IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i4p1682-d1341235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Safety Management and Organizational Resilience System Maturity of Aviation Organizations during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparison of Two Approaches to Achieving Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Tomasz Ewertowski

    (Faculty of Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, 2 Prof. Rychlewskiego Str., 60-965 Poznan, Poland)

  • Patryk Kuźmiński

    (Faculty of Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, 2 Prof. Rychlewskiego Str., 60-965 Poznan, Poland)

Abstract

The coronavirus pandemic crisis highlighted the critical importance of comprehensive safety management for all organizations. Safety management literature delineates two approaches to achieving safety, characterized as safety management through centralized control, known as the safety management system (SMS), and safety management through guided adaptability, known as organizational resilience (OR). Each of these approaches plays a pivotal role in establishing and maintaining the safety and sustainability of an organization. This paper aimed to compare the maturity of SMS with the maturity of OR, identifying the relationship between aspects of SMS and OR in the context of the crisis of the pandemic. Based on a literature review, the author presents adopted concepts of SMS and OR, as well as a customized maturity model for both. The survey methodology involved two questionnaires on SMS and OR, consisting of 26 and 18 questions, respectively. The survey was conducted in three approved training organizations (ATOs) in the Greater Poland voivodeship. When comparing key aspects of both approaches to safety management (SMS vs. OR), significant differences in ratings were observed. Additionally, a moderate correlation was found between aspects of SMS and OR. This discrepancy was reflected in the maturity models. According to the survey results, SMS achieved the fourth level of maturity, labeled proactive safety management, while OR attained the third level of maturity, termed a fairly agile organization. Furthermore, the results showed that while the guided adaptability approach is more difficult to achieve in an organization, the centralized control approach is insufficient. Therefore, both components are necessary to ensure the comprehensive safety of the organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomasz Ewertowski & Patryk Kuźmiński, 2024. "The Safety Management and Organizational Resilience System Maturity of Aviation Organizations during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparison of Two Approaches to Achieving Safety," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:4:p:1682-:d:1341235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/4/1682/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/4/1682/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tomasz Ewertowski & Marcin Butlewski, 2022. "Managerial Perception of Risk in an Organization in a Post-COVID-19 Work Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tomasz Ewertowski & Buse Çisil Güldoğuş & Semih Kuter & Süreyya Akyüz & Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber & Joanna Sadłowska-Wrzesińska & Elżbieta Racek, 2024. "The use of machine learning techniques for assessing the potential of organizational resilience," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 32(3), pages 685-710, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:4:p:1682-:d:1341235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.