Process Matters

By Didrik Strand offroadpilots@gmail.com
Changes are often difficult to accept and to put in effort to make it work. When new things are introduced there are often skepticism and opposition. At times these arguments make conflicts within an organization. It might be tempting not to make changes just to keep peace in the valley. Personnel who don't like changes make their own changes by making hurtles to stop the new process. That's in itself is a change and an ineffective process. 

Process Matters – Get the material first and then build.
The process matters to everyone, for or against. It matters to the ones who want a change in the process and it matters to those who opposes. If processes didn't matter there would be no need to plan, do act and check. Processes are how we do things. Most of us have a process of how to get dressed in the morning. Some of the steps may not be in the same order each day, while there are other steps that must conform to a required process. Socks must come on before the shoes.

When changes become personal issue, the changes are no longer operational process changes, but process protection of independent comfort. The fear of change is the fear of loosing a stable and comfortable position. A comfortable position may not be productive or produce a profit, but at least it is comfortable. 

Process Matters – Get the tracks first then move the freight.
In an organization with flexible processes personnel adapt easier to changes. These are not variable processes, just flexible, and allowing resilience. Knowledge of how to improve a process is at the level of competence. Inputs for process changes (which is a process in itself) have better rate of success if all levels of competence in an organization is included. When including suggestions and addressing objections during the planning phase changes do not become strange competition to comfort, but just changes to the processes.

Processes matters to all.  It matters to those who say it doesn't (or they wouldn't have objected) and it matters to those who embrace process changes. 

BirdsEye59604

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting or Rejecting Risks

By Didrik Strand offroadpilots@gmail.com
Image
Accepting or rejecting risks is a fundamental principle in a successful safety management system (SMS). A person managing the safety management system is expected to maintain a process for identifying hazards to aviation safety and for evaluating and managing the associated risks and ensuring that personnel are trained and competent to perform their duties as they apply to the safety management system. This includes training for both the accountable executive and SMS manager, in addition to other airport and airline operations personnel. A level of risk is an inherent element of aviation safety and there are several types of risks to consider when accepting or rejecting risks. One type of risk may take precedence over another type even if it is not directly associated with operations. Risk control strategies are beyond accepting or rejecting a risk, it is to justify control actions based on defined criteria. There are five categories of risks. The total risk is the sum of identified an
Read more

Lawless

By Didrik Strand offroadpilots@gmail.com
Image
A safety management system (SMS) is a regulatory requirement for airport and airline operators, the SMS regulations are performance-based, processes must conform to regulatory requirements, but still, a healthy SMS is lawless. In a lawless system events are unrestricted, actions are reactive to immediate threats, and data are collected by random chance. A safety management system contains multiple components to conduct research study of patterns. Research study design is a framework, or the set of methods and procedures used to collect and analyse data on variables specified in a particular research problem. A safety management system research study designs comes in many shape and forms, with advantages and limitations. A rule-based SMS is an overcontrolled system to justify an expected definite and unambiguous output. A system where predetermined results exists, is a system without trust, without learning, without accountability, and a system where information sharing impossible. A la
Read more

Human Factors

By Didrik Strand offroadpilots@gmail.com
Image
Human factors and human errors are two separate things but are often used interchangeable in conversations and in the aviation industry. Human errors are attached to a person who could be linked to an occurrence. In addition, the severity of the outcome is a predetermining factor how important it is to assign human error as the root cause after an accident.  Human error root cause analysis has widespread support from the aviation industry. However, with the implementation of the Safety Management System (SMS) regulations, accountability came into play, and it became impossible to justify human error as the root cause.  A healthy SMS looks at the organization and its systems, and the fact that a person overlooked, or missed an item is no longer a root cause, such as a pilot missing a checklist item. Checklists are required and are used for any flight, but there is no evidence a missed checklist item was the root cause of any accidents. At the other end of the spectrum, completing the ge
Read more