What I meant was that we give the answer that is currently in vogue that
will allow us to pass. For example, I was taught to fly (and taught others
to fly) instruments in the Air Force. As a result, I have a bias towards
the "control & performance instruments" approach they teach. But when I
took FAA checks, I always knew the "silly way" they talk about about
instrument cross check: "in the northern hemisphere on a Thursday rolling
out of a right hand turn the clock is primary attitude reference." And I
always would give the "politically correct" FAA answer whne talking to
them...
======== Dave Wilson wrote =======
>...What and how are we going to measure?
>What are the criteria for success? ...
>...about behavior modification, then the answers
>lie in the realm of the psychologist. If CRM is the aquistion of certain
>skills, then their presence or absence should be fairly easy to
determine...
>What is the purpose for evaluating CRM output? ...
====== end snip ========
Dave, I believe, has asked all the right questions here.
I do not claim to have the answers, only a strong set of biases given to me
by my experimental psychologist mentor. He taught me to be very careful
about measurement tools and to be even more careful about what I claimed.
What I would really like to hear is what people are doing that might begin
to answer some of the basic questions of CRM measurement. For example, I
have been told that one of the major Britich carriers is using cockpit
voice recorder data. This is something that I think would be the best
measure if it operated like ASRS (i.e., total confidentiality, and ong
generic results reported). Is anyone doing anything different?
John
John A. Wise, Ph.D., CHFP Tel: (+1) (904) 226-6384
Center for Aviation/Aerospace Research Fax: (+1) (904) 226-7050
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University E-mail: wise_at_db.erau.edu
600 South Clyde Morris Blvd.
Daytona Beach, FL 32114-3900 USA