Traditionally there has been an unrealistic design assumption that maintenance engineers will get things right 100% of the time: there is no recognition of, and therefore allowance for, potential errors. Experience shows that, despite the good work that has been done with regard to training maintenance engineers about human factors, and the implementation of maintenance error management systems, maintenance errors continue to cost the industry millions of dollars, and contribute to accidents and serious incidents. There is a need formally to recognise the conflict between policy and practice, accept that human factors result in variable human performance in maintenance, and to design for maintenance in a human-centred way. We need to work together to put as much effort into this as has been done with great success in the design of flight decks, and specifically design to eliminate the potential for undetected errors, making maintenance quicker, cheaper, more reliable, and safer.
Illustrated through real-life examples, come and learn why ‘work as imagined’ by the designer does not always end up as ‘work as prescribed’ in the technical manuals, and, in turn, is not always ‘work as done’ by the maintainer.