Accidents: The human factors

Synopsis: Contributing factors exist not just in the person but also in the dynamic, sometimes unknown surroundings.


Both novices and experienced personnel contribute to the human error causing 70 percent of accidents.

Levels of failure

Reporting systems are usually ineffective in identifying these human failures. Hence, while engineering or mechanical failures have significantly been reduced, human error ratios over four decades remain the same.

Researchers say that they actually occurs at four different levels that need appropriate analysis:

• Unsafe acts of operators, like errors or violations by aircrew.
• Preconditions for unsafe acts like physical, mental or psychological health of operators or crew resource mismanagement.
• Unsafe supervision, like inadequacy or violations of supervision, poorly planned operations, and failure to correct known problems.
• Organizational influences like resources management, organizational climate or operational processes.
  

Personality?

A study in 2001 held that a quarter of ‘human error’ accidents are attributable to personality. High or low scores on certain traits correlate with the ability to avoid accidents or be prone to them:

• Dependability – conscientious and socially responsible
• Agreeableness – not aggressive or self-centred
• Openness – learning from experience and accepting suggestions from others.
  

High scores on the first two and low scores on the last decrease the likelihood of accidents. Low scores on first two causes competitiveness, and non-compliance with safety regulations. High score on the last leaves people dreamy and increases accident risk.

Profiles

Studies on pilot profiles however, failed to find a typical personality type. Important traits are intelligence, self-confidence, emotional maturity, adaptability, extraversion, and action orientation with desire for challenge and success. Combat pilots score highly on abstract thinking, stress tolerance, decisiveness and resilience.

Essentially operators in hazardous jobs need to be practical, sober and dependable. But a point with jet pilots appears to be a close relationship with their fathers. Also of the first 23 US astronauts in space flight, 21 were ‘first-born’.

Regarding gender, men in aviation score higher in competitiveness but lower in expressivity and striving for achievements. Women pilots appear to be more extraverted, agreeable and conscientious, having less openness and neuroticism than their male counterparts.

The surroundings

But some say labels merely enable people to blame their mistakes on their personality type. The point is factors exist not just in the person but also in the dynamic, sometimes unknown surroundings represented by:

• Technology
• Procedures
• Physical and non-physical environment
• Other people
  

People generally don’t go out with intention of causing accidents, but how they react to situations is important. That means interactions between the individual and objects or people around them are just as important.

The dynamics

Researchers believe that tests homogenize groups and the resulting average obtained becomes the ‘right stuff’. This obscures variability, and actual motivations for the job, because training and operational performances tend to differ.

Operations brings into focus adaptability, coping with stress, and a more crucial aspect to success – teamwork. Rising environmental pressures can cause personality conflicts, with operators either internalizing negativity or projecting it on others. This interferes with interpersonal relationships and individual contributions to team effort.

Comments/opinions, anyone??

References for “Accidents” blogposts:

All 155 Survive as Pilot Ditches Plane in Hudson

A human error analysis

Are you accident prone? (twmacademy.com)

Identifying the accident prone

Personality studies in air crew