Not-so-clever F/O asked one of my colleagues - his Captain for the day - which sectors he would like to fly.
Captains response - " Well thank you, I'll fly them all"
Made my day, that did...
In forty years of professional flying, only once did I have a First Officer that was 'not especially nice' and argumentative. He was referred to the Fleet Manager...who promptly sent him home for three months, with no pay. Many complants from other Captains, apparently.
Just finished my annual CRM refresher and one of the excercises simulated being on a boat which was about to sink in the middle of an ocean. Our group of 4 had to decide which items to take with and put in order which items were the most important.
To cut a long story short, 2 of the guys were in agreement that a certain item should be put on top of the list as the most important. I was after another item. The other guy did not offer an opinion. I placed my argument for some time. The other guys placed their item first after I 'gave in' with reservations.
At the end we discussed the excercise and it happened that the item I was after was indeed number 1 on the priority list (according to a survival expert).
My question is this: was I assertive enough? In my opinion I was not, even though the other 2 guys 'hijacked' the discussion (they are best friends and me and the other guy were left out a little).
On the other should I have kept pressing on with my argument without portraying an image of being arrogant or rude?
The problem is that with such group excercises there are not any right or wrong answers.
Any help on the matter would be greatly appreciated as I have being pondering on this question for 2 days
First of all I don't believe it matters if item A or B was #1 on the list. However if the other two chaps would have turned-out to be correcr then, our of interest, would you have bothered with this thread?
However if the other two chaps would have turned-out to be correcr then, our of interest, would you have bothered with this thread?
I think you missed the whole point. The question was never whether I was right or wrong. My question is how much should one press on with his argument? One could be right or wrong and, as you rightly said, it doesn't matter which item should be top of the list.
It was a CRM excercise and each presented his case and arguments in favour of the particular item. It's a matter of how much one can be assertive without giving the impression of being 'aggressive' or too cocky.
Thanks to all for your thoughts. Any more imput would be greatly appreciated. We can all learn from our own experiences I guess
What was the point of the exercise in the first place?
I'm wondering why you were doing this particular activity. You sometimes see this sort of exercise as part of an attempt to demonstrate that collective decision-making is often better than individual D-M (synergy). Was it to illustrate conflict resolution? Was it to show assertion v aggression?
What was the objective of the session? What was the facilitator doing? How was it all debriefed?
Some these CRM scenarios seem like they were concocted by Misses Tooey, because they all seem like a bunch of Hooey
seriously how do these 'ground think 'tanks' help pilots' ?
Only aeronautical knowledge--airplanes aren't run by committees and think tanks but by procedures and practice--how does this type of CRM scenario teach how to effective use all available resources available in the AIR not the GROUND?------ because these committees --- are on the ground!!!!--and most everything on the ground is useless to pilots
I think accident/incident discussion is FAR, FAR more productive...
we need to cease with these 'Oprah and Dr. Phil' playtime sessions and STOP CRASHES!!!!!
There's a captain in our company who's theory is that a relaxed cockpit leads to more input (which may be valuable, may be rubbish, but is input nonetheless). However this never undermines the fact that he's the boss, and the final decision and, importantly, responsability, lies with him. Moreover, in the above "real life" scenario, I suspect that the FO would have found himself spoken to much earlier, and quite right too.
I enjoy most of all flying with this particular chap, have learned oceans of useful stuff from him ever day, don't feel I cannot suggest anything (although if it's daft he'll tell me with a grin) and frankly I think I perform better when flying with him. I've done some stupid things, and been informed in no uncertain terms, but back on the ground I've learned why.
The atmosphere is less stiff and so is the flying because of it. However he's so good at what he does I think he has more in reserve than some and can handle a daft inexperienced FO's flying to a greater degree. The most frustrating thing about flying with him is wondering why it won't do that for me.
Neither of us are spring chickens, so I am inclined to agree with PilotPete about the "younger masses" to which he refers.
Interestingly, in this debate the real life scenario stems from the FO's rudeness to the captain, rather than the other way around. Is this always the case?
Some these CRM scenarios seem like they were concocted by Misses Tooey, because they all seem like a bunch of Hooey
seriously how do these 'ground think 'tanks' help pilots' ?
Only aeronautical knowledge--airplanes aren't run by committees and think tanks but by procedures and practice--how does this type of CRM scenario teach how to effective use all available resources available in the AIR not the GROUND?------ because these committees --- are on the ground!!!!--and most everything on the ground is useless to pilots
I think accident/incident discussion is FAR, FAR more productive...
we need to cease with these 'Oprah and Dr. Phil' playtime sessions and STOP CRASHES!!!!!
well this post just proves the need for more understanding of the CRM concept. The fact is it is people and their interactions that cause incidents more than mechanical breakdowns.
Yes.Im an old hairy ass Captain and seen it all.Had many an arrogant,over confident f/O on Flt deck...same scenario...you meet in crew room..no pleasantries definate chip on shoulder..dissagrees with anything you come up with...fuel/performance/reserves etc...gets very tiring..you know your in for a lousy day..guy cocks up descent planning despite several prompts..would you like the gear etc to get back on profile...no way!!...he s an ace...end up on finals double the height and requesting "orbit to loose height"...takes a/pilot out and hand flies orbit at 15flap loosing speed below target speed..several more prompts ...for crappy landing.try to debrief,not interested but admits "several captains think Im a cowboy!!!"I agree I say which prompts a look of disdain ."Maybe we should talk to base Captain if you dont like my flying" Im told!..in disbelief I walk away from this guy with a mega chip on both shoulders.I think CRM really has gone too far and encourages this sort of behaviour in Flt deck.At the end of the day the CAPTAIN is in command of the aircraft with all the responsibility that goes with it.We are seeing too many arrogant,overconfident ,insolent trainees in the right hand seat,all well balanced individuals with chips on both shoulders!....I could go on.Im sure many Capts have experienced the same scenario.....
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 142
CRM is about getting the right balance - not about letting the F/O do whatever he likes so you dont hurt his feelings! For No More Night Flights' hypothetical example, a hypothetical CRM assessment might be:
F/O: Poor on cooperation (not considering others, conflict solving); poor on leadership & management skills (planning and coordination, maintaining standards); poor on situational awareness; poor on decision making (risk assessment & option selection
Captain: OK on cooperation and SA, but poor on leadershp & management (ineffective use of authority & assertiveness) and poor on decision-making.
CRM is not just massaging your colleagues' egos, its about demonstrating the appropriate behaviour for the situation. Letting the FO fly dangerously is not appropriate, and would result in a failed CRM assessment for the captain.
A cowboy F/O has to be put in his place, otherwise one day, god forbid, he will be a cowboy captain!
Last edited by Non-PC Plod : 23rd August 2008 at 09:11. Reason: more thoughts
"At the end of the day the CAPTAIN is in command of the aircraft with all the responsibility that goes with it.We are seeing too many arrogant,overconfident ,insolent trainees in the right hand seat,all well balanced individuals with chips on both shoulders!....I could go on.Im sure many Capts have experienced the .."
Totally agree with this feeling, and more and more difficult to handle.. and the worse the f/o will be, the quicker he will complain to the fleet manager about your interventions in the process..to save the day..
A long boring technical lecture during cruise sets all the little snots straight not that I've flown with any of those recently-----
the answers are simple, if you want improvements 1. Burn 'em all out in ground school---- don't even let the incompetent losers near a transport aircraft 2. Don't let misses Tooey give lessons on airmanship 3. These are NOT my words they are a Quote from Old Smokey --and it applies across the deck "Trust Nothing Trust No One"
4. Just do the job it isn't difficult [or at least the airside of things should be easy---easy like pie 5. Nothing replaces knowledge --especially knowledge tempered with experience
Most importantly---Never Say the word 'Dood'---on the FD--a VERY common word used [from CVR's] especially at part 135 carriers---before the fatal accident-
CRM: A complicated method of allowing the FO to pipe up without the worry of losing his job, when the capt is about to wreck the plane. Hire better pilots, CRM will be much less of an issue and ergo FOs using CRM to beat on capts.
I think CRM really has gone too far and encourages this sort of behaviour in Flt deck.At the end of the day the CAPTAIN is in command of the aircraft with all the responsibility that goes with it.
CRM has nothing to do with encouraging that sort of behaviour in F/Os....their complete lack of understanding of it does, coupled to the wrong attitude. Your second sentence is interesting in so much that you singularly failed to exercise your command authority in the scenario you relayed and allowed the situation to go much further than it should have done. If alarm bells weren't ringing when he refused your 'suggestions' they damn well should have been when he requested an orbit and then started to mishandle the jet even more. I think Non-PC Plod assessed your scenario and summed it up quite nicely. Funny how the F/O was not the only one with the CRM issues........
What is puzzling me is why do we still hear about CRM related problems if the psychometric tests at interview have any value.
Last I'd heard is that there is still no definative pilot profile available, they still use a management profile for recruitment, which must have its limitations.
Assertiveness and arrogance, a fine/undefined line? (I don't mean manners) I have, as an F/O, on 4 different occasions, with 4 different captains, been 'instructed' : "You can go!". Each scenario was identical. We are lined up and fully ready. However, my clock was started as the heavy (Jumbo size) rotated. We are in a bottom-end scale medium. On all occasions, much less than 2 minutes had elapsed. Yes, there were cross winds.......on the ground, and we had both engines functioning normally~~~~~ The last time turned ugly there and then. I was arguing with the captain, and he saw my resistance to his decision as insubordination. Till today, I can feel that uneasy feeling lingering when we fly together. I can assure you, it does NOT go down well when you resist the commanders command for you to go! Any objective/learned/experienced comments?
Location: Over Oceans, Continents, Mountains and Clouds.
Age: 40
Posts: 53
CRM should never be understood as any type of replacement for good manners, or reasonable social skills. CRM could / should be viewed as a living toolbox, filled with skill tools, and knowledge tools, to be used when appropriate.
CRM is simply a sub-element of the Human Factors subject, and as such, is something that we are expected to learn, consider, and apply on all flights.
A simple observation of the various conflicts (wars) that are going on around the world should be ample evidence that we don't generally get along ---as a rule---.
I fly for a national carrier with a fairly homogenous pilot group-culture, and even here we need to be very careful with some of our colleagues. That said... Not all of us find the same guys difficult.
CRM is a professional skill, and as such, it is most certainly not meant to water down the captain's authority, or command responsibility.
The captain stays the captain. It's just that now we have found a way to get through to those who are more ego-centric, as well as those who are simply normal...!
CRM does not replace manners or seniority (as in "experience").
Similar Threads 
CRM gone too far????? 
---on the FD--a VERY common word used [from CVR's] especially at part 135 carriers---before the fatal accident-
Linear Mode
