Steve Bentley, FRAeS, CEO of Sofema Aviation Services, discusses the challenges of knowledge transfer, maintaining safety and quality, and ensuring strong, effective engagement as more experienced employees retire.
Where we are in 2025 – The Core Problem to Solve
Aviation organizations today are relying on a shrinking pool of highly experienced technicians, engineers, and Operational Controllers, many of whom are nearing retirement.
The risk faced today is twofold:
- Silent loss of know-how (the judgment you only get, for example, after several thousand hours on task)
- Uneven performance as less-experienced staff shoulder complex tasks too soon
Leaders must convert personal expertise into organizational capability, keep retirees engaged without creating single points of failure, and accelerate the growth of younger colleagues – without compromising safety or compliance.
Typical Challenges Leaders Should Expect
First, we know that much know-how is not written down. It includes simple fault-finding tips, small warning signs, and unwritten rules- like when not to use an MEL deferral or how to read an unclear vendor manual.
Second, workloads and shift patterns often challenge mentoring opportunities; senior people become firefighters trying to cope with skill dilution and overall workload.
Third, sometimes incentives misalign, where ageing employees may feel used for “hard jobs only,” while juniors feel stuck on repetitive tasks with little progression.
Fourth, documentation systems can become messy when ownership is weak.
- This means even when knowledge exists, people often cannot find the current, correct instruction.
Finally, cultural friction arises as subject matter experts dismiss new digital tools, while younger staff may undervalue legacy wisdom.
- If unaddressed, this mix erodes psychological safety and drives errors into handovers and interfaces.
Leadership Approach – How to Address
Consider knowledge transfer as a safety objective, not an HR nicety.
- Treat it like any other controlled process: scoped, scheduled, versioned, and audited.
- Define what must be taught (role-critical tasks and interfaces), who teaches it (named mentors with time protected), how learning is evidenced (Task performed under observation, or scenario outcomes reviewed), and where knowledge lives (a single, version-controlled repository).
- Explicitly state the order of priorities- safety, compliance, reliability, schedule, then cost- so speed pressures never trump training discipline.
Converting Know-How into Teachable Assets
Short expert captures – Meet a senior colleague and record key points (names and identifiers redacted).
- Ask simple questions:
- “What makes you stop and look again?”
- “What went wrong on this task before?”
- “What do you always check—even if the procedure doesn’t ask?”
Turn notes into simple job aids:
- One-page checklists (do/verify/record).
- Hazard cue cards (what to watch for, immediate actions).
- Decision trees (yes/no steps to isolate faults).
- “Red-flag” lists (signs to halt or escalate).
- Link each aid to the relevant ATA chapter or task code.
Mentoring That Actually Scales
> Build a repeatable system that protects time and defines outcomes.
> Structured pairings:
- Assign each junior to a named mentor for a fixed period (e.g., 4–6 weeks).
- Define 2–4 competencies per cycle (e.g., torque discipline, MEL logic, ATA 24 basic troubleshooting).
- Block protected mentoring time in the roster for both parties.
Before the task: 3-minute huddle:
- Intent: what success looks like today.
- Hazards: top risks and escalation triggers.
- Plan: who does what; where the current data/procedure lives.
After the task: 5-minute debrief:
- Junior: “What surprised me,” “What I’d do next time.”
- Mentor: one reinforcement, one improvement.
- Capture a short note (Mentor [REDACTED] / Date / Task Ref / Version 1.0) in the approved library.
Rotation for breadth:
- Rotate pairings every 6 weeks to expose juniors to different styles, aircraft, and systems.
- Keep a simple exposure log (systems/ATA chapters touched).
Accelerating Competence Without Compromising Safety
Use a modular competence framework that lists observable skills (from basic tooling and documentation to advanced troubleshooting).
- For each skill, set a simple learning path: read → observe → do under supervision → do with remote standby → do independently.
- Define the evidence needed at each step (e.g., checklist signed, photo/notes, mentor observation).
- Practice on low-risk setups (rigs, mock-ups, scrap units, sims) and add short scenarios that force safe trade-offs under time pressure.
- Teach juniors a standard decision brief—situation, risk, options, recommendation—so mentors can judge thinking, not just outcomes.
Optimize the Use of Subject Matter Experts (SME) – Identify SME’s as “capability builders” rather than “firefighters.”
- Create rosters that allocate part of their hours to capture, coaching, and standard improvement, not only to AOG recoveries.
- Give them ownership of two or three high-leverage assets-such as a troubleshooting playbook for a chronic system, an IPC/use-of-data workshop, or a recurring cross-team interface review-and recognize those contributions publicly.
- Pair each retiree with a junior “shadow author” who co-writes job aids and runs refreshers; this builds succession and reduces single-point risk.
Culture: Psychological Safety With Standards
Encourage “two-challenge then escalate” behaviours so juniors can question respectfully and seniors expect it.
Motivation That Works for Both Generations
Older Staff tend to value respect for craft, meaningful impact, and flexible work; juniors value growth, recognition, and visible progress.
- Build recognition around these known factors.
- Celebrate improvements to a standard or training asset with the same energy you celebrate on-time performance.
- Offer dual career ladders so technical mastery and people leadership are both valid routes.
- Give juniors rapid, visible wins and acknowledge SME contributions that reduced risk or taught a hard lesson well.
Measuring Whether the Transfer is Working
- Look for leading indicators: fewer handover defects, shorter time-to-isolate recurring faults, improved first-time-fix rates on mentored tasks, and increased use of current job aids.
- Track mentoring throughput (hours scheduled vs. protected, competencies signed off) and audit whether lessons from post-event reviews are converted into updated documents within set timelines.
Avoiding Common Pitfalls
- Do not treat knowledge capture as a one-off project; make it a standing routine.
- Do not overload SME’s with urgent tasks that crowd out mentoring.
- Do not assign juniors to repetitive low-value work without a visible progression plan.
What Progress Looks Like
In a healthy knowledge-transfer system, senior expertise is visible in short, current aids that people actually use;
- Juniors progress from supervised to independent work with well-evidenced competence;
- SME’s feel respected as teachers and standard-setters, not just emergency muscle;
- Safety reviews focus on learning and fixes rather than blame.
- Handover defects fall, troubleshooting becomes faster and calmer, and documentation improves because the people who do the work co-own it.
- That is how organizations preserve craft while renewing capability—keeping safety, quality, and engagement high as the workforce ages.
Tags:
aviation, Aviation Leadership, SAS blog, aviation leaders, AviationTraining, Aging Workforce, Knowledge Transfer in Aviation, MentoringMatters, KnowledgeTransfer, AgingWorkforce, WorkforceDevelopment
