36 RAMP SAFETY BRIEFING
Idealism or realism?
Brenda Aremo, Managing Director of Twiga Aero, remains less than impressed with the sector’s approach to the subject of safety.
afety on the ramp: a seemingly difficult goal to achieve or maintain, yet one that is critical. The quest is never-ending and the call to act is as constant and repetitive as a broken record. It is of great concern to all players within the aviation industry, from regulators, airport authorities, airlines, airframe manufacturers and ground service providers to ground support equipment manufacturers. Industry associations and many state authorities have it on their strategic priorities and agendas; however, ground operations remains under-regulated and, in most cases, unregulated. It is important to note that safety and
quality begin and end on the ground, which means the GSPs are a lot more visible and that they are key players. It also means there is a great opportunity to take some forward leaps. The GSP needs to ensure its place at the round table and discuss pro-actively and productively with airlines, regulators and airport authorities, because the industry demands it, and more importantly, because the passenger demands and deserves it. The costs (both indirect and direct)
related to incidents and accidents are skyrocketing, despite the certification/audit regimes of ISO, ISAGO, IOSA and so on, along with the accompanying frenzy of cosmetic compliance. So, are we expecting far too much from these audits? Are we guilty of Managing By Audit in our operations and, as a result, are we slowly losing sight of the fundamentals? These audits are, after all, only a snapshot of the operation at a particular time.
Targets and their importance
The relationship established by well intended, yet ill-written or unrealistic ground handling service level agreements and concession licenses, driven only by financial gain, should evolve into a partnership where the challenges facing all concerned are actively and collaboratively addressed. Setting unrealistic targets as clients and over-promising as providers only starts off the relationship on a bad note - a relationship that is frequently riddled by disappointments through failure to meet expectation and, in some cases, failure to
define those very expectations. We are pointing to the operational personnel and, quite likely, failing to point at the leadership. After all, they make the decisions, formulate the policies and devise the strategies. The leadership sets the stage, so if it looks chaotic on the ground it is because the leaders had a rôle to play, which may not have lived up to expectation.
Perhaps we simply ought to go back to basics in order to get it right, and implement the right systems to get the right results. After all, there is no sustainable benefit deriving from building on an insecure foundation. To manage safety we need to fully implement a robust and integrated risk, safety and quality management system. Additionally, having a strong base in process management and review will trigger continuous improvement in all tiers of the organisation and will further reinforce the system. Moreover, we must understand and leverage the organisational culture to drive any change. That inherent conflict that exists amongst the subcultures of the organisation gives rise to silos, which affect us greatly because they are unseen or simply ignored or downplayed. The reality is that people who are immersed in any of these subcultures have a hard time seeing that others may have a different and valuable perspective. The typical subcultures that exist today
range from those of the newbies to the old timers, the management vis-à-vis “the rest of us” and, to some extent, to the disparate departmental team cultures created by matrix organisations. It is worth, perhaps, a brief look at the key subcultures created by hierarchical organisations, broadly classified into three levels. These reveal the following. The operational level culture: This consists of day-to-day staff and line managers who, when empowered and active, can get a bunch of disparate individuals to pull together and work as a team. They expect good people to be loyal, candid and trustworthy and they will work to shut out those that don’t fit in. They can also be equally sceptical of all-embracing solutions and, from experience, know that technology generally does not work unless people are around to compensate for the
flaws and bugs in the design. The tactical level engineering culture: Engineers and technical specialists (particularly in IT) personify this culture. They are stimulated by puzzles, problems and the design challenge of creating an ideal world of elegant machines and systems that operate in harmony. There is a great tendency to design humans out of the systems rather than into them, and are often under utilised in the organisation. The strategic level executive culture: This typically consists of the senior management. Although they may support learning and human potential, their jobs and passion lie in marshalling the cashflow that keeps the organisation alive. They are directly accountable for maximising revenues and where applicable, shareholder value. They tend to be aloof and hardly visible in the operational environment. There is a tendency to overrate their presence and underestimate their influence.
The longer term
I feel that we must design the appropriate enterprise and structure for strategy and execution which calls for rôles, responsibilities and accountabilities that are fully understood and aligned throughout the organisation. There should be the setting of clear, specific, measurable objectives, metrics and targets and we should be communicating the progress made both regularly and widely. Moreover, we ought to be devoting the required resources, including time, to empower staff to perform and make improvements with the appropriate knowledge, authority and control. Finally, we should be frequently visiting the operations to reinforce performance, dissipate filters and test the effectiveness of decisions made. So, should there be a paradigm shift in the way we view safety? Absolutely - micro to macro! To summarise, elevating the view of operations to the strategic level not only broadens our perspective but also allows us to understand the value and impact of our leadership style and stakeholder management capabilities. Leaders are not only responsible for getting the right results
GROUND HANDLING INTERNATIONAL JUNE 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48