Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships

The Authority Gradient and Leadership Styles

Introduction

Leadership should not be confused with authority. Authority is normally assigned, while leadership is acquired and suggests a voluntary following.

Figure 12.4 shows what is termed the Cockpit Authority Gradient. It illustrates the three types found in the air:

•The Autocratic Cockpit.

•The Laissez-faire Cockpit.

•The Synergistic Cockpit (the ideal).

The Captain’s task is to maintain a compromise which maintains the authority gradient without losing the support of the crew members.

A. The Autocratic Cockpit

B. The Laissez-faire Cockpit

C. The Synergistic Cockpit (The Ideal)

Figure 12.4 The Authority Gradient

12

Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships 12

243

12 Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships

Relationships Interpersonal and Differences Individual 12

The Autocratic Cockpit

The autocratic cockpit is one in which the Captain:

•Decides and imposes his/her decisions without consultation.

•Takes no account of the opinions of the other members of the crew.

•Rarely delegates.

•Makes general comments which teach nothing.

•Does not listen and is isolated from the rest of the crew.

•Considers forcefully made suggestions as either criticism or insubordination.

•Encourages a tense and non-communicative atmosphere in the cockpit.

By the very nature of the way the cockpit is run, the Captain is normally overloaded in the event of a problem.

This nightmare scenario can occur when:

•The under-confident Captain uses his/her authority to hide inherent weaknesses.

•There is a large gap in both the seniority and technical ability/knowledge between the Captain and the remaining members of the crew. For example, a very senior Captain flying with a new co-pilot.

•The Captain has a very strong character and the co-pilot has a personality which is weak and self-effacing.

Faced with a Captain whose manner is too authoritarian, crews tend to react in a stereotyped manner. In a three-seat cockpit there tends to be collusion between the co-pilot and flight engineer thus somewhat redressing the situation.

However in a two-seat cockpit this is not possible and the co-pilot is forced to handle the situation alone. In this case, the classic reactions of the co-pilot can be any of the following:

•Aggression is met with aggression and, with this confrontational attitude, the tension in the cockpit is increased.

•An apparent submission and withdrawal coupled with the decision “to say nothing more”.

•The unexpressed aggression is turned against a third person (or scapegoat). This is normally ATC or cabin staff.

•The aggression is delayed, contained and “mulled-over”. Not only will this preoccupation deprive the co-pilot of his/her situation awareness but the aggression will be suddenly and unexpectedly released - possibly in just the situation which demands careful and analytical reasoning and in which emotion has no part to play.

Crews meeting such situations must be aware of the potential dangers and approach the flight with as positive attitude as possible. The presentation of cooperation can be made in a conciliatory form but the contents of this cooperation must be firm.

This not to say that there is no place at all for authoritarianism in the air. In an emergency situation and when pressed for time, the Captain must give crisp, clear orders needed for immediate reactions and responses.

244

Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships 12

The Laissez-faire Cockpit

At the other end of the spectrum is the laissez-faire cockpit. In this situation the Captain:

•Remains passive.

•Allows other members of the crew freedom in decision making.

•Makes few suggestions.

•Makes neither positive or negative judgements.

•Encourages a relaxed and laid-back atmosphere in the cockpit with communications leaning towards non-professional subjects.

•Has a primary aim to please the rest of the crew.

This situation tends to arise when the Captain is working with competent pilots and flight engineers, particularly during the “co-pilot’s leg”.

The consequences of the laissez-faire cockpit are apparent. Either the vacuum is filled by another member of the crew who takes over the leadership role or members of the crew work on their own, preoccupied on different plans of their own, and without keeping each other informed. A “self-centred” cockpit is thus created which offers the least synergy and is the most dangerous of the cockpit situations.

The Synergistic Cockpit - the Ideal

The Synergistic Cockpit is one where the Captain:

•Leads by example.

•Motivates the crew.

•Develops the skills of the crew.

•Supports team working.

•Clearly communicates intentions and required standards.

•Monitors the crew performance and gives constructive advice to the crew members.

•Coordinates interrelated activities concerning the flight.

•Listens to the rest of the crew and looks upon their suggestions as helpful.

•Makes decisions with the help and active participation of the other crew members.

•Makes a plan of action defined by the group.

•Delegates responsibilities and actions.

•Shares information and explains decisions.

•Tries not to over-participate leaving each member of the crew to show their worth and capabilities.

•Works to maintain a positive, cordial and professional cockpit atmosphere throughout the flight.

•Openly shows appreciation for work well done.

•Debriefs the crew and encourages ideas for improvements.

Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships 12

245

12 Individual Differences and Interpersonal Relationships

Interacting with Other Agencies

People are very good at identifying themselves with a group but the pilot is a member of a number of groups at the same time. He/she is obviously a member of the flight deck group and it is with this group that he/she has the most identity of purpose and common interests.

The pilot, is of course, also a member of the whole crew, including the cabin crew. In many circumstances the whole crew must act together against what is seen as a threat to them all such as a plane-load of drunken passengers or in the case of an emergency.

The pilot is also a member of a larger organization; the company or airline. In this group the pilot interacts with dispatch clerks, ticket agents, technical services etc. To resolve certain problems the pilot must interact with all of them.

Perhaps the largest group to which the pilot belongs is the Aviation Group. The common purpose of this group including ATC agencies and controllers is to maintain a safe and expeditious flow of traffic across the world, combining together to overcome weather conditions, health problems, or in some circumstances political considerations.

Relationships Interpersonal and Differences Individual 12

246