Safety and Commercial Aviation
The relative nature of the phrase ‘safe’ in aviation involves the theory, study and classification of flight breakdowns, and the avoidance of such malfunctions through directives, teaching, and training. Besides, the term could also be applied in regards to operations that are used in informing the public about the safety in aviation. Commercial aviation has been able to get much safer since the formation of the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST). Coupled with others rules, this has contributed to the reduction of possible dangers. Commercial Aviation Safety Team has undergone several developments and moving well past the remarkable advance of assessments of pervious accident statistics to a high level practical advance that is centered on the detection of dangers and execution of mitigation policies before the occurrence of accidents or severe incidents. The future goal is to change to forecasting safety examination (Stolzer, Halford & Giglia, 2010). For example, the CAST seeks to decrease the risk in the United States by about 51% by 2016. The increasing number of flights requires a lot of concentration on the achievement, sharing, and examination of aviation safety statistics.
Through the application of incident statistics, CAST is undertaking the assessment of the rising and varying dangers in order to come up with policies for prevention. The Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) agenda bring together a variety of safety statistics and information basis across businesses and is jointly operated with CAST for checking known dangers, assessing the efficiency of organized alleviations, and detecting looming dangers. CAST has to formulate an incorporated, statistics-driven policy to help in decreasing the threats of accidents in commercial aviation. The long-term goal of CAST is to ensure an international reduction in accident risk (Liou, Yen & Tzeng, 2008). The body recognizes forerunners and causes in order to ensure that resources are able to satisfy a critical situation of dangers that pose the greatest death threat. Some of the factors that are looked into when it comes to ensuring safety in commercial aviation include weather, landing risks, and uncontained engine malfunctions among others.
A safety management system (SMS) is a methodical advance for enhancing safety, encompassing the essential structures, responsibilities, practices and strategies (HSU, Li & Chen, 2010). It is critical that the top management should support SMS programs since they endeavor in offering a structured administration method for the management of safety threats in processes. Efficient safety management has to be focused on the particular structures and practices of the organization that are associated with safety of operations. The safety of functions in aviation has critical significance both with regards to the prevention of accidents, as well as monetary activities of the sector. The advancement of SMS by the top management and their approval by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) creates a strongly structured progress of the various factors aimed at generating a safe process. The use of SMS could be considered by many as the application of an excellent administration advance in the management of safety threats. Like other administration objectives, safety management requires planning, structuring, communication and provision of direction.
The supporting of SMS programs by the top management start with the structuring of the safety strategy of the organization (Mahajan, 2010). It identifies the common standards whereby the Safety Management System is driven (O’Connor, O’Dea, Kennedy & Buttrey, 2011). This first development defines the policy for the accomplishment of satisfactory ranks of safety in an organization. The preparation of safety and the execution of operations for safety management entail the other developments in the practice that are aimed at alleviating and holding threat in processes. When these controls are set, better management systems can be applied in making sure that they achieve the required goals and correct mistakes. This is accomplished through the use of a safety assurance and assessment practice that provides constant scrutiny of the functions and identification of parts that need safety advancement. It can also be said that the top management uses threat and excellence administration techniques in efficient SMS to achieve their safety objectives. Besides, Safety Management Systems also provide the institutional structure for ascertaining and promoting the advancement of a constructive commercial safety civilization. The top management’s role of executing Safety Management System offers a planned set of tools used in the gratification of their accountabilities for safety as observed by the supervisor.
Safety in an Organization
Safety responsibility involves the commitment towards advancing an allocated safety associated task to its victorious end. The authority of guiding and acquiring the essential achievement of guaranteeing success comes together with responsibility. Accountability in safety shows the commitment to revealing the task accomplishment and taking answerability in the safety performance in consistence with the approved anticipations. Therefore, accountability is the duty of response to performance (Lee, MA, Thimm & Verstraeten, 2008). Safety accountabilities and responsibilities that are comprehensive and set out excellently are crucial for the achievement of the safety plan of the organization. Besides, it is also important for the execution of an efficient safety administration and safety advancement practice. The management and staff that are involved in the activities linked to safety are responsible and accountable for safety (Remawi, Bates & Dix, 2011). This does not only involve the distribution of accountabilities and accountabilities for the safety of activities, but also help in executing and functioning of the SMS of the worker with regards to the safety management operations. In many companies, the top management of an organization is outlined in a devoted annex to the required work while those who undertake duties associated with safety are normally illustrated in the manual for Safety Management Manual.
The responsibility of safety could be entrusted to other workers within range of the description of work responsibilities (Reason, 2008). It is important that such allocation is recorded where possible. Safety accountability is not accorded to other employees apart from the designated ones. It provides the description of the commitment of the answerable individual in showing the suitable discharge of safety requirements. Responsibilities and accountabilities for safety in an organization are well outlined according to the administration and structure of Safety Management System in an organization. The SMS cannot usually provide responsibilities and accountabilities for safety beyond the range that it is designed to achieve. Thus, it does not give an outline of the whole allocation of responsibilities in the operational and technological departments and their internal safety management. In various organizations, the responsibilities and accountabilities for enhancing safety as pertains to SMS are entirely given to the top managers and personnel conducting Safety management operations.
Safety Management System Program is ‘’Scalable’’
Safety Management System processes can be scaled according to the magnitude and intricacy of the employee (Reason, 2008). This is important since if provides the main directors with the right information that is needed to give an assurance that the conducted risk management operations were effective and are successful. With regards to this, an organization can choose the audit devices that are required for obtaining important information that is critical in sustaining conformity with the strategies and operations of the organization. Examples of such can include, airplane assessment intermissions, training of pilots, and scrutiny intervals among others. When the Safety Management System is scalable, internal assessment and management review practices are applied in assessing the operations of key activities like flight operations, teaching, preparation, sustenance, assessment, and engineering (Stolzer et al, 2010). Besides, if the SMS programs are not scalable, companies could be duped into initiating projects that are above their abilities, thereby end up failing to carry them on to completion, assess them, or even manage those projects in a way that is beneficial.
Hsu, Y. L., Li, W. C., & Chen, K. W. (2010). Structuring critical success factors of airline safety management system using a hybrid model. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 46(2), 222-235.
Lee, S. G., Ma, Y. S., Thimm, G. L., & Verstraeten, J. (2008). Product lifecycle management in aviation maintenance, repair and overhaul. Computers in Industry, 59(2), 296-303.
Liou, J. J., Yen, L., & Tzeng, G. H. (2008). Building an effective safety management system for airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management, 14(1), 20-26.
Mahajan, R. P. (2010). Critical incident reporting and learning. British journal of anaesthesia, 105(1), 69-75.
O’Connor, P., O’Dea, A., Kennedy, Q., & Buttrey, S. E. (2011). Measuring safety climate in aviation: A review and recommendations for the future. Safety Science, 49(2), 128-138.
Reason, J. T. (2008). The human contribution: Unsafe acts, accidents and heroic recoveries. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Remawi, H., Bates, P., & Dix, I. (2011). The relationship between the implementation of a Safety Management System and the attitudes of employees towards unsafe acts in aviation. Safety Science, 49(5), 625-632.
Stölzer, A. J., Halford, C. D., & Goglia, J. J. (2010). Safety management systems in aviation. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.