SMS That Works: Revisiting the 6 Components for Real-World Performance (Part 1 of 6)
Part 1: The Safety Management Plan — From Words to a Working System
Most aviation organizations can point to their Safety Management System.
They have the manual.
They can list the six components.
They’ve passed audits.
And yet when something happens, the system doesn’t respond the way it should.
Not because a component is missing.
But because the components aren’t functioning together as a system.
A System - Not a Checklist
Transport Canada’s Advisory Circular (AC) 107-001 clearly identifies the six components of an SMS:
Safety Management Plan
Documentation
Safety Oversight
Training (Safety Promotion)
Quality Assurance
Emergency Response Plan
These are not six independent requirements to be satisfied.
They are interdependent parts of a management system—and if they don’t connect, the system doesn’t work.
A management system, in practical terms, is not a manual.
It is:
A set of interconnected processes designed to achieve a consistent outcome.
In this case:
Managing safety risk as part of everyday operations.
What Does “System” Actually Mean?
If your SMS is functioning as a system, you should be able to follow the flow:
A hazard is reported
It is assessed
A risk decision is made
Actions are taken
Those actions are verified
Lessons are fed back into the system
That flow crosses multiple components:
Safety Oversight
Safety Management Plan
Quality Assurance
Training
Documentation
If those handoffs are unclear—or don’t happen—the system breaks down.
And that breakdown is rarely visible in the manual.
The Foundation: Safety Management Plan
The Safety Management Plan (SMP) is where everything starts.
Not because it is the first section in the AC.
But because it defines:
How safety is managed
Who is accountable
What processes exist
How performance is measured
In other words, the SMP should describe how the system actually works.
Can You Understand Your Own System?
Here’s a simple test:
If you are an Accountable Executive—or any member of the leadership team—you should be able to pick up your Safety Management Plan and answer:
How does a safety issue move through the organization?
What processes are triggered?
Who is responsible at each step?
What outputs are generated?
You don’t need to know every procedure.
But you should clearly see:
Processes—and how they connect.
If you can’t, there is a problem.
Because if leadership can’t understand the system, it’s unlikely the system is functioning as intended.
Processes: The Missing Link
At its core, a system is built on processes.
And every process has:
Inputs (what triggers it)
Outputs (what it produces)
If those aren’t clearly defined, the system becomes inconsistent, dependent on individuals, and difficult to verify.
Let’s look at some examples.
Example 1: Safety Policy
What it’s supposed to be:
A foundational statement of intent.
What it often becomes:
A poster on the wall.
Process view:
Inputs:
Safety culture survey results
Feedback from employees
Trends from reporting systems
Outputs:
Revised policy
Communication updates
Review and approval by SMS Committee
Sign-off by the Accountable Executive
What good looks like:
The policy evolves based on real feedback and is visibly supported by leadership.
What bad looks like:
The policy hasn’t changed in years, and no one can say when it was last reviewed.
Example 2: Safety Risk Management
What it’s supposed to be:
A structured way to manage hazards and risk.
What it often becomes:
A form that gets filled out.
Process view:
Inputs:
Hazard reports
Incident reports
Existing corrective actions
Outputs:
Hazard Register
Safety Risk Profile
Risk decisions
Feedback to reporters
What good looks like:
Risks are prioritized, visible, and tied to decisions and resources.
What bad looks like:
Reports go in, but no one can clearly show what changed as a result.
Example 3: Emergency Response
What it’s supposed to be:
Preparedness for when things go wrong.
What it often becomes:
A plan that sits on a shelf.
Process view:
Inputs:
Incident reports
Exercise results
After-action reviews
Outputs:
Corrective actions
Updates to the AERP
Training adjustments
What good looks like:
Exercises lead to real changes, and those changes are tracked and verified.
What bad looks like:
The same issues come up in every exercise.
Where Systems Break Down
In our experience, the most common failure points are:
Processes are not clearly defined
Inputs are not consistently captured
Outputs are not tracked or verified
Components operate in silos
Leadership cannot clearly see how it all connects
And yet on paper the system looks complete.
What Good Looks Like
A functioning Safety Management Plan:
Clearly describes processes, not just policies
Shows how components connect
Defines inputs and outputs
Is understood by leadership
Is actively reviewed and updated
Most importantly:
It reflects what actually happens, not what is intended to happen.
A Challenge for Leaders
Take 15 minutes this week:
Pick up your Safety Management Plan and ask:
Can I follow the flow of a safety issue from start to finish?
Are the processes clear or implied?
Do I understand how the components connect?
Would I know if this system wasn’t working?
If the answer to any of these is unclear, you don’t have a system you can rely on.
What Comes Next
In the next article, we’ll move beyond the plan and into Safety Oversight which is the engine of the system.
Because even the best-designed system doesn’t matter if it isn’t generating, analyzing, and acting on real safety information.
Work With Us
At Acclivix, we work with aviation organizations to move beyond documentation and build SMS that actually function.
Whether it’s reviewing your Safety Management Plan, mapping your processes, or identifying where your system is breaking down, we can help you see what’s really happening.
If you’re not sure whether your SMS is working as a system, it’s worth a conversation.