The aviation industry has seen many advances in safety, including the development and implementation of SMS worldwide. Within the aviation industry, while most organizations are larger, more established commercial companies; there also exist smaller organizations from informal flight clubs to government agencies tasked with enforcement of policy and law. Because it is prohibitively difficult to address a tailored concept of safety for each type of organization, a general concept that can be adapted to individual organizational needs is the approach discussed in this blog. This article presents a general concept of the development of safety culture that can be used by leaders within any aviation organization to allow that organization to further develop their safety culture.
Safety Culture
Safety Culture is the set of enduring values and attitudes regarding safety issues, shared by every member of every level of an organization. Safety Culture refers to the extent to which every individual and every group of the organization is aware of the risks and unknown hazards induced by its activities; is continuously behaving so as to preserve and enhance safety; is willing and able to adapt itself when facing safety issues; is willing to communicate safety issues; and consistently evaluates safety related behavior.
In recent years, the aviation industry has seen progress toward a safety-oriented approach to business. As SMS implementation has increased within the industry, greater awareness of safety concerns has become apparent within all levels of management. There was a five step progression in the evolution of aviation safety culture as shown in the below table. With the additional emphasis of the SMS programs, it is apparent the safety culture has evolved from stage two (reactive) to stage three (calculative). With the move to SMS based safety, established safety departments now exist within few airports in our country to address safety issues although these issues are not necessarily addressed in a proactive manner. However, there is a discernible progression in the evolution of safety culture and the industry is in the calculative stage of safety culture evolution. This represents a midway point within the overall progression as shown on the table. While this is a move in the right direction, further action is needed.
| GENERATIVE | Safety is how we do business |
| PROACTIVE | We take steps to deal with issues before incidents occur |
| CALCULATIVE | Our approach to safety is systematic, through an established bureaucracy |
| REACTIVE | We take action only in response to incidents |
| PATHOLOGICAL | We don’t care as long as we don’t get caught |
In order to present the argument for further evolution in safety culture, new terms must be introduced. First among these terms is ‘value’. In general, value is a well-understood term, but within safety culture, there are two aspects of the term ‘value’ that must be clearly stated and understood.
Monetary value
Monetary value is the valuation of safety in terms of money. This is expressed in terms of money saved through accidents avoided. The monetary valuation of safety reflects an understanding that accidents are costly. Property is damaged, judicial suits create financial strain on companies, insurance costs increase and regulatory oversight creates additional costs. The evolution of a safety culture to the third level reflects an increased understanding of the monetary value of safety, and is driven primarily by this valuation.
Human value
Human value is a higher understanding of safety than monetary valuation. Human valuation places value on human life and development. This understanding places a high value on human life, higher than the valuation of money. In a human valued safety culture, monetary valuation is present, but is secondary to the value of human life. Human life is understood to be the greatest value within the company, and its development on both the corporate and individual levels is given an equally high value. Therefore, safety is known as practices and policies that not only protect human life, but also protect human well-being so that development is not encumbered. In other terms, human valued safety is not satisfied with preservation of finance and property, nor is it satisfied with preservation of human life, but it is also concerned with the preservation of human health and well-being.
The Reactive stage represents a mindset that has a limited understanding of the monetary value of safety, and no understanding of the human value of safety. The Calculative stage has a very limited understanding of the human value of safety, with an advanced understanding of the monetary value of safety. It is this advanced understanding of the monetary value of safety that mandates a bureaucratic, systematic approach to safety culture. The calculative approach to safety has an engineering element to it; it is based on logic and consistency, but it is logic and consistency that places greater value on money and property than on humanity.
Again, the move to SMS within the aviation industry represents the move through the Calculative stage and into the Proactive. In order to make this leap from the calculative stage to the proactive stage, companies and agencies must realize the value of humanity within the organization. In placing a greater value on human life and development than on money and property, the aviation industry will fully realize this next phase in its safety evolution.
In addition to defining the specific terms provided here, it is equally important to define the scope of safety culture. SMS has been increasingly implemented in recent years to manage aviation safety.
Safety culture should encompass all aspects of an aviation industry. Regardless of the activity, a human-value centered safety culture will recognize the need to protect human life and well-being in any activity, not just the central activities that define an industry or organization. Organizational safety at the proactive stage will incorporate an organization-wide safety scope.
Evolving the Culture
The evolution of safety culture within an organization requires changes throughout the entire organization. Managers must be fully committed and demonstrate the beginning of the desired culture, encouraging growth of the culture within the body of the organization. Generally, a simple mentoring model will suffice for this process. The key element is not the transfer of attitude from Managers to members, but rather the alteration of attitude within the organizations leadership. Within an organization that possesses strong Management, the transfer of attitude should happen rapidly and easily.
| MAINTENANCE | The change has been effected, and is now becoming the norm |
| ACTION | Belief in change has been internalized, reflected in consistent action toward the new state |
| PREPARATION | The beginning steps of change have begun, but is still inconsistent |
| CONTEMPLATION | We have realized the need for change, but no change has started |
| PRECONTEMPLATION | We haven’t begun to think about change yet |
According to Hudson (2001), the evolution of safety culture requires a five part change process: Pre-contemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action and Maintenance. As shown previously, the aviation industry in general is currently at the Calculative/Proactive stage of safety culture evolution. When examined in the light of the five steps of change process described by Hudson and outlined above, it is clear that the industry is currently in the maintenance phase of the calculative evolutionary stage. Indications are also clear that the industry is in the pre-contemplative phase of the proactive evolutionary stage, since no public discussion has been found concerning the next stage of evolution. As industry leaders begin to understand and implement the requirements for a proactive safety environment with SMS, the industry will move to the Preparation process phase of this stage of safety evolution. It is hoped that this article will move industry leaders to begin contemplating a proactive safety attitude.
Finally, the organization will enter the maintenance phase of the evolution. This phase is characterized by solidification of new habits and attitudes. If management has been diligent in guiding the change, problems identified in the action phase will be diminished before the maintenance phase begins, and should not be a recurring focus of leadership in the maintenance phase. Rather, the focus should shift to a reviewing and evaluation. It is easy for the organization members to revert to old habits in the beginning of this phase, and so the critical issue facing leadership is to ward against reversions. Encouraging the organization as a whole to continue in their new cultural habits is vital, and will aid in prevention of reversions.
Bibliography
Hudson, P. (2001, January). Safety Culture - Theory and Practice. RTO MP, (032), 8-1 - 8-12. Retrieved from http://ftp.rta.nato.int//PubFulltext/RTO/MP/RTO-MP-032/MP-032-08.pdf
Lewis, C.L. (2008, January). A Brief Overview of Safety Management Systems (SMS). Flight Safety Information Journal, 2-12.
