Institutions, sociology and flight.

[Mitzi.]

Any takers for how an 'institution' characterised by sociologists as following the 'channelled groove' compromises what 'idividuals do' or dont, as the case maybe ?

The institution hands out roles, and these through a process of socialisation become 'a constraining force', a reality that guides us as humans.

Still with me ?...

So as to the 'crux' of my foray... how much of those 'I will not question the taken for granted' TRUTH'S, instilled in training, appraisals, etc, compromise....Well anything that you care to mention.

Safety. (my personal biggy)
Efficiency. (the commercial biggy)
CRM. (the psycologist/sociologist biggy)

If I have yet to convince you of the relevence of this leader, check out AAIB monthly returns....

Mitzi.

[Ricky Butcher]

Can you explain that in English? Sounds like you've escaped from your Institution. Fly Qantas.

[Lou Scannon]

Clearly a coded message from Osama giving his next set of instructions.

On the other hand, Osama can probably spell Psychology correctly so it must be someone rambling following a night on hand rolled!

[zerozero]

The original question may be too broad in the first place. You might want to narrow it down a little.

But I'm interested in a comment made by one of my former instructors on a similar subject.

He felt that too much of our knowledge and technical expertise (as pilots) is gained through anecdote.

As you say, "I will not question the taken for granted' TRUTH'S, instilled in training, appraisals" etc.

For example: Sometimes when asking a peer about whether or not a certain technique is legal or appropriate the answer may very well be based on gospel from a senior check airman rather than a citation from an approved document.

In my experience, we rely too heavily on story-telling, hangar-flying, and maybe even internet bulletin boards. Rather than taking the time ourselves to research the official and approved answer we often take the short cut and go ask for advice.

Of course sometimes the advice is based on folk-lore or someone else's out-dated information but it always seems to be blessed by their rank or position in the organization--thus squelching any creative or critical information.

I happen to think too much anecdotal information made credible by one's position in the company may very well be a threat to both Safety *and* Efficiency. How it's dealt with in the cockpit may be a CRM issue but I wouldn't separate CRM from Safety or Efficiency.

It's an interesting topic. See if you can narrow it down a little.
Peace.

[Blacksheep]

Being both an Engineer and a Social Scientist, I'm well and truly Institutionalised and also speak fluent psycho-babble, .

I realise that Mitzi's post really refers to more informal institutions, but to illustrate a point I'll turn to the more formal kind. In defence of the formal "Institutions" I'll say that they exist for the sharing of professional information; the best are very good at networking and the 'channelled groove' doesn't simply result in anecdotal folklore but rather, it produces well researched, publicly criticised and professionally accepted facts.

Generally, I say...

Naturally there are some exceptions, but on the whole, expert debate carried out under the glare of peer review doesn't result in unquestioning acceptance of taken for granted truths. It produces what is otherwise known as science. Scientific truths are regularly challenged and progress occurs as each old 'truth' falls under the questioning of new generations. As Sir Isaac himself put it "If I have seen further than other men, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants" He would have been delighted to see what happened when others stood on his own shoulders.

In my own field we provide detailed technical advice and assistance to all comers and are only too happy to engage in informed discussion about any of the topics, for such is the way we learn and make progress ourselves.

Now lets go back to the less formal intitutions that Mitzi infers are so threatening to real truth. Internet Bulletin Boards are such irreverent fun places, aren't they? Do they serve any useful purpose or are they yet another source of 'taken for granted truths' that compromise safety, efficiency and CRM to name but three?

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[nearlynormalmike]

Back to first principals, sport.

Learn how to put it on a bumper sticker.

[Blacksheep]

You mean like PPRuNeing Makes Yer Bum Dribble sorta thing?

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[nearlynormalmike]

What I'm saying is, learn how to organise your thoughts and express them concisely.

As you would if you did not have the luxury of unlimited space, but had to put them on a bumper sticker.

Not that hard, really.

[Alien Shores]

Fly QANTAS. Through Adversity to the Golf Course.

[nearlynormalmike]

Your'e picking things up nicely boys.:=

[arcniz]

Actually seen on the road - far from any campus: Subvert the Dominant Paradigm

[PPRuNe Pop]

Ah well, we tried didn't we. Can't see any future in this thread unless someone can explain to ME exactly what it means! :eek:

[Sonny Hammond]

Multi Engine man........

[bugg smasher]

Socialization is a necessary step for any progressive human society; we can build far more effectively together than we can as individuals. I agree that it becomes a constraining force in many ways; our prisons are full of people whose behavior necessitates shackles and chains. As far as I can gather from your post, however, the sociologists in question appear to be more concerned that creativity is stifled. The ‘reality that guides us’ is addressed very entertainingly in ‘The Matrix’; I find the subject fascinating.

In becoming pilots, we certainly become ‘channeled’, in that we learn a very specific set of behaviors and thought processes that allow us to transit from A to B in one piece; very little room for creativity, even less for error.