Crew Resource Management

CRM Crew resource management Evolving Concepts of CRM CRM is a process, which aims at preventing aviation accidents and incidents by progressing crew performance through an advanced understanding of human factor concepts. It involves the understanding of how crewmembers attitudes and behaviors influence safety, using the crew as an asset of training, and creating opportunities for them to evaluate their behavior and make decisions on various ways to improve controller teamwork. Notably, crews operate efficiently as teams and cope effectively with unexpected situations than crews lacking CRM training (OAC, 2007).

There has been substantial evidence over the last decade supporting that CRM training has the capacity and does change attitudes and behavior among flight crews, and the changes increase the level of safety in their air operations. The growing number of accidents owing to human failures and pilot errors in 1979, led to the introduction of the concept of Crew Resource Management, through a workshop called by NASA entitled Resource Management on the Flight deck.

Numerous studies conducted to decide the carrier mishaps since 1970 have provided substantial evidence that human error is the main factor contributing to 60-80% of all accidents. This is due to the reactions, actions, decisions of the crew that lead to major accidents, not mechanical failures. In addition, most of the problems were associated with poor tem decision-making, failed communication, incapable leadership, and inadequate resource management. The past two decades of research and development on CRA has assisted in identifying core concepts, which would help in handling the "human factor" issue.

The CRM concepts have evolved through numerous phase of application. The first evolution emerged owing to the NASA workshop, whereby the first concepts of CRM focused on interpersonal skills. Many approaches employed management-training techniques, using managerial style evaluations, and psychological testing. The approaches advocated effective interpersonal behavior strategies, but forgot to provide clear definitions of proper behavior in the cockpit.

Later on in the mid-to-late 1980's, the earlier concepts changed when NASA called for a second CRM workshop and various aviation organizations attended to report their advancement, and perceptions into the workability of the proposed CRM concepts (McKeel, 2012). In this second workshop, the emphasis shifted from focusing on interpersonal proficiencies in the first generation, to highlight group dynamics and teamwork in the cockpit, in this second generation.

Some of the issues and concepts discussed in this generation included teambuilding, briefing strategies, situational awareness, stress management, decision making and eliminating the chains of human error. In addition, the stakeholders also suggested that CRM would not be a separate training module and called for integration with all other elements of flight training (Helmreich, Kanki and Anca, 2010). Notably, in this concept evolution, there was a name change from Crew to Cockpit Resource Management. However, achieving the intended objectives was still a critical matter.

Many of the training offered continued to lack adequate links to aviation, and many pilots criticized CRM. There was the emergence of a broadened scope of CRM. This is because the CRM's definition included flight attendants, dispatchers and the maintenance workforce in a bid to offer extensive training. Nevertheless, specific training modules for the trainers who taught and assessed CRM proficiency emerged in this phase (Helmreich, Kanki, and Anca, 2010).

The training approaches began to incorporate the ideas in aviation fields, and topics for training involved organizational culture and its effects, recognition and evaluation o human factor challenges, issues and effects of flight deck automation, and the leadership, specifically for the newly hired captains. The efforts began to incorporate CRM with technical training and focus on particular skills and behaviors that pilots could utilize to operate effectively.

However, critiques suggested that owing to the evolution of concepts, some of them diluted the intended purpose of CRM concepts, which was to eliminate human error. However, this did not stop the adoption of other concepts. Therefore, every organization came up with means to create adaptability and allow individual organizations to conduct their own training programs, to suit their organizational cultures and needs.

The tailored CRM training concepts were in line with the introduction of the Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) introduced by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), whose primary purpose was to allow individual carriers to create modified training programs to tackle all training areas in an organization (OAC, 2007).

CRM behaviors were incorporated to checklists in an attempt to ensure that the basic concepts are practiced, especially in "non-standard cases." In order for some concepts to work, some organizations assumed that CRM had ceased being a separate training module and that the sector had achieved its integration of CRM into all elements of flight training as was the objective in prior evaluation. Currently, CRM is still in evolution, whereby concepts apply in the general practice of aviation.

In addition, currently, there is a combined manner, which makes the current unique in a way, but does not limit the chance of evolution. Currently, the concepts used aim at reinstating the prior objective of the CRM, which was to eliminate the human error, or the "human factor." It does with an exceptional variation because it has introduced a way of managing the human error.

In support of this, there have been numerous studies, which suggest that a variety of initiatives to improve the aviation practice, using the concepts of CRM, will require a pro-active approach to manage the human errors, which are the main cause of air or aviation accidents (Helmreich, Kanki and Anca, 2010). The emerging theme in CRM research is the need for assessment of the effectiveness of CRM concepts, utilized in the training programs.

Although conducting a systematic training assessment is a complicated assignment, it is the only way to make sure that the concepts utilized in the.