Human Factors and Safety Management (Regulatory Context)
Why human factors appear in legislation
Human factors requirements in CARs exist because maintenance error is a major cause of accidents. Candidates should know the SHELL model (Software, Hardware, Environment, Liveware) and the Dirty Dozen (complacency, fatigue, pressure, distraction, lack of communication, lack of resources, lack of teamwork, lack of knowledge, lack of assertiveness, stress, norms, awareness). These are examined as concepts, not as slogans - be able to match a scenario to the factor.
Regulatory context: organisations must have a Safety Management System (SMS) with the four pillars - policy and objectives, safety risk management, safety assurance, safety promotion. The Accountable Manager provides resources and authority for the SMS. Just culture distinguishes honest error from reckless or intentional violation. Occurrence reporting feeds the safety data system, and confidential reporting protects reporters.
Traps
A frequent trap is confusing SMS (the organisation's proactive safety system) with occurrence reporting (a reactive reporting obligation) - reporting is one input to the SMS, not the whole system. Another trap is treating just culture as "no blame"; it is a proportionate response, not immunity. A third is mixing the Dirty Dozen with the SHELL elements - one is a list of error precursors, the other a model of interfaces.
Worked example / rule of thumb
A technician signs off a task without the correct manual because the computer was down. Map it: lack of resources plus pressure; the fix is systemic (availability of data), not just individual blame. Rule of thumb: SMS = proactive system; reporting = reactive input; just culture = proportionate response.