Influence of Organisational Culture on Safety Compliance Behaviour Among Aviation Maintenance Technicians.

Despite rigorous regulatory frameworks like EASA Part-145 and FAA AC 120-79A, aviation maintenance organizations (AMOs) exhibit significant variance in safety compliance outcomes. This study investigates the influence of organisational culture on safety compliance behaviour among aviation maintenance technicians in Nigeria, addressing the gap between structural Safety Management Systems (SMS) and actual technician behaviour. Grounded in Edgar Schein’s tripartite model of organizational culture, the research employs a concurrent mixed-methods design, surveying 178 licensed and unlicensed technicians across various maintenance domains and conducting 20 semi-structured interviews. Quantitative results indicate that cultural dimensions explain 34% of the variance in routine compliance and 41% in discretionary safety behaviour. Management Commitment emerged as the strongest predictor of routine compliance (β = .29), while Just Culture was the dominant predictor of discretionary safety behaviour (β = .34). Notably, the effect of management commitment on discretionary behaviour was fully mediated by just culture perceptions. Production pressure negatively impacted both compliance types, disproportionately suppressing voluntary safety contributions. Qualitative findings revealed a dissonance between espoused safety values and underlying assumptions, with technicians describing SMS documentation as “audit theatre” and adhering to informal “real procedures” transmitted through peer enculturation. Core assumptions such as “experience trumps documentation” and “real professionals solve problems silently” were identified as primary drivers of non-compliance. The study concludes that sustainable safety compliance requires targeting basic underlying assumptions rather than merely enhancing artifacts or espoused values. Recommendations include establishing facilitated dialogue sessions to surface assumptions, implementing formal decision documentation protocols for safety-production trade-offs, and restructuring apprenticeship programs to integrate tacit knowledge formally. These findings offer AMO leaders and regulators evidence-based strategies for evolving from document-based auditing to performance-based cultural assessment.

Organisational Culture, Safety Compliance, Aviation Maintenance, Schein’s Model, Just Culture, Management Commitment, Production Pressure.

1. Alidadi, M., & Sharifabadi, A. M. (2023). Safety culture maturity and maintenance error reduction: A longitudinal assessment in Middle Eastern MROs. Journal of Air Transport Management, 112, 102489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2023.102489 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al-Saidi, M., & O’Connor, P. (2023). Digital transformation and safety culture in aircraft maintenance: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Air Transport Management, 108, 102398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2023.102398 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bieder, F., & Bourrier, M. (2023). Normalization of deviance in aircraft line maintenance: An ethnographic study of shift handover practices. Safety Science, 169, 106312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106312 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chen, H., Zhang, Y., & Liu, W. (2024). Just culture perception scales for aviation maintenance: Cross-cultural validation across Asian and European AMOs. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 198, 107456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2024.107456 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Daramola, O., & Olatunji, S. (2024). Espoused values versus lived reality: Safety culture dissonance in Nigerian aircraft maintenance organizations. Safety Science, 172, 106412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106412 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Dekker, S. W. A. (2023). The field guide to understanding ‘human error’ (6th ed.). CRC Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. EASA. (2023). Human factors in aircraft maintenance: Guidance material GM 145.A.30. European Union Aviation Safety Agency. https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/regulations/easa-decisions/gm-145a30-human-factors [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. EASA. (2024). Annual Safety Review 2024. European Union Aviation Safety Agency. https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/general-publications/annual-safety-review-2024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. FAA. (2023). Advisory Circular AC 120-79A: Development and implementation of safety management systems. Federal Aviation Administration. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_120-79A.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fruhen, L. S., Griffin, M. A., & Andrei, D. M. (2023). Leadership behaviours and safety compliance in technical workforces: A multilevel meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(7), 1142–1165. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001089 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Guldenmund, F. W., Claridge, T., & Smith, A. (2023). Safety culture in maintenance: A multi-level analysis of alignment and misalignment. Safety Science, 167, 106267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106267 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. ICAO. (2023). Safety Report 2023 Edition. International Civil Aviation Organization. https://www.icao.int/safety/Pages/Safety-Report.aspx [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. ICAO. (2024). Doc 9859: Safety management manual (4th ed.). International Civil Aviation Organization. https://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/9859_en.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Johnson, C. W., & Lee, K. (2023). Digital maintenance records and procedural alienation: Unintended consequences of EASA Part-145 digitalization mandates. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 238, 109421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109421 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Kim, S., Park, J., & Choi, H. (2024). Generational differences in safety compliance attitudes among Korean aircraft maintenance technicians. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 99, 103567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2023.103567 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lawton, R., & Parker, D. (2023). Revisiting the Manchester Patient Safety Framework: Application to aviation maintenance organizations. BMJ Quality & Safety, 32(8), 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015678 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Li, Y., & Wang, L. (2024). Dimensions of safety culture and their differential effects on maintenance technician compliance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 195, 107389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2023.107389 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Maurino, D., Patriarca, R., & Di Gravio, G. (2023). Resilience engineering in aircraft maintenance: Bridging safety-I and safety-II perspectives on compliance. Cognition, Technology & Work, 25(4), 723–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-023-00745-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Nisbet, E., & Haddon, A. (2024). Supervisor support as cultural translator: How frontline leaders mediate senior management safety commitment in base maintenance. Safety Science, 174, 106489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106489 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Nordlöf, H., Wiig, A., & Torp, S. (2023). Production pressure as cultural moderator: Safety compliance in Swedish aircraft maintenance. Cognition, Technology & Work, 25(3), 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-023-00738-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Pettersen, K. A., & Aase, K. (2023). Professionalism as cultural assumption: Ethnographic insights into maintenance technician compliance decisions. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 31(4), 612–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12489 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Reason, J. T. (2023). Managing the risks of organizational accidents (Revised ed.). Ashgate. (Original work published 1997) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Robertson, K., & O’Connor, P. (2023). Self-report bias in aviation maintenance safety research: A comparison with objective audit data across six European AMOs. Applied Ergonomics, 113, 104112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2023.104112 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Santos, M., Silva, R., & Ferreira, L. (2024). Shift work fatigue and cultural normalization of procedural shortcuts in night-line maintenance. Chronobiology International, 41(2), 234–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2023.2287654 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Siu, O. L., Phillips, D. R., & Leung, T. W. (2023). Safety climate versus safety culture in aviation maintenance: Clarifying conceptual boundaries through confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Safety Research, 87, 312–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2023.09.008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Taylor, B., & Foster, K. (2024). Procedure validation panels: Integrating tacit maintenance knowledge into formal documentation systems. Journal of Maintenance Engineering, 19(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/JME.2024.01.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Teizer, J., & Cheng, T. (2023). Artifact analysis in MRO safety culture assessment: Beyond surface indicators. Automation in Construction, 148, 104756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2023.104756 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Wang, X., Li, Y., & Zhao, Q. (2023). Production pressure thresholds as leading indicators: Predictive modeling of maintenance violations using quarterly safety climate data. Risk Analysis, 43(11), 2456–2473. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2023). Multilevel safety climate in technical organizations: Disentangling group-level and organization-level effects on individual compliance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 28(5), 301–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000358 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Employee Suggestion Schemes as a Driver of Innovation and Value Creation in Organizations
• Profitability, Growth and Market Valuation of Leading Pharmaceutical Companies in India: A Comparative Financial Analysis
• Problems and Prospects of Sale Employees of Non-Banking Financial Companies
• Core Temperature Estimation and Thermal Management of Lithium-Ion Batteries Using a Nonlinear Adaptive Extended Kalman Filter
• A Conceptual Analysis of How Sustainable Public Procurement Practices Influence Value for Money in Developing Economies