Where Audit Findings Hide: It’s Not Always One Department’s Fault

After many years working in aviation compliance, one pattern has become impossible to ignore:

Most audit findings don’t come from what one department gets wrong — they come from what no department fully owns.

In other words, the real risk lives in the interfaces — the blurred lines, handovers, and assumptions between teams.

Common Interface Gaps That Lead to Findings

Here are just a few examples where unclear ownership often results in non-compliance, audit findings, or worse:

CAMO vs MRO / Line Station

• Oversized work packages

• Missing tooling or parts

• Overdue tasks

• Missing signatures or incomplete work cards. Often due to poor coordination and planning assumptions.

Flight Ops vs Crew Training

• Who ensures flight crew licenses, medicals, and training records are current, complete, and traceable? This isn’t just an HR or training task, it’s also operational risk management.

Ground Ops vs Flight Ops

• Who owns final loading instructions, weight & balance data, and security checks? When assumptions replace procedures, risk increases.

Ground Ops vs Tech Ops

• Who handles de-icing procedures on sensitive parts?

• Who’s responsible for cockpit cleaning that may affect flight controls or avionics? Even minor oversights here can have major consequences.

Flight Ops vs Tech Ops

• How are AJTL entries, MEL deferrals, or ETOPS limitations communicated across teams? Clear communication channels are critical, not just documented processes.

Training vs Other Departments

• Who tracks and controls non-crew training (dispatchers, load controllers, ops support staff)? When training accountability is unclear, people end up unqualified or overdue without anyone noticing.

🛠️ The Real Root of Many Findings

Findings often show up not because someone failed, but because everyone assumed someone else was responsible.

The solution?✅ Clear ownership✅ Defined interfaces✅ Documented responsibilities

✅ Regular cross-functional communication.