SAFETY ACCOUNTABILITIES .1 SMS PLANNING

8-6 Safety Management Manual SMM 8.4.7 Chapter 2 discusses the allocation of resources as a fundamental organizational process. Allocation of resources is therefore one of the primordial functions of management. Paragraph 8.4.1 further discusses the management function as one of control of the activities of personnel and of the use of resources that are directly related to the delivery of services, as a consequence of which the organization is exposed to safety hazards. The fore-mentioned underlies the justification for the responsibilities and authorities of the Accountable Executive in 8.4.6: such responsibilities and authorities refer to either allocation of resources or control of activities, exclusively. An organization that appoints an Accountable Executive who does not have these authorities and responsibilities places the designated person in a position in which the person does not have the essential attributes to fulfil such a role. 8.4.8 The Accountable Executive may assign the management of the SMS to another person, provided that such assignment is properly documented and described in the organization’s safety management systems manual SMSM discussed later in this chapter. The accountability of the Accountable Executive is not, however, affected by the assignment of the management of the SMS to another person: the Accountable Executive retains final accountability for the performance of the organization’s SMS. 8.5 SAFETY ACCOUNTABILITIES 8.5.1 Chapter 3 discusses the management of safety as a core business function that contributes to the analysis of an organizations resources and objectives. This analysis forms the basis for a balanced and realistic allocation of resources between protection and production goals that supports the overall service delivery needs of the organization. Paragraph 8.4.1 discusses SMS as a management system for ensuring safe operations. Safe operations are unlikely unless a balanced and realistic allocation of resources between protection and production goals, which supports the overall service delivery needs of the organization, is achieved. In general terms, the safety accountabilities for ensuring safe operations, and the achievement of balance and realism in the allocation of resources, are materialized though the organization of the SMS itself, and particularly through one specific element of the SMS: the definition of the safety accountabilities of all personnel, but most importantly, of key personnel. 8.5.2 The safety accountabilities of managers regarding the organization of the SMS refer to the definition of an architecture of the organization’s SMS which corresponds to the size, nature and complexity of the operations, and to the hazards and safety risks associated with the activities necessary for the delivery of services. The safety accountabilities of managers regarding the organization of the SMS furthermore include the allocation of human, technical, financial or any other resources necessary for the effective and efficient performance of the SMS. 8.5.3 While the job descriptions of all employees, regardless of level, should include safety accountabilities and responsibilities, the safety accountabilities regarding the definition of safety responsibilities and authorities of key personnel refer to the inclusion in the job description of each senior manager departmental head or person responsible for a functional unit, of the responsibilities regarding the operation of the SMS, to the appropriate extent, in addition to the specific responsibilities for the operation of the departmentfunctional unit. Under the perspective of the management of safety as a core business function, every departmental head or person responsible for a functional unit will have a degree of involvement in the operation of the SMS and its safety performance. This involvement will certainly be deeper for those responsible for operational departments or functional units directly involved in the delivery of the basic services of the organization operations, maintenance, engineering, training and dispatch, hereafter referred to by the generic term “line managers” than for those responsible for supporting functions human resources, administration, legal and financial. 8.5.4 The safety accountabilities, responsibilities and authorities of all departmental heads andor persons responsible for functional units, and in particular line managers, must be described in the organization’s safety management systems manual SMSM, discussed later in this chapter. Safety accountabilities, responsibilities and authorities must be graphically depicted in a functional chart showing the interfaces and interrelationships in terms of the management of safety among the various sectors of the organization. Figure 8-2 is an example of a functional chart. Chapter 8. SMS Planning 8-7 Figure 8-2. Safety accountabilities 8.5.5 It is very important to note that Figure 8-2 depicts functions rather than organization. It is not intended to depict the organization of the management of safety in terms of departments and functional units and their relative hierarchical position within the enterprise, but rather the functions of each department andor functional unit in terms of the delivery of safety as a core business process. This caveat is important because there will be as many organizational charts as organizations may exist in aviation. Therefore, for the purposes of this manual, Figure 8-2 must be considered as a functional chart, not as an organizational chart. 8.5.6 The safety services office is at the heart of the functional chart. The concept of a safety services office is key to the notion of managing safety as a core business process, and to SMS as the system that management employs for such purpose. The safety services office is independent and neutral in terms of the processes and decisions made regarding the delivery of services by the line managers of operational units. In an SMS environment, the safety services office fulfils four essential corporate functions: a manages and oversees the hazard identification system; b monitors safety performance of operational units directly involved in service delivery; Safety Review Board SRB Accountable Executive Safety Action Groups SAG Flight safety officer Maintenance safety officer Safety services office Head of other areas Head of maintenance Head of operations 8-8 Safety Management Manual SMM c advises senior management on safety management matters; and d assists line managers with safety management matters. 8.5.7 In the traditional perspective of safety discussed in Chapter 2, the safety office was the exclusive “owner” of the entire safety process within the organization. The safety officer, often known as the accident prevention officer, was the person in change of identifying the safety concerns, proposing solutions, participating in the implementation of the solutions, and monitoring the effectiveness of the solutions. In recent years, the notion that “ownership” of the safety process was exclusive to the safety office was unwillingly reinforced by a widely-adopted industry practice establishing a direct reporting and communication link between the safety officer and the CEO of the organization. 8.5.8 The intention behind this widespread practice was two-fold. First, it aimed at raising the hierarchical level and conspicuousness of the safety office by establishing a direct link between the safety office and the CEO. Second, this direct link was intended to generate neutrality by removing those in charge of managing operational activities directly related to service delivery line managers from the assessment and resolution of safety concerns. The perspective was that there was a strong likelihood that line managers could, to varying degrees, be interested parties, thus leading to potential conflict of interest in the assessment and resolution of safety concerns. The direct relationship between the safety officer and the CEO was established to remove this perceived conflict of interest. 8.5.9 Clearly well-intentioned, this practice presented two serious downsides. First, by putting ownership of the safety process entirely in the safety office, it removed line managers from safety decision making. This nurtured the perception that “safety problems were the line manager’s problem; safety problems belonged to the safety office and the safety officer”. The line of accountability was effectively reduced to a two-party dialogue between the CEO and the safety officer. Given the workload of a CEO, this dialogue had all the potential to become a monologue. Second, and most importantly, it neglected the valuable input, in terms of know-how, that the operational units could bring to the organizational safety decision-making process. 8.5.10 The SMS environment brings a different perspective. The name safety office has been changed to safety services office, to reflect that it provides a service to the organization, to senior managers and to line managers, with regard to the management of safety as a core business process. The axiom “one cannot manage what one cannot measure” discussed in Chapter 3 is addressed under SMS. The safety services office is fundamentally a safety data collection and analysis unit. Through a combination of predictive, proactive and reactive methods discussed in Chapter 3, the safety services office captures what takes place within the operational drift also discussed in Chapter 3, by continuously and routinely collecting safety data on hazards during service delivery activities. 8.5.11 Once hazards have been identified, their consequences evaluated and the safety risks of such consequences assessed i.e. once safety information has been extracted from the safety data, safety information is delivered to line managers for resolution of underlying safety concerns. Line managers are the true subject-matter experts in their respective areas and therefore best able to design effective and efficient solutions and implement them. Furthermore, line managers can take the last step in the safety data analysis process, by turning safety information into safety intelligence and by providing a context for the information on hazards distilled by the safety services office. 8.5.12 As with the organization as a whole, the primary responsibility for safety management rests with those who “own” the production activities. It is during the production activities where hazards are directly confronted, where deficiencies in organizational processes contribute to unleashing the damaging consequences of hazards, and where direct supervisory control and resource allocation can mitigate the safety risks to ALARP. Moreover, process owners are the domain technical experts in any organization and thus the most knowledgeable about the technical processes of production. 8.5.13 After the safety information has been delivered to the appropriate line managers, the safety services office resumes its routine safety data collection and analysis activities. At a time interval agreed between the safety services office and the line managers in question, the safety services office will present new safety information about the safety Chapter 8. SMS Planning 8-9 concern under consideration to the line managers of the areas to which the safety concern pertains. The safety information will indicate if the mitigation solutions implemented by the line managers have addressed the safety concern, or if the safety concern persists. In the latter case, further mitigation solutions are deployed, a new time interval is agreed, safety data are collected and analysed, safety information is delivered, and this cycle is repeated as many times as necessary until safety data analysis substantiates that the safety concern has been resolved. Throughout this process, the line managers do not report to the safety services office, but to the Accountable Executive, as the person with final responsibility for the organization’s SMS, through any of the organization’s two formal safety bodies discussed in section 8.6. 8.6 APPOINTMENT OF KEY SAFETY PERSONNEL 8.6.1