In aviation, one thing is for sure — things change. New technologies, equipment and even shift changes can cause consternation. The best employees are flexible and adapt, but it’s not always so easy. As Franklin Roosevelt said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
Politicians and corporate officers have used the powerful word "change" in recent months to convince voters and lenders to support their causes. The word demands action from those involved and certainly comes with a fair share of risk with everyone concerned.
For years, aviation technicians have encountered their own challenges with change in technology advancement, procedural requirements, administrative laws and a host of other practices. While mechanics normally possess excellent troubleshooting skills and are very resourceful with an excellent mechanical aptitude, some lack the skill of coping with change. Whether it is a new tool to help ease a difficult job or a manager asking for a shift in their schedule time, some technicians develop a resistance and have no desire to try the change.
Fears
When change is initiated, fears develop; we feel we are losing control of our environment, worry about our self-interests and are skeptical that the change is even necessary. In discovering some of the underlying reasons that technicians oppose change, and develop skills to cope with it, we become better within our career and also in our personal lives.
Next-generation aircraft have capabilities and resources far beyond that of aircraft from past years. Onboard computers can pinpoint problems and generate solutions. Engine diagnostic information develops fan balancing without extended engine runs in a remote location.
Computer-generated displays provide tire pressure, engine parameter exceedance, hydraulic, pneumatic, fuel and cabin temperature readings at a touch of a button. These new technologies are tremendous tools when utilized, but are useless when they intimidate the technician attempting to use them.
Gaining Trust
While completing an overnight check and running the diagnostic onboard computer test on the Boeing 777, a mechanic finds a problem. The computer indicates that an engine fan-air modulating valve isn’t working properly.
Trusting the new technology and replacing the valve would be the sensible action. But instead he spends a significant amount of time attempting to reset the latched indication because of past erroneous signals he has chased through the airplane. It is only after he reluctantly tries a new valve that he trusts what the computer already knows; the valve is malfunctioning.
When I asked aircraft mechanics about this predicament, their input explains some of the problems that can be encountered when trusting new technological information.
Arnie Cardenas, a 20-year mechanic, states that "to dismiss a ghost (faulty) message, a technician has to aggressively troubleshoot the system. Randomly replacing expensive parts to repair a chronic problem at times is futile and benefits neither the company nor the technician."
Learning Curve
Gary Lakie, also a mechanic, believes that trusting the computer and not peeling away the layers diminishes the technician’s troubleshooting abilities. "Technicians have lost that edge to troubleshoot problems. It becomes a factory setting in which you just remove and replace the part to see if it corrects the problem," Lakie says.
Jerald Jellison, professor of psychology at the University of Southern California, believes that time may factor in this situation. The mechanic may have more time to diagnose the problem and not immediately trust the computer because of his/her historic experience with the information. What Jellison would find unproductive is if the technician doesn’t change his judgment after the occurrence. "I guess the only fault would be if you didn’t revise your opinion of the computer afterwards. You would have to conclude that you were wrong about that and the next time you’ll trust it more," he says.
Keeping an Open Mind
Accepting something new requires faith and an open mind. Technology is normally developed for problems in our industry. The goal of the new devise is an easier path for better production, safety and efficiency. Many remember a time when ATA manuals were in book form. There was also a time when the manuals were on microfiche. Then CD-Rom made the process easier through a computer and now most aviation maintenance resources are accessible through a database computer system, which provides updated information quickly to the source.
Resistance to change is not exclusive to technology. Your manager decides that your start time would work better if moved forward by an hour. He explains to you the reasoning, but your belief is it doesn’t address the true problem they are attempting to solve. Because of the disruption in your personal schedule your self-interest is harmed. You reluctantly start your new hours but uncommitted and disinterested. The spiral begins, and as you lose your dedication to the job, the manager loses confidence in you, and so it goes.
Lakie believes that not fully understanding the problem creates reason for doubt. "I think the change is never understood by anyone as a whole; the reasoning they’re implementing it and not taking into account the technician’s who have to rearrange their lives to accomplish it," he says.
These failures provide one common denominator; resistance to the new technology or the idea that change doesn’t work. While the old way will get the job done, the ability to work smarter, safer and quicker is lost if we immediately reject the change.
Why We Fight Change
There are a number of reasons why we resist change. It is important to recognize these negative behaviors to change and develop the skills to correct our immediate resistance to the new process.
Experts consider our self-interest the primary concern when change is announced. Cardenas believes that self-interest also benefits our work atmosphere. "A person who maintains his self interests makes it better for all. It develops a happy workplace as opposed to a miserable one," he says.
"Self interest is the root cause," Jellison adds. "What we don’t always realize about ourselves is the thought of going through a change, because we do become frightened, and we think it (the change) will have a negative impact on our self-interest, we’re going to lose control in a situation, we’re going to make mistakes and look foolish, and at times we may even think we could lose our jobs," he says. "What we do is we exaggerate the consequences of what failure would mean. That’s what I call going over an emotional cliff in that, when we anticipate what’s going to happen, we just inflate it."
Attitude Adjustment
Understanding that going through change is a team activity and a way of developing a healthy attitude for the new process. Mechanics have a vast wealth of knowledge and skills that each can draw from. When taking on that new task we use the internal support system looking for someone who has done this or something comparable. It gives us confidence in doing the job and provides a new skill we can pass on to the next person. During change we can use the same support method. One person can mentor the next until the team is proficient at the new change or technology. Support is more than just management providing resources. It is at the ground level when we assist each other through the difficult or unknown.
When asked how he deals with change, mechanic Phil Wyka says, "I approach my co-workers and ask their opinions of the change and develop my personal approach from that point and if the change is something I have insight on, I will certainly provide guidance if asked." Most importantly, when facing a change at your job, your attitude is the essential factor of your acceptance. The act of closing off and becoming immediately negative to the change does not benefit anyone and only interferes with business and professional goals.
More Than Communication
Managers hastily point to communication as the prime persuasion tool to inspire doubtful employees. Professional consultants agree to an extent, but do advise caution when relying on only this particular resource.
Communication is an open system that allows the manager to explain the change, the reason for the change, benchmark goals, and expected obstacles. It should provide the management and employees a path to discover the difficulty and develop a new technology together. Valuable feedback to management and other departments can assist the change for adjustments when necessary.
Sherrie Campbell, a business professional counselor and host of a statewide PBS special Good News, believes that validating the employee’s fear is critical for a manager trying to implement change.
When asked about resources for managers and employees to tap into for change assistance, Campbell points out, "There are tons of coaching books about change. But the biggest tip — know your employee and you’ll know which resource to use. If you hand an employee a book on how to accept change and haven’t validated their fears, you may have just driven a bigger wedge."
Management Focus
All too often in our careers we witness management speaking at us, but not with us. The manager is divided between accomplishing his goals and satisfying the employee’s needs. When these obstacles appear, it is important for managers to understand that employees are the solution to the problems and have valuable input that can provide answers.
Leaders will find that employees are very persistent in continuing the old way of doing things. Campbell believes that words carry very powerful meaning; using the term "the old way" implies the wrong significance. "Why not go through the current way and all of the aspects that work. Then ask what aspects may not be working as well. Then brainstorm. Give your ideas and changes along with hearing their ideas. You may be surprised," Campbell says.
Jellison has authored a number of books providing guidance on organizational resistance to change and has developed a program for leader direction during change implementation. Most managers believe they can win over the biggest resistors through persuasion. Persuasion is a silver bullet solution with the concept that influencing employees will alter their behavior. While this course changes a few employees’ minds, more often than not, it does little to motivate a person.
Activation
Jellison advocates a process called activation. This is a bottom up approach designed to get employees to take action even when they have doubt or fear of the change.
Jellison outlines basic concepts that help manage employees through change. Communication, while not emphasized, is necessary between managers and employees. "The key to communicating down at the ground level is to be very specific about what you want the employee to do," he says.
Clarification of the business goals with those initiating the change counters resistance. This step will also present an opportunity to understand the end objective and provide input in the change development while also dispelling rumors. This leaves no ambiguity and provides a definitive leader when employees need it most. "Remove the barriers," he continues. Find the obstacles that will bog down your change implementation and get rid of them. This process will remove footholds that resisters will dig into and defend their assumptions. Front-load the rewards, praise your employees early and often and if incentives are an option provide them immediately. "Praise your employees just for trying the new process, whether they are successful or not, it keeps them going," he says.
Although activation is more time-consuming than persuasion, management gets a tremendous return on their effort. Through the added energy, managers have the ability to include employees in the change while assuring the goals of the company are acquired. It provides ground level understanding of what is working and what isn’t and it establishes ownership in the business.
Technology Transformation
Today’s maintenance problems are more complex and involved compared to airplane issues of the past. Aircraft like the Boeing 777 and the "next generation" 787 come with the standard equipment to fly but also provide useful tools that can improve a technician’s chance at making a quality repair on the first try. It is our responsibility to not only be a quality technician but also develop skills to interpret and use some of these new technologies and resources to help us do our job.
Better technicians realize it is essential to overcome our fear of change to move us forward in our careers. The cliché "thinking outside the box" certainly applies to this situation. As mechanics in today’s complex technical aviation industry, it is in our best interest to understand our struggle with change and adapt to it.
Continual Improvement
An airline I worked for purchased a new Panasonic Toughbook computer for technical maintenance data improvement. The laptop allowed for maintenance manuals, illustrated parts catalogs, company part ordering and technical information, and a collection of other resources carried directly to the aircraft problem. It was a valuable tool for better efficiency, providing needed resources to the fingertips. Very versatile, it was extremely useful on trips when recovering incapacitated aircraft or use at a station in remote areas. During a training class discussing the computer’s operation it was revealed that the Toughbook was scarcely used for unknown reasons. It was later discovered that a few bad experiences by mechanics spread through word of mouth and the computers went ignored. The Internet speed was slow and connecting to the resources was next to impossible in many areas. Unreported, this developed two problems, the first being that a valuable time-saving tool was not utilized to repair airplanes. The other problem was that those who provided this computer were unaware of the networking issues and did not get the opportunity to fix it. The digital age is moving information faster than ever and only assists us in our jobs. As a technical crew chief I am able to send a digital photo of aircraft damage to the engineering department, technical department and management in milliseconds. Five years ago we were taking pencil rubbings of the damage and faxing them to these decision makers and 20 years ago we were trying to give our best definition of the problem over the phone. There is nothing wrong with a fear of the unknown, allowing it to intimidate you is where we begin to lose our edge. University of Southern California Psychologist Jerald Jellison says that, "there are no promises of ‘try it and you will like it,’ but what can be promised is if you do try it, you will learn and grow." Moving our profession forward requires technicians to understand change is continual and unstoppable. When the computer problems were eventually addressed it gave the airline mechanics a beneficial resource to fix aircraft. The mechanic’s responsibility goes much further than repairing airplanes. We have to develop skills to cope with the new change, give feedback to those who require it and stay positive while implementing it.
|
Print This Page
Email This Page
Archives
Copyright Permissions
Reader Comments
It used to be you were looked down upon for simply changing components and not doing troubleshooting. Then you got the hot shot supervisor who was good at moving metal saying just change something, anything, whatever is in stock, just to kick it over the fence. If you read some of the maintenance manuals today you will read change A, if that doesn’t work change B, etc. When you have gone through the alphabet you start all over again. Then you have the component reliability issue. You have the onboard computer telling you to change B five times. Trust the computer because you are installing a bad component from stock. So you change numerous components until you find one that works. Is this troubleshooting? Not the way I understand it to be.
Change is subject I have studies for some time and it has many facets. You mentioned trust and I thought you were on the right path but you were referring to trust in technology. Not where I hoped you were going to go. Aircraft mechanics, at least the ones I have known over a 35 year career, are mostly technologically curious. They accept new technology as was mentioned by the comment on continuous improvement using the Panasonic Toughbook. I too was part of the group that utilized, or tried to utilize this technology. It was used infield conditions successfully and the concept was well accepted by most of the mechanics. You were actually going to be able to take the maintenance manual and IPC out to the aircraft. The problem with the Panasonic Toughbook is that it only worked if you were within 20 feet of the host computer. When the technology improves I am sure the mechanics will welcome it with open arms.
What aircraft mechanics and maybe many employees are skeptical is process changes. Management is the purveyor of the processor of the month club and it is no wonder that employees are underwhelmed when a new one is rolled out. “Here it comes, how much time should we give this one before it fails?” Of course the failure is the result of lack of employee support and commitment. Very true, but who bred that attitude?
When confronted with new technology it is an affront to your established confidence (your comfort zone). Now you have to retrench (move out of that comfort zone) and start to learn again to regain what you had (re-establish a new comfort zone). People don’t fight change; they fight being changed. Human being are very adaptable as can be seen in our society so we must be open to a changing environment otherwise we would not have survived all these years. You state that change is a team activity is ignoring the aircraft mechanics culture as being very individualistic. If you attempt to change an aircraft mechanic or group of aircraft mechanic’s culture you will be met with resistance.
I have to agree with you that communication is only a component of the change process. It is a tool that needs to be honed by the user if it is to be efficient and that efficiency is going to be based on mutual trust between employee and management. But it is still just a tool and in the hands of a novice can prove damaging. Strangely enough employees and management have the same goals in sending out safe aircraft but we have different avenues on how to achieve them, thus the core of the employee/management conflict.
Jerald Jellison missed the boat and doesn’t understand the aircraft maintenance culture. We don’t trouble shoot because we have excess time on our hands, nor is it because we lack trust in the new technology. If you will look closely at what is being done is that the mechanics knows when to trust the computer and when to trust bread and butter troubleshooting skills. The computer isn’t infallible, it just thinks it is.
William you are correct in your observation that persuasion, as Jellison believes, is not a silver bullet. There is no silver bullet but maybe a series of bullets that are needed for different situations. Persuasion is moderately effective but another tool in the box to be used by skilled professionals. Mutual trust rear its’ ugly head again.
The second problem with Jellison is that you don’t “manage employees”. Nobody likes to be managed just as nobody likes to be changed. You manage processes and lead employees. This is a fundamental axiom that most so called “management gurus” fail to understand with the exception of Deming, Juran, Drucker, and a few others. There are very few true leaders out there as proven by the poor employee-management relationships in most organizations.
Management has fallen into the Milgram trap. If you read about the Stanley Milgram experiments and the more recent work by Philip Zimbardo we are subject to believe, without question, those that are or appear to be in authority. We will do what they say, deferring to their authority, even acts that we would not otherwise have done on our own. What has this to do with the subject? Management seems to fall victim to the beguiling allure of the consultants who sell the newest and best programs, even though it is the same old stuff in a different wrapper. What they sell is the attraction of being on the cutting edge. ABC Company is doing it and you should too. “Those consultants are the experts so we should buy it.” They sell the ‘Keeping up with the Corporate Joneses’ package. Employees will fall victim to this also. There are supervisors and managers that will steer them in the wrong direction and lull them into making incorrect decisions. I am drifting off into another subject of failure to comply with documented procedures but it conceptually applies to this subject of change. Can we be directed through reward/punishment programs? Can we be led like sheep to slaughter with a carrot on a stick? In a word, yes, but only for awhile. This is where you get involved with group theory. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. You can lead a herd of horses to water and some will drink but if some fall over dead the rest will stop drinking. No matter what you do, they will not drink. Does this from management sound familiar, “But this time it is different.”
My point being is that resistance isn’t simple, it requires more than communication and there is no silver bullet to kill the beast. Is it futile? No but as you state you have to understand the source of the resistance. How different would the Borg be accepted if instead of changing the individual (assimilating into their society) they were instead changing the technology, improving our surroundings? Would it still be viewed as futile?