SMS Pro Aviation Safety Software Blog 4 Airlines & Airports

Aviation SMS Are Not Required by All Operators

In November 2006, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICA0) mandated the implementation of formal aviation safety management systems (SMS) for most commercial aviation service providers. Besides the usual suspects of large airlines and airports, the list of required operators includes

• flight schools,
• aircraft designers,
• aircraft parts manufacturers, and

How to Understand Fatigue in Aviation SMS

Fatigue is a top safety priority. Even moderate levels of fatigue can cause employees to demonstrate the same mental and physical capabilities as an intoxicated person.

Discussing fatigue in aviation safety management systems (SMS) becomes interesting when one considers the onus for managing fatigue is on multiple parties, namely:

• Civil aviation authority for providing regulatory framework and oversight activities to ensure operators manage fatigue based on scientific principles, knowledge, and operational experience;

Employee Resistance in Aviation SMS Implementations

The majority of aviation service providers are required to implement formal aviation safety management systems (SMS) per the November 2006 ICAO mandate. This is a requirement. SMS implementation is not optional for most operators.

Just as the SMS implementation is not optional, employees do not have the luxury of shirking their duties and responsibilities to the SMS.

What Is Trend Analysis in Aviation Safety Management?

It is a common misnomer that trend analysis in risk management is used to forecast future performance. This understanding of trend analysis is both reductive and distorts the purpose of trend analysis in aviation safety management systems (SMS).

According to the FAA, the objective of aviation SMS implementations is to:

• proactively manage safety,
• identify potential hazards;
• determine risk, and

What Does It Mean to Restructure Aviation SMS Implementations

Occasionally aviation safety managers will want to do a turn and pivot with the direction of their aviation safety management system (SMS) implementation. What this looks like is restructuring.

When safety managers decide to restructure an aviation SMS implementation, it means changing and updating the bureaucratic structure of the SMS and possibly some of the SMS' documented risk management processes.

The Obvious Reasons

We are generally aware of the more straightforward indicators of unhealthy aviation safety management systems (SMS).

Things like:

• Low safety reporting numbers
• Poor safety audit results
• High accident rates

There are several other data-supported indicators of course, but you get the idea.

The Real Purpose of Gap Analysis

A true aviation SMS implementation takes years and a lot of hard work to effect lasting change. SMS implementations can take considerably longer due to:

• Poor gap analyses;
• Ineffective procedures;
• Unstable safety management teams;
• Resistance from upper management;
• Poor oversight (internal & external audits); and
• Mistaken assumptions.

Safety Auditors Are a Rare Breed of Personality Traits

Good aviation safety auditors play a vital role in the ability of an aviation safety management system (SMS) to identify

• substandard safety performance; and
• ways in which the SMS can improve.

Furthermore, safety auditors provide oversight to ensure regulatory and contractual obligations are fulfilled. This oversight is one method of data collection in an SMS' Safety Assurance (SA) component.

All Four Pillars Are Not Created Equal

Aviation safety professionals know that the four pillars of safety management systems are the foundational idea upon which aviation safety management systems (SMS) are based.

1. Safety Policy – Defines methods, procedures, and organizational structure
2. Safety Risk Management – Looks at the adequacy of, and determines the need for, risk controls, and identifies new hazards

FAA’s Safety Risk Management (SRM) Process and Hazard Identification Element

The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) SRM compliance requirement for hazard identification controls every U.S. aviation service provider required to implement formal aviation safety management systems (SMS). These SRM requirements indirectly affect these operators' safety culture and risk management processes whether they like it or not.

Unlike traditional safety programs, formal aviation SMS implementations have requirements for management to participate and provide oversight to ensure the SMS remains operational across the entire organization.