Keywords in Aviation Safety Management Systems (SMS) are the most important words that new or experienced aviation safety professionals need to know. Usage of the correct terminology in the aviation industry is important for stakeholders to understand particular contexts in which safety events may occur and also any nuances that may cloud definitions due to regional differences or the introduction of unfamiliar technology.
SMS keywords are not just for safety personnel, but rather for all people who interact with the SMS' risk management system, including:
A “keyword” is simply a word that is more important or relevant than most words within a type of subject matter. In the case of aviation SMS, keywords are simply the most important concepts to know in order to comprehend:
Here are the 15 most important keywords in aviation safety management systems.
There are two ways to define hazards in risk management.
Most commonly, they are assumed to be a “dangerous condition” that leads directly to an accident. In this definition, hazards arise from hazard mechanisms, such as root causes and Human Factors.
Less commonly (but perhaps an easier to understand definition) they are considered as “benign elements that can become dangerous” through interaction (i.e., human interaction, weather, etc.).
How you define risks depends on how you define hazards.
Most commonly, risks are synonymous with a safety mishap, such as an accident. This understanding of risk comes from understanding a hazard as a “dangerous condition.”
Less commonly (but perhaps less confusing) is considering risks as the “dangerous condition”, such as companies who use Risk Events in their risk management practices. Understanding risks in this manner involves considering hazards as “benign elements that can become dangerous”
“Risk” in the infinitive sense of the word is the combination of:
Risk is used with Risk Matrices to rank and categorize dangerous conditions.
Accidents, sometimes called “mishaps,” “risks,” or “incidents,” are the negative outcomes that arise from dangerous conditions, such as:
Accidents are distinguished from Consequences in that Accidents are “damages done” and Consequences are “repercussions from damages” or “final losses.” Note that in real-world operations, there is often overlap between Accidents and Consequences, with no clear line to easily distinguish them.
Consequences are the end result of a safety incident and arise in response to safety mishaps. As pointed out, in real-world operations, the line between Consequences and Accidents can be frustratingly vague. Consequences have a certain “business flavor” such as:
Reactive risk management are exposure-mitigating actions that are done in-response to safety incidents and concerns. Reactive risk management is what new aviation SMS implementations practice initially as operators begin their SMS implementation. After an event happens, management reacts by putting out the fire.
Contrary to popular dissemination, reactive risk management is not a lesser or less desirable form of risk management than either proactive or predictive risk management activities. Reactive risk management techniques are an equal and indispensable type of action on the part of management for achieving safety performance.
Predictive risk management is a type of risk management that involves looking at historical safety data and existing business processes and attempting to anticipate future risks. This is done through:
Predictive risk management is sort of like stress-testing an SMS implementation by seeing how existing operational practices behave in novel situations (i.e., situations that have never happened).
Proactive risk management is the practice of addressing known safety concerns before they result in a safety incident. The term “nipping it in the bud” applies very strongly here.
Contrary to popular belief, proactive risk management is not the most important form of risk management. It’s simply a type of risk management that is hard to practice until later in SMS implementation. As an SMS implementation's safety culture matures and reactive risk management processes have been fully developed and practiced, there will be more time and opportunity to begin to practice proactive risk management strategies.
Key performance indicators (KPIs) are safety metrics, such as aviation leading indicators, that directly indicate the performance of safety goals and objectives.
For example, if one safety goal is to develop an above-average safety culture, a good leading indicator might be; the company average turnover rate (CATR) vs. industry average (IATR). Any number above 1.0 (i.e., CATR/IATR) would be considered above average.
With KPIs, more is not better. Only KPIs that best represent organizational safety goals and objectives should be considered. Over time, the list of KPIs should change in response to both changes:
Safety performance is the net result of an SMS implementation in terms of:
You might call these the “four pillars of safety performance.” All three elements of safety performance should be accounted for in goals and objectives, and corresponding KPIs.
A risk assessment is the activity of documenting “risk” (see above). It organizes and ranks a dangerous condition based on severity and likelihood.
In an aviation SMS risk management process, risk assessments are documented using a risk matrix that displays increasing levels of probability and servility in a grid of cells that run both horizontally and vertically.
Mechanisms are the various items that “conspire” together to result in a dangerous condition. These mechanisms are:
Mechanisms are not inherently dangerous but become dangerous due to interaction.
Risk controls are measures taken to mitigate exposure of potentially dangerous conditions and/or accidents. Risk controls are "control measures" that can be of the following types:
In short, a risk control can be anything so long as its function reduces risk. Function with the “intention” of reducing risk but does not actually do so should not be considered bonafide risk controls.
Non-punitive reporting policy is the requirement that aviation service providers, such as airlines and airports, make active attempts to focus on the “problem” rather than the “person.” What this entails is that when employees report issues, they should have limited protections from management as long as the employee was not engaged in criminal or negligent behavior. To strengthen safety reporting cultures, employees must not be scared of retaliation from:
This is an extremely difficult thing to accomplish, and it’s for this reason that many companies opt to not allow employees to see reported safety issues until they have been de-identified.
In short, the Dirty Dozen Human Factors account for the 12 types of human behavior that either contribute or mitigate safety exposure.
While they are commonly considered as being inherently “negative” it’s important to keep in mind that Human Factors can be used to mitigate exposure. Human error comes from Human Factors, but so does quality human action.
Put your keyword knowledge to the test with this FREE hazard and risk assessment test. There are two tests available to suit the needs of all aviation service providers.
Last updated in May 2024.