1. 1 Human Factors in Air Navigation Services HUFA Safety Culture in ATM: Air Traffic Control Billy Josefsson, SCAA Norrköping Åsa Ek, Ergonomics, Lund University Marcus Arvidsson, Psychology, Lund University Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics, Lund University Curt R Johansson, Psychology & UNIVA, Lund University Sven Ternov, Ergonomics / SCAA A co-operation between Swedish Civil Aviation Administration (SCAA) and Lund University

2. 2 Human Factors in Air Navigation Services HUFA Background Operational and organizational changes in ATM a call for focus on preserving and continuously improving safety. Overall objectives with HUFA Provide tools for implementing, monitoring and improving safety culture and safety - support learning processes and proactive risk analysis - monitor how org changes affect safety culture (SC)

3. 3 HUFAs environment at Lund University: multi- disciplinary centres and HOFRIM group Change@Work change processes LUCRAM risk analysis and risk mgmt Swedish Centre for Aviation Research DTA, Decision Training Academy HOFRIM Human and Organizational Factors in RIsk Management Projects:. HUFA.

4. 4 Examples of some projects Incident reporting system in airline Curt R Johansson, Psychology, Johan Jönsson, Psychology, Per Odenrick, Ergonomics, Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics Operator-centered local error management in ATC Sven Ternov, LU and SCAA, Göran Tegenrot, ATCC Malmö, Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics Learning for safety - mental load and learning in pilot training Nicklas Dahlström, Ergonomics, Lund University School of Aviation, Clemens Weikert, Psychology, Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics Safety in airport ground handling - a pilot project Åsa Ek, Ergonomics, Mattias Hallberg, Sven Ternov, Ergonomics, Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics Maritime safety Göran Jense, Sociology, Växjö University, Bengt Erik Stenmark, expert, Åsa Ek, Ergonomics, Max Mejia, Ergonomics, World Maritime University, Roland Akselsson, Ergonomics

5. 5 Basic views A system view on safety - from legislative bodies to the process Management and organizational factors (change management) Organizational learning (learning from ’everything’) Identify system weaknesses (latent conditions, safety barriers) – to err is human Proactive risk management Man-technology systems (complex systems; design for safety)

6. 6 A system view on safety Nat & Int Government Company Management Process Stressors Changing political climate Changing market conditions Change competency and levels of education Fast technological development Rasmussen 1997 Regulators Staff The whole system must be in phase with the environment Goal oriented control Fast feedback Continuous learning is necessary Levels for RM

7. 7 Learning from ’everything’ large accidents accidents near accidents anomalies risk analyses training revisions research education Proactive and reactive

8. 8 How to measure safety culture? Perceptions of safety culture dimensions Behaviours Safety management system

9. 9 Safety culture perceptions Learning Reporting Justness Flexibility Working situation Communication Attitudes Behaviours Risk perception J Reason, 1997

10. 10 Safety management system E.g. (facts + judgments): Are there policies, plans and procedures? Are responsibilities allocated? Do communication channels exist and operate? Do risk assessments take place? Are monitoring, feedback and learning systems in place? Are design solutions implemented?

11. 11 Safety behaviour E.g. (facts + judgments): Are policies, plans and procedures followed? How are the communication channels used? Do risk assessments take place? Are design solutions implemented? Are monitoring, feedback and learning systems used? Are safety devices used?

12. 12 Method and material Study locations:  ATCC Stockholm  ATCC Malmö  SCAA Norrköping Response rates: 385 individuals completed the questionnaires 63 % ANS office 66 % ATCC Malmö 61 % ATCC Stockholm Methods: Standardized quesionnaires, interviews and feedback meetings

13. 13 Research layout time System2000 Investigation and feedback Develop and test learning methods

14. 14 Some results Average scores for SC dimensions at study locations

15. 15 Some SC results Positive SC dimensions Working situation - more mental exhaustion & stress at ANS - ATCC Mö assistants more negative than ATCC Sthlm assistants due to different work organization Reporting - local near incident reporting more developed at ATCC Mö Learning - although more reactive approach to improvements Attitude towards safety - managers reported better perceptions of Attitude compared to non-managers

16. 16 Some SC results SC dimensions with both positive & negative components Communication - request for more training in communication in emergency situations Flexibility - could be due to innate factors in op work situation Justness - low degree of scapegoat thinking when something went wrong

17. 17 What influences Safety Culture? Organisational climate Team climate Psychosocial working environment Situational leadership Safety Culture and Safety Culture Dimensions Research questions. Results are needed for proactive risk management.

18. 18 Psychosocial working environment The mental health is very much dependent of social factors such as the working organization, influence, responsibility, demands etc. A poor psychosocial working environment may become stressful and give rise to mental illness. This may in turn influence the safety. Method COPSOQ: Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, (Kristensen & Borg). Items: 141 Dimensions: 30

19. 19 Psychosocial working environment: ATCC 1

20. 20 Psychosocial working environment: ATCC 2

21. 21 Psychosocial working environment: ANS

22. 22 ATCC 1 & 2 Psychosocial working environment: comparisons ATCC 1 x ATCC 2 Manager xxxxxxxx Non manager Administrative xxxxxx Operative x Manager Adm. xxx Manager Op. Quantitative demands Cognitive demands Emotional demands Demands for hiding emotions Sensorial demands Influence at work Possibilities for development Freedom at work Meaning of work Commitment Predictability Role-clarity Role-conflicts Quality of leadership Social support Feedback at work Social relations Sense of community Insecurity Job satisfaction General health Mental health Vitality Behavioural stress Somatic stress Cognitive stress Sense of coherence Problem focused coping Selective coping Resigning coping

23. 23 ATCC and ANS Psychosocial working environment: comparisons Quantitative demands Cognitive demands Emotional demands Demands for hiding emotions Sensorial demands Influence at work Possibilities for development Freedom at work Meaning of work Commitment Predictability Role-clarity Role-conflicts Quality of leadership Social support Feedback at work Social relations Sense of community Insecurity Job satisfaction General health Mental health Vitality Behavioural stress Somatic stress Cognitive stress Sense of coherence Problem focused coping Selective coping Resigning coping ANS ATCC 1 ANS ATCC 2 xx Manager xxxxxxxxxxx Non manager xx

24. 24 The psychosocial working environment is overall positive assessed Three red dimensions: Sensorial demands, freedom and feedback. Almost no differences between the tree units An overall picture shows the management group as more positive compared with the non-management group at all three units The administrative group experience the working environment as more positive compared with the operative group Summary: psychosocial environment

25. 25 Thank you very much for your attention!