Jet Solutions On-Site Operations Control
Transcript of Jet Solutions On-Site Operations Control
Jet Solutions, L.L.C. Development of SMS
J7SA150H
Presented to the SMS Focus GroupFebruary, 2009
Development Timeline1998:
Business Decision to Implement
an IEP
2001: IEP revised to include daily
functional managers
2002: Decision to implement AS9100
QMS
2003: AS9100
Registered
2005: Decision to
formally implement
NATA Standard &
SMS
2007: 1st Internal
GAP Analysis
2008: - 2nd GAP Analysis
-NATA/ACSF Audit-- FAA,
evaluation visit
2009: -Response to
ACSF-- Awaiting registration-- Awaiting
FAA response-Moving forward
• The implementation of SMS evolved over a 10 year time frame.– Foundation work with IEP and QMS programs
started years before formal implementation of SMS.
• SMS implementation accomplished in stages, or steps.– Change did not happen overnight.– Senior management remained committed
throughout process.– Many other benefits resulted from management
system(s) implementation.
• Monitoring and measurement of management systems, to improve the functions, and profitability – nothing new –the 5th principle of the 14 principles of management.– First drafted by Henry Foyal in 1889
1998: IEP implemented using quality management techniques, based on AC120-59. Developed first version of scorecard system, primarily compliance oriented.
Implemented as a separate department for compliance auditing.Bombardier Flexjet required to actively participate.
2001: IEP revised to include as part of functional departments daily management. Training of managers and supervisors in basic auditing and data collection.
Reporting format changed to administrators meeting, with department managers and Senior Managers.
2002: Decision to implement AS9100 QMS.Development of QMS and associated programs and processes, training of personnel.
IEP program and data collection and reporting become part of the QMS process.
2003: ISO 9000/2000 AS9100 Registered
2005: Decision to formally implement SMS, and explore available standards and programs, to include IS-BAO; Selected NATA/ACSF
2007: First internal GAP analysis to draft NATA/ACSF standards, and proposed FAA AC120-92. – Flexjet implements ASAP
2008: 2nd GAP Analysis – NATA/ACSF audit – FAA visit
2009: Response to ACSFAwaiting registration determination
FAA acknowledgementMove forward to ensure everyone is included
Director of Maintenance
Functional Responsibility
Director of Operations
Functional Responsibility
Director Quality Assurance
Functional Responsibility
Management Controls Systems
QMSSMSIEP
ASAPAudit Functions
Senior Management
Organizational Responsibility
• Original structure was traditional – Safety, IEP, QMS was the responsibility of a stand alone department.– Only senior management got briefed on the system– Functional managers were left out, and did not receive
the benefit of the information being gathered.• Information to make decisions, was not available to the day to
day operational decision makers.
• Decision to include functional departments in the monitoring, measuring, analysis, and decision making process.– The result!!
Senior Management
Organizational Responsibility
Director of OperationsFunctional
Responsibility
Director of Maintenance
Functional Responsibility
Director Quality Assurance Functional
Responsibility
Level 3ProcessesSystems
Level 2Management
Oversight
Level 1Operational Performance
Measures
External Audits
SafetyFunctional
Responsibility
Process M
easures and Audits
• How it works basically
Surveillance/Audits
Surveillance Area's
Routine HighRisk
IdentifiedProblemArea's
Data Collection - Audits
Data Reduction - Scorecards
Data/Trend Analysis - Scorecards
Analysis of Identified Problem Area's
Identification of Corrective/Preventive Actions
Flight & Duty Records
Manuals(CASS)
Ops RecordsFligt Logs
Ops RecordsCrew Records
Ops RecordsCrew Training
FOMCompliance
ReleaseRecords
Ops TrainingCenter Audits
RTS(CASS)
Ramp Checks(CASS)
Facility Audits(CASS)
GMM Compliance
(CASS)
Quality Assurance
(CASS)
MaintenanceRecords(CASS)
CMTS(CASS)
MaintenanceTraining(CASS)
Drug & AlcoholProgram
ASAP(Safety)
IEP(SYSTEMS)
(CASS)
TSASecurity
AccidentsIncidents(SFTY)(CASS)
ExternalAudits
(CASS)
AS9100
FAA Audits(CASS)
Monthly ReportingBi-Monthly Administrators Meetings
CAR'sandAccepted DAR's
Safety
CASS
FAR's
Functions
Driver's
SDR/MIS(SFTY)(CASS)
• Where does all of the information go?
Mx Ctrl RTS Audits
AS9100 Audits
IEP Audits
Release Audits (A008)
Safety Data Reporting
Ops Records Audits
MX Records AuditsQA CASS Audits
Safety DepartmentOperations Department
Maintenance Department
CASS Data
CASS Program IEP Audits
Senior Management
IEP Program / ProcessesEffectiveness of Controls
Lessons Learned (1)
• Senior Management commitment and support imperative:– System would not be where it is today
otherwise.• Continuous education process
– For and to mangers as well as employees• Concepts, theories, & application of techniques
Lessons Learned (2)
• Program Manager, must work directly for senior management:– To guide and manage program– Functional application must be from the
functional department managers.• They are the experts in their departments and are the
people able to implement change in their departments.
Lessons Learned (3)
• Administrators meeting– Success depends on the structure of the meeting
• Accountable and responsible mangers must participate (process owners/operational mangers)
• Directors and senior managers must participate• This meeting has the decision makers and the
operational managers analyzing the data, and making corrective and preventive action decisions.
Lessons Learned (4)
• Program must be scaleable to operation– Small operators will not have thousands of
operations per month, so measures in thousands or higher meaningless for them.
– Current measures, practices are not life cycle, so true indication of risk exposure not accurately measured.
Obstacles and Barriers (1)
• Standardization (covers many subject areas)– Implementation guidance
• Many organizations, many standards?– Risk Matrices– Risk Assessment/Assignment Codes– Training
• Evaluators/auditors– Industry– Government
Obstacles and Barriers (2)
• Standardization– Acceptance by Principle Inspectors
• Acceptance of self-reporting by operator(s), without punitive actions if operator can/does demonstrate corrective or preventive actions are being taken.
Level 1Unknown
Level 2Defined
Level 3Repeatable
PerformanceManagement
Standardization
Value BasedEngineering
Level 4Capable
Adaptation
Level 5Efficient
Standard Procedures
Level 6Adaptive
WasteReduction
ProblemSolving
ProblemSolving
Defect Elimination
ManagementVariations
Time BasedEngineering
SPCSpecial Causes
SPCCommon Causes
Adaptive DesignTechniques
LearningOrganizations
Mgmt Systems
Development Flow
Strategy
Method
Tools
And
Techniques
InputRequirementsmonitoring
ManualsRegulatory
ManualsCompany
Policies andProcedures
PDCA
Root CauseAnalysis
Theory ofConstraints
DepartmentSOP’s
Error rateReporting & Monitoring
ProcessMapping
ErrorProofing
LocalizeRecurringerrors
InternalComplianceAudits
HR Mgmt &Development
FederalAviation
Regulations
CustomerStandards orContracts
DefineProcedures/Instructions
InternalControlsManagement
ProcessInput
Management
RealityBased
Analysis
ValueAnalysis
Constraint IDManagement
CycleReductions
ProcessTime
Reduction
ChangeMgmt
Empowerment
LearningCycles
Adoption ofPer. Measures
MassCustomization
AlternativePathing
ReduceHidden
Frustrations
Process Improvement Initiatives
Stan
dard Procedures
Perf
ormance
Mana
gement
End
J7SA150H
Discussion /Questions