Train-the-Trainer by DataHomeLab
Concept

Threat and error management

TEM is the operational model of how crews keep the margin of safety when the world and the human system do not behave as planned. Threats and errors are normal. Competence is judged by how they are detected, managed, and prevented from cascading into an undesired aircraft state.

Core definitions (ICAO)

Term Meaning
Threat Events or errors beyond the operational person's influence that increase complexity and must be managed to keep the safety margin
Threat management Detect threats; respond with countermeasures that reduce or eliminate consequences and cut the chance of errors or undesired states
Error Action or inaction that deviates from organisational or personal intentions or expectations
Error management Detect errors; respond with countermeasures that reduce or eliminate consequences and cut further errors or undesired states

Undesired aircraft states are the third TEM node: aircraft configurations or flight-path conditions that reduce safety margin. Competencies are the countermeasures. Monitoring (comparing actual to expected state) is embedded in role competencies and requires knowledge, skills and attitudes (KSA) to build a mental model and act when deviations appear.

How TEM structures EBT

The aim of an EBT programme is to identify, develop, and assess competencies pilots need to operate safely, effectively, and efficiently by managing the most relevant threats and errors, based on evidence from operations and training.

Design implications:

  • Training topics are prioritised by likelihood, severity, and training benefit across aeroplane generations and flight phases (Doc 9995 criticality method).
  • Scenario and evaluation phases are line-oriented so TEM can be exercised in real time, not as a slide pack.
  • Grading a competency includes how many observable behaviours (OBs) appeared, how often, and the TEM outcome for that competency as a countermeasure.
  • Manoeuvres training builds psychomotor skill; scenario-based training develops TEM-capable crew performance. They are different phases for a reason.

TEM in diagnosis and debrief

When performance fails, TEM supplies the diagnostic questions:

  • What threats were present (weather, traffic, fatigue, MEL, time pressure, unfamiliar field)?
  • What errors occurred (omission, wrong selection, procedural deviation)?
  • What undesired state developed or was avoided?
  • Which competencies worked or failed as countermeasures?

The Risk Management Model compresses the same idea for crew talk: risk potential versus resources, closed by communication. The Performance-Influences model places TEM first among individual managing factors the crew can bring to bear.

Do not treat TEM as a separate grade. Map observations to core competencies (situation awareness, workload management, communication, problem solving, application of procedures, flight-path management, and the rest of the adapted set).

Instructor use

  1. In brief, ask crews to name expected threats for the scenario or sector, not only the manoeuvre list.
  2. In evaluation phases, observe without training interruption so TEM data stays clean; role-play external parties as required.
  3. In debrief, facilitate crew reconstruction of threat → error → state chains before delivering your own analysis.
  4. When grading, explicitly weigh TEM outcome for the competency under assessment.
  5. For programme design or training needs analysis (TNA) input, prefer threats and errors that are frequent, severe, or high training-benefit for the fleet generation.

Connections

Sources