Your dashboard, if you take part
The board answers one question: is our ramp getting safer, and why? It's built from your own checked observations, round by round.
Is the ramp getting safer?
How turnarounds ended: how many went well, and how many ended in an undesired state, such as a load error or a near collision.
What puts it at risk?
Threats seen most: the conditions to fix first, mostly upstream of the crew.
Are problems caught in time?
How the team handled them: a managed threat doesn't become damage or an injury.
Did our changes work?
Progress over time: each action your Learning Teams chose is marked, then measured next round.
How do we compare?
Where you sit: against the reference data and the range across organisations, never another organisation's own figures.
Everything below is example data. In the tool, you pick the round and the measure.
How turnarounds ended
- Went well, nothing in the way10%
- Went well despite a threat79%
- Did not go well11%
Threats seen most
How the team handled them
Most often, the team
- Rejects badly packed freight 6
- Supervisor moves people or brings in help 5
- Waits for the area to clear 3
Progress over time
you middle half of organisations reference data action decidedWent well ▲ better (+13) since Round 1 → no real change (+4) on Round 3
- 1Load information to the team before the aircraft arrives decided in Round 1 · done
- 2Loading supervisor walk-round before the doors close decided in Round 3 · under way
Departures (D15)
Never shown by crew, shift or observer.
Each category: Round 4 against Round 3
| Category | Share | Change | Every round |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threats | |||
| Freight and baggage | 38% | → no real change (-6) | |
| Load control and load planning | 18% | ▼ less often (-16) | |
| Enablers | |||
| Time and schedule | 68% | ▲ better (+22) | |
| Good practice | |||
| Load cross-checked before door closure | 46% | ▲ better (+20) | |
| Coordinate | 44% | → no real change (+4) | |
| Variations | |||
| Loading | 20% | ▼ better (-18) | |
| Restraint | 14% | → no real change (-2) | |
| Undesired states | |||
| Conflict or near collision: equipment with aircraft | 4% | → no real change (-2) | |
Expand
What goes with work going well
- Loading instruction on time → fewer loading variations
- Load cross-checked before door closure → turnaround going well
Shrink
What goes with work getting harder
- Freight and baggage problems → more restraint variations
- Equipment serviceability → more undesired states
Where Round 4 sits
you middle half of organisations median reference dataThe shaded band is the middle half of organisations that share their results (Supported membership); the line inside it is the median. Here it is illustrative: the real band appears once enough members pool their results. The black mark is the NOMIC reference data, where it holds the measure. Better or worse means beyond chance for the number of turnarounds; otherwise no real change.
Behind the dashboard
- Full results for each round: every category against the reference, the links in both directions, how recovery happens, and on-time kept separate from safety, never by crew, shift or observer.
- A Learning Team pack for any finding, and an action plan that measures again next round, so the board shows whether the change worked.
- A managers' report link that shows the summary only, never notes or single observations.
See also the sample report, built from the NOMIC reference data, and how pooling works.