To consider the differences and the advantages of bringing together the elements associated with MEDA and the analytical capacity that is available within the SMS system.

Maintenance Error Management System (MEMS) which is typically represented by “Maintenance Error Decision Aid” (MEDA) as developed by Boeing is an effective way of analyzing events (initially MEDA was developed to facilitate the analysis of incidents and accidents – At the inception its use was employed where there was an adverse outcome; however it was subsequently extended and it is now typically found to be also employed for the investigation of events).

A Safety Management System, on the other hand, focuses not just on incidents and accidents (which are also addressed) but uses a range of proactive techniques to also consider risk in respect of a range of potential exposures that could have a detrimental outcome for the business.

We should understand that MEDA focuses in a significant way on the individual who experienced the event. The difference is in the way the techniques of the “MEDA Interview” are employed to identify not just the root cause but also serve as the catalyst for exploring the potential corrections that can be introduced.

The MEDA interview process recognizes that the person who experienced the event will have a deep understanding of the causes and typically solutions that can be employed (or should have been employed) to prevent the event from happening.

Remember that in a chain of events, if we can break just one single link, we can stop the accident.

SMS on the other hand, is generally considered to be further “upstream”, meaning it is identifying the exposure or the potential of “something” impacting the business. This perceived risk is the subject of expert analysis, which is typically a group activity involving typically 3 or often 4 persons, compared with MEDA, where we can perform an interview with 1 or 2 persons.

So can we combine the two environments? The answer is undoubtedly yes. Once we recognize the roles of both situations, we can see the possibility of developing the MEDA interview as a precursor to a further step of “expert analysis” to understand fully the organization exposure, for example, what has been experienced, manifest in another environment within the same organisation and to determine appropriate mitigation's that can be taken to alleviate the exposure or to reduce the potential of an event.

Whilst SMS is more general in its role of analysis, it really does sit very well alongside the MEDA process. Working either independently in the case of an input into the SMS or as an additional activity following a MEDA event.

SofemaOnline offers cost-effective regulatory training, Online to the highest professional standards.

For details please visit our website www.sofemaonline.com or email us: team@sassofia.com