Originally Posted by JG
(such as the captain who let the FO get behind the aircraft on approach or the other who accepted his FOs decision to only divert 15 miles around CBs instead of 30) saying nothing and justifying their actions by labeling them as effective CRM
- not having the benefit of being able to look at these posts to which you refer I'm not sure how much 'scorn' you are effectvely pouring on these events. As many have said, CRM is not a scientific/quantifiable value. Sometimes good CRM can result in the examples you quote where the Captain has judged the error by the F/O to be of sufficiently small risk as to benefit the F/O by allowing the error as a remarkably efficient learning curve, rather than one alternative which is the 'No! Don't do that - I have control, lad!' technique of old.
I welcome your arrival on the scene and the questions you are asking. I have to say, however, that as I said earlier, CRM will never, in my opinion, eliminate human error accidents and it is incorrect to anticipate that. Look only at the 'Darwin' awards for proof of human frailty in self-preservation. It has resulted in a dramatic change in cockpit managenent (in the western world anyway) in the last 30 years or so, and as such can, I think, be quantified in a subjective way (if that is not a non-sequitor).
Keep us posted please!.