Re: Culture

george sweeney (george.sweeney_at_nwa.com)
Tue, 08 Sep 1998 15:51:07 -0700

Lt Col Tony T. Kern, X-3230 wrote:
>
> Vince and group
> I would like to echo--and caveat-- Vince's observations about
> differences in cultures and the pursuit of perfection. In the past 2 1/2
> years I have addressed and consulted with 12 large organizations on
> aircrew performance. Six military, five civilian/commercial and one
> "other" (US Forest Service). The distinctions Vince makes are clear and
> obvious to me, but I would like to add one more distinction. In every
> organization where clear and unambiguous definitions of excellence
> have been spelled out, the brutal process of self-improvment through
> honest and thorough debriefing is present. I have seen this in action
> outside of the military, and I have seen military organizations without it.
> Perhaps the effort it takes to codify excellence is indicative of the level
> of support that is required to enforce and motivate the practice of
> self-improvement. Perhaps not, but I thought it worth mentioning.
> On a similar note, I have been asked (by private e-mail) by
> several in the group for permission to copy and use the "Airmanship
> Model" (from my book Redefining Airmanship) for training. Please be
> advised that the model also exists in several public domain documents
> and I feel it is far too important not to share. Please feel free to use it for
> training however you would like. For permission to use the textual
> information in the book, please contact the permissions editor at
> McGraw-Hill.
>
> Warm Regards
>
> Tony Kern
>
> ----------------------[Reply - Original Message]----------------------
>
> Sent by:"V. Mancuso" <vince_mancuso_at_CompuServe.COM>
>
> Hello Folks,
>
> I fly for an airline that has traditionally hired around 95%
> military-trained pilots. I also fly in the Air Force Reserve as a T-38
> Instructor Pilot. One would think that the pilot culture and the manner
> in which pilots conduct themselves in these two flying organizations
> would
> be very similar. My experience, however, is that the manner in which
> pilots conduct themselves is vastly different in the two organizations. I
> believe I have identified two fundamental differences (and will likely
> identify more as the months roll on):
>
> 1. The reverence the organization has for perfection
> 2. The acceptable methods for dealing with deference to experience and
> position
>
> In military flying, perfection is a religion. Consequently individual and
> small group accountability is very high. Formal debriefs are an
> expected
> part of every mission. Within the context of these debriefs, all
> crew/flight members have the formal sanction to debrief anything or
> anyone.
> In commercial flying, the reverence for perfection and the acceptable
> methods for deference are largely determined by the individual captain.
> Individual and small group accountability varies significantly between
> crew
> pairings. The result is a wide variability in both items listed above.
>
> I would like to share with you an excerpt that my commander has
> prominently
> displayed under the glass on his desk:
>
> ********
> "There is a subtle tendency to protect your ego in the debrief instead of
> focusing on lessons learned. If you're giving alibis during the debrief
> explaining why you didn't do things perfectly, chances are you're not
> getting everything out of the debrief that you could. It's human nature to
> rationalize substandard performance as the result of outside factors.
> Good
> fighter pilots have the discipline to honestly admit their mistakes to
> themselves (and others) whether or not a gradesheet comment is written.
> It
> pi**** them off when they get gunned on a mission. They spend time
> even
> after the debrief reviewing how they screwed up and how they're going to
> make certain that it never happens again. The ones who excel drain
> every
> bit of learning from every debrief. If you haven't got the determination
> to analyze your performance in precise detail, or the humility to admit
> errors at your present skill level, your progression to higher levels will
> be slower than it should be.
>
> There is also a tendency to focus on others mistakes during the debrief.
> Typical examples are blaming GCI, RAPCON, the rejoin platform's
> airspeed,
> or 2's wide base position. Even if your individual performance was only
> a
> small part of a debrief ask yourself: How could I have improved our
> execution."
>
> *******
>
> The fact that my commander has this prominently displayed and lives by
> it
> says more about the culture than any verbal picture I could paint.
>
> I would be interested in the perspective of others who have flown both
> military and civilian. I would also be interested in learning form our
> resident scholars on culture whether my experience matches existing
> theories on cultural influence on performance.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Vince Mancuso
>
>
>
> ===========================================================
> ==========
Vince, Tony, et. al.:
Thanks for the stimulating discussions. Could not agree more with
comments on pusuit of perfection institutionalized by mutually held core
values and "rituals." While often more identifiable in the
military,(and, perhaps, more easily mandated) I don't believe that the
military is the sole environment in which such behaviors may thrive.

As Marine Lieutenants on our way to Southeast Asia in F-4s, one of our
veteran pilots (Korea and SEA) told us that "Professionals OFTEN make
mistakes! They then immediatetly debrief the event (assuming they have
survived the event!), read the book (Again!), and take steps so as not
to repeat the event."

Some other "Grey Eagle" wrote or said something to the effect that a
"Profession" was characterized by members possesssing specialized
abilities gained by (and maintained by) arduous study and practice, with
well-defined standards, rigorously (perhaps "brutally") enforced by the
members themselves.

Through these ideas, and in the searching apparent in the discussions
in this forum, seems to run the notion of, and the desire for,
consistent accountability. This concept, may always be at variance with
the desire for comfort, security and absolute guarantees-whether in
military, private and commercial aviation or any business.

We don't call them "Performance Experiences."

Thanks for continuing this outstanding dialogue on "Culture."

Semper Fi',
George Sweeney
Manager- Human Factors Development
Northwest Airlines Flight Operations

-----------------------------------------------------------