Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-rdph2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-30T07:33:17.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bridge Resource Management: Training for the Minimisation of Human Error in the Military Naval Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2020

Sandra Campaniço Cavaleiro ,
Catarina Gomes  and
Miguel Pereira Lopes
Sandra Campaniço Cavaleiro*
Affiliation:
(CINAV, Escola Naval Centro de Investigacao Naval, Almada, Portugal) (Universidade de Lisboa Instituto Superior de Ciencias Sociais e Politicas, Lisbon, Portugal)
Catarina Gomes
Affiliation:
(CIPES, Centro de Investigação em Política, Economia e Sociedade, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisbon, Portugal) (CICPSI, Universidade de Lisboa Centro de Investigacao em Ciencia Psicologica, Lisbon, Portugal)
Miguel Pereira Lopes
Affiliation:
(Universidade de Lisboa Instituto Superior de Ciencias Sociais e Politicas, Lisbon, Portugal) (CAPP, Universidade de Lisboa Centro de Administracao e Politicas Publicas, Lisbon, Portugal)
*
(E-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Naval maritime operations entail a permanent concern for safety, ensuring that all crew members receive the necessary information on time. This implies the existence of specific training for improving non-technical skills (NTS). This paper proposes that bridge resource management (BRM) may be determinant for the success of naval maritime operations. Through a literature review on NTS, maritime team training and BRM, the paper presents insights about the way the level of NTS, inherent to BRM, may be determinant for naval officers to operate in safety. We propose that human error may be minimised and safety maximised in military teams operating in the maritime environment through the implementation of an NTS training programme. The paper offers an insight into the importance of safety during maritime operations, focusing on recent international orientations about training requirements, proposing that implementing BRM will be pivotal for the future of the military navy context.

Keywords

Bridge Resource ManagementNon-Technical SkillsTeam TrainingHuman Error
Type
Review Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 73 , Issue 5 , September 2020 , pp. 1146 - 1158
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

AIBN/DAIBN. (2019). Report Marine 2019/08. Summary of the part one report on the collision on 8 November 2018 between the frigate HNOMS HELGE INGSTAD and the oil tanker SOLA TS outside the Sture Terminal in the Hjeltefjord in Hordaland County. Lillestrøm: Accident Investigation Board Norway/Defence Accident Investigation Board Norway.Google Scholar
Arbuthnot, K. (2017). Key issues in incident command. In: Flin, R. and Arbuthnot, K. (eds.). Incident Command: Tales From the Hot Seat, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 10–31.Google Scholar
Arbuthnot, K. and Flin, R. (2017). Introduction. In: Flin, R. and Arbuthnot, K. (eds.). Incident Command: Tales From the Hot Seat, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 3–9.Google Scholar
Baninajarian, N. and Abdullah, Z. B. (2009). Groups in context: A model of group effectiveness. European Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 335–340.Google Scholar
Bertram, J., Moskaliuk, J. and Cress, U. (2015). Virtual training: Making reality work? Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 284–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conceição, V. P., Basso, J. C., Lopes, F. C. and Dahlman, J. (2017). Development of a behavioral marker system for rating cadet's non-technical skills. The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 11(2), 89–96.Google Scholar
Conceição, V. P., Mendes, J. C., Teodoro, M. F. and Dahlman, J. (2019). Validation of a behavioral marker system for rating cadet's non-technical skills. The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 13(1), 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordón, J. R., Olivier, P. R., Sedeño, M. A. G. and Martín, J. W. (2014). Diseño y validación de una prueba de selección para controladores de tráfico marítimo basada en la medida de la conciencia situacional. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 30, 83–93.Google Scholar
Delpizzo, R. C. and Valluri, S. (2017). An introduction to NATO Standard ANEP (Allied Naval Engineerring Publication) 77 and its application to naval ships. Ship Science & Technology, 11(21), 75–8.Google Scholar
DoD. (2008). Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Joint Publication 1-02. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Driskell, T., Salas, E. and Driskell, J. E. (2018). Teams in extreme environments: Alterations in team development and teamwork. Human Resource Management Review, 28(4), 434–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eliopoulou, E., Papanikolaou, A. and Voulgarellis, M. (2016). Statistical analysis of ship accidents and review of safety level. Safety Science, 85, 282–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espevik, R. and Olsen, O. K. (2013). A new model for understanding teamwork onboard: The shipmate model. International Maritime Health, 64(2), 89–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Fisher, J. (2000). Does Crew Resource Management training work? Air Medical Journal, 19, 137–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fjeld, G. P., Tvedt, S. D. and Oltedal, H. (2018). Bridge officers’ non-technical skills: A literature review. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 17(4), 475–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flin, R. and Maran, N. (2015). Basic concepts for crew resource management and non-technical skills. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology, 29, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flin, R., O'Connor, P. and Crichton, M. (2013). Safety at the Sharp End: A Guide to Non-Technical Skills. 2nd Edition. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Formela, K., Neumann, T. and Weintrit, A. (2019). Overview of definitions of maritime safety, safety at sea, navigational safety and safety in general. TRANSNAV. International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 13(2), 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, J. and Zachary, W. (2018). Intelligent tutoring for team training: Lessons learned from US military research. In Johnston, J., Sottilare, R., Sinatra, A. M. and Burke, C. S. (eds.). Building Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Teams (Research on Managing Groups and Teams), Vol. 19. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing, 215–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frick, S. E., Fletcher, K. A., Ramsay, S. and Bedwell, W. L. (2018). Understanding team maladaptation through the lens of the four R's of adaptation. Human Resource Management Review, 58(4), 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, A. K., Scott, D. J. and Abdelfattah, K. R. (2016). Do great teams think alike? An examination of team mental models and their impact on team performance. Surgery, 161(5), 1203–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, G. F., Blacksmith, N. and Coats, M. R. (2018). The science of teams in the military: Contributions from over 60 years of research. American Psychologist, 73(4), 322–333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graff, D. and Clark, M. A. (2018). Clear as a bell: The influence of analogies on the development of cross-understanding in design teams. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(7/8), 396–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grand, J. A. and Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2013). Eight basic principles for adaptability training in synthetic learning environments. In: Best, C., Galanis, G., Kerry, J. and Sottilare, R. (eds.). Fundamental Issues in Defense Training and Simulation. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 97–113.Google Scholar
Grossman, R. and Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: What really matters. International Journal of Training and Development, 15(2), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardison, C. M., Sahnley, M. G., Saavedra, A. R., Crowley, J. C., Wong, J. P. and Steinberg, P. S. (2015). What Veterans Bring to Civilian Workplaces. A Prototype Toolkit for Helping Private-Sector Employers Understand the Nontechnical Skills Taught in the Military. Santa Monica, CA: RAND National Defense Research Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedlund, E. and Österberg, J. (2013). Team training, team learning, leadership and psychology safety: A study of team training and team learning behavior during a Swedish military staff exercise. Sociology Mind, 3(1), 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hefner, J. L., Hilligoss, B., Knupp, A., Bournique, J., Sullivan, J., Adkins, E. and Moffatt-Bruce, S. D. (2017). Cultural transformation after implementation of Crew Resource Management: Is it really possible? American Journal of Medical Quality, 32(4), 384–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hontvedt, M. and Arnseth, H. C. (2013). On the bridge to learn: Analyzing the social organization of nautical instruction in a ship simulator. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IMO. (1997). Resolution A.850(20) – Human element vision, principles and goals for the organization. Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/VisionPrinciplesGoals/Documents/850(20).pdf [accessed 28 August 2019].Google Scholar
IMO. (2010). STCW Convention & Code 2010 Manila Amendments. Available at: http://www.imo.org [accessed 6 February 2019].Google Scholar
Kanki, B. G. (2019). Communication and crew resource management. In: Kanki, B. G., Anca, J. and Chidester, T. R. (eds.). Crew Resource Management. 3rd Edition, London: Elsevier, 103–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kececi, T. and Arslan, O. (2017). SHARE technique: A novel approach to root cause analysis of ship accidents. Safety Science, 96, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerry, J. (2013). Competency in the military. In: Beste, C., Galanis, G., Kerry, J. and Sotilare, R. (eds.). Fundamental Issues in Defense Training and Simulation, Farnham: Ashgate, 9–20.Google Scholar
Larken, J. (2017). Military Commander – Royal Navy. In: Flin, R. and Arbuthnot, K. (eds.). Incident Command: Tales from the Hot Seat. Oxfordshire: Routledge, 105–139.Google Scholar
Marques-Quinteiro, P., Curral, L., Passos, A., Lewis, K. and Gomes, C. (2019). How transactive memory systems and reflexivity relate with innovation in healthcare systems. Análise Psicológica, 1(XXXVII), 45–51.Google Scholar
Mathieu, J., Luciano, M. M. and DeChurch, L. (2017). Multiteam systems: The next chapter. In Anderson, N., Ones, D., Sinangil, H. K. and Viswesvaran, C. (eds.). International Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2nd Edition. London: Sage (in press).Google Scholar
McCann, C. and Pigeau, R. (1996). Taking command of C2. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Command and Control Research and Technology, Market Bosworth, UK, September 1996, 531–546.Google Scholar
McEwan, D., Ruissen, G. R., Eys, M. A., Zumbo, B. D. and Beauchamp, M. R. (2017). The effectiveness of teamwork training on teamwork behaviors and team performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled interventions. PLoS ONE, 12(1), e0169604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, J. D. and Duke, W. M. (2014). The Debrief Imperative. 1st Edition. Campbell, CA: FastPencil Premiere.Google Scholar
Nestel, D., Walker, K., Simon, R., Aggarwal, R. and Andreatt, P. (2011). Nontechnical skills: An inaccurate and unhelpful descriptor? Simulation in Healthcare: Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 6, 2–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nguyen, N., Elliott, J. O., Watson, W. D. and Dominguez, E. (2015). Simulation improves nontechnical skills performance of residents during the perioperative and intraoperative phases of surgery. Journal of Surgical Education, 72(5), 957–963.Google Scholar
Nilsson, R., Gärling, T. and Lützhöft, M. (2009). An experimental simulation study of advanced decision support system for ship navigation. Transportation Research Part F, 12, 188–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noord, I. V., de Bruijne, M. C., Twisk, J. W. R., van Dyck, C. and Wagner, C. (2015). More explicit communication after classroom-based crew resource management training: Results of a pragmatic trial. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 21, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NSC. (2019a). ANEP-77 PART1 – Naval Ship Code: Goals, Functional Objectives and Performance Requirements. Edition G Version 3. July 2019. NATO Standardization Office (NSO). Available from: http://www.navalshipcode.org [accessed 21 August 2019].Google Scholar
NSC. (2019b). ANEP-77 PART3 – Naval Ship Code: Justification & Guidance. Edition G Version 3. July 2019. NATO Standardization Office (NSO). Available from: http://www.navalshipcode.org [accessed 21 August 2019].Google Scholar
O'Connor, P. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of Bridge Resource Management training. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 21(4), 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, P. and Long, W. M. (2011). The development of a prototype behavioral marker system for US Navy Officers of the deck. Safety Science, 49, 1381–1387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, P., Hahn, R. G., Nullmeyer, R. and Montijo, G. (2019). The military perspective. In: Kanki, B. G., Anca, J. and Chidester, T. R. (eds.). Crew Resource Management. 3rd Edition, London: Elsevier, 515–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ornato, J. P. and Peberdy, M. A. (2014). Applying lessons from commercial aviation safety and operations to resuscitation. Resuscitation, 85, 173–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patraiko, D. (2014). Managing expectations. In Ward, E. (ed.). Bridge Resource Management; Working as a Cohesive Team. The Navigator, Issue no. 07, 2, London: The Nautical Institute/Royal Institute of Navigation.Google Scholar
Powell, S. M. and Hill, R. K. (2006). My copilot is a nurse – Using crew resource management in the OR. AORN Journal, 83(1), 179–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Psarros, G., Skjong, R. and Eid, M. S. (2010). Under-reporting of maritime accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 619–625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raffanelli, I., Miškoviæ, J. and Paviæ, I. (2018). Concepts of recognition of seagoing service and certificates to crew members of warships in accordance with STCW convention. Transactions on Maritime Science, 2, 199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rico, R., Hinsz, V. B., Burke, S. and Salas, E. (2017). A multilevel model of multiteam motivation and performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 7(1), 197–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rico, R., Hinsz, V. B., Davison, R. B. and Salas, E. (2018). Structural influences upon coordination and performance in multiteam systems. Human Resource Management Review, 28, 332–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Röttger, S., Vetter, S. and Kowalski, J. T. (2016). Ship management attitudes and their relation to behavior and performance. Human Factors, 55(3), 6569–671.Google Scholar
Saeed, F., Bury, A., Bonsall, S. and Riahi, R. (2019). The application of AHP in the development of a taxonomy of merchant marine deck officers’ non-technical skills (NTS). Logistics & Sustainable Transport, 10(1), 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 471–499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salas, E., Prince, C., Bowers, C., Stout, R., Oser, R. L. and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1999). A methodology for enhancing crew resource management training. Human Factors, 41, 161–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salas, E., Wilson, K. A., Burke, C. S. and Wightman, D. C. (2006). Does Crew Resource Management training work? An update, an extension, and some critical needs. Human Factors, 48(2), 392–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salas, E., Rosen, M. A., Weaver, S. J., Held, J. D. and Weissmuller, J. J. (2009). Guidelines for performance measurement in simulation-based training. Ergonomics in Design, 17(4), 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellberg, C. (2017). Simulator in bridge operations training and assessment: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 16, 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SOLAS. (2009). International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea. Available from: https://www.ifrc.org/docs/idrl/I456EN.pdf [accessed 21 August 2019].Google Scholar
Stevens, M. J. and Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 20(2), 503–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swezey, R. W., Owens, J. M., Bergondy, M. L. and Salas, E. (1998). Task and training requirements analysis methodology (TTRAM): An analytic methodology for identifying potential training uses of simulator networks in teamwork-intensive task environments. Ergonomics, 41(11), 1678–1697.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tvedt, S. D., Espevik, R., Oltedal, H. A., Fjeld, G. P. and Mjelde, F. V. (2018). Can you teach an old seadog new tricks? Experimental evaluation of BRM training in the commercial fleet. Necesse, 3(2), 164–179.Google Scholar
Uitdewilligen, S., Rico, R. and Walker, M. J. (2018). Fluid and stable: Dynamics of team action patterns and adaptive outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39, 1113–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbañski, J., Morgao, W. and Miêsikowski, M. (2009). The present and expected changes in maritime safety, security and defense functions. In: Weintrit, A. (ed.). Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Van den Bosch, K. and Riemersma, B. J. (2004). Reflections on scenario-based training in tactical command. In: Elliott, L., Coovert, M. and Schiflett, S. (eds.). Scaled Worlds: Development, Validation and Applications, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vogel-Walcutt, J. J., Fiorella, L. and Malone, N. (2010). Instructional strategies framework for military training systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1490–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahl, A. M. (2019). Expanding the concept of simulator fidelity: The use of technology and collaborative activities in training maritime officers. Cognition, Technology & Work, 1–14.Google Scholar
Wallace, P. (2013). Training needs analysis for simulation-based training. In Best, C., Galanis, G., Kerry, J. and Sottilare, R. (eds). Fundamental Issues in Defense Training and Simulation. Dorchester: Ashgate, 31–46.Google Scholar
Yang, Z. L., Wang, J. and Li, K. X. (2013). Maritime safety analysis in retrospect. Maritime Policy & Management, 40, 261–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yousefi, H. and Seyedjavadin, R. (2012). Crew resource management: the role of human factors and Bridge Resource Management in reducing maritime casualties. In Weintrit, A. and Neumann, T. (eds.). Human Resources and Crew Resource Management. Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar