Human Factor Analysis and Classification

Human Factor Analysis and Classification System

Human beings are basically wired in a way that they make mistakes by their very nature to an extent that human error has been considered as a major cause of various occupational accidents. In civil and military aviation, human error accounts for between 70 to 80% of aviation accidents. While mechanical failures, which traditionally contributed to most aviation accidents has decreased, human error has remained as a major contributing factor for accidents because of slow rate of decline. Consequently, human error is considered as the biggest obstacle to efforts of achieving 100% flight safety. In essence, human error can be described as human mistakes that contribute to aviation accidents such as mistakes by air traffic controller, fuel contamination, inappropriate aircraft loading, and poor maintenance procedures.

As a result of its contribution to aviation accidents, there has been numerous initiatives and interventions geared towards lessening human error. However, most of these interventions have been futile since they have not achieved similar results to those directed at mechanical failures. In the recent past, Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) has emerged as a major means of examining human error in aviation accidents. The system is a general human error mechanism that was initially developed and assessed with the American military as a technique for investigating and evaluating human factors that cause aviation accidents (Wiegmann & Shappell, 2001). While it was developed on the basis of 1990 Reason's framework of latent and active failures, the system deals with human mistakes at all levels such as organizational factors and condition of aircrew. Generally, this system is a hierarchical arrangement that explains the human factors and other reasons that lead to an aviation incident or accident. The basis of these explanations is the chain-of-events theory of the causes of aviation accidents or incidents. HFACS categorization framework has four level sie. unsafe acts, organizational factors, preconditions for unsafe acts, and unsafe supervision.

In attempts to deal with human error, Human Factor Analysis and Classification System can be both proactive and reactive. The system can be proactive when used as a framework for predicting unsafe acts that contribute to aviation incidents or accidents ("Evaluation of the Human Factor Analysis and Classification System," 2008). In this case, HFACS helps in understanding skill-based errors, decision errors, and perpetual errors. The findings are then used to develop effective interventions that lessen the frequency and impact of such errors in aviation. On the contrary, the system can be reactive when used to predict higher levels human error within the hierarchy. This does not necessarily lead to the development of effective interventions but approaches that focus on lessening higher-level factors. Actually, the prediction of higher-level human factors is usually carried out after the occurrence of an accident or incident.