C-A-L model

The C-A-L model is a three-part frame for structuring crew discussion of each line-oriented simulation (LOS) topic in debrief: C (crew resource management applied to the company model), A (analysis and evaluation of LOS performance), and L (application to line operations). Post it on a wallboard during the debrief so the crew keeps all three legs in view. Without the frame, discussion drifts into anecdote or abstract theory.

#Why three legs

Each letter is a deliverable the crew should leave with:

C without A is theory. A without L is a self-critique that does not change line behaviour. L without C and A is unanchored intention.

#Table 1 content (what to cover)

#C: CRM: applying the company model

• Use wallboards with the company CRM concept list.
• Tie CRM techniques to operational issues that actually arose.
• Keep discussion interactive: CRM is practised in the room, not recited.

#A: Analysis and evaluation of LOS performance

Evaluate performance explicitly.

• How effective was management of the situation?
• What went well, and why?
• What could be improved, and how?

Analyse the situation interactively.

• What happened?
• How was it managed (including CRM techniques used)?
• Why was it managed that way?

#L: Line operations: applying lessons from LOS

• Relate LOS performance and CRM issues to line operations.
• Discuss related line incidents that illustrate the same CRM issues.
• How to apply LOS successes to the line.
• What could have been done differently in the LOS, which CRM techniques would have helped, and how to turn improvable areas into strengths.
• What can prevent or manage similar situations on the line.

#Session setup that makes C-A-L work

#Introduction (brief the debrief)

Before C-A-L content, set roles and expectations. Without this, crews default to passive-recipient mode.

• Instructor role: outline process; help set agenda; facilitate; act as CRM/technical resource; keep discussion crew-centred; ensure training objectives are met.
• Crew responsibilities: raise issues; talk to each other, not only to you; analyse situations and management; evaluate outcomes; discuss what they would do differently.
• Rationale: self-discovery beats lecture, draws on professional expertise, and helps you understand their performance.
• Length and format: state duration (about an hour for a thorough crew-centred debrief) and the format (agenda, video, C-A-L).

#Agenda

Ask the crew to name topics (include strengths, not only problems). Add critical issues they miss. Chronological order helps if you will use video segments; some instructors follow crew-initiated topics immediately to reinforce initiative. Prefacing the pre-LOS brief with "note issues you want to discuss later" improves agenda quality.

#Delivery per segment

A clean pattern: show the relevant video segment (if used), then walk C → A → L for that topic. Use questions, silence, and active listening at each row; do not lecture the table.

#Instructor use

• Treat C-A-L as the organising spine for each topic, not a script you read aloud.
• Start most topics with open reaction ("What went well or not so well there?"), then deepen into A, surface C techniques by name, and close the topic with L transfer.
• Do not accept surface "what happened" as sufficient for A; force why and evaluation.
• For high-performing crews, still run C-A-L: they often cannot articulate why success happened, and L is where transfer is earned.
• Limit learning outcomes: in the EBT nine-step debrief, two or three root-cause learning outcomes beat a chronological symptom catalogue.
• Score facilitation quality against whether the crew actually analysed, evaluated, discussed CRM, and spoke to each other (not only to you).

#Connections

• Facilitation. Technique that delivers C-A-L; levels of facilitation decide how hard you push each row.
• Instruction versus facilitation. When to insert direct instruction after the crew finishes A.
• Questioning technique. Open analysis questions that drive A without interrogation tone.
• Set and closure. Topic set before each C-A-L block and mini-closure before the next topic.
• Active listening. Toolset that keeps A interactive rather than instructor monologue.
• Johari window. A and L expand Blind Spot and Hidden content; C names the company model in Public space.
• The briefing, conduct and debriefing loop. Where C-A-L sits in the post-session half of the arc.
• Crew resource management. The C component's subject matter.
• Line-oriented flight training. Scenario type the model was built to debrief.

#Sources

• A1.3 The C-A-L Debriefing Model. Canonical Table 1; introduction discipline; agenda development.
• A1.4 Facilitation Techniques. Toolkit used to run each C-A-L row.
• A1.5 Five-Point Facilitator Rating Scale. Worked application of C-A-L with effective/ineffective dialogue.
• 7.3 General Debrief Techniques. In-chapter summary of C-A-L as organising frame.
• 7.5 LOFT Debriefing - Introduction. "Brief the debriefing" role/expectation contract that enables crew-centred C-A-L.