The Science

Non-technical skills in high-stakes work

The science of non-technical skills

Non-technical skills (NTS) are the cognitive and social skills used together with technical skill: situational awareness, decision making, communication, teamwork, leadership, and the management of stress and workload.1 They do not replace professional knowledge or procedure. In aviation, healthcare and other high-risk work, investigations show that many adverse events involve failures in these skills as well as in technical knowledge.23 Because the skills can be observed, they can be trained and discussed after events.14

Professions

Aviation

Modern aviation safety rests on more than aircraft systems and procedural checklists. The industry early recognised that many failures involved breakdowns in crew resource management (CRM) — communication, leadership, situational awareness, and decision making. Structured CRM training and behavioural marker systems such as NOTECHS were developed for flight crews; parallel research has addressed the non-technical skills of cabin crew and air traffic controllers, who manage congestion, complexity, and coordination under sustained workload. Aviation research established many of the taxonomies and assessment methods now used across other high-risk domains.81011

Healthcare

Across all domains of health care, patient safety depends on teams working under time pressure with incomplete information. Research shows that adverse events often involve breakdowns in non-technical skills — not just technical knowledge or manual skill. Behavioural marker systems such as ANTS (Anaesthetists’ Non-Technical Skills), N-ANTS for nurse anaesthetists, and NOTSS (Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons) were developed for observing and rating these competencies in clinical practice and simulation.12131415 In the United States, TeamSTEPPS is a national team-training programme for healthcare in the same CRM lineage.316

Fire & rescue

Fire and rescue operations are dynamic, hazardous, and information-limited. Incident commanders must maintain situational awareness of evolving fire behaviour, building conditions, and crew safety while making time-critical decisions, coordinating multi-agency teamwork, and communicating under extreme stress. Research on UK fire and rescue services has described the non-technical skills of incident command and developed the THINCS behavioural marker system to assess them.171819

Law enforcement

Policing takes place in uncertain, time-pressured, and emotionally charged environments. Officers and commanders must read rapidly changing situations, coordinate across agencies, communicate under stress, and make consequential decisions when information is incomplete. Research on critical incident decision making shows that performance depends not only on policy knowledge and tactical skill, but on cognitive and interpersonal competencies that parallel NTS in aviation and healthcare. Studies of police–public encounters identify core competencies including perceptual and situational awareness, communication and de-escalation, decision making and problem solving, emotion and behaviour regulation, and stress management. In major incidents, researchers have documented decision inertia — redundant deliberation when all options appear to carry negative consequences — highlighting why structured training in judgment, leadership, and team coordination matters as much as technical proficiency.202122

Disaster management

Major disasters and civil emergencies place commanders under extreme uncertainty, time pressure, and organisational complexity. Police, fire, ambulance, military, and local authority responders must build a shared picture of the incident, coordinate across agencies, and commit to action when every option may carry negative consequences. Research on decision inertia and multi-agency simulation shows how redundant deliberation, unclear goals, and poor inter-agency communication can delay life-saving action.232425

High-risk industry

Process industries with major-accident potential — including nuclear power, offshore oil and gas, well operations, and other energy sectors — were early adopters of CRM-style training after recognising that technical systems alone cannot prevent catastrophe. Control-room operators and emergency command teams must maintain situational awareness, communicate assertively, manage stress and fatigue, and make sound decisions in routine and emergency conditions. Research has identified team skills taxonomies for nuclear operations and adapted CRM to offshore platforms, informing syllabi now used across the energy sector. Investigations after major industry accidents have underscored how non-technical skills, safety culture, and system complexity interact when things go wrong.26272829

Business & organizations

Modern organizations operate in complex, dynamic environments where leaders and teams must sense emerging risks, adapt to ambiguity, and coordinate across functions. Human factors research shows that the same cognitive and social skills underpinning safety in aviation and healthcare — often termed crew resource management (CRM) skills — are equally relevant in business settings where errors, miscommunication, or delayed decisions can have serious operational and financial consequences.303132333435

What we offer

Decision Workout is a simple, concrete digital course with self-evaluation, for learning and reflection. It is informed by the research tradition described on this page.

Course scores are not a validated assessment of professional competence, not clinical or operational advice, and not certification by a professional body.

Disclaimer

Decision Workout is an independent educational platform. Names such as CRM, NOTECHS, ANTS, N-ANTS, NOTSS, TeamSTEPPS and THINCS are cited as research sources. Decision Workout is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or licensed by the authors or institutions behind that work, and is not a product of those systems.

References

  1. Flin, R., O'Connor, P., & Crichton, M. (2008). Safety at the Sharp End: A Guide to Non-Technical Skills. Ashgate.
  2. Helmreich, R. L., Merritt, A. C., & Wilhelm, J. A. (1999). The evolution of Crew Resource Management training in commercial aviation. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(1), 19–32. doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0901_2
  3. Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., & Donaldson, M. S. (Eds.). (2000). To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academy Press. doi:10.17226/9728
  4. Flin, R., Patey, R., Glavin, R., & Maran, N. (2010). Anaesthetists' non-technical skills. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 105(1), 38–44. doi:10.1093/bja/aeq134
  5. Cooper, G. E., White, M. D., & Lauber, J. K. (Eds.). (1980). Resource Management on the Flight Deck (NASA CP-2120). NASA Ames Research Center.
  6. Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64. doi:10.1518/001872095779049543
  7. van Avermaete, J. A. G., & Kruijsen, E. (Eds.). (1998). The evaluation of non-technical skills of multi-pilot aircrew in relation to the JAR-FCL requirements (NLR CR-98443). NLR.
  8. Flin, R., Martin, L., Goeters, K-M., Hörmann, H-J., Amalberti, R., Valot, C., & Nijhuis, H. (2003). Development of the NOTECHS (non-technical skills) system for assessing pilots' CRM skills. Human Factors and Aerospace Safety, 3(2), 95–117.
  9. Flin, R., O'Connor, P., Mearns, K., Brenner, M., Fleming, M., Sexton, B., … the JARTEL Group. (2002). Developing a method for evaluating crew resource management skills: A European perspective. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 12(3), 275–300. doi:10.1207/S15327108IJAP1203_5
  10. Flin, R., & Martin, L. (2001). Behavioural markers for crew resource management: A review of current practice. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 11(1), 95–118.
  11. Kontogiannis, T., & Malakis, S. (2013). Strategies in coping with complexity: Development of a behavioural marker system for air traffic controllers. Safety Science, 57, 27–34. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.01.014
  12. Fletcher, G., Flin, R., McGeorge, P., Glavin, R., Maran, N., & Patey, R. (2003). Anaesthetists' non-technical skills (ANTS): Evaluation of a behavioural marker system. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 90(5), 580–588. doi:10.1093/bja/aeg112
  13. Yule, S., Flin, R., Paterson-Brown, S., Maran, N., & Rowley, D. (2006). Development of a rating system for surgeons' non-technical skills. Medical Education, 40(11), 1098–1104. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02610.x
  14. Lyk-Jensen, H. T., Jepsen, R. M. H. G., Spanager, L., Dieckmann, P., & Østergaard, D. (2016). Using a structured assessment tool to evaluate nontechnical skills of nurse anesthetists. AANA Journal, 84(3), 197–204.
  15. Flynn, F. M., Valeberg, B. T., Tønnessen, S., & Bing-Jonsson, P. C. (2021). Psychometric testing of a structured assessment instrument for non-technical skills (NANTS-no) for use in clinical supervision of student nurse anaesthetists. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 29(1), E59–E77. doi:10.1891/JNM-D-19-00086
  16. King, H. B., Battles, J., Baker, D. P., Alonso, A., Salas, E., Webster, J., Toomey, L., & Salisbury, M. (2008). TeamSTEPPS™: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety. In K. Henriksen et al. (Eds.), Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches (Vol. 3). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. NCBI Bookshelf
  17. Cohen-Hatton, S. R., Butler, P. C., & Honey, R. C. (2015). An investigation of operational decision making in situ: Incident command in the UK fire and rescue service. Human Factors, 57(5), 793–804. doi:10.1177/0018720815578266
  18. Butler, P. C., Honey, R. C., & Cohen-Hatton, S. R. (2020). Development of a behavioural marker system for incident command in the UK fire and rescue service: THINCS. Cognition, Technology & Work, 22(1), 1–12. doi:10.1007/s10111-019-00539-6
  19. dos Santos, V. M., & Son, C. (2024). Identifying firefighters' situation awareness requirements for fire and non-fire emergencies using a goal-directed task analysis. Applied Ergonomics, 114, 104136. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2023.104136
  20. Alison, L., & Crego, J. (Eds.). (2008). Policing Critical Incidents: Leadership and Critical Incident Management. Routledge.
  21. Bennell, C., Jenkins, B., Blaskovits, B., Semple, T., Khanizadeh, A-J., Brown, A. S., & Jones, N. J. (2022). Knowledge, skills, and abilities for managing potentially volatile police–public interactions: A narrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 818009. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.818009
  22. Power, N., & Alison, L. (2018). Decision inertia in critical incidents. European Psychologist, 23(3), 167–173. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000320
  23. Alison, L., Power, N., van den Heuvel, C., Humann, M., Palasinksi, M., & Crego, J. (2015). Decision inertia: Deciding between least worst outcomes in emergency responses to disasters. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(2), 295–321. doi:10.1111/joop.12108
  24. Power, N., & Alison, L. (2017). Redundant deliberation about negative consequences: Decision inertia in emergency responders. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(2), 243–258. doi:10.1037/law0000114
  25. Hayes, P., Bearman, C., Butler, P., & Owen, C. (2021). Non-technical skills for emergency incident management teams: A literature review. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 29(2), 185–203. doi:10.1111/1468-5973.12341
  26. Flin, R. (1995). Crew resource management for teams in the offshore oil industry. Journal of European Industrial Training, 19(2), 23–27. doi:10.1108/03090599510096617
  27. Flin, R., Slaven, G., & Stewart, K. (1996). Emergency decision making in the offshore oil and gas industry. Human Factors, 38(2), 262–277. doi:10.1518/001872096779048110
  28. O'Connor, P., O'Dea, A., & Flin, R. (2008). Identifying the team skills required by nuclear operations personnel. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 38(11–12), 1028–1037. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2008.01.014
  29. Reader, T. W., & O'Connor, P. (2014). The Deepwater Horizon explosion: Non-technical skills, safety culture, and system complexity. Journal of Risk Research, 17(3), 405–424. doi:10.1080/13669877.2013.815652
  30. Salas, E., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2001). Linking Expertise and Naturalistic Decision Making. Lawrence Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/9781410604200
  31. Lipshitz, R., Klein, G., Orasanu, J., & Salas, E. (2001). Taking stock of naturalistic decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14(5), 331–352. doi:10.1002/bdm.381
  32. Gore, J., Banks, A. P., Millward, L. J., & Kyriakidou, O. (2006). Naturalistic decision making and organizations: Reviewing pragmatic science. Organization Studies, 27(7), 925–942. doi:10.1177/0170840606065701
  33. Baker, D. P., Day, R., & Salas, E. (2006). Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Services Research, 41(4 Pt 2), 1576–1598. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00566.x
  34. Salas, E., Reyes, D. L., & McDaniel, S. H. (2018). The science of teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead. American Psychologist, 73(4), 593–600. doi:10.1037/amp0000334
  35. Ramašauskienė, V., Župerkienė, E., & Šimanskienė, L. (2025). Situational awareness in leadership: Application of methods in business organisations. Administrative Sciences, 15(6), 210. doi:10.3390/admsci15060210

← Back to home