If one analyses the airline loss data over the last 10 years, it becomes clear that even in years where the losses have been at an all-time low, fatalities can be substantial. For instance, in 2022 there were only 2.4 accidents of jet and turboprop aircraft of more than 14 seats, but almost 150 people died in commercial operations that year. This is one fatality too many and a state of affairs that the industry cannot and should not accept, and where Safety Management Systems come to play. They have been defined by the International Civil Aviation Organisation as a systemic approach to managing safety, which includes the necessary organisational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures which are detailed in their published Annex 14. Put differently, it is a business administration process akin to those geared towards obtaining the best return on investment, but in the field of safety. The desired result is to reduce losses and risks to acceptable levels within the organisation, using the resources at hand.

On the other hand, The International Air Transport Association, IATA, has established two programs to measure the way airlines and ground handling companies manage their operational risk, the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) and the IATA Safety Audit for Ground Operation (ISAGO). Whereas before, the operators were subject to multiple audits every year from their commercial partners, regulators, and other industry actors. Since these programs were introduced, there has been a unified way of assessing operational and safety practices throughout the industry. These programmes have made it clear that operators could do better in their SMS, Safety Assurance, Safety Risk Management, Documentation and Training Programs. In 2021, almost 40% of the Top IOSA Findings or non-compliant items where in the field of SMS, 22% in documentation management and almost 28% in auditor and ground handling operations training. The ISAGO programme also found most deficiencies in the SMS implementation arena (45 findings on average). Problems lie in issues such as the design of the safety programs, regulatory oversight, management decisions which affect the administration of safety programmes, etc.

And it is precisely here where the industry is moving away from merely ticking the box of ascertaining whether the airline or operator has a safety policy, an SMS manual or a person responsible for safety promotion, to making sure the administration of safety is effective and resilient. An effective SMS, combined with initiatives in safety technology, is thus at the forefront of ensuring safe operations. The question is, how is this measured? What tools do we have to determine whether management is getting the best business result in reducing risk and performing with the highest degrees of safety? Several models exist, in particular the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Management System Assessment Tool, The CANSO (Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation) Maturity Scheme, The SMS Maturity Assessment and Refinement Tool (SMART), the SM ICG (Safety Management International Collaboration Group) SMS Evaluation Tool, and our very own Insurance Safety Assessment Tool (ISAT), developed exclusively for Gallagher Specialty by our partners in safety, Sirius Aviation.