CRM – The new religion
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the watch list
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRM – The new religion
Over the last years I’ve felt that CRM has become a gargoyle. Supposed to be very impressive and monumental but like its analogy it has long since had its prime and is only changing by deterioration.
When I started flying, although not that long ago, I thought CRM was a good idea and a thought worthy topic.
We have all learned, and benefited, from the teachings about the Tenerife accident for instance. This one lesson, and others, were good ones when the issue was first raised. Now the conclusions of these lessons seem like common sense. Certainly this is mainly because of what CRM has done for us in the past.
Now however I find myself in a classroom once every year listening for hours at end to someone who has done a quick training course on how to teach it. Hearing the same old textbook stories with the same old voice over and over again. Haven’t they found any new material since 1979?
Sure, there’s plenty of finger pointing going around with every example. “If he hadn’t forgotten that, this thing wouldn’t have happened!”
Why that sure helps me, “I’ve got it Watson, I’ll remember the flaps next time!”.
Mind that I’m not knocking the teachings of human performance and limitations. That stuff is actually very good to ponder, to understand others and not least yourself.
What really gets me itching about this is that, like with religion to its believers, you are not allowed to criticize it or its teachings and like religion, people generally seem to miss the basic point of the message.
If a pilot would openly have a go at CRM in a company I’m pretty sure he’d have an appointment with the DFO within days.
“Well Hoskins, if it’s one thing I know, it’s that the emperor’s gots his clothes on”.
I’m sure most see it but never have I heard a single outright complaint. Complaints are plenty where other ground courses are concerned but the holy cow no one’ll touch.
Once I had the fortune to partake in a course held by a guy who actually researched the issues of CRM and human performance for years, long before he decided to lecture on it. He didn’t follow the normal patterns of a CRM lesson but instead opened up to new though-loops, explanations and suggestions. This guy really taught me something new that made me think.
Sadly he is one in a thousand it seems. Because what attracts opportunists more than a forum where you can’t be questioned? “Why yes sir this here snake oil ‘ll cure you even of your mother in law!”
Remember, there is a lot of money to be made for an approved CRM instructor.
I’d venture to say that most, and I mean most, CRM instructors are under trained and not fit to be teaching at all. And why should that be so strange? In the before time, when requirements were tougher you couldn’t become an instructor over night. Why should that be any different today?
“But the CAA says that CRM is important, the most important subject!?”
Yes they do. What else could they say? CRM is portrayed as the one single biggest hope for aviation safety. To hell with lowering FTLs or what have you that could actually make a change. The CAAs and the airlines don’t have the courage to say that we need a change of course. Would you like to have been the one who denied god in the 15th century? Of course not, but it had to be done at one point.
So what to do? If one pill is good for you, two must be great, right?
No!
What we need is not eight hours of endless drivel by an under trained, over motivated guy, fresh from a ten day instructors course with no theories or experiences of his own but with random pointless examples a plenty.
We need perhaps two hours by a truly knowledgeable teacher who has teaching itself as his motivation, with one good insightful example instead of five off the shelf ones.
The idea of CRM was to get people thinking and to raise awareness of the pitfalls lying ahead. Not for them to yawn through what will surely be the same headache as last year.
I’m sure CRM is not an easy topic to teach well. This should be the reason to increase instructor requirements rather than the opposite.
Eight hours of 0.1 is a hell of a lot less than two hours of 1.0
I say let us develop this subject into something befitting of aviation today and raise the bar for instructors
Or
Stop kidding ourselves, wasting our time and leave the whole thing behind as part of our evolution and await the next prophet.
/Thought for food.
When I started flying, although not that long ago, I thought CRM was a good idea and a thought worthy topic.
We have all learned, and benefited, from the teachings about the Tenerife accident for instance. This one lesson, and others, were good ones when the issue was first raised. Now the conclusions of these lessons seem like common sense. Certainly this is mainly because of what CRM has done for us in the past.
Now however I find myself in a classroom once every year listening for hours at end to someone who has done a quick training course on how to teach it. Hearing the same old textbook stories with the same old voice over and over again. Haven’t they found any new material since 1979?
Sure, there’s plenty of finger pointing going around with every example. “If he hadn’t forgotten that, this thing wouldn’t have happened!”
Why that sure helps me, “I’ve got it Watson, I’ll remember the flaps next time!”.
Mind that I’m not knocking the teachings of human performance and limitations. That stuff is actually very good to ponder, to understand others and not least yourself.
What really gets me itching about this is that, like with religion to its believers, you are not allowed to criticize it or its teachings and like religion, people generally seem to miss the basic point of the message.
If a pilot would openly have a go at CRM in a company I’m pretty sure he’d have an appointment with the DFO within days.
“Well Hoskins, if it’s one thing I know, it’s that the emperor’s gots his clothes on”.
I’m sure most see it but never have I heard a single outright complaint. Complaints are plenty where other ground courses are concerned but the holy cow no one’ll touch.
Once I had the fortune to partake in a course held by a guy who actually researched the issues of CRM and human performance for years, long before he decided to lecture on it. He didn’t follow the normal patterns of a CRM lesson but instead opened up to new though-loops, explanations and suggestions. This guy really taught me something new that made me think.
Sadly he is one in a thousand it seems. Because what attracts opportunists more than a forum where you can’t be questioned? “Why yes sir this here snake oil ‘ll cure you even of your mother in law!”
Remember, there is a lot of money to be made for an approved CRM instructor.
I’d venture to say that most, and I mean most, CRM instructors are under trained and not fit to be teaching at all. And why should that be so strange? In the before time, when requirements were tougher you couldn’t become an instructor over night. Why should that be any different today?
“But the CAA says that CRM is important, the most important subject!?”
Yes they do. What else could they say? CRM is portrayed as the one single biggest hope for aviation safety. To hell with lowering FTLs or what have you that could actually make a change. The CAAs and the airlines don’t have the courage to say that we need a change of course. Would you like to have been the one who denied god in the 15th century? Of course not, but it had to be done at one point.
So what to do? If one pill is good for you, two must be great, right?
No!
What we need is not eight hours of endless drivel by an under trained, over motivated guy, fresh from a ten day instructors course with no theories or experiences of his own but with random pointless examples a plenty.
We need perhaps two hours by a truly knowledgeable teacher who has teaching itself as his motivation, with one good insightful example instead of five off the shelf ones.
The idea of CRM was to get people thinking and to raise awareness of the pitfalls lying ahead. Not for them to yawn through what will surely be the same headache as last year.
I’m sure CRM is not an easy topic to teach well. This should be the reason to increase instructor requirements rather than the opposite.
Eight hours of 0.1 is a hell of a lot less than two hours of 1.0
I say let us develop this subject into something befitting of aviation today and raise the bar for instructors
Or
Stop kidding ourselves, wasting our time and leave the whole thing behind as part of our evolution and await the next prophet.
/Thought for food.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Formerly resident of Knoteatingham
Posts: 957
Received 116 Likes
on
57 Posts
CRM or Common Sense?
I attended my first CRM course before the term had even been invented. It lasted 30 seconds and consisted of a very senior pilot telling the assmbled students:
"Don't upset anyone who you think might ever be in a position to buy you a beer, tiddle in your coffee or save your life."
It's worked well for me for the last 27 years.
"Don't upset anyone who you think might ever be in a position to buy you a beer, tiddle in your coffee or save your life."
It's worked well for me for the last 27 years.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The center of the earths surface
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo,bravo,bravo:
Well you certainly said it all?
I feel we would be better if CRM and the line between HUMAN FACTORS wasn't there.
Secondly, they pontificate about pilots undertaking CRM/Human factors.
While I am a strong believer in the sense,I too don't like the "RELIGIOUS" aspect and fervor of it.
When I see Aircraft engineer's and Airline management/bean counters having to undergo the same teachings,
we may be somewhat more balanced.
IF they took away the CRM title, and called it HUMAN FACTORS, I for one would be more interested.
You are in the cockpit, you are the resource,I am the Manager, now do as I say.
Chr's
H/Snort
I feel we would be better if CRM and the line between HUMAN FACTORS wasn't there.
Secondly, they pontificate about pilots undertaking CRM/Human factors.
While I am a strong believer in the sense,I too don't like the "RELIGIOUS" aspect and fervor of it.
When I see Aircraft engineer's and Airline management/bean counters having to undergo the same teachings,
we may be somewhat more balanced.IF they took away the CRM title, and called it HUMAN FACTORS, I for one would be more interested.
You are in the cockpit, you are the resource,I am the Manager, now do as I say.
Chr's
H/Snort
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall one so-called CRM course I attended, wherein I was asked what I would personally do in a particular situation.
I offered an answer, which apparently did not especially suit the instructor, whereupon he offered his thoughts, which were totally counter to mine.
I then asked him just how many flying hours he has, and of course the reply was....none.
He then proceeded to look at every pilot in the group, and they all concured with my views.
Even the junior First Officers.
The instructor then became so flustered, that he left the building, not to return.
He was not missed.
An absolutely true story.
I offered an answer, which apparently did not especially suit the instructor, whereupon he offered his thoughts, which were totally counter to mine.
I then asked him just how many flying hours he has, and of course the reply was....none.
He then proceeded to look at every pilot in the group, and they all concured with my views.
Even the junior First Officers.
The instructor then became so flustered, that he left the building, not to return.
He was not missed.
An absolutely true story.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not by any chance one of those older Captains that believe you do not need CRM training by any cnance are you ??
You are in the cockpit, you are the resource, I am the Manager, now do as I say.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a certain big successful company pilots are confined to do CRM online, home alone, with a 20’ learning module. That pretty much sums up what these bosses think of it: “…now go do that crap in your room, leave me alone and when you have ticked the box, we’ll all forget about it”.
The basic idea of CRM was to even out barriers during team work, to enhance monitoring, intervention or warning, all in the name of safety. It was then extended to bringing out the best of every fellow team worker, to enhance individual motivation and to gather good ideas for the benefit of he whole entity.
The mentioned barriers are mostly due to a specific hierarchy. It can be based on grade, age, sex, religion, cast, provenance and many other subjects deemed sensitive by any authority of the entity. Right there lies the first (and unfortunately final) obstacle to sense or nonsense of any CRM dealings: The readiness (or capacity) of any authority in the line of hierarchy of the entity to accept intervention, suggestion or even criticism of a subordinate.
Reading through aviation forums, discussing the issue with fellow airmen and even more through personal experience, I must say that this readiness was initially there, no doubt. The recent years, especially as the airline industry was in a deep crisis, has brought in a new breed of managers however. Their merits originated more in marketing and bean-counting than in operations or field experience. This lack of insight made that their readiness to accept CRM faded to “…you guys do that thing, it might suit your dealings at your level. But this stops right over your heads, we take over from there and it’s take it or leave.” Adding to that is the particular sensitivity of the owners of some very successful new airlines. Success has always set a new tone, irrespective of the moral content. Under pretext of a lot of unnecessary self declared “sensitive issues”, many achievements of CRM can be conveniently kept under the rug and nobody, neither individuals nor regulatory or control bodies, dare to even raise the issue. It would be the fastest way out.
Today CRM is reduced to a fig leaf.
The basic idea of CRM was to even out barriers during team work, to enhance monitoring, intervention or warning, all in the name of safety. It was then extended to bringing out the best of every fellow team worker, to enhance individual motivation and to gather good ideas for the benefit of he whole entity.
The mentioned barriers are mostly due to a specific hierarchy. It can be based on grade, age, sex, religion, cast, provenance and many other subjects deemed sensitive by any authority of the entity. Right there lies the first (and unfortunately final) obstacle to sense or nonsense of any CRM dealings: The readiness (or capacity) of any authority in the line of hierarchy of the entity to accept intervention, suggestion or even criticism of a subordinate.
Reading through aviation forums, discussing the issue with fellow airmen and even more through personal experience, I must say that this readiness was initially there, no doubt. The recent years, especially as the airline industry was in a deep crisis, has brought in a new breed of managers however. Their merits originated more in marketing and bean-counting than in operations or field experience. This lack of insight made that their readiness to accept CRM faded to “…you guys do that thing, it might suit your dealings at your level. But this stops right over your heads, we take over from there and it’s take it or leave.” Adding to that is the particular sensitivity of the owners of some very successful new airlines. Success has always set a new tone, irrespective of the moral content. Under pretext of a lot of unnecessary self declared “sensitive issues”, many achievements of CRM can be conveniently kept under the rug and nobody, neither individuals nor regulatory or control bodies, dare to even raise the issue. It would be the fastest way out.
Today CRM is reduced to a fig leaf.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If the training is c**p, (which it sounds like you have had a poor experience), it doesnt mean that the subject is c**p too! Trainers need to be selected, trained, and make the effort to engage the trainees with relevant, new and pertinent topics. If they are chucking out the same stuff year in/year out, they need to try harder, or more resources need to be put into the training dept.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ireland
Age: 49
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRM Human Factors
H/Snort,
You hit the nail on the head, in the Military we have moved away from CRM days and now have Human Factors days where all and sundry are invited to partake including Engineers and ground crew, we all have a responsibility to operate aircraft safely but it does need motivated instructors with lots of tales of woe, how can people with no technical knowledge whether engineers or crews stand and lecture after just a 10 day instructor course.
You hit the nail on the head, in the Military we have moved away from CRM days and now have Human Factors days where all and sundry are invited to partake including Engineers and ground crew, we all have a responsibility to operate aircraft safely but it does need motivated instructors with lots of tales of woe, how can people with no technical knowledge whether engineers or crews stand and lecture after just a 10 day instructor course.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The center of the earths surface
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Participation:
CARVE111:
Tk's mate.
Good instructors:Particularly ones that have had first hand experience.
I had to endure a CRM refresher in Geneva/Berne, tought by a young T--n Air instructor that lectured us all "mechanically" and refered to the 79 A-NZ Erebus crash as being caused by the "SILLY PILOT's breaking company SOP's and changing a series of Wpt's to navigate AROUND the mountain:
To which point I stood up and said how wrong he was, and that maybe he should lecture on subject matter he understood, I suffered the wrath from a senior company person on the course with us, this individual said the moral was not the accident but the failure to use company SOP's???????????? this "Tutonic" (he was Austrian) would not entertain reason.
Now: the next course in Berne/Geneva, we had a DHL 757 driver, ex 727 chappie.
This guy was good, and he came from EXPERIENCE, he had faced his DEMONS, he had been SCARED, and when he asked Q's, like WHAT IN FLIGHT EMERGENCIES has anyone here had, there was minor everyday stuff.
I started to squirm in my seat when he asked about the "F" word, even I could see that I was the only one apart from the instructor, that was not at all comfortable, when he asked about "F"word, I think I nodded my head, he "uncomfortably" "respectfully" zeroed in, asked what it was like? to which I replied "not a very nice experience" and "We" were only too willing to leave it at that, but I know from something UNSPOKEN this chappie had had the same, I could tell it in the way he asked the question, his body language, his LIP/facial expresion, and the "Instant" unspoken bond,
"sound corney or what".
BUT: The point I am making is just that I could have contributed more, and In light of my then present peer's, It was just I felt an innappropriate "place" to share my successes
In saying this: it is my "Unfounded" belief that the MILITARY is more open to this sort of thing.
Maybe, Human factors classes should only relate to the mandatory membership and attendence of those that have either had problems or Suffered Major mechanicals/Events? and the info filter down that way.
As I say "I don't know", and perhaps this has diversed somewhat from the religous fervor aspect.
But the Q remains: Who would you want teaching you.
Now do I post this? or delete it!
H/Snort
Tk's mate.
Good instructors:Particularly ones that have had first hand experience.
I had to endure a CRM refresher in Geneva/Berne, tought by a young T--n Air instructor that lectured us all "mechanically" and refered to the 79 A-NZ Erebus crash as being caused by the "SILLY PILOT's breaking company SOP's and changing a series of Wpt's to navigate AROUND the mountain:
To which point I stood up and said how wrong he was, and that maybe he should lecture on subject matter he understood, I suffered the wrath from a senior company person on the course with us, this individual said the moral was not the accident but the failure to use company SOP's???????????? this "Tutonic" (he was Austrian) would not entertain reason.
Now: the next course in Berne/Geneva, we had a DHL 757 driver, ex 727 chappie.
This guy was good, and he came from EXPERIENCE, he had faced his DEMONS, he had been SCARED, and when he asked Q's, like WHAT IN FLIGHT EMERGENCIES has anyone here had, there was minor everyday stuff.
I started to squirm in my seat when he asked about the "F" word, even I could see that I was the only one apart from the instructor, that was not at all comfortable, when he asked about "F"word, I think I nodded my head, he "uncomfortably" "respectfully" zeroed in, asked what it was like? to which I replied "not a very nice experience" and "We" were only too willing to leave it at that, but I know from something UNSPOKEN this chappie had had the same, I could tell it in the way he asked the question, his body language, his LIP/facial expresion, and the "Instant" unspoken bond,
"sound corney or what".BUT: The point I am making is just that I could have contributed more, and In light of my then present peer's, It was just I felt an innappropriate "place" to share my successes
In saying this: it is my "Unfounded" belief that the MILITARY is more open to this sort of thing.
Maybe, Human factors classes should only relate to the mandatory membership and attendence of those that have either had problems or Suffered Major mechanicals/Events? and the info filter down that way.
As I say "I don't know", and perhaps this has diversed somewhat from the religous fervor aspect.
But the Q remains: Who would you want teaching you.
Now do I post this? or delete it!
H/Snort
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: any town as retired.
Posts: 2,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
save money with on line crm courses
How can a real pilot justify the advantages of on line CRM, or SEP recurrent training course.
The entire purpose of these courses IMHO, the interaction between persons of different backgrounds and knowledge base.
Even the RVSM, MNPS recurrent course: these also benefit from interaction.
We are investigating these " to save money", so the cost of one extra day, not available to be available, will cause financial ruin, or perhaps the saving on the 10$ travel cost. I suppose the cost of the training organisation is considerable.
Put the bean counters on the same initial course, is an excellent idea and call it COMPANY RM.
Rant over, for today.....glf
The entire purpose of these courses IMHO, the interaction between persons of different backgrounds and knowledge base.
Even the RVSM, MNPS recurrent course: these also benefit from interaction.
We are investigating these " to save money", so the cost of one extra day, not available to be available, will cause financial ruin, or perhaps the saving on the 10$ travel cost. I suppose the cost of the training organisation is considerable.
Put the bean counters on the same initial course, is an excellent idea and call it COMPANY RM.
Rant over, for today.....glf
