Crew Resource Management CRM Is Research Paper
- Length: 10 pages
- Sources: 20
- Subject: Transportation
- Type: Research Paper
- Paper: #55133236
Excerpt from Research Paper :
The study made a comparison of the performance of the crew in two types of equipment.CRM failures were note to lead to a general increase in the number of mishaps (56% due to CRM failure).
The development of Crew Resource Management came as response to the new revelations on the causes of aircraft accidents that followed the introduction of flight and cockpit voice recorders into the modern aircraft jets. Information received from these devices suggests that most aircraft accidents are as a result of inability of crews to respond appropriately to the situations they find themselves in. this is contrary to general beliefs that these accidents are caused by technical malfunction of the aircraft systems, failure of aircraft handling skills or lack of technical knowhow by the crew. For instance, lack of good communications channels between the crew members and other parties. This can in turn lead to loss of situational awareness and breakdown in team work within the aircraft which can lead ultimately lead to a bad or series of bad decisions resulting to fatal accidents.
The hype that surrounded the introduction of dynamic flight simulators as training guide helped the emergences of various theories about the studying of causes of aircraft accidents under experimental conditions. Based on the resultant outcomes of these experiments coupled with attempts to find solution to the apparent lack of skills amongst crew members, some airlines introduced more training on flight deck management techniques which were all developed collectively into Crew Resource Management. Consequently, these Crew Management Resource techniques and utility have been recognized worldwide. However, its development has appeared to have waned over the years with the shift of flight safety from human factors to prevention and management of systematic errors. This therefore call for fresh impetus to be put into protecting the negation of gains brought about by the introduction of Crew Resource Management due to its significance in being highly effective as a tool for preventing and managing errors.
It is about twenty years since the introduction of Crew Resource Management buts still there exist a lot of confusion both within and without the aviation industry as to what the term precisely implies. Some feel it is a psychobabble that was invented by an ignorant and strange individual with the scheme of turning ordinary good people with a lot of airmanship leadership experience into uncertain and cloned personalities. On the other hand, there are those who believe that Crew Resource Management is a panacea that is meant for the all wrongs in the aviation industry as it will prevent flying accidents. In between these extreme views lies a wide range of views that embrace the human factor in the aviation industry spectrum in its entirety.
Despite the attention devoted to Crew Resource Management training, aircraft accidents associated worthy human factors still occur. This coupled with the lack of a Universal accepted view of the way forward, give indication that the Crew Resource Management Programme has lost direction n the recent years.
Crew Resource Management involves a wide range of knowledge, skills and attitudes that includes communication channels used, analysis and awareness of situations, solving of problems, making decisions, working as a team, together with the entire sub-disciplines attendant to this. All these elements are not new as they have been recognized in one form or another since the beginning of the aviation industry but under general terms like Airmanship, Captaincy and Crew Co-operation. However, all these terms have not been structurally defined or formally articulated hence Crew Resource Management is seen as an attempt to bridge this gap of definition. It can therefore be defined as system of management that makes maximum use of all available resources including equipment, procedures and human resource in order to promote safety and enhance the efficiency of flight operations.
Crew Resource Management is not concerned with technical knowhow and skills required to fly and operate and aircraft. It is mainly concerned with the cognitive and interpersonal skills required for the management of flight within an organized system of aviation. The cognitive skills here are defined as the mental process that one uses to acquire and maintain awareness of situations. These skills can also be used while solving problems and making decisions. Interpersonal skills on the other hand are the ranges and channels of communications together with behaviors that are associated with working together as a team. In the aviation industry as is in other walks of life, these skills often overlap with each other. In addition, these skills are not confined to multi-crew aircraft, but also apply to single pilot operations that cannot avoid interfacing with other aircrafts as well as other ground support agencies for their missions to be successful.
The credibility of the concept of Crew Resource Management (CRM) in the improvement of operational efficiency as well as the enhancement of flight safety in the aviation industry is therefore confirmed since failure to institute then leads to a general increase in aviation accidents while their application leads to a general reduction in aviation mishaps.
Organizations must therefore prepare to embrace the latest CRM strategies in order to ensure that they prepare their crew for the worst case scenarios. The need for constant education in the latest CRM initiatives cannot be overemphasized since CRM is a rapidly evolving discipline. All organization must therefore observe the latest Crew Resource Management (CRM) initiatives and implement them to the latter in all of their operations.
Barker JM, Clothier CC, Woody JR, McKinney EH, Jr., Brown JL (1996). Crew resource management: a simulator study comparing fixed vs. formed aircrews. Aviat Space Environ Med 1996;67:3-7
Billings CE, Reynard WD (1984).Human factors in aircraft incidents: results of a 7-year study. Aviat Space Environ Med;55:960-5.
Cooper GE, White MD, Lauber JK. Resource management on the flightdeck: proceedings of a NASA / Industry Workshop. Moffett Field, Calif: NASA - Ames Research Center; 1980. NASA Conference Publication No. CP-2120.
Helmreich, R.L., Merritt, a.C., & Wilhelm, J.A. (1999). The evolution of Crew Resource Management training in commercial aviation. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(1), 19-32.
Helmreich RL, Merritt AC. Cultural issues in crew resource management (1996).Conference presentation at the ICAO Global Human Factors Seminar; April, 1996; Auckland, New Zealand.
Helmreich RL, Foushee HC (1993) Why crew resource management? Empirical and theoretical bases of human factors in training and aviation. in: Wiener E, Kanki BG, Helmreich RL, eds. Cockpit resource management. San Diego, Calif: Academic Press;:3-45.
Helmreich RL, Wilhelm JA, Gregorich SE, Chidester TR (1990) Preliminary results from the evaluation of cockpit resource management training: performance ratings of flight crews. Aviat Space Environ Med 1990;61:576-9.
Helmreich RL, Foushee BR, Benson R, Russini W.(1986) Cockpit Resource Management: Exploring the attitude-performance linkage. Aviat Space Environ Med1986;57:1198-200.
Royal Aeronautical Society (1999).Crew Resource Management
Smith, DD (2002).An examination of the applicability of crew resource management training concepts to a combined air operations center team: an operational-level analysis of the USAF-15C fratricide of provide comfort. U.S. Army Command and General Staff College
Wiegmann DA, Shappell SA (1999) Human error and crew resource management failures in Naval aviation mishaps: a review of U.S. Naval Safety Center data, 1990-96.Aviat Space Environ Med; 70:1147-51.
Wiegmann DA, Shappell SA. (1996)Human error and crew resource management failures in Naval aviation mishaps: a review of U.S. Naval Safety Center data, 1990-96.Aviat Space Environ Med 1999;70:1147-51