Main Street: Learning from aviation to build better leaders
May 29, 2013, 10:27 am
Editor's note: Dr. David Vance is a guest author and this is part of a continuing series on diamond organizations and organizational excellence.
During a recent lunch meeting, we began thinking about the contrast between the world of the airplane pilot and the organizational leader. American aviation is the largest and safest system in the world, and pilots are allowed a very large degree of freedom as to when, where and how they fly. Are there factors in the aviation community that could be transferred to organizational leadership?
It has been said that even more than the sailing, aviation is cruelly unforgiving of mistakes. Once the wheels leave the ground, the pilot is committed. Unlike driving or sailing, a pilot cannot drop anchor or pull to the side of the road to regroup, fix small problems or call for a tow. The pilot must work through the situation with the resources they have at hand, relying on their training and their equipment to overcome whatever adversity has been thrown at them.
To be unable to surmount the problem can be fatal. It is said there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots. Therefore, pilots live in a culture keenly aware of risk assessment and management, while pursuing the central mission, which is flying the plane.
A content review of pilot-oriented magazines is instructive. Along with highlights of a new plane, a new piece of electronic gear and so forth there are the National Transportation Safety Board reports. The NTSB investigates aircraft accidents. A few will be described briefly. Those that illustrate teachable points are described in great detail, on a timeline, to illustrate a causal chain of events culminating in a tragedy. Every month we read stories of "how not to do it." Also included will be self-confessionals written after the fact by a pilots who made some poor decisions but learned from the experience, and now want to share that experience with the readership (pilots) to help them avoid the same predicament. What stands out is the comparative focus on mentoring. And this is not accidental. It is part of the culture. When a student pilot graduates, having passed written, oral and practical tests and earns his license, it is always referred to as a "license to learn." It is never the expectation that the formal education portion achieves mastery.
Many aspects of the pilot culture flow from this. For example, at many airports you will find a pilot community engaged in "hangar flying." Hangar flying is telling stories about past flights to other pilots. It is greatly akin to organizational culture, where elders share tribal lore with the young of the tribe. It is an indoctrination that pilots and workers gain knowledge of the environment. It is mentoring and freely sharing information that will help another pilot become a better pilot: Where to go; what to avoid; how to handle various kinds of emergencies.
Let's say a pilot has become aware that some part of his flying proficiency has become rusty, or that he wants to try something new. He will hire a flight instructor to fly with him for an hour or two to master or re-master that skill. There's no shame in asking for help. In fact, not asking is what's seen as unprofessional. No one is infallible. What does the community do when someone makes an honest error? We have something called a NASA Report which is submitted to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. This is a confidential, non-punitive voluntary reporting system wherein pilots are encouraged to self-report mistakes made. Given that the error was non-intentional, any disciplinary action is waived. The substance of the report is compiled with others and published for the purpose of educating the community and improving the safety and efficiency of flight. In short, you are encouraged to "fess up" so we all can learn from your mistake. Should we have something like this for organizational leaders? If it reduced future errors, could it be accepted?
A pilot is required to self-assess his physical and emotional condition before flying. Is he in some way compromised in his ability to make good decisions? He will assess the possible effects of any medications he may be taking. Is he rested enough? Is he feeling too stressed to accomplish some goal to the point of ignoring caution points? And then, if he is good to go, what about the plane? A thorough pre-flight is in order, even if he flew it yesterday. Routines and checklists make sure that nothing is taken for granted. If all is well, a final check of the weather is in order. So a call is in order to a Federal Aviation Agency briefer who uses radar and a number of other assets to tell him what to expect on his route. Having addressed all the foreseeable risks, he launches into the unknown. The adventure is at hand, while always being cognizant of the risk.
We want to draw a parallel to business leadership here. If a leader knows he or she is impaired physically or psychologically, the wise choice is to refrain from making momentous decisions. If a leader is under considerable stress, are his or her cognitive facilities not impaired? Likewise, if the organization's internal structures are weak, radical maneuvers should probably be avoided lest the organization be torn apart. As to weather predictions, there are sources available to the leader to give him or her sense of what lies ahead in their particular sector (environmental scans).
In the end, organizations need good pilots. I believe that an awareness of risk and a shared passion for the adventure of flight leads to be a mentoring culture. Good pilots tend also to be good mentors. To the same extent an airplane pilot must assess himself and his equipment before risking flight, a leader must be equally vigilant and self-aware. And as we endeavor to build excellent organizations (diamonds) we are called upon to grow our internal people resources, to enable them to achieve their maximum potential. This is a mentoring process. Not everyone can or should become a pilot. Not everyone can or should be a mentor. That process requires honesty and transparency. Mentoring is not just about pointing the way or providing skill training. Mentoring is also about pointing out the landmines ahead and insight into the people to be connected to and those to avoid. I don't want my mentor to be a "bold pilot" charging on, oblivious to risk. I want a Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger (who safely landed his powerless Airbus 320 in the Hudson River in Manhattan) who never has let his ego get in the way of his professionalism. And who, coincidently, mentored crews in how to respond to crisis in the air.
David Vance, Ph.D., is a retired business executive, educator and coach. His career spans managerial positions in engineering, manufacturing and education. He holds degrees in quantitative analysis, industrial psychology and Information Systems. A combat veteran of Vietnam, Vance consults on organizational development and high performance work teams. You can contact him at
[email protected].
Dr. Edward Piatt, Ed.D., is a manager with the state of Illinois with 28 years' experience and is an adjunct professor of business in the MBA and MOL program at Olivet Nazarene University. He also lectures frequently on emotional intelligence, organizational culture and leadership. You can contact him at
[email protected].
Altro che "New business model"?!
Fly Safe
DOVE
P.S.
Quando la coda guida il serpente: Competenza non fa rima con incarico, i cavalli diventano senatori, si pretende di copulare con la luna in fondo al pozzo, e si finisce tutti nella polvere.