Introduction
Safety is one of the pillars of the modern civil aviation industry. Regarding the constantly growing number of passengers and the high price of mistake, there is a critical need for practical systems and approaches that will help to minimize the chance of error and create a safe environment beneficial for all clients. Unfortunately, some aspects might deteriorate the effectiveness of measures employed by airlines, precondition the emergence of vulnerabilities and accidents with victims (Cromie et al., 2015).
The human factors are one of the problems belonging to this group. Statistics show that the bigger part of undesired events or issues emerges due to the careless attitude of the crew, disregard of responsibilities, lack of professionalism, and errors that appear because of the human factors (FAA, 2014). The probability of mistake linked to the issue estimates around 30%, which is too high for aviation (FAA, 2014). For this reason, there is a need for an enhanced understanding of the problem that can be generated by analyzing existing accidents and cogitating about possible ways to avoid them.
Definition
The importance of the given problem is evidenced by the existence of multiple approaches to determine human factors and their role in the modern aviation sphere. One of the definitions views this concept as a unique phenomenon, including numerous social, biological, physiological, and psychological features of individuals and groups that might influence the effectiveness of their performance, processes, and outcomes (ICAO, 2016). It means that employees working in the aviation industry are affected by multiple factors that should be considered to ensure the high level of their effectiveness and passengers’ safety.
Real-life experience shows that disregard of this factor might precondition the emergence of multiple accidents and crashes. International agencies, such as International Civil Aviation Association (ICAO) and International Air Transport Association (IATA) also show their concerns regarding human factors and emphasize a severe need for the alteration of the existing approach to this problem to create more effective security systems (IATA, 2018; ICAO, 2016). In such a way, the discussed aspect preserves its topicality for the aviation sphere.
Analysis
The critical importance of the human factors is evidenced by one of the most disastrous catastrophes in the history of civil aviation. To passenger jets, KLM Flight 4805 and Pan Am Flight 1736 collided on the runway at Los Rodeos Airport and preconditioned the death of 583 individuals (Weick, 1990). The investigation of the tragedy showed that the misunderstanding between the flight crew and ground personnel was the major cause of the event (Weick, 1990).
The complex weather conditions, thick fog, and the limited visibility demanded close cooperation between pilots and dispatchers responsible for aircraft, their movement, and the permission to start take-off. However, the strong accent of the specialists, the use of ambiguous and non-standard by the KLM co-pilot, and simultaneous radio transmissions resulting in the emergence of interference and noises complicated communication between all specialist and preconditioned the fatal decision to continue moving in selected directions and try to take off (McCready et al., 1998). The investigation board concluded that human factors could be viewed as the basic cause of this disaster.
Relevance
The given case demonstrates the relevance of human factors for the civil aviation sphere. At the moment, the effective functioning of any airport can be linked to sociotechnical systems (STS) regulating the essential operations and their outcomes. STS can be determined as a specific method of organizational work design that presupposes the interaction between people and technology in the workplace (Price, 2013).
It means that regardless of the advances in technology and the use of innovative devices to regulate complex processes and the functioning of the airport, people still remain an integral part of all activities, and their contribution is central for results. The analyzed disaster shows that the human component of STS failed to employ existing technologies and devices appropriately and create a dangerous situation (Price, 2013). The airport was provided with all equipment needed to guarantee safety to passengers; however, the human factors preconditioned the emergence of fatal accidence.
Analysis of the disaster and its primary causes shows that the crash could have been avoided. In general, the case can be considered a chain of misunderstandings and a lack of correct vision of the whole situation. The limited visibility introduced the need to rely on data from devices and dispatchers. At the same time, the high traffic load and simultaneous messages from two aircraft preconditioned the confusion of the ground personnel and the flight crew (McCready et al., 1998).
It shows the relevance of human factors and, at the same time, outlines the idea that the adherence to standardized practices, observation of existing rules, and additional training can be viewed as the basic measures to promote higher safety levels and avoid mistakes linked to individual’s inability to act effectively in stressful situations.
Human Factors Measurement
The given accident triggered vigorous debates about the ways to minimize risks associated with the human factors and their measurement to avoid the repetition of such scenarios. The case also showed the critical need for regulatory measures that would be able to affect the given component and ensure that personnel possesses the level of skills appropriate for performing complex tasks. However, there are several challenges coming from the fact that human factors encompass multiple components that should also be measured to ensure that a person can work with a high level of effectiveness (Arcurio, Nakamura and Armborst, 2018).
For this reason, regulatory measures offered by ICAO (2016) are focused on the enhancement of result by affecting flight deck design, levels of motivation, crew training, supervision, adherence to standard operation rules, and ground personnel resource management. Measurement of these phenomena presupposes regular checks and exams for specialists working in airports to guarantee current motivation, performance, and skill levels are sufficient to work and support a safe environment.
Training
The analyzed case also shows the critical importance of training as a vital component of human factors measurement and improvement. In accordance with the investigation board’s conclusion, the lack of skills, experiences, and poor understanding of standardized practices should be viewed as the causes for the collide (Weick, 1990).
For this reason, ICAO and IATA recommend the creation of the environment beneficial for the acquisition of additional knowledge and training by staff (ICAO, 2014). The dominant idea states that all workers of the civil aviation industry should be provided with generalized data of human factors, their impact on outcomes, and the ways to avoid mistakes in their work.
At the same time, training and specific courses can be considered a potent tool to improve language and communication skills, promote the ability to react in complex situations, and fill the gaps in knowledge related to some processes peculiar to the aviation sphere (Seedhouse et al., 2019). For this reason, regular skill revision and enhancement is a crucial component of human factors management.
Motivation
Motivation can be viewed as another essential component related to the case. Thus, in accordance with IATA’s (2018) guidelines, it is the central factor that helps to reduce the number of poor mistakes in civil aviation and reduce risks linked to human factors. For this reason, all organizations working in the industry recognize the need to cultivate motivation among workers to minimize the incidence and improve their performance (ICAO, 2016).
At the same time, the lack of motivation might be linked to the unwillingness to be involved in processes important for positive outcomes and make a serious effort to avoid mistakes. For this reason, human factors cannot be analyzed without discussing motivation and its critical importance for the creation of a safe environment during flights. Moreover, being one of the basic determinants of employees’ satisfaction, it should also be provided with much attention and resources to avoid the decrease in its levels.
Tiredness
Finally, the case demonstrates the critical role tiredness and stress play in preconditioning negative outcomes and disasters. As per reports, the airport at Los Rodeos was over-loaded, and the level of traffic was high. Representatives of the ground service and dispatchers had to manage aircraft in complex conditions. Moreover, the deterioration of weather and limited visibility also increased the level of their tiredness and stress. For this reason, providing instructions to two planes at the same time, specialists failed to consider all factors and make a correct decision (McCready et al., 1998).
Today, there is a specific approach to planning working schedules and shifts to avoid overload and tiredness (IATA, 2018). Moreover, there are additional specialists that can assist ground personnel when needed. For pilots, the high levels of stress and fatigue can also be managed by providing more extended rest periods and appropriate planning.
Normalization of Deviance
The analyzed crash also poses an important question of the differences between standard practices that are recommended by organizations such as ICAO and IATA, and practices employed by pilots and personnel. The fact is that the investigation board considered the use of unconventional, non-standard, and ambiguous language by the KLM co-pilot, and the control tower was one of the primary causes of the misunderstanding between all participants and the crash (McCready et al., 1998).
It means that the use of such phrases and the manner of communication was accepted between pilots and other specialists and was viewed as a common practice. For this reason, it is possible to conclude about the case of unprofessional behavior and normalization of deviance.
The given term is closely linked to the human factors and is often taken as the factor deteriorating the outcomes. It can be determined as the continuous process when unacceptable and even dangerous practices, methods, approaches, and standards transform into acceptable and are employed by specialists in their workplaces (Lock and Bearman, 2018). The main threat associated with normalization of deviance comes from the fact that it might precondition the disaster due to the disregard of vital elements of safe practice and lack of attention to other concepts (Lock and Bearman, 2018).
As for the accident in Los Rodeos, pilots and workers of Tenerife control tower did not observe the basic instruction demanding the use of distinct and standard phrases to outline intentions and warn other specialists about changes in plans or would be actions (McCready et al., 1998). Instead, the crew and ground service used simplified practices that preconditioned the use of false information and the inability to accept the correct decision about future actions.
Organizational Weakness
Finally, the case demonstrates the importance of correct and effective organization of processes to ensure the absence of critical mistakes or failures. Organizational weakness can be determined as the existence of some gaps or loopholes in the planning and management that can precondition the deterioration of outcomes or the emergence of problematic issues. As for the accident, the airport in Tenerife was not equipped with the additional take-off runaways to guarantee that all boards would be able to use them.
For this reason, dispatchers had to face difficulties in managing two aircraft and trying to avoid their clash (Weick, 1990). The given organizational weakness preconditioned the deterioration of the situation and the emergence of a critical issue that resulted in the death of multiple passengers and members of the crew.
Impact of the Accident on Practice
In such a way, investigation shows that human factors became a primary cause of the accident. For this reason, the crash triggered the emergence of new practices recommended to pilots and specialists. ICAO introduced the requirement for standard phrases and the need to master English as a working language to avoid misunderstandings similar to those that emerged in the case (Weick, 1990).
Moreover, any air traffic instruction should be acknowledged with a readback of the major parts to prove the mutual understanding and demonstrate the readiness to follow guidelines. Finally, relations between the crew members were reconsidered to encourage less experienced members to debate with captains if they have doubts (Price, 2013). Today, crew resource management is obligatory for all airline pilots to avoid similar accidents.
Conclusion
Altogether, the crash at Los Rodeos evidences the critical importance of human factors for the aviation sphere. The central causes that preconditioned the collapse included the poor understanding between pilots and ground service, the use of unusual phrases, and lack of the complete image of the current situation.
The accident triggered the reconsideration of the major practices used to increase the effectiveness of STS and avoid similar cases in the future. Today, ICAO and IATA recommend paying significant attention to human factors as a vital component of a safe environment that might guarantee that all passengers will benefit from the high level of security and comfort. Moreover, the need for measuring this aspect also became evident as one of the methods to avoid negative outcomes.
Reference List
Arcurio, M., Nakamura, E. and Armborst, T. (2018) ‘Human factors and errors in security aviation: an ergonomic perspective’, Journal of Advanced Transportation. Web.
Cromie, S. et al. (2015) ‘Integrating human factors training into safety management and risk management: a case study from aviation maintenance’, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability, 229(3), pp. 266-274. Web.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2014) Human factors research and applications. Web.
International Air Transport Association (IATA) (2018) Safety report. Web.
International Civil Aviation Association (ICAO) (2014) The integration of human factors in research, operations, and acquisitions. Web.
International Civil Aviation Association (ICAO) (2016). Safety report. Web.
Lock, J. and Bearman, C. (2018) ‘Normalization of deviation: quotation error in human factors’, Human Factors, 60(3), pp. 293-304. Web.
McCready, J. et al. (1998). Human factors: Tenerife revised. Web.
Price, J. (2013). Practical aviation security: predicting and preventing future threats. 2nd edn. New York, NY: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Seedhouse, E. et al. (2019) Human factors in air transport: understanding behavior and performance in aviation. New York, NY: Springer.
Weick, K. (1990) ‘The vulnerable system: An analysis of the Tenerife Air Disaster’, Journal of Management, 16(3), pp. 571–593. Web.