Introduction
The Resource Management Department plays a major role in managing the aviation department. This department can be regarded as one of the most important and significant components of aviation and flight management, since even the slightest error in its operations can result in heavy costs or even the loss of human life. This places a very sensitive and critical responsibility on the Information Management (IM) department to work efficiently and effectively to the greatest extent through the optimized use of resources.
Even though the IM department seems to be working on techniques and strategies to operate more effectively, it still faces a growing number of problems and issues. The IM department is heavily criticized by concerned American authorities for not being able to eliminate or at least reduce the possibility of human-induced errors resulting in serious accidents and disturbing incidents. Some of the most common allegations against the IM department include landing an aircraft on an unplanned, unknown, or simply wrong runway; mistakenly landing or entering the airspace of an unknown or unplanned country; an aircraft striking pilings during its final approach; and, despite the implementation of high-definition technology, the possibility of an aircraft diving into a mountainous area or range.
Under this scenario, the fact must not be ignored that the IM department is trained using the latest simulation-based teaching aids. Furthermore, personnel are regularly trained in the latest technologies, programs, and implementation techniques to enhance their effectiveness, yet they tend to make errors that result in the aviation incidents described above. To ensure precision, reliability, and efficiency in the operations and processing of the Information Management Department, this paper proposes the implementation of a custom-built IMS for aviation.
Problem Statement
In aviation, there is no chance for negligence or ignorance. Any imprecision and mismanagement in information dissemination can create significant threats and risks, with hundreds of lives at stake. Therefore, the aviation department needs a system that can ensure precision as well as credibility when it comes to decision-making and information sharing.
Proposed Resolution
To ensure integrated precision and reliable decision-making through secure information sharing, an IMS can be implemented to ensure data engineering as well as Corporate Intelligence.
Lack Of Precision And Possibility Of High Error Rate By IM Department
The introduction of the IM department in the aviation domain is often termed a successful and beneficial enhancement to aviation management systems, since it contributes to enhancing crew efficiency and provides well-documented and planned training sessions (Helmreich & Wilhelm, 1991). The IM department may fail to address and manage the human errors that exist within aviation management systems. Furthermore, regardless of the vigilance of the crew, it is difficult to rule out the possibility of human error and negligence.
Fig: Aviation Operations that require IMS-based Efficiency and Security
It is a well-known fact that human beings are not perfect creatures. They are bound to make mistakes, specifically in situations of excessive workload and fatigue. To support this, it may be taken into account that the majority of positions in aviation departments are highly stressful and overloaded, causing fatigue that can impair the human brain and result in unintentional errors.
Parallel to the concept of vulnerability of the human mind, it must also be kept in mind that the majority of accidents and disasters, as reported and investigated by the aviation department, were the result of the failure or malfunctioning of so-called high-technology-based systems; the causes are often multiple, meaning that human error alone is relatively unlikely (Maurino, Reason, Johnston, & Lee, 1995). In the research and observations conducted by Reason (1997), it is clearly evident that multidimensional latent features and factors can develop from several organizational contexts, resulting in combinations of causes that lead to aviation disasters.
This also protects the IM department’s training programs against allegations of failed training sessions and the neglect of human factors in aviation accidents. Some blame must also be attributed to the erroneous definition of IM developments by several concerned aviation authorities. It has further been reported that these authorities define the evaluation criteria for the IM department in such a way that they even include personal and private details, including marital status and incidents of sexual harassment. Caught up in such controversial definitions, the IM department loses sight of its actual goals and objectives while becoming entangled in multiple unnecessary details. Critically analyzing the above-stated issues, the IM department can be regarded as an underdeveloped tool that needs to be improved to enhance team skills and capabilities.
The causes of errors are often multifaceted and multidimensional. They can affect even highly trained, experienced, motivated, and committed crew members. Such instances occur not only because of human error but also because of the natural limitations and vulnerability of the human mind, which can malfunction due to fatigue, sleep deprivation, workloads, systematic errors, etc. The systematic errors of another aviation department, such as air traffic control, can also increase the possibility of human error in another aviation department. Other than that, there is always a chance of unfortunate, unexplained events that are often termed the result of human error but are not. “Posed against these challenges is an array of defenses and weaknesses that can deflect or exacerbate latent errors or permit them to pass through unhindered. These include the positive and negative aspects of national culture, the strengths and failings of the organizational and professional cultures, and the nature and quality of training the organization provides” (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000). Other than that, there is also a minor chance that the personal attitude and mood of crew members may affect their efficiency in the workplace and thus result in human error. The following is a brief figure that describes several factors that contribute to the occurrence of human errors in various aviation departments.
Fig: The Causes of Error Inducing Agents and the Possible Defenses Against Them (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000)
Furthermore, “The observable outcomes of the flow of errors through the defense line of the organization are the behaviors of the flight crews as they reflect the concepts taught in CRM and reinforced (or ignored) by management and role models such as instructors and evaluators” (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000). The following is a brief figure that showcases the positive as well as the negative behaviors of the aviation crew. It is clearly evident from the diagram that sticking firmly to the underlying objectives and goals of CRM will enhance the possibility of safe aviation processes, while the chances of unsafe aviation processes are enhanced if CRM concepts are ignored.
Fig: Dependency of the Chances of Error over the Personal Behaviors of the Crew (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000)
Identification Of The Nature And Causes Of The Errors In Aviation
One of the major requirements for reducing the possibility of future errors in aviation departments within the organizational context is the ability of the concerned authorities to investigate an incident to its roots and identify the ultimate cause of the error that might have triggered a chain reaction leading to the incident. The investigation must include situations involving complacency, regardless of the perceived significance of the aviation processes. It must be kept in mind that “One of the things we know about pilots as a group is that they are of above-average intelligence and not likely to show sub-standard performance when their certification is at stake during formal evaluation” (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000).
Therefore, the aviation authority has compiled a list of essential components of error management that includes trust, a non-punitive policy toward errors, a commitment to identifying the causes of errors, essential flight data, high-tech training in a simulated environment that explains error-management strategies, specialized evaluators and trainers, etc. (Helmreich & Merritt, 2000).
Other essential strategies are Line audits, Incident Reporting Systems, Constant research and development of strategies, Error Avoidance Techniques, Error Tapping, in-range checklists, Error Mitigation, Error Exacerbation, etc.
If these strategies and components are generalized and customized by the top aviation authorities according to their customs and culture, error investigation will improve and the rate of future errors is likely to decrease. Furthermore, CRM will then be better enabled and more committed to working by precisely concentrating on its defined goals and objectives. The following is the conclusive diagram that describes the response of the crew to human errors.
Fig: Human Induced Error and the Response from the Crew
Benefits Of Implementing MIS
One of the best and most important benefits of implementing an integrated and purpose-built IMS system for aviation is efficient data engineering that ensures precise data management, information sharing, secure storage, etc.
Organizational structure in aviation is the hierarchical setup of the organization’s staff according to their positions and jobs. The organizational structure holds a very important position in maintaining and developing a firm foundation among competitors. It affects the internal processes, such as project time management, monitoring of project teams, and communication with clients, in such a way that the organization gets maximum productivity from its employees.
To get the best from its employees, the organizational structure needs to have three basic qualities. These qualities are flexibility, focus, and streamlining (Vladimir Collak 2007).
As we have already discussed data acquisition by the company’s HR Department, this article will now examine how important the relationships among members of this department are to acquiring and analyzing the best possible data. People often discuss the character and personality traits of the employees needed to work as a team; however, very few pay attention to the organizational structure (Sandal 1999).
In the process of data acquisition, the basic element of the organizational structure that affects data acquisition is the flexibility of the organizational structure. The structure should show enough flexibility to allow its HR Department to collect data from various dimensions to obtain the best and most accurate data that will remain valid in the long term.
To convert information into knowledge, the fundamental elements needed are “focus” and then “streamlining.” The team will be focused only when the authorities are sufficiently focused. In other words, teams reflect the authorities, and together they create a focused organizational structure. The more focused the HR team is, the more focused and relevant the information it will extract from the data. Focused information provides the foundation for authentic knowledge.
Streamlining an organizational structure makes it more effective and responsive regarding output (Transforming Organizational Structure). A streamlined organizational structure will reduce the HR Department to only the most relevant and competent employees. These employees are more likely to analyze and evaluate the information in the best possible way to provide maximum benefit to the organization. Information carefully analyzed by competent HR experts will result in the best possible form of ‘knowledge’ for the authorities.
Conclusively, it can be said that the organizational structure of the company should be very well organized to enable employees to focus on their tasks in the best possible way and provide the company with the most relevant benefits. A well-constructed organizational structure will streamline the processes and tasks within the organization by providing increased focus and an adaptive nature (Adnanman 2006).
Importance Of Data Management Through Integrated MIS
From the organization’s point of view, data represents organizational facts and the values of the results obtained (Bellinger, 2004). Further, the relationship between data and other tasks and relationships has the capacity to represent valuable information (Bellinger, 2004). Similarly, in the organizational setup, traced patterns that represent the relationship between data and information have the capacity to represent knowledge about various factors for the organization (Bellinger, 2004). The continuum of data, information, and knowledge is therefore very important for the organization; however, inherent limitations exist in each of these components. These inherent limitations also influence the decision-making processes of the organization.
The data collected specifically for accounting and sometimes for general use does not provide an absolute or concrete basis. This makes the data extremely vulnerable and sensitive. To handle this, the data has to be collected and evaluated with considerable judgment, precise estimation, and intense care. One has to wait before actually passing on the data and labeling it as complete. The time factor, resources, and authenticity of the sources have to be evaluated to collect reliable data; otherwise, the result may be unreliable.
Similarly, information acquisition is the system that gathers information for the organization. Its main concern should be how to obtain accurate information effectively rather than where and when the information can be extracted (Vitez, 2009). Some other factors that act as inherent limitations of the information-acquisition process can include the expense allocated to information management (Vitez, 2009). This can be one of the most crucial considerations. Employees have to be trained in a very planned and efficient manner, as this is a critical part of information management (Vitez, 2009). “The length and depth of the training may vary, making it difficult to estimate the cost of this training. Management will also have to account for the lost productivity during this training period” (Vitez, 2009).
The third factor in this continuum is ‘knowledge’ for organizational use. Similar to the inherent limitations related to data and information, knowledge also faces certain limitations that can affect organizational decisions. Knowledge depends greatly on experiences and external sources influencing the respective fields of the organization. Precisely, it can be said that the broader the organization’s vision, the more accurate the knowledge it will gain and the more likely that knowledge will remain reliable in the long term.
Collectively, we can identify the following factors as the basic inherent limitations that affect the continuum of data acquisition, information, and knowledge:
- Human Judgmental Skills;
- Evaluation Skills and Tricks;
- Time Factor;
- External Resources;
- Focus of the Concerned Team;
- Expenses;
- Employee Training;
- Organizational Vision.
These inherent limitations apparently affect the continuum of data, information, and knowledge; however, they also have a significant impact on the decision-making policies of organizations. The limitations can create serious problems in decisions made by organizations by producing “incorrect or inadequate information” for organizational use (Vitez, 2009). This can ultimately result in the waste of time, money, and resources. This may require another episode of reviewing the whole system, which may add to the cost and demands on the capabilities of the organization.
Recommendation: Information System Design
Infrastructure
The following are the basic components of the infrastructure of the “Aviation Management System” Project. As we know, the project is intended to design a system that simulates a system for aviation.
Hardware Platforms
No system can run without defined specifications. The project specifications define the minimum requirements needed to run the system. For example, we will have to specify the basic hardware specifications for the project so that it can run with all its features working efficiently.
For this project, we have defined our hardware specifications as follows:
- Core2Duo Processor
- VGA card installed with full graphics support
- JAVA-enabled system.
Accounts/Permission Control
We are designing our project in such a way that it is divided into sections that allow specific access to specific people depending on their levels. The following are some of the basic Control and Permission Features of the Aviation Management Project:
- Only one administrator has access to all the data and information of all the members who have signed in to the Aviation Management System;
- Senior Aviation Members: these are aviation members who have been actively working with the volunteers and have excelled compared with other members in their performance. These members will be assigned some management tasks in the system.
- New aviation members have to register in the member area by submitting their personal information. They will have permission only to access their information and data on the system.
Server Platforms
To run the system efficiently, a proper server platform is needed. This server platform should be capable of performing tasks at high speed and supporting multiple clients at high multitasking speeds. The following is our server platform.
12-core Opteron 6100 processor: it operates at clock speeds ranging from 1.7 to 2.3 GHz. This speed is sufficient to support a full-fledged and complex system. It has the capability to handle the multitasking needed to support thousands of clients at a time.
Environments For Build/Test/Deploy
- Building: The ‘Aviation Management System’ needs to be built in a specific environment to ensure proper development. The recommended environment will be a software house where the latest and best simulation modules are available to check the validity of the project.
- Testing: The project will be tested in a real-time scenario in which test cases will be assigned and evaluated while the system operates temporarily online. This testing phase will last for a few months to check for the possibility of any errors.
- Deployment: It is recommended that the ‘Aviation Management’ project be deployed at hospitals, universities, and high schools to attract a large number of aviation users. All of these locations will be connected to a cloud-computing environment.
References
Federal Aviation Administration (1997). Aviation safety action programs. Advisory Circular 120-66.
Helmreich, R.L. (1993). Fifteen years of the CRM wars: A report from the trenches. In Proceedings of the Australian Psychology Symposium (pp. 73-87). Sydney, Australia: The Australian Aviation Psychology Association.
Helmreich, R. L. (1997). Managing human error in aviation. Scientific American, pp. 62-67.
Helmreich, R.L., & Foushee, H.C. (1993). Why Crew Resource Management? Empirical and
theoretical bases of human factors training in aviation. In E. Wiener, B. Kanki, & R. Helmreich (Eds.), Cockpit Resource Management (pp. 3-45). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Helmreich, R.L., & Merritt, A.C. (1998). Culture at work: National, organizational, and professional influences. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Ashgate.
Helmreich, R.L., & Wilhelm, J.A. (1991). Outcomes of Crew Resource Management training. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1(4), 287-300.
Helmreich, R.L., Merritt, A.C. & Wilhelm, J.A. (in press). The evolution of Crew Resource Management. International Journal of Aviation Psychology.
Maurino, D. (1996). Eighteen years of the CRM wars: A report from headquarters. In B. Hayward & A. Lowe (Eds.), Applied Aviation Psychology: Achievement, Change and Challenge (pp. 20-26). Sydney: Avebury Aviation.
Maurino, D. (1998) Preface. In Helmreich, R.L., & Merritt, A.C. Culture at work: National, organizational, and professional influences. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Ashgate.
Maurino, D.E., Reason, J.T., Johnston, A.N. & Lee, R.B. (1995). Beyond aviation human factors. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Avebury Aviation.
Merritt, A.C., & Helmreich, R.L. (1996). Creating and sustaining a safety culture: Some practical strategies. In B. Hayward & A. Lowe (Eds.), Applied Aviation Psychology: Achievement, Change and Challenge (pp. 20-26). Sydney: Avebury Aviation.
Merritt, A.C., Helmreich, R.L., Wilhelm, J.A., & Sherman, P.J. (1996). Flight Management Attitudes Questionnaire 2.0 (International) and 2.1 (USA/Anglo). The University of Texas Aerospace Crew Research Project Technical Report 96-4.
Reason, J. (1997). Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Ashgate.
Helmreich, R.L., & Merritt, A.C. (2000). Safety and error management: The role of Crew
Resource Management. In B.J. Hayward & A.R. Lowe (Eds.), Aviation Resource Management (pp. 107-119). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Sandal, Gro M. (1999). “The Effects of Personality and Interpersonal Relations on Crew
Performance During Space Simulation Studies,” Journal of Human Performance in Extreme Environments, 4(1): 43-50.
Adnanman. (2006). What are the advantages of the organizational structure?
Bellinger, Gene. (2004). The Value of Knowledge Management.
https://www.systems-thinking.org/kmgmt/kmgmt.htm
Vitez, Osmond. (2009). Limitations on Management Information Systems.
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
