Skip to content
Log in

Author

Konstantinos Pechlivanis

View on Semantic Scholar

2 papers indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Open access 2026

The role of workforce planning in the implementation of Human - AI Teaming in Transportation

The increasing adoption of Human–AI teaming across the transportation sector is reshaping operational roles, organisational structures, and future workforce competencies. As artificial intelligence systems evolve from decision-support tools to collaborative teammates capable of perception, prediction, and autonomous action, transportation organisations must fundamentally rethink how they design, train, allocate, and sustain their workforce. Workforce planning—traditionally centred on staffing levels, qualification pipelines, and operational forecasts—now plays a pivotal role in ensuring that human capabilities remain aligned with the cognitive, technical, and ethical demands of future human–AI teams. This paper examines the strategic function of workforce planning in supporting the safe and effective implementation of human–AI teaming across aviation, rail, maritime, and ground transportation environments.The analysis begins by outlining the systemic transformations introduced by AI-driven operations. In contrast to earlier waves of automation, contemporary AI systems introduce non-deterministic behaviour, dynamic adaptability, and shared decision-making responsibilities. These characteristics challenge legacy workforce models premised on stable task distributions and predictable human roles. Across transportation modes, the shift toward human–AI teaming requires workforce planners to anticipate emerging competencies such as AI oversight, interpretability skills, mixed-initiative collaboration, and algorithmic risk assessment. The alignment of these competencies with recruitment, selection, training, and career progression becomes essential to preventing skill gaps, cognitive overload, and mismatches between human capabilities and system demands.The paper further examines workforce planning as a human factors instrument that supports organisational readiness. Effective planning requires an integrated understanding of future task redesign, shifts in workload dynamics, and the redistribution of responsibilities between humans, AI agents, and remote support structures. In aviation, for example, workforce planners must prepare for mixed-crew configurations, single pilot operations with AI copilots, and remote supervisory roles; in rail and maritime systems, the emergence of autonomous navigation and predictive maintenance similarly redefines operator roles. Planning must therefore incorporate scenario-based forecasting, human reliability analyses, and long-term modelling of human–machine performance interactions to ensure that human resource strategies align with technological evolution.Training and competency development are examined as critical components linking workforce planning to operational implementation. As human–AI teaming becomes central to safety-critical operations, organisations must develop training pathways that cultivate adaptive expertise, trust calibration, interpretability awareness, and resilience under automation. Workforce planning provides the structural basis for identifying training populations, sequencing AI-focused skills acquisition, and embedding competency-based training and assessment (CBTA/EBT) methods across the transportation ecosystem. The paper argues that overlooking this alignment risks creating workforces that are operationally certified but cognitively unprepared for high-automation environments.The study also addresses regulatory, cultural, and organisational constraints. Many transportation regulators have yet to establish competency frameworks for human–AI teaming, leaving workforce planners without standard definitions of required skills or acceptable performance thresholds. Organisational cultures may further influence AI acceptance, trust, and reporting behaviours, requiring workforce planning to integrate cultural readiness assessments and targeted change-management strategies.The paper concludes by proposing a workforce planning model designed to support large-scale adoption of human–AI teaming in transportation. This model integrates technological forecasting, human factors analysis, competency mapping, and AI-focused resilience strategies. The findings emphasise that technological innovation alone is insufficient; the success of human–AI teaming depends on a strategically designed workforce that is cognitively, operationally, and organisationally prepared for the transport systems of the future.

Dimitrios Ziakkas, Ibrahim Sarikaya, Konstantinos Pechlivanis et al. · 0 citations
Open access 2026

Challenges in the Implementation of Resilience in Flight Operations: The Role of Safety Management Systems

Resilience has become a central concept in contemporary aviation safety, reflecting the industry’s need to manage complexity, uncertainty, and unexpected disturbances across increasingly automated and dynamic operational environments. While flight operations depend on the capacity of individuals, teams, and organisations to anticipate, adapt, and recover from disruptions, the practical implementation of resilience remains challenging. Safety Management Systems (SMS), as mandated frameworks across global aviation, play a critical role in shaping how resilience is operationalised, monitored, and sustained. This paper examines the challenges associated with implementing resilience in flight operations and analyses how SMS can support or hinder this integration.The analysis begins by defining resilience as a multi-dimensional capability, encompassing anticipation of potential threats, monitoring of system variability, adaptation to changing conditions, and recovery from disruptions. Within flight operations, resilience extends beyond pilot decision-making to include coordination between dispatchers, maintenance personnel, air traffic controllers, and organisational structures that guide operational decisions. Despite its conceptual prominence, resilience is often poorly translated into training programmes, procedural design, and operational policies, leading to fragmented or superficial implementation.The paper identifies several systemic challenges that hinder resilience adoption. First, traditional safety approaches remain predominantly reactive, focusing on compliance and incident investigation rather than proactive monitoring of system variability and weak signals. This reactive orientation limits the ability of SMS to identify early indicators of fragility or organisational drift. Second, existing performance metrics often prioritise efficiency and procedural adherence, inadvertently discouraging the adaptive behaviours that resilience requires. Third, high automation in modern flight decks can lead to reduced pilot engagement, erosion of manual flying skills, and over-reliance on automated systems—conditions that undermine adaptive capacity during system surprises or degraded modes.Human factors challenges are also examined. Pilots and operational personnel must maintain cognitive flexibility, situational awareness, and collaborative communication under dynamic conditions, yet training programmes frequently emphasise standardisation over adaptability. Additionally, organisational cultures that struggle with Just Culture principles may inhibit the open reporting and learning necessary for resilience development.The role of Safety Management Systems is critically analysed as both an enabler and a constraint. SMS offers structured processes for hazard identification, risk assessment, safety assurance, and safety promotion—all of which can support resilience if applied through a proactive, systems-oriented lens. However, many organisations implement SMS in a compliance-driven manner that prioritises documentation over learning, thereby limiting opportunities to build adaptive capacity. The paper argues that SMS must evolve to integrate resilience engineering principles, including system variability analysis, predictive monitoring, scenario-based learning, and cross-functional coordination mechanisms. Embedding resilience within SMS requires cultural transformation, leadership commitment, and the inclusion of resilience-focused competencies within CBTA/EBT frameworks.The paper concludes by proposing a resilience-enhanced SMS model tailored for flight operations. This model incorporates continuous monitoring of operational variability, systemic learning loops, transparent reporting structures, and training designed to cultivate adaptive cognitive and teamwork skills. The findings underscore that achieving genuine resilience in flight operations requires shifting SMS from a compliance instrument to a dynamic organisational capability that sustains safety performance in the face of uncertainty.

Ibrahim Sarikaya, Dimitrios Ziakkas, Eleftherios Bokas et al. · 0 citations