6 Lessons Every Aviation SMS Program Can Learn from Star Wars

Popular Culture Is Useful for Every Aviation SMS Program

Risk management lessons for your aviation SMS program don’t just have to be learned

• on the ICAO's website,
• in a thick SMS manual, or
• from academic risk management research.

Safety management lessons exist everywhere if you are looking out for them.

The movies from the Star Wars saga provide many risk management lessons, including:

• Why lessons learned are so important;
• Why you can’t eradicate risk;
• Power of safety behavior and safety culture;
• Importance of corrective preventative actions (CPAs);
• Effects of punitive safety policies; and
• Performance pressure vs. preparedness.

Star Wars does a good job of demonstrating the same kinds of problems that hurt every aviation SMS program at one time or another. Some problems remain an ongoing plague in aviation safety management, such as performance vs preparedness and punitive safety culture. Here are 6 lessons every aviation SMS program can learn from Star Wars.

1 – Have a Lessons Learned Library

Having a lessons learned library is critical for any aviation SMS program. If the Empire had implemented a lessons learned library, chances are that they would not have repeated the same exact mistake twice in a row.

Despite the fact that a lessons learned library is a fairly straightforward idea, I’m surprised at how few safety programs in aviation actively adopt one. A lessons learned library should:

• Contain critical lessons that were learned from specific risks and behavior; and
• Be available to all employees for review.

If the second death star (and third death star, aka “starkiller” from the new movie) had employed this, architects would probably not have created another hole (twice) that lead directly to the nuclear core of the station, and it probably would have been better guarded (twice).

2 – An Aviation SMS Program Cannot Eradicate Risk

Unfortunately, the death star was created to be an “unbeatable” space station. This idea was doomed from the start.

SMS programs in aviation are not designed to eradicate the risk. This way of thinking is destined for failure. In fact, safety programs that operate with a risk-eradication mindset actually make them more vulnerable to risks when they arise.

Risk management is a two-fold process of:

1. Avoiding risk by identifying precursors to risk and threats before the risk materializes; and
2. Mitigating risks when they do arise through superior safety behavior.

Employees need to be just as equipped to mitigate risk as they are with avoiding it. The death star failed (twice) because it depended so much on its invulnerability, rather than the accountability of personnel behaviors.

3 – Safety Behavior As Important As SMS Structure

No matter how much an SMS program does the following, the program will only ever be as effective as employees’ safety behavior:

• Plans around threats,
• Predicts risks;
• Reviews aviation safety data for further-needed controls; and
• Complies with oversight agencies’ requirements to create the most rock-solid safety management system in existence.

Remember that SMS structure is designed to support an effective safety culture, not replace it. If either the Empire or New Order had focused more on quality safety behavior rather than the structure of their fortresses, the Rebels would have been in pretty bad shape.

4 – Punitive Safety Culture Is Not Sustainable in Aviation Safety Management

Remember what happened to commanders when they reported bad news in the Empire or New Order? They died. While nobody is dying in actual aviation safety programs for reporting concerns, it is not uncommon for employees who report sensitive safety issues to face:

• Being ostracized by fellow employees;
• Retaliation from management through punitive measures; or
• Danger of being terminated, put on a probationary period or suffering poor performance reviews.

Likewise, employees may also face retaliation if they don’t meet reporting requirements, such as in the case where management wants their SMS program to appear legitimate. Safety culture should be positive. Punitive safety culture is not sustainable because it always leads to leading-indicator red flags like:

• High employee turnover rate;
• Low number of average employment time at company; and
• An inadequate number of hazards reports submitted per employee.

5 – Aviation SMS Program Corrective Preventative Actions Negate Repeat Mistakes

The Empire clearly did not employ corrective preventative actions (CPAs). If they did, then they would have made all three of the following changes to the new death star:

1. Preventative changes to reduce the chances of potential risk;
2. Detective changes to more easily identify similar risk in the future; and
3. Corrective changes to fix existing problems that contribute to risk.

All three points are the basis for CPAs in aviation risk management. They are designed to implement changes with small, incremental changes. Their goal is to prevent mistakes – often repeat mistakes – from happening again in the future. However, CPAs can also be used to prevent hypothetical risk scenarios as well.

If the Empire had used CPAs, they might have created one for “No direct access to the nuclear reactor via armed aircraft.”

6 – Performance Pressure vs. Preparedness Kills Safety Behavior

This is perhaps the biggest mistake of the Empire. Too much pressure to perform will cause employees to behave in terribly unsafe ways.

Performance vs. preparedness in aviation SMS programs is an age-old battle. Companies need to:

• Make money;
• Perform quality services; and
• Be timely.

These quality management systems (QMS) often conflict with safety management goals. Tasks need to be timely, but they also need to be safe. The unfortunate fact is that many organizations really push their bottom dollar ahead of the performance. I can think of 2 local aircraft accidents just this year that occurred because the operator chose service over safety.

If you are interested in proactive risk management, you will probably want to review your leading indicators and KPIs.