Authoritarianism in Aviation
In this article, we will explore how the authoritarian management style developed and was applied in aviation, the outcomes it led to, and how the industry transitioned to collaboration and democracy in crew management
Authoritarianism in Aviation
Reading time: ~7-8 minutes
The authoritarian management style is one of the most studied concepts in the field of management psychology. It is based on an ideology where one leader or a set of leaders make decisions without considering the opinions or feedback from subordinates. This management style can manifest in any profession or industry, including aviation.
Aviation is a field where mistakes can cost lives. Due to this responsibility and the unique nature of a pilot's profession, where rapid decisions and clear commands can be critically important, the authoritarian management style is sometimes seen as inevitable. However, this approach can create problems when working as a team, especially in situations that require complex interactions and collaboration.

In the early history of civil aviation, when flying was a new and uncharted domain, pilots were often seen as heroes challenging the perils of the sky. Their authority was unquestioned, and this may have contributed to the strengthening of an authoritarian management style in the cockpit.

However, the situation changed in 1978 when United Airlines Flight 173 crashed due to uncoordinated actions of the crew. This tragic incident raised questions about the interaction and teamwork between crew members and became a starting point for further research and the development of Crew Resource Management or CRM.

Now, understanding the context and historical roots of authoritarianism in aviation, let's delve into the details of its evolution and its impact on flight safety.
Article Outline
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Historical Perspective
Authoritarianism in aviation, as in many other professions, didn't arise by chance. Its roots trace back to a time when aviation was in its infancy, and the world of flight was filled with the unknown and risk.
In the early 20th century, pilots were practically the equivalents of modern-day astronauts. They were brave daredevils who challenged the unknown, mastering new technologies and methods. Back then, there wasn't years-long training or standardized preparation programs. Pilots learned "on the job," and their skills and determination granted them authority over others.
  • World War II
    During wartime, military pilots played a pivotal role. In combat conditions, swift decision-making and precise order execution were critically important.

    This contributed to the formation of an authoritarian management style, which later transitioned into civilian aviation.

    The post-war period also served as a catalyst for the growth of civilian aviation, and with it, the transfer of military standards into commercial flight.
    WWII
  • Technological evolution
    As aviation progressed, aircraft became increasingly complex, demanding more skills and knowledge from the crew.

    This created a situation where the aircraft captain often had the most experience and knowledge, further bolstering his authority in the cockpit.
    TECH
As we previously mentioned the United Airlines Flight 173 in 1978, such incidents stood out as glaring examples of the consequences of an authoritarian management style. In situations requiring active crew interaction and collaboration, an authoritarian approach could lead to mistakes and catastrophes.

In conclusion, the authoritarian management style in aviation evolved as a product of industry progression, where pioneers, military traditions, and technological complexities played a key role. However, as aviation developed and understanding of the human factor in flight safety grew, it became clear that this management style needed adjustment.
Consequences of the authoritarian management style in aviation
The authoritarian management style, while bearing fruit in the early stages of aviation development, began to show its flaws over time, especially in terms of flight safety.
  • 1
    Limited Interaction in the Cockpit
    One of the main drawbacks of the authoritarian management style is that it can suppress communication within the crew.

    If the captain makes all the decisions autonomously, other crew members might feel their opinions and concerns are undervalued or even ignored. This could lead to potentially crucial information not being communicated or being overlooked.
  • 2
    Lack of Learning Opportunities
    An authoritarian approach can also limit the learning and development opportunities for younger pilots. If the captain makes all decisions and does not discuss them with other crew members, it might deprive them of the chance to learn hands-on.
  • 3
    Increased Risk of Human Errors
    As studies and investigations into air disasters have shown, many of which were related to human factors, an authoritarian management style can amplify the risk of such errors.

    In situations where one person makes all the decisions, the likelihood of overlooking something or making an error increases.
  • 4
    Tension and Conflicts within the Crew
    A lack of open communication and feelings of being undervalued can lead to tension in relationships between crew members. In the long run, this can result in conflicts that divert attention from tasks and threaten flight safety.
  • 5
    Obsolescence of Problem-Solving Skills
    The authoritarian management style can also lead to outdated decision-making skills among crew members who are not used to thinking independently or analyzing complex situations.
Although the authoritarian approach to management was characteristic of aviation's early days and had its advantages in certain contexts, its limitations became evident as the world of aviation grew more complex.
How does CRM handle with authoritarianism?
As aviation's development identified dangers associated with an authoritarian management style, it became necessary to find a solution that ensured both safety and flight efficiency. In response to this need, the Crew Resource Management (CRM) concept was developed.

Its primary goal is to enhance flight safety by optimizing the human factor and communications within the crew.

One of the main principles of CRM is the encouragement of open and honest communication among all crew members. The importance of each team member and their contribution to flight safety is emphasized. This fosters an atmosphere of trust where all crew members feel free to voice their concerns or suggestions.

CRM also supports the idea that decision-making should be collective. This doesn't mean the captain is stripped of their authority, but it acknowledges the value of the opinions and views of other crew members, especially in critical situations.

CRM focuses on continuous learning and development. Mistakes are viewed as learning opportunities rather than reasons for punishment. This approach helps eliminate the fear of making errors and encourages crew members to share their experience and knowledge.

CRM also places emphasis on the importance of interpersonal skills, such as active listening, conflict management, and leadership. These skills form the foundation for creating an effective and harmonious crew operation.
Overall, CRM doesn't merely combat authoritarianism: it offers an alternative approach to management and interaction in the cockpit. This approach is based on mutual respect, collaboration, and a commitment to ongoing improvement.
Modern approaches to training and Safety Culture
Since the authoritarian methods of management in aviation began to fade into the past, the industry faced the need to adopt new training methods and safety approaches. Modern methodologies recognize the importance of flexibility, adaptability, and the involvement of every crew member.
EBT Learning

Instead of standard training based on rote learning, many airlines now use scenario-based training, where pilots encounter realistic, dynamic situations requiring quick and effective decision-making. This method trains pilots to react to unexpected events rather than just following a checklist.
Transparency
Instead of hiding mistakes, modern airlines aim for open analysis. This allows for lessons to be learned and similar incidents to be prevented in the future.

Safety Reports
Safety systems are introduced where pilots and other flight personnel can report issues or incidents without fearing punishment. This helps establish a culture of openness and mutual aid.

Proactive Risk Management
Modern safety management methods are more focused on identifying and minimizing risks before they lead to incidents. To achieve this, sophisticated analytical tools and models are used to forecast and manage potential threats.

Safety Culture
Safety culture becomes an integral part of corporate culture. It highlights the significance of each individual and personality in the safety process, calling for responsibility, awareness, and active participation.
The aviation industry is actively developing new methods and approaches to adapt to changing conditions and challenges. At the heart of all these efforts is the individual — and their ability to work as a team, learn, and evolve.
In conclusion
The authoritarian management in aviation, once considered the norm, is becoming increasingly outdated and dangerous today. The processes that began with the Portland disaster and NASA's efforts led to the creation of the Crew Resource Management system, which changed approaches to training, teamwork, and safety in aviation.

The modern aviation industry recognizes that authoritarianism can suppress the initiative and critical thinking of other crew members, which is fraught with errors and accidents. Now the focus is on openness, collaboration, and collective responsibility for flight safety.
Based on our analysis, we offer the following practical tips for airlines and pilots undergoing training:

  1. Continuous updating of training programs: Given the rapid development of technologies and management methods, airlines must regularly review and update their training programs to align with current standards and best practices.
  2. Active involvement of all participants: It is essential to ensure the active participation of each crew member in decision-making, training, and safety discussions. This will help establish a culture of mutual assistance and collaboration.
  3. Transparency of incidents: Every incident must be thoroughly analyzed to derive lessons from it and prevent the recurrence of similar situations in the future.
  4. Maintaining a safety culture: Airlines must constantly maintain and develop a safety culture by creating mechanisms for feedback, stimulation, and recognition of best practices.

The key to the successful development and maintenance of a safety culture is the interaction and involvement of every employee. Everyone should understand their role, responsibility, and the importance of their contribution to a safe sky.
Name of article: Authoritarianism in Aviation
Release date: 10/19/2023
Acrticle author: Georgii Kurbatskii
Also you can like
Subscribe and learn with us
All photo and video materials belong to their owners and are used for demonstration purposes only. Please do not use them in commercial projects.
Made on
Tilda