The Concept Of SMS
Post by CatalinaNJB
The first thing when giving Safety
Management System (SMS) taring to personnel, is to provide training in the
concept of SMS. It is crucial to success of a newly implemented SMS that the concept
of SMS is introduced at all levels in the organization prior to any other SMS
training takes place. This includes management and the CEO in addition to all
other personnel. The CEO, President or Accountable Executives are just as new
to SMS as the airport manager, pilots, mechanics and other personnel in the
organization. That a person ranks higher in an organizational hierarchy does
not imply that there is a greater knowledge of SMS, or that this person has a comprehension
of the SMS. It could be an intimidating task
for a brand-new SMS Manager approach the CEO and suggest SMS training. It could
also be an assumption that since the AE has final authority over SMS financial
and human resources they are already SMS experts. However, when the AE accepted
the AE position and appointed an SMS Manager, the SMS Manager became the only
SMS expert within that organization with accountability to the SMS program
itself to train the AE from the ground up.
 |
| Compliance with regulations, standards and policies is not a safety guarantee |
There are two primary concepts to
the SMS. The first concept of an SMS is for an abstract idea to produce an
abstract result. This is applied when developing SMS manuals and processes for
regulatory compliance. Regulatory compliance is a static-state of the
operations and therefore abstract in nature.
The second concept of SMS is for an
abstract idea to produce a tangible result. This combination in itself is a direct
conflict with normal operations, where an abstract input, or existing in
thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence, is
expected to only produce an abstract output. [E.g. Brainstorming sessions are
not expected to produce real results but are expected to produce safety plans
for implementation.] An Enterprise could easily fall into a trap where the only
purpose of their SMS becomes to produce a paper-trail, or the collection of
data, as evidence of safe operations. It becomes evident in the Regulator’s validation
of an SMS that there are distinct differences between abstract compliance and
tangible compliance, by their design and demonstration validation.
Since hazards are opinion based, hazards
become the abstract concept of SMS, while the task of initiating hazard
reporting becomes the tangible output. Incidents and accidents cannot be
reported until after the fact and are not staged for the purpose of reporting.
On the other hand, real hazards may be staged for the purpose of reporting
within a supervised environment. During a training session multiple hazards
could be introduced to the group for hazard reporting. Each person may place
different weight on the same hazard based on learning, expectation, experience
and opinions and therefore abstract conditions. One person may report all
conditions as hazards, while others may report none or just a few. Within an
effective SMS, opinions of hazards are transformed into an output of hazard
reports. Continuous safety improvements and proactive safety measures are
dependant on data received by hazard reporting. When the concept of SMS is
defined beyond the hazard reporting, SMS becomes reactive in concept.
 |
|
In the eye of the
beholder a sunset is a hazard.
|
Incidents and accidents cannot be
predicted, but the intent of hazard reporting is to prevent accidents. Some
years ago, the root cause of a 747-airliner accident was an event that had
occurred twenty-two years earlier. During these years the airplane had been in
and out of the shop many times, but nobody reported what they had observed. Hazard
reporting was not an acceptable approach and by reporting a hazard caused by a
faulty repair and questioning workmanship could be disrespectful to the mechanics.
Over several years a discoloring on the airframe was observed, but there was no
toolbox for personnel available to report this concern. A hazard report of
these observations would have required at least one person to review the hazard
and sign off on a safety risk analysis. Investigation of a hazard report may
have guided personnel to inspect a damaged bulkhead.
The old saying is that “selling is
not telling” also goes for the concept of SMS that “teaching is not telling”.
Training in the concept is to introduce SMS as a toolbox full of tools to use
for continuous safety improvements. Tools available to all personnel are sorted
by their roles, responsibilities and accountability. The role, responsibility
and accountability of the AE is to ensure that each person feels included in
the SMS processes, that they take ownership of their hazard report and that
they are following their own report from beginning to end. The end result of a
hazard report may discover options that could never be imagined.
CatalinaNJB
