The outline of the crew coordination concepts at Continental airlines is: (1) Present relevant theory: Contained in a pre-work package and in lecture/discussion form during the work course, (2) Discuss case examples: Contained in the pre-work for study and use during the course; and (3) Simulate practice problems: Introduced during the course as the beginning of an ongoing process. These concepts which are designed to address the problem pilots have in understanding the interaction between situations and their own theories of practice are briefly discussed

Christian, Darryl

Morgan, Alice

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N87-22642
CREW COORDINATION CONCEPTS:
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES CRM TRAINING
Capt. Darryl Christian
Assistant Chief Pilot
Alice Morgan
CCS Learning Systems
INTRODUCTION
This workshop emphasizes the importance of crew coordination as part of the
overall resource management function. The need for such training has received
increasing emphasis because of studies conducted by NASA that indicate a link between
resource management and safety. John Lauber summarizes the findings of those studies
in his paper presented at a NASA/Industry workshop in 1979 and states that: '_C)ne of
the principal causes of incidents and accidents in civil jet transport operations is the lack
of effective management of available resources by the flight-deck crew."
A pilot interview study by NASA indicated an expressed level of satisfaction with
technical training, but difficulties with issues such as leadership, crew coordination, and
communication within the cockpit.
The NASA studies also included research of the Aviation Safety Reporting System
(ASRS) that found problems in resource management in the following areas:
1) Social and communication skills
2) Leadership and management skills
3) Planning, problem solving, and decision-making
4) Role
5) Resources (human and material)
Another significant contribution to the research on human resource management on
the flight deck is from Robert L. Helmreich of the University of Texas. His comments
stem from many years of research dealing with situational and personality determinants
of crew performance. He indicates that "...perhaps our most serious failing in our
approach to complex problems of crew performance comes from ignoring the fact that
behavior is a function of the interaction of the personality and situational factors."
A third source of information comes from Lee Bolman of Harvard University in his
research on "Aviation Accidents and the Theory of the Situation." His research provides
the basis for the approach we are taking in presenting a model for examining
68
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19870013209 2020-03-20T10:35:35+00:00Z
interpersonal skills and human interaction as a vital element in overall safety and
effectiveness in the cockpit.
The Crew Coordination Concepts Workshop is designed to address his
recommendations that: '_)ilots need to understand the interaction between situations
and their own theories of practice. They need to appreciate the distinction between
espoused theory and theory-in-use and be able to explore the possibilities of discrepancies
in their own theories. They need to understand the importance of skill in inquiry and
on-line learning, and they need to learn theories of piloting that emphasize those skills.
They need a conceptual understanding of the interpersonal processes and role issues that
are critical to the flight deck situation and they need practice and skill in implementing
those concepts." As Bolman suggests, we:
1) Present relevant theory: Contained in a pre-work package and in
lecture/discussion form during the work course.
2) Discuss case examples: Contained in the pre-work for study and use during
the course.
3) Simulate practice problems: Introduced during the course as the beginning
of an ongoing process.
OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT MANAGEMENT THEORY
There are many theories about leadership style that have served as points of
reference in developing the model that is presented here and discussed in detail in the
two-day course. Among the most prominent theories is Douglas McGregor's model of
leadership developed in 1960 that has resulted in a standard reference to 'rrheory X" and
Wq'heory Y" management. According to McGregor, management styles range from
Autocratic (Theory X) to Democratic (Theory Y). A Theory X leader would be
directive, structuring, critical, and autocratic, while a Theory Y leader would stress
democratic procedures, participative decision-making and self-control.
In 1983 Bill Ouchi introduced his Theory Z, which indicates that managers need to
combine characteristics of both styles if they are to be successful in current times. In
1964 Robert Blake and Jane Mouton introduced The Managerial Grid, describing five
basic styles, as a way of understanding differences in leadership behavior. In 1969 Paul
Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard developed the Situational Leadership model that
suggests leaders adopt a style that matches the maturity level of the follower. Works by
Peter Drucker and Daniel Yankelovich indicate work-place trends that emphasize the
need to be concerned with a better educated and more diverse workforce.
Most of these theories place emphasis and responsibility for success on the manager
or leader. Although many different labels are used, all of these theories have one thing
in common, i.e., they all present behavioral options on the two basic dimensions of task
and relationship, depicted in the following illustration.
69
Crew Coordination Concepts
BEHAVICRAL DI._E_NS IONK
(HI)
W HIGH REL
(LOW TASK)
(LO) T A S
HIGH TASK
HIGH REL
HIGH TASK
{LOW REL)_
(HI)
TASK AND RELATIONSHIP MODEL FOR THE FLIGHT DECK
All airlines regularly conduct recurrent technical training which is designed to
develop and enhance piloting skills and systems knowledge. Most airlines set very high
standards in the area of the technical aspects of being a pilot. The pilots hired must
already be skilled before they are even considered. Once hired, a new pilot is provided
technical training which focuses on raising both piloting skills and systems knowledge to
the maximum. That skill and knowledge must then be demonstrated before the pilot
goes out on the line.
As noted in the NASA research, and supported by more recent studies, most flight
crew members are competent in the technical dimension, but need a better
understanding of their interpersonal relationships.
Because optimum performance on the flight deck depends on cooperation among
crew members, we need to pay equal attention to developing interpersonal
communication skills to match the technical skill level required. This area becomes more
complex because human factors, such as differences in personal style, are harder to define
than a concrete set of technical skills.
However, if we look once again at the basic task and relationship model, we can
7O
appreciatethe desirabilityof functioning at the peak of both high relationship-behavior
and high task-behavior.
BEHAVIORAL DIMENS_0NST ,
',HI,
HIGH RE;.
k_ TASK
/
LOW R_
LOw TASK
__ HIGH TASk
HIGH REL
dk
HIGH TASK
tOw REL
(tO) T A S
In order to be an effective crew member, each person needs to understand his/her
own basic behavioral style and the behaviors that are required to perform effectively.
While no one behavior is inherently better than another, there is definitely desired
behavior in the cockpit.
We can begin the process of identifying four basic behaviors by looking again at the
task and relationship model and applying labels to the four quadrants:
Hi)
R
£
L
h
T
!
0
N
s
M
P
(LO)
_MAYI {)RAt DINENSIONS
1
NURTuR! PIG
Z
AUTONOMOUS
4
ASSERTIVE
3
AGGRESSIVE
D-
T A S _ (HI}
o Quadrant 1 indicates a high level of relationship-behavior and a low level of
71
task-behavior,labeledNurturing.
o Quadrant 2 indicates a low level of both relationship- and task-behavior,
labeled Autonomous.
o Quadrant 3 indicates a high level of task-behavior and low level of
relationship-behavior, labeled Aggressive.
o Quadrant 4 indicates a high level of both relationship- and task-behavior,
labeled Assertive.
Our contention is that assertive behavior is always the desirable behavior in the
cockpit. Assertive behavior indicates highly-developed skills in both task and
relationship and is most likely to produce an assertive response from other crew members
and ensure the open exchange of information.
As noted above, the review of ASRS reports indicated a need for pilot development
in five key areas:
o Communication
o Leadership
o Role
o Decision-Making
o Resources
Communication
We use Bolman's terminology to present and develop communication skills.
Advocacy and inquiry are ways to bring information to the surface when it is needed and
are essential to effective flight deck management. All crew members have an obligation
to raise issues that affect the safe operations of the aircraft and an equal obligation to be
open to the input of other crew members. Developing these skills typically requires
changes in one's theory of practice. The ability to confront and manage any conflict that
might arise from that confrontation develops skill in advocacy. The skill of inquiry is
developed by seeking information from other crew members that would test the
assumptions made by self and others. The ideal situation in the cockpit would be where
each crew member volunteers information and advocates a course of action, and where
each remains open to further inquiry.
Each person's individual style and theory of practice need to be consciously
understood so that conscious choices can be made to effect the desired change in
behavior or theory in use. The desired behavior on the flight deck would be to have
available the skills to operate at a high level of both advocacy and inquiry, as required by
the situation.
72
In the workshop, we use a personal styles instrument, the Strength Deployment
Inventory (SDI), to help each person understand how they relate to and communicate
with others. This instrument explores how relations with self and others can be made
more productive and satisfying.
Leadership and Roles
These two topics are combined because of the need to establish role clarity and role
flexibility to ensure that each member of the crew is performing effectively.
In an emergency, captains sometimes try to do too much by themselves and to
overcontrol crew members. Leadership on the flight deck requires well-developed skills
in both task and relationship. As Bolman suggests: Iqh/hat is needed is a system that
preserves the captain's authority to make binding decisions, but places a positive
responsibility on other crew members to raise questions or suggest alternatives when
they perceive that the captain's strategy might lead to significant error? t
Thus leadership behavior is best determined by the situation. In times of
emergency, this calls for the ability to surface information quickly and consistently in
order to make effective decisions.
Decision- Making
Traditionally, the responsibility for making decisions rests almost entirely on the
shoulders of the captain. That responsibility consists of not only making the proper
decision, but also of possessing all of the knowledge necessary to make the proper
decision. The captain on today's flight deck still has that ultimate decision-making
responsibility. That has not changed. What has changed is that the other crew members
on the flight deck are being asked to accept more responsibility in helping and assisting
that decision-making process by communicating the knowledge they possess regarding a
particular situation. Obviously, the more knowledgeable input there is into making a
decision, the better the odds are that the right decision will be made.
Resource8
The importance of using all resources has been repeatedly stressed in reviewing
aviation accidents that could have been prevented if the crew had made optimal use of
available resources. An example is the worst accident in history, the collision of two B-
747s at Tenerife. In that accident, the KLM captain began his take-off roll despite his
copilot's suggestion that the runway might not be clear. This course examines the
elements of desired cockpit behavior that could prevent this kind of example.
Summary
Improvement of resource management is the purpose of this workshop. Review of
accidents and NASA studies indicate the following common factors as the most
frequently observed problems:
o Preoccupation with minor mechanical problems
73
o Inadequateleadership
o Failureto delegatetasksand assignresponsibilities
o Failureto set priorities
o Inadequate monitoring
o Failure to utilize available data
o Failure to communicate intent and plans
These findings support the need to emphasize the human resource management
aspect of flight deck management. A commitment to safety includes a system that
ensures the technical capacity to respond to all situations in the cockpit. In this course
we emphasize the equal importance of understanding human resource management by
presenting the concepts of Assertiveness, Theory of the Situation, Testing Assumptions,
Active Listening, Norms, and Critique that will help aviators build these relationship
skills.
74


Crew coordination concepts: Continental Airlines CRM training

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server