any correlation between attitude and several other factors.
>
> Do you currently collect any CRM skill or performance data?
>
> Will the assessment of the value of your CRM program be based on perception
> measures or performance measures?
>
> There were some excellent discussions on CRM metrics last month that you can
> find in the CRM developer's group internet archives.
>
> http://www.caar.db.erau.edu/lists
>
> I would like to see this group zero-in on the issues surrounding the design of
> performance and outcome metrics. While perception measures can be valuable,
> they have distinct limitations.
>
> I think we have a lot of good folks on this listserv that can begin to frame the
> issues. Last month Dr. Wise suggested that there is a need to identify the
> theoretical underpinnings of CRM performance metrics. The further we progress
> with tightening up our performance metrics at Delta, the more I tend to agree.
>
> Regarding error-management approaches to CRM and Human Factors:
>
> Last year at Delta, we adopted a error-management approach to our CRM and Human
> Factors programs that closely mirrors the wisdom of Professor James Reason. I
> outline the framework for Delta's approach in a paper that I presented at the
> ICAO Human Factors Conference in New Zealand earlier this year. I will make it
> available on the developer's group web site.
>
> The distinct industry shift of CRM and Human Factors programs toward error
> management was evident at the ICAO Human Factors Conference. Dr. Reason's
> models and theories have made their way across the oceans and appear to be part
> of most leading edge CRM and Human Factors program designs. If you have not
> read his books, I would highly recommend them. It will become very clear, once
> you have read these books, where the building blocks for this error-based
> approach came from.
>
> I look forward to exploring the issues underlying and surrounding CRM
> performance metrics with this group.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Vince Mancuso, Ph.D.
> Delta Air Lines Training
Hello Vince,
"Until we learn to design and manage aviation systems so that they can
tolerate 'normal errors,' we will continue to have human-error accidents.
This, then, is *the* human-error challenge." (Lauber, J.K. (July, 1993.
Air Line Pilot).
Of course, this applies to operating nuclear power plants, flying a
Pitts, or hauling boxes in a freighter.
The quote, by a colleague of yours, was the first time in print that I
saw the idea of accepting errors. Helmreich was the first to put it in a
CRM perspective. From my side of the cockpit, the fuse is lit for the
systematic, systemic, sanguine methodology to deal with the real problem:
management of "honest errors."
My pedagogical probe for the attitudes of pilots toward CRM has been
paper and pencil tests, my treatment of CRM in recurrent ground school,
and a post test. For sure, this is a combination of performance and
outcome metrics. My shift, after I get "Human Error" by Professor Reason,
will be toward dealing with our fifth generation of CRM. What this group
needs to do is be responsible for writing the 6th generation of CRM.
Cheers,
gheart