Continuous vs. Snapshot LOSA
What is the difference between a Continuous and Snapshot LOSA?
Continuous LOSA
A LOSA program that provides a constant stream of observational data over time with discretionary data validation and analysis windows.
Snapshot LOSA
A LOSA program that collects, validates, and analyzes observational data within a set time (usually six months from start to end, concluding with a LOSA Report).
| Continuous LOSA | Snapshot LOSA | |
|---|---|---|
| Management Style | Program-driven | Project-driven |
| Timetable Frequency | Variable (can start and stop) | Fixed (usually conducted once every three years) |
| Workload Distribution |
Self Managed
Operator personnel needed for all LOSA phases Involvement from The LOSA Collaborative as is required |
Turnkey
Operator personnel needed for specific LOSA phases The LOSA Collaborative is responsible for the majority of the workload |
| Observers | Team of consistent observers that are susceptible to groupthink | Team of one-time observers that offer a fresh perspective of TEM performance |
| Data Collection Timing | Flexible and variable | Fixed within one time period |
| Data Validation | Multiple roundtables that validate data periodically | One roundtable that validates all data at once |
| Data Analysis | Variable – Dashboard-centric with the option to perform data deep-dives depending on a sample size | Exhaustive - One-time data deep dive resulting in analysis within a given time |
| Results Impact | Discretionary feed of LOSA findings, typically upon request | Organizational jolt with one ceremonial presentation of LOSA findings |
| Pricing Model | Annual subscription | One-time transaction |
LOSA Operating Characteristics
What makes LOSA different from other observational methods?
Frontline evaluations, such as proficiency checks, are not part of LOSA due to the high potential for “angel performance” exhibited by those under observation. LOSA is about capturing as close to natural performance as possible. While evaluations and training events can highlight many practical issues, they are not the best sensor for performance when no one is watching. Peer-to-peer observations are one step closer to allowing frontline workers to perform freely without concern.
Trust in the LOSA process is mainly dependent on keeping observations free from jeopardy. LOSA does not record names, dates, or any other potentially identifying information that could result in disciplinary action.
Another element of building trust in LOSA is providing frontline workers with the right to refuse an observation. Experience has shown that this one action drastically changes the observation environment from suspicion to trust. Operators will benefit from seeing how frontline workers manage pressures and trade-offs that occur during everyday operations.
Observers are the lifeblood of LOSA. Observers must be trusted and appropriately trained to be as unobtrusive as possible while collecting quality data. The LOSA Collaborative has many years of experience in selecting and training LOSA observers. Many observers report that this experience is one of the most valuable and professionally rewarding in their careers.
The LOSA Collaborative formalizes every LOSA with a signed agreement between management and frontline workers that observations will be kept confidential and anonymous. Often in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), this agreement provides a critical safeguard needed to build trust in the LOSA process and create a non-threatening observation environment.
TEM data capture is the essence of LOSA. However, this does not mean ignoring other sources of data. Common elements added to LOSA data collection can include fatigue competency, CRM, or target area measures that can complement an operator’s understanding of TEM performance.
To ensure confidentiality, LOSA must have a trusted data collection site to eliminate the potential for misuse. The more comfortable frontline workers feel about data security, the more likely LOSA observers will capture natural performance.
LOSA success requires strict data validation procedures to generate credible findings that operators can quickly act on with confidence. LOSA data validation’s primary component is called the “Data Verification Roundtable,” where operator subject matter experts meet, review, and validate all threats, errors, and undesired states captured by their LOSA observers.
LOSA is much more than a data collection program. Its primary objective is to generate TEM performance targets that operators can rally around in creating an action plan to improve safety and efficiency. These targets are known as Targets for Enhancement, all of which are empirically driven by LOSA findings.
Operators implementing LOSA must provide frontline workers with insights gained and, more importantly, how management intends to use these insights for improvements. It is crucial to close the loop and enhance an operator’s ability to capture even higher quality observations in the future LOSA observations.
LOSA Benefits
LOSA is a safety program that can provide operators with several direct and indirect benefits. Some of the reported benefits based on our clients’ feedback include:
Monitor Everyday Operations
Gain Convergence with Other Safety Data Sources
Enhance Safety Mindfulness
Compare Performance with Benchmarking
Gather Evidence for Training
Measure Procedural Drift
Better Understand an Operation’s Threat Environment
Gather Insights on Resilience
Manage Safety Data Burnout
Get Frontline Worker Feedback
Obtain a Return on Investment
TEM Applications
TEM has a long history in the aviation industry. While initially developed as LOSA’s primary measure, TEM has evolved into much more over the years.
Below are some typical applications of how TEM has evolved into other applications.
Performance Aide
TEM offers a heuristic for frontline workers to remain mindful of threats, errors, and undesired states and their effect on performance in an ever-changing and complex operational environment.
Incident/Accident Analysis
TEM is commonly used by investigators to parse and better understand the causes of aviation incidents and accidents. TEM has served as a sensemaking tool in many industry safety studies and accident reports produced by the NTSB and other transportation safety boards
Training
TEM training is designed to help frontline workers manage threats, errors, and undesired states with tools and techniques. The ICAO Annexes, which document the standards and recommended practices for the world’s aviation operators, require TEM training for pilots and other organizational stakeholders.
Enhance Safety Mindfulness
TEM offers a dependent performance measure for researchers who want a better understanding of the systemic, team, and individual influences on safety and efficiency, emphasizing how frontline workers display resilience when confronted with threats, errors, or undesired states.
Safety Management System (SMS) Diagnostic
Perhaps, TEM’s most salient application is when it serves as a measure to monitor performance in everyday operations. Using TEM in this manner drives the LOSA process and is what The LOSA Collaborative offers in its primary portfolio of services.
TEM Description
TEM serves as the primary measure for LOSA observation. Developed by members of The LOSA Collaborative in the late 1990s, TEM is a conceptual framework that suggests threats, errors, and undesired states are critical events that frontline workers must manage to maintain adequate safety and efficiency margins.
TEM’s fundamental premise relies on the notion that frontline workers can be better trained and supported to anticipate, detect, and recover from threats, errors, and undesired states.
While LOSA observation of TEM performance is comprehensive, the areas of focus can be viewed as three general categories: threats, errors and undesired states.
Threats
Observable events or errors that occur outside the influence of a frontline worker requiring immediate attention to manage safely. Examples of threats include frontline workers having to manage weather, aircraft malfunctions, challenging ATC clearances, or errors that come from other departments.
Errors
Observable frontline worker deviations from organizational or individual expectations or intentions. Examples of errors include making a wrong automation entry, not turning on a system for protection, missing a checklist item, or failing to brief a critical item.
Undesired States
Observable states induced by a frontline worker that exhibit an apparent reduction in safety margins. Examples of undesired states include speed, vertical, or lateral aircraft deviations with an increased potential for an incident or accident.
LOSA Description
Aviation is data-rich, and sometimes it is hard to separate noise from meaningful signals that can promote positive change. LOSA provides resonant signaling by going to the sharp end and conducting observations in everyday operations. With this approach, LOSA provides operators with unrealized insights into systemic and frontline performance’s strengths and weaknesses.
LOSA (Line Operations Safety Audit) is a peer-to-peer observational methodology based on the capture of qualitative and quantitative TEM performance data of frontline personnel in their natural work conditions.