Safety Management Toolbox Continued from page 83 perform a comprehensive risk profile, looking at past ac- cidents, incidents, injuries, and near misses, as well as current conditions that could impact the operator’s busi- ness. Once the data was collected and analyzed, it became apparent that the operator was missing a large number of contributing factors and latent conditions that could impact its overall performance, from inconsistent corporate guid- ance to incomplete SOPs, to an over-reliance on “This is the way we have done it for years.” The organization was provided the much-needed insight into why it performs the way it does, and a roadmap to change the way it com- municates, encourages feedback and insight, performs its oversight and demonstrates regulatory compliance. Routinely performing independent assessments, evalu- ations, diagnostics and even performance-based audits will help raise the level of organizational awareness and attention to the effectiveness of your programs. This rais- ing of awareness, if properly performed, will enable the organization to communicate what is important, beyond the regulations. In this way, every employee understands that shortcuts and not following SOPs are not welcomed; and, reporting of incidents and potential incidents or near misses is encouraged so we can learn and analyze what impact these conditions may have on our ability to perform safely and deliver a quality service—24/7. Communication is the essence of safety management and is something every operator should embrace as a fundamen- tal objective of a day-to-day operation. A universal char- acteristic of highly reliability organizations (HROs), where failure is not an option, is a reporting culture that extends to open discussion and dialogue across all levels of the enter- prise. Even these highly effective organizations can benefit by involving a third party who will often elicit some very candid opinions and observations from within the organi- zation that otherwise were unexpressed or not noticed. A compelling reason for engaging external help is about protecting your employees, customers, and brand. By its nature, aviation attracts people who are naturally risk-averse and in this context, change-averse. This is a good thing! We want pilots, mechanics, dispatchers and air traffic controllers who are risk-averse and who like to follow SOPs, use checklists and perform their duties in a predictably consistent fashion. These are the same people we draw into our management teams, our direc- tors of operations, directors of maintenance and our safety Aviation Business Journal | 3rd Quarter 2016 managers, all of whom have gained insight from experi- ence, and close association with the evolution of formalized proactive and predictive safety and quality programs. Understanding SA and MoC requires a unique set of acquired skills. Even in an organization with a mature SMS, it is probable that the development of a safety risk profile for any particular change will be biased by the paradigm of the organization’s culture. The concern here is that some risks are given an undeserved high score while others are all but ignored. This condition, if left unchecked, can lead to an inefficient and perhaps even an unsafe allocation of mitigation strategies and resources. From these observations, there arise two logi- cal points in the change management process that an external evaluation can provide added value. First, in developing the risk profile for a specific change, for example, a new aircraft type, new airport, new approach, new ground support equipment (GSE), or amended process for evaluating a new external ven- dor, a third party can provide a fresh perspective on that change and its attendant risks; and can validate the as- sumptions that drive the risk assessment process. Secondly, and equally important, when conducting a post-implementation review of the specific change or new process, an outside view of the change can help uncover any unintended consequences that might otherwise go unnoticed by those close to the implementation process. When deciding to engage a third party to perform an external evaluation of your SMS or change management plans, it’s important to consider the experience of that Continued on page 86 85
