> ----------
> From: Mark Pitt[SMTP:M.Pitt_at_xtra.co.nz]
> Sent: 10. September 1997 14:02
> To: crm-developers
> Subject: CRM Exercises
>
>
> I am assisting in the development of a CRM indoctrination course and
> annual refreshers within an airline. Sourcing good practical
> exercises
> for the classroom is proving difficult.
>
> Specifically, I am looking for some good exercises to reinforce
> concepts
> associated with communication, conflict resolution, distraction and
> workload, situational awareness, decision making and problem solving,
> and team building.
>
> Can anyone assist?
>
> Regards
>
> Mark Pitt
>
Mark, in April this year I had a similar question, and got some very
useful replies. I take this opportunity to put them all together and
share them with the group. Thanks to Dave Wilson, HTI, Harry Holding,
Ansett Australia, David L. Bair, Frontier Airlines and Greg Deen, HTI -
I hope you forgive me for sharing "your" exercises with everyone!
The first exercise is from Dawe Wilson, HTI:
Here is a role playing exercise we have used with some success.
Our basic crew has five people. We set five chairs in front of the group
arranged like the crew sits in the aircraft. The cabin crewmember's
(loadmaster)chair is faced in the opposite direction of the other
chairs. A
vounteer crew from the audience, one person from each crew discipline,
chooses a chair. They may not choose the seat they normally occupy. That
is,
the pilot's are not allowed to choose either pilot's seat, etc.
The crewmember who sits in the left pilot's seat is designated as
the
aircraft commander. He is given a box, about the size of a shoe or shirt
box.
There is a large "X" drawn in the center of the box. A marble is placed
in
the box and the "pilot's" job is to keep the marble in the center of the
box.
Any time the marble hits the side of the box, the noise will attract the
attention of the group to "aircraft control". The facilitator should
position
himself so that he can, unobtrusively, watch the pilot's contol. As the
problem solution heats up, the pilot may or may not hand-off control to
the
co-pilot, but should not be encouraged to do so, either in the setup or
cnduct of the exercise.
Each crew member is given a card describing a dilemma. One
paragraph
describes the general situation, then specific circumstances are
described on
the card for each crew member. The cards are constructed so that each
crew
member knows the general situation, but only he sees his own specific
instructions. Those instructions might be that he has a sick child at
home
and badly wants to get back to home station. Another is that the crew
member
has an old flame in a likely stopover base and wants to stop there.
There are
others. Each is designed to raise conflict between and among the crew
members
as they try to resolve the general dilemma. It may be something like an
engine shut down, deteriorating weather, and a choice to continue to
home
station or land at an intermediate base. The problem can be simple or
complicated requiring use of the flight manual (to compute performance
data),
etc.
Like any role playing exercise, the success is in the
believability,
reality and construction of the exercise. The facilitator's setup is
also
important. After the exercise is complete (they reach a decision). The
crew
and the audience discuss what they saw. The facilitator leads the group
through the presence or absence of the CRM behaviors.
The next exercise is from Captain Harry Holding, group leader, CRM
development, Ansett Australia:
The Blocks Exercise
Time: 30 minutes
Media: Slide and blocks
Relationship to Other Areas:
This exercise builds on the communication theory discussed in the
previous
module and highlights the importance of feedback. This can also be
linked
with the Support Process and crew situation awareness.
Overview:
The block exercise has been designed to demonstrate how a task involving
more than one person can be much better performed if there is good two
way
communication and feed back between the participants. Hearing is a
passive
process and occurs even when we are asleep. Listening, on the other
hand,
is not. It means not only hearing but paying attention, understanding
and
remembering.
Sequence:
The exercise is conducted in two parts:
Part A.
The instructor seats both participants at a table, separated by a
partition, and arranges the blocks in a haphazard sequence.
Person one should attempt to instruct person two how to arrange the
blocks,
so that the two sets look the same. Person two can not reply to person
one's instructions in any way or view the original set up of person
one's
blocks. Neither player can view the other's blocks during the game.
This
demonstrates the limitations of one way communication.
Allow a time limit of 5 minutes.
Part B.
With the same two participants, the instructor arranges the blocks again
in
a different way.
Person 1 now instructs person 2 how to arrange the blocks. Person 2 can
now ask questions and seek clarification which person 1 can answer.
this
demonstrates a two way communication process.
Allow a time limit of five minutes again.
The results should be better in part b, which should reinforce the value
of
feedback. If it hasn't use the exercise to analyse what went wrong in
the
communication process using the theory presented immediately before this
exercise.
The following communication skills are essential for this exercise to be
a
success:
The ability of person one to give clear concise and unambiguous
instructions.
Good listening skills by both participants.
When feedback is allowed person 2 must feel encouraged to ask and
question
- the link with the Skywest Support Process should the highlighted here.
Language used must be understood by all involved.
Keep it light hearted. this exercise is designed for people to enjoy.
Conduct the exercise more than once if time permits using different
participants. observe the process taking place and ask the class to
comment and offer constructive criticism.
Some of the class may question the validity of the exercise given the
effect of practice on the two participants. This question should be
countered by saying that given the broad range of skill participants
should
be kept the same for both parts of the exercise. Compliment them on
that
though and remark the practice and training are effects that will be
discussed during the review of situation awareness.
If time permits carry out the following exercise as a adjunct to the
Blocks
exercise.
Next exercise - Captain David L. Bair, Frontier Airlines:
One of the fun exercises I like to do during indoctrination comes from a
childhood game called "Brain Teasers". It shows how easily we as humans
make
assumptions about what we perceive. It comes in the form of a riddle
for them
to ask questions about. I can only answer " yes , no, or irrelevant"
to their
questions. This involves "Inquiry" on their part and "Incomplete
Communication"
on my part from the beginning. So here it goes.
"Tom and Mary" Tom is asleep on the couch and Mary is lying on the
floor, dead.
There is broken glass and water on the floor. What happened?
As the group asks their questions the "Mental Model" slowly changes in
everyone's mind from their original picture, as the process takes place.
Each
person has a unique view of the situation depending on my answer to each
question from the group. Every question and answer adds a different
"picture", (
perception vs reality ). There are as many perceptions of the
situation, as you
have people in the class. Eventually the class through "Teamwork" and
"Inquiry"
solves the mystery of the "Reality of the Situation". Tom is a cat and
Mary is
a fish. Tom accidently knocked the fish bowl onto the floor on his way
to his
nap on the couch. (Someone usually asks why Tom didn't eat the fish).
It is
amazing to watch the process take place and then to see the "lightbulb"
come on
when they figure out the "Reality of the Situation".
You have to tell them how naturally we assume certain things when the
"communication" or message is incomplete from the beginning and how long
it
takes to resolve the "Ambiguity". ( Precious time in an aircraft on
arrival ).
If I told them,"Tom is a cat asleep on the couch and Mary is a dead fish
on the
floor. There is broken glass and water on the floor. What happened"?,
they
would not have any trouble at all. But I purposely left out some
important
details. They can see what happens when we accidently leave out
important
details when communicating. I tell them that I knew the situation all
the time,
why didn't they? Then I say how easily I can assume that they got the
right
message the first time.
There are lots of "Brain Teasers" to choose from varying in difficulty
and
sometimes after class at the local watering hole is a better place, than
to take
up too much class time by doing more than one. It's also fun to have one
of the
students know the answer to the riddle and answer the questions form the
class
instead of me.
And finally, an exercise from Greeg Deen, HTI:
One of mine, which is used during my Facilitator Training course, is
what
seems to be a "trivia" test, on the CRM courseware. This comes on day
four
(of 5), when the students have been repeatedly exposed to the technical
aspects and vocabulary of our course. In one partiular session, a
certain
student taught the others something very important.
The exercise has two phases--an individual and a group. The
individuals take a test about the course. There are 15 questions that
ask for
terminology and numbers that have been discussed in class and are in the
book
(which they study at night of course). This is a closed-book test. The
individuals are given 5 minutes to complete the test, and the tests are
then
taken from them. They are then formed into small groups, 3-5 each
depending
on the size of the overall class, and asked to take the test again, as a
group.
During the group test, the facilitator scores the test and posts the
individual scores on the board. Only the test score is posted, not
"which"
ones were correct. After 15 minutes, the "group" answer sheet is
collected,
and scored. If the group is better than the strongest individual, we
call
that "synergy", and the team learns that they did better as a group.
On the session I mentioned before, one particular student, during the
"individual" part, scored higher than anyone else. In fact over the
next two
years, no one has scored as well as he. He answered 14 of 15 questions
correctly, when the average score is about 8. What was interesting in
the
"group" session, is that the group's score was lower than his; they did
NOT
achieve synergy.
Now you may be wondering what's so special about this? This
individual's aircraft job is a radio operator in the back of the
airplane--he
does NOT have "aviator" wings on his chest, and he was not of an officer
rank.
Think about that!
I hope these exercises are useful for you, Mark, and others
Best regards
Jens Rolfsen