*5.4. E*ff*ectiveness of Learning*

The evaluation of any initiative's success is much more straight forward when clear objective indicators (learning outcomes) are employed. In the case of learning in an aircraft maintenance and managemen<sup>t</sup> environment, organisations can generally employ indicators such as inspection non-compliance, audit findings and rates of incident reoccurrence in support of gauging the effectiveness of learning. Probing salient aspects such as timely investigation of incidents, assessing the learning content and feedback are a starting point for assessing effectiveness. Cooke [20] concludes the absence of or poor information can compromise the effectiveness of feedback. He also suggests that if the feedback cycle is ailing, the climate may deteriorate and have a negative impact upon organisational safety. From a commercial viewpoint, it is perhaps understandable that aircraft tend to only generate revenue when flying. However, airline operators need to maintain a balance between safe operations and productivity. It is essential that incident causal factors are fully identified and adequate time and resources are available to support this important aspect of learning. Cooke [20] endorses a suggestion that increased reporting of incidents enhances continuous improvement in high reliability industries. However, establishing adequate causation is also an attribute capable of supporting effective learning from an event in dynamic environments.

The importance also of just culture as an enabler for incident reporting and subsequent effective learning cannot be ignored. Under-reporting of events resulting from a single-loop learning experiences amongs<sup>t</sup> operational maintenance staff and production pressures can also impact negatively upon efforts to propagate a learning environment. McDonald [38] suggests from their analysis, '*that there is a strong professional sub-culture, which is relatively independent of the organization. One implication of this finding is that this professional sub-culture mediates the e*ff*ect of the organizational safety system on normal operational practice*'. Von Thaden and Gibbons [39], conclude safety culture '*refers to the extent to which individuals and groups will commit to personal responsibility for safety; act to preserve, enhance and communicate safety information; strive to actively learn, adapt and modify (both individual and organizational) behaviour based on lessons learned from mistakes* ... ... ... '. A just culture is defined in the affecting regulation EU 376/2014 [6] as, 'a *culture in which front line operators or other persons are not punished for actions, omissions, or decisions taken by them, that are commensurate with their experience and training, but in which gross negligence, wilful violations and destructive acts are not tolerated*'. Accordingly, a just culture is a fair culture. The effectiveness of the learning system can also be compromised by its efficiency as well as its inadequacies. The volume of information that staff must process and assimilate is continually increasing. Guardians of learning outcomes should be mindful that staff risk becoming information weary as a result of the ever-increasing demands on their cognitive abilities.
