Human errors in quality and compliance monitoring management within the aviation sector have a great impact on air operators. Many times, these failures translate into economic losses, but also, in the worst cases, they can end up causing regrettable sanctions in commercial operations, and even the loss of licenses.
Quality and compliance monitoring management has been an attribute traditionally achieved through human work. That is to say that the human factor is seen not only in the actions of their direct executors, but it is also the result of the actions of those who inspect, supervise, audit, etc.
Nevertheless, all actions are subject to errors, because there are situations within quality and compliance monitoring management, especially in the aviation sector, that have certain characteristics which are prone to possible human errors, like not being able to guarantee that your organization complies with all the regulations, an issue that when recurrent, can harm the entire organization.
In fact, the aviation sector has the characteristic of having to comply with far more requirements than other sectors. This implies a higher number of audits and as a consequence, human errors in quality and compliance monitoring management in the aviation sector are far more visible.
With the use of basic applications like Excel, air operators have tried to avoid human errors in quality and compliance monitoring management within the aviation sector, but with these applications, it is very difficult to establish a defined and efficient work methodology, because all the processes end up being performed manually, a way of working that is prone to errors as they can be interpreted according to the criteria of the person in charge.
In this sense, which are the human errors in quality and compliance monitoring management within the aviation sector that can harm the air operators? Here we have the most severe ones:
- To incorrectly identify a regulation, either for not paying attention to the publication of a new one or because some modification has been made.
- When performing an audit, not to include part of your organization in that task, which is the same as not taking into account a department that should have been considered for such an audit.
- Not to have under control the closing date of an audit or the expiration date of a non-compliance.
- Not auditing all the requirements that affect the organization.
- To store the reports incorrectly.
Besides these, another human error in quality and compliance monitoring management within the aviation sector is to be unable to guarantee the traceability of a requirement that, for example, has been audited seven times, of which six have ended up in a non-conformity. The mistake here lies in not having the ability to identify the root cause of the problem not being able to take care of and to definitively solve it. This happens especially with the processes that are repeated constantly, or that have to be audited once a year. The traceability allows trends’ analysis and to see the performance in the resolution of the findings from the previous audit.
Can human errors be avoided in quality management within the aviation sector?
The elimination of human errors in quality and compliance monitoring management within the aviation sector is already possible with the use of a quality and compliance monitoring software for air operators like SICOMO, as it allows a better control and planning, because within the characteristics of the system you have a calendar and a timeline that help you to automatically identify the state of any process.
SICOMO is a software specialized in the process of quality and compliance monitoring, and it has been developed by a group of people with vast experience in quality and compliance monitoring as well as in the aviation business, so the application complies with all the known processes of the sector, as they have been established by the authorities.