The use of statistical analyses to assert safety levels has persuasively been established within the aviation industry. Likewise, variations in regional statistics have led to generalisations about safety levels in different contexts. Caution is proposed when qualitatively linking statistics and aviation's resilience to hazards. Further caution is proposed when extending generalisations across contexts. Statistical analyses - the favoured diagnostic tool of aviation - show sequences of cause/effect relationships reflecting agreed categorisations prevalent in safety breakdowns. They do not, however, reveal the processes underlying such relationships. It is contended that the answers to the safety questions in contemporary aviation will not be found through the numbers, but through the understanding of the processes underpinning the numbers. These processes and their supporting beliefs are influenced by contextual constraints and cultural factors, which in turn influence individual and organisational performance. It is further contended that the contribution of human factors is fundamental in achieving this understanding. This paper, therefore (1) argues in favour of a macro view of aviation safety, (2) suggests the need to revise a long-standing safety paradigm that appears to have ceased to be effective, and (3) discusses the basic premises upon which a revised safety paradigm should build. (A)
Abstract