SMS That Works: Revisiting the 6 Components for Real-World Performance (4/6)

Written By Currie Russell

Part 4: Quality Assurance — The Truth Teller

Nobody likes surprises during an audit.

Yet many organizations still approach audits reactively:

  • Preparing frantically before an external review

  • Scrambling to gather records

  • Hoping major findings don’t appear

But if your Quality Assurance program is functioning effectively, there should be very few surprises at all.

Because Quality Assurance is not about “passing audits.”

It’s about understanding whether your organization is actually functioning the way it believes it is.

The “Check” in Plan-Do-Check-Act

Transport Canada’s Advisory Circular 107-001 positions Quality Assurance (QA) within the familiar:

Plan – Do – Check – Act

Most organizations are comfortable with:

  • Planning

  • Doing

Far fewer are effective at:

  • Checking

  • Acting on what they discover

And yet this is where continuous improvement actually happens.

Quality Assurance is the organization’s opportunity to step back and ask:

  • Are our processes working as written?

  • Are they producing the intended results?

  • Are they being followed consistently?

  • Are corrective actions actually effective?

In many ways:

QA is the truth teller within the system.

QA Must Be Process-Driven

Transport Canada is very clear on this point:

Quality Assurance must be process-driven. AC 107-001 – Part 9 Quality Assurance

And this matters more than many organizations realize.

Because without documented processes:

  • There is no consistent standard

  • There is nothing to verify against

  • And QA becomes subjective

This ties directly back to the Documentation component we discussed last week.

If a process is not clearly defined:

  • What are we auditing?

  • How do we know whether it is functioning properly?

  • How do we identify gaps?

Without process definition, organizations often audit activity instead of effectiveness.

Operational QA vs System QA

Quality Assurance generally covers two major areas:

🔹 Operational QA

This focuses on operational activities and whether they are being performed correctly and consistently.

Examples may include:

  • Airfield inspections

  • Wildlife management activities

  • Winter operations procedures

  • Training records

  • Vehicle inspections

  • Operational checklists

Operational QA asks:

“Are we doing the work correctly?”

🔹 System QA

This focuses on whether the Safety Management System itself is functioning effectively.

Examples include:

  • Are processes interconnected?

  • Are corrective actions being tracked and verified?

  • Is hazard information flowing properly?

  • Are responsibilities understood?

  • Is oversight occurring at the appropriate levels?

System QA asks:

“Is the system itself functioning the way it was designed to?”

Both matter.

An organization can perform operational tasks reasonably well while the system behind them is fragmented or ineffective.

Internal Audits — Your Early Warning System

One of the most important components of Quality Assurance is the internal audit process.

And yet, in many organizations, internal audits are:

  • Weak

  • Inconsistent

  • Treated as administrative exercises

  • Or only performed shortly before a regulatory audit

That’s a problem.

Because internal audits are how organizations identify weaknesses themselves—before someone else does.

What Internal Audits Should Really Do

An effective internal audit process should:

  • Identify gaps

  • Verify process compliance

  • Assess effectiveness

  • Confirm corrective actions worked

  • Reveal trends over time

Not to assign blame.

But to provide visibility.

A mature organization does not fear internal findings.

It values them.

Because findings provide:

  • Awareness

  • Evidence

  • Opportunity for improvement

A finding is not necessarily failure.

Often, it is proof the system is working—because the organization identified an issue itself and took action before the issue became larger.

What Bad Looks Like

Weak QA programs often share similar characteristics:

  • Audits performed only before regulator visits

  • Checklist completion without meaningful analysis

  • Repeat findings year after year

  • Corrective actions closed without verification

  • Little involvement from leadership

  • Findings viewed as punishment rather than insight

In these environments, audits become stressful events instead of continuous improvement tools.

And organizations end up learning about their weaknesses from external auditors instead of themselves.

What Good Looks Like

Strong QA programs look very different.

They are:

  • Structured around processes

  • Integrated into everyday operations

  • Risk-informed

  • Focused on effectiveness—not just compliance

In mature organizations:

  • Findings are tracked and analyzed

  • Corrective actions are validated

  • Leadership reviews trends regularly

  • Repeat findings are uncommon

  • External audits rarely contain major surprises

That last point is important.

If your internal QA program is functioning effectively:

Your organization should already know where its weaknesses are.

How Executives Can Know If QA Is Working

Executives do not need to become auditors.

But they do need visibility into whether the QA system is functioning effectively.

Here are a few important questions to ask:

  • What did our last internal audit reveal?

  • Are repeat findings occurring?

  • How do we know corrective actions were effective?

  • Are audits focused only on compliance—or also on effectiveness and risk?

  • Would a regulator discover something we don’t already know about?

If the answers are unclear, the QA system may not be providing the visibility leadership needs.

Quick Wins

Organizations looking to strengthen Quality Assurance can start with a few practical steps:

🔹 Focus audits on processes—not just documents

Verify whether processes are functioning as intended.

🔹 Track trends over time

Repeat findings often indicate systemic issues.

🔹 Validate corrective actions

Closing an item does not necessarily mean the problem is solved.

🔹 Increase leadership visibility

QA results should support executive decision-making.

🔹 Normalize findings

Findings should drive improvement—not fear.

Quality Assurance Creates Confidence

When QA is weak:

  • Audits become stressful

  • Problems remain hidden

  • Leadership lacks visibility

  • Organizations become reactive

When QA is strong:

  • Issues are identified early

  • Corrective actions are meaningful

  • Trends become visible

  • Leadership gains confidence in the system

And ultimately:

The organization understands itself better.

That is what effective Quality Assurance should achieve.

What Comes Next

Next week, we’ll move into Training and Safety Promotion—because even the strongest system and oversight framework depend on people understanding their role within it.

Work With Us

At Acclivix, we help aviation organizations build Quality Assurance programs that support real operational and system performance.

Whether it’s:

  • Developing process-driven QA frameworks

  • Conducting or supporting internal audits

  • Improving corrective action tracking

  • Identifying trends and systemic gaps

  • Or implementing tools like Wombat Safety Software to improve visibility and follow-through

—we help organizations move beyond audit preparation and toward continuous improvement.

Because Quality Assurance should not create fear.

It should create confidence.

Currie Russell
Next

Un SGS qui fonctionne : Revisiter les 6 composantes pour une performance concrète