It’s interesting to note that aviation safety regulators are legislating to require Safety Management Systems (SMS) for most air operators’, aerodromes, air traffic services and support services. Australia legislated for aerodromes in 2003 and followed with air traffic service providers and eventually air operators.
In this country the SMS concept is not new. The recommendation for passenger carrying AOC holders to implement a safety management system was published in a public report “Systems for Safety”. This report resulted from the “Safety Systems Assessment Project for Passenger Carrying Operators” (SSAPCO) which the then Director of Aviation Safety, Leroy Keith, established after the Seaview disaster.
The project was the first to include industry people as full members as well as some very capable Authority Managers, almost all of whom have since left the agency. I was the Project Manager. This was the first real attempt to fully include capable industry people, rather than just collaborate or consult with industry and it was very successful.
The SMS recommendation was implemented through another project and CASA then, over a number of years, encouraged and guided industry about safety management systems. At one time, CASA was a world leader in our promotion of SMS and willingly provided material and expertise to a number of other leading aviation countries. I note from a recent article in the CASA publication, Flight Safety Australia that our country is still influential and has a very capable representative on the ICAO SMS working group.
I was also pleased to note a more pragmatic approach to SMS in the article. I have been concerned over the last few years, and had seen some evidence to suggest that SMS was being hi-jacked by people who made it mysterious. I even wrote a book called; “Safety Management without the Mumbo Jumbo” to make it clear that safety management does not have to be a mystery. Rather than enhancing safety, any mystery may have a detrimental effect by diverting funds from key safety initiatives. See www.rdcollins.com.au to purchase the book.
Trackback Link
http://www.rdcollins.com.au/BlogRetrieve.aspx?BlogID=1307&PostID=81657&A=Trackback
Trackbacks
Post has no trackbacks.
Australia is moving to mandate Safety Management Systems (SMS) for air transport operations. The new Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 119 will mandate these systems for commercial passenger carrying operations, however it will not be implemented for some time yet. Amendments to the Civil Aviation Orders will also mandate SMS and provide an interim solution until Part 119 is made.
Proactive operators have already implemented a SMS. In my experience, the enthusiasm to obtain what they perceive as the best system does not always match the operator's capability to maintain and use the system thoughtfully.
A SMS must be entirely suitable to the 'personality' and capability of the business, complement other management systems and the nature of the operations. In other words, the SMS must be appropriate to the business and the operations conducted. For example, a large high capacity air carrier may have an elaborate suite of manuals, a dedicated Safety Manager and support team, a safety magazine, a large safety committee and a complex IT system, whereas, a small operator may have less documentation, a part time Safety Manager, regular safety meetings over an evening drink, a small committee, and a paper based reporting, recording and analysis process.
Almost without exception, if the SMS and the operator are mismatched or misaligned, it will produce a sub-optimal result. In my experience, elaborate systems, without suitable operator capability fall into disuse as soon as the hype dies! Conversely, an overly simplistic system for a large operator will be inefficient, costly and ineffectual. When this occurs, Management looses faith and interest.
Misalignment occurs when the SMS does not complement other management systems. This often occurs when systems evolve as separate projects rather than be fully intergrated into the business. This may lead to corporate confusion, frustration and inefficiency. To counter this, SMS are often intergrated with other management systems (such as Quality Managment Systems). Not surprisingly, Intergrated Safety Managment Systems is becoming more popular.
Safety Managment Systems are only there to enhance safety; not to simply comply with a rule; to keep the clients happy; or to satisfy an insurance requirement - its only about safety! The SMS must match and align with the capability and nature of the operation; otherwise the physical and emotional efforts to establish and maintain a system may result in (some) money wasted. Sometimes less is really more !
Trackback Link
http://www.rdcollins.com.au/BlogRetrieve.aspx?BlogID=1307&PostID=18645&A=Trackback
Trackbacks
Post has no trackbacks.
Comments
Post has no comments.