The Purpose and Objectives of Study
This case explores the risk and its settlement in managing the British Heathrow Airport. The successive stages of action include the targeted identification of possible hazards, their assessment, and the preparation of a sustainable response that is sufficiently flexible in relation to probable threats. The following set of key performance indicators is used to assess the overall performance of an airport and its susceptibility to disruption:
- Security: Quality
- Healthcare: On the flight and at the airport
- Flights: Safety, skilled cabin crew, and the aircraft inspection
In contrast, various structural models are used for financial and probationary risk and damage assessments. In the format of a personal research diary, the individual contribution of one of the creators of the project presentation will be presented, including a personal reflection of the academic work done.
Academic Diary
Risk Management Plan
July 16, 2022. The initial focus of the project was on exploring the theory necessary to be able to apply risk assessment models when assessing London Heathrow Airport. The literature review included only eligible academic sources that study risk management in major corporations. What is more, the studies that explored the possible ways of risk forecasting and creating conditions for their timely warning or prevention were also researched. In addition, the literature devoted to real cases of risk management in the management of airports was studied in detail to prepare for conducting this particular research.
July 25, 2022. The exploration of the literature that focuses on similar matters shaped the conceptual idea of this project, providing the sequence of actions required for the risk management plan. Therefore, Hutsaliuk et al. (2020) claim that the primary stages of developing the abovementioned plan are monitoring, controlling, and reporting. As a result, the activities required for London Heathrow Airport’s risk management plan should include an assessment of the existing circumstances, a search for deficiencies, an assessment of potential damage, the preparation of a sustainable plan, and then control over a fixed problem-risk area.
The risk management plan is an integral part of smooth airport operations as it helps prevent dangerous situations that can put the lives of staff and passengers at risk. Therefore, the previously mentioned key performance indicators assess the chances of disruption within or outside the airport. The quality of security ensures the safe experience of the passengers while they prepare to board the plane, which includes the following steps: check-in and baggage check (Fouzi et al., 2021; Moretti et al., 2018). However, it is also critical to be prepared for health emergencies that might occur in the airport or on the actual flight to provide the customers with medical attention and confirm satisfactory health conditions (Rezaee & Yousefi, 2018; Insua et al., 2018). Still, the most crucial indicator is safety on the flight, which can be ensured not only with a skilled cabin crew that can find a solution to any problem that can happen in the air but with an aircraft that is checked in accordance with all the requirements for the flight.
Risk assessment requires thorough research of the airport’s conditions, internal and external, that can provoke catastrophic repercussions. The possible risks identified in the section of this project were developed using brainstorming and an in-depth analysis of London Heathrow Airport’s case. As a matter of fact, the indicators of the risks’ impacts were defined to create well-developed risk criteria further.
Identifications of Risk
July 30, 2022. The united effort of the group was critical for searching the risk areas for this project. The scenario-building techniques were employed during the online group meeting to create the most eclectic set of possible problems or issues worthy of attention. Scenario planning allowed for a broader view of risks and the opportunities arising from them, as it considered and took into account the potential results and the corresponding actions of the management personnel (Martin-Vegue, 2021). The Ishikawa diagram, dedicated to analyzing causes through the root structural model, made it possible to more adequately and formally distribute the categories of hazards (Pearl & Mackenzie, 2018). The identification of risks thus becomes more meaningful, making it possible to deduce reasons for preventive measures from specific causes.
Risk Criteria and Probability Impact Model
July 2, 2022. The second critical stage in the preparation of the project was creating a following stable model of risk criteria that would allow the distribution of possible risks at London Heathrow Airport. Furthermore, the table provides the hazards in the groups according to their impact scores, which allows the development of ways to prevent the following issues.
Risks were assessed by their impact on a scale from 1 to 5, which then assigns the descriptor to the identified possible hazards that can happen within or outside the airport. The minor problems that can occur on the flight without affecting the crew, passengers, and pilots were labeled with a lower impact score (Rakas et al., 2018; Ketabdari et al., 2018). On the contrary, mechanical and electrical failures in real-life situations received the highest hazard rating among risk situations.
Consequently, the risk criteria in the last part of the project depend on an in-depth analysis of possible scenarios that might happen if any of the KPIs is unsatisfactory. The methods employed to define the potential threats to the passengers or crew have been further explored to create a probability impact model (Huang et al., 2021; Di Mascio et al., 2020). This table is critical for realizing what mitigation strategies should be developed to prevent the hazards from happening within or outside London Heathrow Airport.
Monte-Carlo Simulation as a Tool for Risk Management Plan
July 10, 2022. Calculating the estimated cost of covering risks is also a prerequisite for preparing a sustainable hazard management plan. The analysis of Monte Carlo’s counting system was conducted to find the minimum, maximum, and median risk management costs. Overall, the Monte Carlo simulation is an efficient tool for not only identifying the probability of certain risks occurring within the company but estimating the risk management costs (Arend & Schäfer, 2019). Therefore, this counting system was used to develop the mitigation strategies and compare them in accordance with the funds they require to be successfully integrated into the system of London Heathrow Airport. Therefore, the following mitigation strategies are considered along with the costs for their execution:
- Loss reduction. The airport and the aircraft cabin crews must ensure that unwanted risks can be avoided by preventing them with the needed solutions. For instance, emergency landings are often dangerous and can lead to crashes (Janssen et al., 2019). Therefore, it must be ensured that the airplane has extra fuel that can suffice to fly to the place where the landing is safe and does not pose a danger to the people. However, considering the risks that can be prevented this way, this strategy is an expensive option that London Heathrow Airport can opt for if needed.
- Coping with the risk. The airport should focus on the quality of its operations and eliminate any possible factors that can provoke repercussions that may put in danger staff or clients. To elaborate, the in-depth assessment of aircraft after each flight ensures that everything works properly (Dan et al., 2019). Thorough inspections of the passengers’ baggage to prevent any issues because of easily flammable or sharp objects. Naturally, the daily preparations for safe flights do not require much money, just effort.
Reflections
During the preparation of this project, I also discovered and applied the leadership skills that are the basis of effective group management. It is important to note that in the modern world, leadership is impossible without knowledge of corporate ethics, which will be human-centric at its core. The focus on the employee as a person and not on the performance function allows you to build ethically based, economic-institutional, but at the same time, socio-emotional relationships within the corporate space. The leader must consider human-centeredness as a principle of successful human resource management. In the process of working on the project, I noticed that it is this gentle and sensitive, empathic leadership that is the natural way to achieve results that would be dictated by real motivation and, therefore, become more valuable.
Reference List
Arend, M.G. and Schäfer, T., 2019. Statistical power in two-level models: A tutorial based on Monte Carlo simulation. Psychological methods, 24(1), p.1.
Dan, P.A.N., Yongzhou, L.I., Fan, L.U.O. and Ao, L.I.U., 2019. Risk identification and action mechanism of flying area in civil airport. China Safety Science Journal, 29(4), p.152.
Di Mascio, P., Cosciotti, M., Fusco, R. and Moretti, L., 2020. Runway veer-off risk analysis: An international airport case study. Sustainability, 12(22), p.9360.
Fouzi, B., El Idrissi, H. and Nouzha, J., 2021. Applying a risk management approach in controlling QMS processes and interactions with the relevant interested parties: The case of an airport. Iraqi Journal of Science, pp. 36-43.
Huang, C.N., Liou, J.J., Lo, H.W. and Chang, F.J., 2021. Building an assessment model for measuring airport resilience. Journal of Air Transport Management, 95, p.102101.
Hutsaliuk, O., Koval, V., Tsimoshynska, O., Koval, M., & Skyba, H. (2020). ‘Risk management of forming enterprises integration corporate strategy’, TEM Journal, 9(4), 1514.
Insua, D.R., Alfaro, C., Gómez, J., Hernandez-Coronado, P. and Bernal, F., 2018. A framework for risk management decisions in aviation safety at state level. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 179, pp.74-82.
Janssen, S., Sharpanskykh, A. and Curran, R., 2019. Agent-based modelling and analysis of security and efficiency in airport terminals. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 100, pp.142-160
Ketabdari, M., Giustozzi, F. and Crispino, M., 2018. Sensitivity analysis of influencing factors in probabilistic risk assessment for airports. Safety science, 107, pp.173-187.
Martin-Vegue, T. (2021). How to write strong risk scenarios and statements. ISACA.
Moretti, L., Di Mascio, P., Nichele, S. and Cokorilo, O., 2018. Runway veer-off accidents: Quantitative risk assessment and risk reduction measures. Safety science, 104, pp.157-163.
Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Allen Lane.
Rakas, J., Bauranov, A. and Messika, B., 2018. Failures of critical systems at airports: impact on aircraft operations and safety. Safety science, 110, pp.141-157.
Rezaee, M.J. and Yousefi, S., 2018. An intelligent decision making approach for identifying and analyzing airport risks. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, pp.14-27.