Well, lots of clever words, but no facts to suggest that all of the CRM training that pilots and others endure has made a difference. What a shame.
Occasionally, when the topic comes up in a presentation or lecture, I ask for a definition of 'CRM'. I've yet to hear a concise and meaningful one. If something can't be defined in a few words, how can it be valid?
'CRM' seems to me to be an abstract concept, without foundation in science and without tangible benefit.
Comparing fleet ages to the accident rate gives a good match, though. Modern aircraft are safer.
Now, why not acknowledge that 'CRM' has failed to deliver the desired effect and abandon it? Three reasons: the accident rate is acceptably low; there is no young pretender to take its place; there is a huge and influential industry around 'CRM' to protest its own dissolution...
I fear that the failure of 'CRM' to deliver is only another building block as we unwittingly construct the great new road to pilotless air transport.