Distance Education in the Business Aviation...

20 Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 3(1), 20-43, Jan-March 2005

Copyright © 2005, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without writtenpermission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to understand the expectations and behaviors of businessaviation pilots toward online learning. The authors believe that the company able to offer anintegrated, individualized and useful online training experience will gain a significantcompetitive advantage. To that end, the authors have researched and synthesized studies thatare currently available and relate to this important future product. In addition, an exploratorysurvey of business aviation pilots and interviews with key aviation industry players are used todetermine current attitudes and expectations toward online learning. The scope of this paperwill be limited to exploring the niche market of business aviation pilots using the aviationtraining company CAE SimuFlite and their new SimfinityTM .technology. However, the authorsconsider the concepts discussed to be applicable to all business aviation pilots.

Keywords: active learning; business aviation industry; decomposed theory of plannedbehavior; visual imagery effective communication

Distance Education in theBusiness Aviation Industry:

Issues and Opportunities

Mahesh S. Raisinghani, University of Dallas, USAMohammed Chowdhury, University of Dallas, USA

Chris Colquitt, University of Dallas, USAPedro M. Reyes, University of Dallas, USANilofar Bonakdar, University of Dallas, USA

Joseph Ray, University of Dallas, USAJose Robles, University of Dallas, USA

INTRODUCTION:BUSINESS AVIATIONINDUSTRY

The business aviation industry is aniche market within the general aviationindustry concerned with air travel servicesspecific for business customers. This in-dustry ranges from individuals owning onesmall piston-powered aircraft to multina-tional corporations that possess a number

of larger long-range jet aircraft that cancarry up to 19 passengers over several thou-sand miles. The majority of business avia-tion missions are conducted on demand.Only a handful of companies operatescheduled flights, and are typically knownas “corporate shuttles.”

According to the National BusinessAviation Association (NBAA), the numberof companies operating business aircraftincreased nearly 50% between 1999 and2001. This is largely due to the corporate

Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 3(1), 20-43, Jan-March 2005 21


world’s realization that the use of businessaircraft as a means of transportation and aviable business tool leads to increases inefficiency and productivity (NBAA Busi-ness Aviation Fact Book, 2002). The world-wide fleet size for business aviation exceeds22,000 aircraft, with the vast majority ofbusiness aircraft (more than 15,000) locatedin the United States (U.S.). Moreover, in arecent survey by Honeywell AerospaceCompany, the expected number of businessjet deliveries worldwide over the next de-cade will exceed 8,400 aircrafts, valued atmore than $130 billion. Each aircraft thatis scheduled for full-time operations wouldtypically require five pilots per aircraft —more than 100,000 business pilots requiredworldwide (with more than 75,000 for theU.S. alone). This means that over the next10 years, more than 40,000 new pilot posi-tions will be created due to the arrival ofnew aircrafts alone.

STATE OF BUSINESSAVIATION TRAINING

Business aviation pilots are highlytrained and usually possess advanced pilotcredentials, such as an Airline TransportRating (ATP). In the U.S., business air-craft fly under strict regulations as definedby the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)of the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA). The training required under the FAAand similar regulatory bodies worldwide isvery specific, where a pilot in command(captain) requires continuous training ev-ery 6 months and a second in command(co-pilot) will require training at least oncea year. The training is aircraft specific andis requisite for each aircraft the pilot flies.

At a meta-level, the key differencebetween existing online education systems

and those for aviation pilot training relatesto the online education that is envisionedfor successful pilot training. The intent ofthis study is to empirically explore the rel-evant concepts and ideas based on percep-tions and previous studies of pilots coupledwith what is envisioned for the future ofonline distance learning (i.e., data centric,artificial intelligence, simulation and inter-active multi media). Today, this training isalmost always conducted in a combinationof personnel study, classroom lectures andsimulator training. One major facility thatconducts this type of training is CAESimuFlite in Dallas, Texas. SimuFliteopened in 1984 as the first of its kind tooffer multi-platform training in a comfort-able environment at one location. That sameyear, the first all-simulator business jet typerating was earned. Simulator training isthe standard for today’s pilot to earn air-craft type ratings because it is more costeffective and safer than using actual air-craft.

In the latter part of the 1980s,SimuFlite introduced a computer-basedtraining (CBT) program called FasTrak. Itwas tedious and non-engaging. Pilot cus-tomers were dissatisfied; therefore,FasTrack was eliminated in 1991. Unfor-tunately, this failure damaged the reputa-tion of SimuFlite and followed them formany years. Today, SimuFlite has morethan 375 employees and 29 full-flight mo-tion simulators. It has revenues of C$150million and is owned by CAE of Canada.CAE is a conglomerate dedicated to aero-space, defense and marine control tech-nologies and training solutions. Based outof Canada, CAE generates revenues inexcess of Canadian $1 billion and employsmore than 7,000 people (CAE SimuFlite,n.d.).



PRODUCTDIFFERENTIATION

CAE SimuFlite is the No. 2 providerof business aviation training, following FlightSafety International (FSI). Additionally,there are a number of smaller training fa-cilities that exist throughout the world.Growing competition due to increased mar-ket demands and substitute product offer-ings created by new technologies arethreatening SimuFlite’s market share. Toremain competitive and to continue to be aleader in business aviation flight training,SimuFlite is in an opportune position to com-bine the well-established training knowledgeand techniques with the cutting-edge tech-nology of CAE in order to provide interac-tive distance learning.

SimuFlite’s business strategy can beviewed as customer centric. By under-standing its client (the business aviator) aswell as catering to the capricious and qual-ity-demanding nature of this niche market,a well-thought-out online ground schooltraining program will not only cater to thenew demands of the future computer-ori-ented business aviator but also to the cost-conscious aircraft operator who wishes toreduce the pilots’ time away for training.With the addition of other technologies andtechniques, such as “virtual instructors,”customer relationship management (CRM)tools, differentiated instruction theories andbroadband Internet, we could avoid a re-peat of the FasTrak failure. Today’s technol-ogy can provide for well-planned and -ex-ecuted differentiated data-driven instruction.

LITERATURE REVIEWAND SYNTHESIS

Pilots are by their education and vo-cation technically proficient. The pilot cul-

ture is one that enjoys new and excitingtechnology and is very inquisitive and dili-gent. Pilots enjoy change and newness, butthey want to be in control (Rose, 2001).

Current Attitudes

Current attitudes toward distancelearning and/or CBT for business aviationpilots are reflected in the concerns overthe failed history of SimuFlite’s FasTrackCBT training system. Clients were unhappybecause they wanted more human inter-action than was possible with FasTrack(CAE, 2003). Further, many other onlinecourses are not delivered in a way that isconducive to effective learning (Sand &Schoenfelder, 1998).

According to Lehrer, Moore andTelfer’s (1999) research, traditional pilotground training that instructors conduct inthe classroom environment is more on asurface or rote level instead of the deep orintrinsic level they found was desired bypilots. Many instructors take the approachof preparing the student to pass an examby “teaching to the exam.” One form of“teaching to the exam” is by using govern-ment aviation exam questions as talkingpoints during class discussions and evalua-tions. They believe that there is a lack ofcongruence in how pilots and instructorsapproach learning, which can be overcomewith the concept of “Structure of theLearning Outcome” (SOLO), first offeredby Biggs and Collis in 1982. This five-levelscaffolding approach can be combined withcooperative and collaborative learning andmodeling to provide the deep or intrinsiclearning desired by pilots. This scaffoldingbegins with the pre-structural level, wherethere is little understanding, and movesthrough five levels to the extended abstractlevel, where the pilot turns reflexively ononeself.



According to Small, Lakowske,Breese and Callejo (1999), CBT is limitedby the lack of full user interaction requiredto fully explore complex tasks that call for“what if” analysis. They support a “closedloop” system of training — feedback pro-vided using flight operations quality assur-ance (FOQA) programs and visualizationsystems — instead of the “open loop”system — infrequent feedback and littleobjective data to assess — used commonlytoday in pilot training.

A groundbreaking 1999 study by theFAA on the use of personal computer-based aviation training devices took theposition that CBT training coupled withemerging technologies will be very benefi-cial in reducing the pilot error accident ratefrom its staggering 87% level in 1999. TheFAA also allowed for the substitution ofCBT hours for actual flight hours, a majorcost savings for pilots and an official in-centive for developing such systems.

A Forrester survey of training man-agers and knowledge officers of 40 global2,500 companies conducted by John P.Dalton reveals that general attitudes con-cerning online training reflect enthusiasmabout online training possibilities. Cost sav-ings similar to the $80 million in travel andhousing expenses saved by IBM as a re-sult of their global online learning efforts in1999 (Delio, 2000) could also be realizedby the business aviation industry.

Differentiated Training

Herold, Davis, Fedor and Parsons(2001) provide excellent concepts in pro-filing the pilot customer around three im-portant personality dispositions found to bedirectly related to training effectiveness;conscientiousness, emotional stability andopenness to experience. Combined with theAviation Education Reinforcement Option

(AERO), concepts mentioned in the 2000study by Karp, McCurry, Turney andHarms; and the Holistic Technology —Based Training models (HTBT) set forthin the 1998 study by Hsu and White, it isclear that any interactive training programmust begin with understanding the trainingpilot.

HTBT is a “virtual learning envi-ronment” in which a thorough understand-ing of factors such as education and read-ing level, subject matter expertise, learningcapabilities and experience of the studentare essential. The pilots’ training needs arethen tailored and fitted into a “collabora-tive learning environment.” In fact theHTBT models claim that the lack of col-laboration is the “Achilles Heel” of tech-nology-based training.

The AERO and SOLO models men-tioned earlier both emphasize collaborativeand cooperative learning. In the AEROmodel, collaborative learning is describedas a team effort in which students are re-quired to define “roles and responsibilities”amongst themselves. The AERO model com-bines collaborative learning with cooperativelearning techniques, in which small groups ofstudents engage to solve a problem.

“The AERO model incorporates elements ofthe adult education paradigm; learning styletheory, including gender specific differences;cooperative and collaborative learningtechniques; and personal computer-basedflight simulator programs, to bridge the gapbetween the classroom and the flight line.”(Karp et al., 2000)

Learning style theories must incorpo-rate auditory, visual and tactile learners.However, in a combined study of 117 pilotsby Karp, Condit and Nullmeyer (1999), thefollowing results showed a definite major-ity of pilots, 44.4%, are tactile learners. Yet,



the typical classroom setting for pilot train-ing is geared toward the auditory and vi-sual learner, with little support for tactilelearning (Karp et al., 2000).

There are four key requirements nec-essary for an effective distance learningprogram: Interactivity, Active Learning,Visual Imagery and Effective Communi-cation (Sherry, 1996). The technology cur-rently exists for an online pilot training pro-gram to provide all of these requirements,and advances in technology and communi-cations infrastructures will only improvethose capabilities.

Online courses are already very in-teractive, with chat rooms, e-mail andthreaded discussion groups. Many univer-sity programs offer highly interactive onlinecourses, and the theories surrounding thesetechniques continue to evolve. Addition-ally, instant messaging provides a greatmedium for impromptu communicationsbetween a student and teacher or fellowstudent.

Active learning is the idea that a stu-dent should actually participate in the learn-ing process, rather than simply listening toa lecture or reading a book. Certain as-pects of the flight management system areavailable in a simulated manner, and deliv-ering a virtual aircraft terminal to a studentis certainly possible. Broadband promisesto enable high-quality streaming video ondemand. It is currently possible to delivertelevision-quality video on demand; as tech-nology improves, the capability to sendDVD- and even HDTV-quality video willbe realized. This will enable pilots to viewvideos of cockpit scenarios or other train-ing materials when they are best able toabsorb that information. Effective commu-nication is much less a technology issue asit is a responsibility of the training company.Students must be able to communicate withan instructor through one of the mecha-

nisms mentioned above, and have theirquestions answered in a timely manner.

Hardware andSoftware Requirements

Increasingly complex technology andmore demanding international airspacestructures will challenge pilots of today andof the future. It is fortunate that the tech-nology for training is also improving rap-idly. The emergence of broadband Internetaccess has enabled most corporations andmany individuals to overcome two of thefundamental limitations of the Internet: di-aling in to an ISP and paying by the minutefor access. Today, broadband carriers suchas AT&T Broadband (www.attbi.com) of-fer high-speed, always-on access to theInternet at a reasonable, flat monthly rate.As broadband emerges as a common ac-cess method for people connecting to theInternet, the opportunity arises to providea much richer online experience than hasbeen offered before. With high-speedbroadband connections it is possible to de-liver video and audio on demand, as wellas conduct live video conversations. In ad-dition, with the always-on feature of broad-band, it is possible to know when peopleare at the computer and contact them im-mediately in real time.

What this means for distance learn-ing is that the opportunity to offer rich onlinecontent is very real; as broadband becomesmore pervasive, the demand for these ser-vices will only increase (Butters, 1999). Inthe context of business aviation pilot train-ing, the possibility exists to create a virtualflight crew, all online but at different physi-cal locations, and present them with sce-narios and observe how they react. Addi-tionally, the ability to meet with and discussissues with a professor via videoconferenceis already well within reach.



Differentiated learning models usingmodern educational concepts coupled withthis improved technology will be essential.However, Sand and Schoenfelder (1998)remind us that the key driver for the adop-tion of new technologies should be theirinstructional value and not their capabili-ties. Maintaining focus on the instructionalvalue of any new technology ensures thatthe training, in and of itself, delivers on itsmain goal of correcting a performanceproblem.

The technology suite required for theproposed model will have to address theneeds for collaborative learning, coopera-tive learning and learning style theory asdiscussed in the SOLO, AERO, IDRS andHTBT models previously mentioned. Itmust be able to profile the pilot and to ma-nipulate the learning style to provide theoptimum array of audio, visual and tactiletraining that best matches the pilot’s per-sonality and learning style. Open standardssuch as XML will be important. Many col-laboration tools are currently available. Oneexample, LearningSpaceTM software, pro-vides for live, instructor-led training thatcombines application sharing, whiteboards,chat, audio and video. It is compliant withthe Aviation Industry Computer-BasedTraining Committee Standards (AICC) andclaims to be easy to use (Stokes, 2000).However, its compatibility with XML andother open standards is currently weak.Tools such as TraxMedia’s ToolBook IITM

software are excellent tools for providingWeb-enabled true/false, multiple choice,drag and drop, and match item lesson ca-pability (Selvaratnam, 2002). Simulationtools such as SimfinityTM, provide forreengineered application simulation. Inother words, they use actual software codeused to create the original application in thesimulation (actual flight data). This is enor-mously advantageous to CBT models in that

the pilots are able to train with the actualconfiguration of their respective aircraft andexperience real aircraft performance(CAE, 2002). The CAE tool suite,seLearningTM, is currently being developed,but it is envisioned that it will provide animproved simulation environment with in-creased interactive content (CAESimuFlite, n.d.).

Security Issues

Cyber-terrorism can be defined as thedeliberate attempt to use the Internet todisrupt, cripple and/or cause havoc to anindustry or business. Several different formsof cyber-terrorism prevail within our cur-rent environment, including computer hack-ing and the spreading of computer viruses.

While the Internet is a marvel in tech-nological ingenuity, it does facilitate cyber-terrorism and has become a breedingground for both domestic and internationalterrorists. Terrorists have been increasinglyusing technology to further their cause, andsome of the most sensitive sites in the worldare vulnerable to this threat. For example,the U.S. Department of Defense (1999)has reported more than 250,000 attemptsagainst its computer system in one yearalone, 62% of them successful.

The boundary-less and ever-reach-ing infrastructure of the Internet provideterrorists with the incentive to be relent-less in their attempts, knowing that theirgoal is within reach with minimal chancesof being caught. Adding to this vulnerabil-ity and, in many cases, causing their owndemise, are the security practices of manyorganizations. A recent study showed thatwhile most organizations prepared docu-ments outlining their Internet strategies,complete with benefits, costs and use, fewof them had considered the security impli-cations. Those that had took into account



one or two specific areas of risk but re-mained vulnerable in others (Trapp, 1997).

Emerging Technology

We believe that rapid advancementsin technology will enable “fully online, in-teractive, time and place independent”(Wentling et al., 2000) online pilot trainingin the near future. In addition to these tech-nology changes, “high quality e-learningproducts and services such as contentproviders, authoring tools, training man-agement, portals, delivery systems andintegrated solutions” (Wentling et al.,2000), which are already available, willmake distance learning for business avia-tion pilots more effective. One of the manyadvantages of online learning for pilots isthat it “will bring together a heterogeneousgroup, with complementary and diverseskills. … Advances in e-learning technolo-gies will continue to occur. These advanceswill be wireless, highly intelligent, interac-tive and integrative, accessible and easy touse. E-learning technologies will allow fora humanized learning environment. Onlineteams will be able to see and hear eachother in real time on enlarged computerscreens that will have high resolution”(Wentling et al., 2000).

By using video conferencing technol-ogy, pilots can learn from each other any-where in the world. This technology willprovide customized learning, so pilots canhave their own personalized learning ex-perience based on their preferences. Wire-less connectivity is another issue that willmake online training easier and more ben-eficial for pilots in order to learn anyplace,anywhere. This, coupled with the arrivalof 3G, wireless broadband services and richmultimedia will give online training for pi-lots a new face in the future.

VALUE-ADDING(PROCESS) SYSTEMDESIGN

While online training for businessaviation pilots’ product service bundle ishighly service intensive, it still follows thetraditional transformation process. Figure1 depicts the value-adding (process) sys-tem within the traditional transformationprocess. The value-adding (process) sys-tem design involves decisions about thesystem’s flexibility, degree of customer in-volvement, technology and structure of sup-ply chain configuration. These four factors,when taken together, create synergy withthe potential to satisfy the customer. Flex-ibility refers to the system’s ability to re-spond to changes in the learning environ-ment and produce a wide variety of tailor-fitted outputs. Technology implies a widevariety of issues, such as computer scienceand information technology. However, tech-nology in the value-adding (process) sys-tem design involves decisions about levelsof automation. The degree of customer in-volvement relates to the customer’s role increating or customizing the product servicebundle. Finally, the structure of supply chainconfiguration pertains to the structure ofinformation flows.

The system’s flexibility is one factorthat creates a differentiated product foreach customer. This is achieved throughthe interactive training program by adopt-ing the student’s prior knowledge base andtailor-fitting a collaborative learning envi-ronment in order to arrive at a desired out-put (e.g., highly trained business aviationpilot). This reduces the uncertainty in train-ing needs and variability in the final prod-uct.

Online courses imply informationtechnologies such as broadband Internet,



largely due to the distance-learning con-cept. Yet in the design of the value-adding(process) system, technology here refersto the levels of flexible automation for in-teractive feedback from “virtual instruc-tors.” This may be found in customer rela-tionship management tools, where the col-laborative learning stems from segmentingthe learning to a micro-level of one in an“anywhere-anytime” atmosphere.

The degree of customer involvementor “active learning” factor design shouldconsider the customer’s possible varyingdegrees of computer and information sys-tem literacy. Because the online course isnot conducted in the traditional classroomsetting, the customer fully participates inthe learning process by interacting with theinformation. The supply chain configura-tion is structured by the information flows.The distance-learning concept allows forhigher levels of spatial convenience by pro-viding customers with access in a largenumber of places. This may include inter-active chat-rooms, whiteboards and video-on-demand.

RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY

This exploratory study is far fromdefinitive, but it is expected to provide in-sight and guidance for others interested inthis dynamic industry environment. Giventhe time and financial constraints, the scopeof this study was limited to addressing onlyan online interactive training environment.Furthermore, since the organization that wefocused on in study was CAE SimuFlite,the technological scope of this study wasmodeled on the tools SimfinityTM andseLearningTM created by CAE (CAE,2003) along with current and emergingtechnology. The integration of online train-ing efforts with CRM and Enterprise Re-source Planning (ERP) is outside the scopeof this study. Perceived usefulness andperceived ease of use determine actual in-tentions and behavior (Davis, 1989). TheTechnology Acceptance Model (TAM)(Davis, 1989) is a popular theoretical modelthat could be used to adequately determinethe behavior of an aviation pilot. However,

Figure 1. Value-adding (process ) system within the traditional transformation process

Value-Adding (Process) System

Flexibility Technology Customer Involvement Supply Chain Configuration

Inputs Product Service Bundle



online learning for business aviation pilotsis currently not available; therefore, TAMcould not be used to predict and explainthe voluntary use of online learning for busi-ness aviation pilots.

This study is based upon a simplifiedversion of the Decomposed Theory ofPlanned Behavior (DTPB) to measure theattitudes and intention to use online learn-ing for getting prepared for a check ride bybusiness aviation pilots. The DTPB is analternative version of the Theory of PlannedBehavior (TPB) (Ajzen 1985, 1991), usedto test the conditions where individuals donot have complete control over their be-havior. The TPB states that behavior is adirect function of behavioral intention andperceived behavioral control. This modelis depicted in Figure 2.

Since no viable online training systemfor business aviation pilots currently exist,the goal of this study is to suggest how topredict online learning behavior for busi-ness aviation pilots by gaining a throughunderstanding of the intentions and attitudesof the respondents. In order to create areliable data set, all the constructs used inthe instrument were derived from the sim-plified version of the DTPB. The study usedthe seven major constructs in testing theDTPB: perceived usefulness, ease of use,compatibility, peer influence, superior influ-ence, efficacy and technology facilitatingconditions. The study could not use theconstruct of resource facilitating conditionsbecause the uses of online learning for get-ting prepared for check ride by businessaviation pilots were not available. Basedon the literature review, a survey of pilotswas appropriate to determine their opennessto and expectations for online learning.

The survey for commercial pilots con-sisted of 20 carefully selected questions(Appendix A). The responses were givenusing a 7-point Likert scale, designed to be

independent variables used to determinespecific user perceptions and expectationsof online learning. The intent of our survey,especially the first few questions, was togain insight into the “attitudes” of pilots to-ward online learning. The major focus ofthe survey was to unveil realistic percep-tions, expectations and attitudes of businessaviation pilots toward the concept of onlinetraining. In the professional aviation world,the need for periodic training is routine andwell defined, so the intent of any trainingprogram is clear. The function of any pilottraining is to provide realistic scenarios andthe relevant information on systems, pro-cedures, rules, environment to handle thescenario (i.e., engine fire in bad weatheron approach to Chicago’s O’Hare Inter-national airport), so pilots can improve their“proficiency” and pass required checkrides. In addition, pilots desire “intrinsic”knowledge. To maintain proficiency of pi-loting skills, business aviators are requiredto satisfactorily complete periodic FAA-approved ground schools covering relatedaircraft courses. They also must satisfac-torily complete periodically scheduled flightand simulator checks according to FAA andcompany standards and procedures. Forthat reason, this study was concentratedon the aviation training market in Dallas,Texas — a major provider of business avia-tion training — among the business avia-tion pilots at SimuFlite in 2003.

Since there are business aviation pi-lots readily available at SimuFlite, a conve-nience sampling method was used to drawthe sample from the Dallas/Fort Worth(DFW) area. Samples from 50 businessaviation pilots were collected from areabusiness locations: SimuFlite, Million Air ofAddison and Piedmont of Love Field Air-port, Dallas. Incomplete questionnaireswere discarded and an additional samplewas drawn. In order to provide anecdotal



evidence to support the study, interviewswere conducted with key officials fromCAE SimuFlite and with pilot clients.

ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

Following completion of the survey,the data was tabulated and entered into theStatistical Program for Social Sciences(SPSS) software for analysis. Descriptivestatistics were collected for each surveyquestion, and the constructs’ independentvariables (survey questions) were testedfor reliability using reliability analysis todetermine a Cronbach’s Alpha (acceptablea > 0.70). The results were then used for afactor analysis using a Varimax rotation.A value of l > 0.40 was assumed to show

strength of relationship between the inde-pendent variables (survey questions) andthe dependent variables (constructs).

1. Perceived Usefulness

Forty-eight percent of the sampleagreed that online learning will be benefi-cial for them to get prepared for a checkride, whereas 28% were neutral and 24%responded that it will be not be beneficialto take online training. It was found that62% of the sample agreed that online learn-ing improves their ability to get preparedfor a check ride, whereas 16% were neu-tral and 22% did not agree. 54% of thesample agreed that the advantages of onlinelearning outweigh the disadvantages,

Figure 2. Decomposed theory of planned behavior (Taylor & Todd, 2001)

Perceived Usefulness

Compatibility

Attitude

Resource Facilitating Conditions

Peer Influence

Subjective Norm

Behavioral intention

Ease of Use

Self Efficacy

Perceived Behavioral Control

Technology Facilitating Conditions

Usage Behavior

Superior Influence



whereas 26% were neutral and 20% werenegative. However, Figure 3 illustrates thatthe response is strongly positive towardsonline learning being advantageous. More-over, 66% of the sample agreed that over-all, online learning presents advantages forthem, whereas 16% were neutral and 18%thought it would not be advantageous forthem.

Perceived Usefulness resulted inan unacceptable alpha of 0.6343. However,the study concludes that pilots are highlyreceptive to the possibility of online learn-ing as a substitute for current traditionalmethods, but could quickly turn if the prod-uct does not provide interactivity, flexibilityand useful knowledge.

2. Compatibility

Sixty percent of the sample agreedthat online learning fits well with the waythey take ground training, whereas 14%were neutral and 26% thought it will not becompatible with the existing way they aretaking the ground training. Subsequently,70% of the sample agreed that online learn-ing is compatible with their work style,whereas 12% were neutral and 18% thinkit will not fit with their existing work style.

3. Ease of Use

The study reveals that 58% of thesample responded that online learning wouldnot be more difficult to follow than current

Figure 3. Histograms for the perceived usefulness construct

Q1

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q1

Freq

uenc

y

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.50

Mean = 3.5

N = 50.00

Q2

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q2

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.55

Mean = 4.6

N = 50.00

Q3

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q3

Freq

uenc

y

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.58

Mean = 4.7

N = 50.00

Q4

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q4

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.47

Mean = 4.9

N = 50.00



training techniques, whereas 26% wereneutral and 16% thought it would be diffi-cult to follow. Forty-four percent of thesample responded that online learning wouldnot require greater mental effort than thecurrent training environments, 32% wereneutral and 24% thought it would require alot of mental effort. In addition, 36% of thesample responded that online learning wasnot frustrating, whereas 28% were neutraland 36% thought it is often frustrating. Theauthors assume that the response regard-ing frustration was made in comparison withthe existing way they are taking groundtraining. During pilot interviews, a nega-tive feedback towards online learning dueto a perceived lack of interactive, audio,visual and tactical features was noted.Computer-based training, such asSimuFlite’s FasTrack, has caused frustra-tion and boredom for pilots in the past.

Sixty percent of the sample respon-dents expect online learning to be clear andeasy to understand, 20% were neutral and20% do not expect it to be clear and easilyunderstandable. The positive responseclearly indicates that the majority of respon-dents expect online learning to be userfriendly and easy to operate. Neutral re-sponses may indicate that they are not sure

what it will be like, whereas negative feed-back toward clarity and understandabilityof online learning may be due to their pre-vious experience or lack of awareness ofemerging online learning technologies.

Subsequently, 78% of the sample re-spondents expect that online learning willbe flexible to interact with, whereas only8% were neutral and only 14% do not ex-pect it be flexible. The positive responseclearly indicates that almost 80% of therespondents expect online training to flex-ible and tailored to their needs. This showsa very strong desire for flexibility in anyonline learning environment.

Finally, the survey reveals that 62%of the sample respondent expects thatonline learning will increase their skill toget prepared for a check ride, whereas only20% were neutral and only 18% do notexpect it be flexible. The positive responseclearly indicates that the majority of respon-dents expect online training will be able tohelp get them prepared for check ride attheir own ease and convenience.

4. Peer Influence

Thirty percent of the sample did notagree that their friends will have any influ-

Figure 4. Histograms for the compatibility construct

Q5

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q5Fr

eque

ncy

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.62

Mean = 4.5

N = 50.00

Q6

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q6

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.61

Mean = 4.8

N = 50.00



ence on them to take online learning to getprepared for a check ride, whereas 60%were neutral and only 10% believe that theirfriends can influence them to a certain ex-tent. This negative response indicates thatthe respondents do not think that they willbe influenced by their friends to take onlinelearning. It was also observed that 32% ofthe sample did not agree that their fellow

pilots will have any influence to take onlinelearning to get prepared for check ride,whereas 48% were neutral and 20% be-lieve that their co-pilots can influence themto a certain extent for online learning. Thenegative response clearly indicates thatone-third of the respondents do not thinkthat their fellow pilots will have any influ-ence on taking online learning, whereas the

Figure 5. Histograms for the ease of use construct

Q7

6.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q7

Freq

uenc

y

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.37

Mean = 3.1

N = 50.00

Q8

6.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q8

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.49

Mean = 3.5

N = 50.00

Q9

6.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q9

Freq

uenc

y

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.42

Mean = 3.8

N = 50.00

Q10

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q10

Freq

uenc

y

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.56

Mean = 4.8

N = 50.00

Q11

7.06.05.04.03.02.0

Q11

Fre

quen

cy

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.35

Mean = 5.1

N = 50.00

Q12

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q12

Freq

uenc

y

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.40

Mean = 4.8

N = 50.00



majority of the respondents provided a neu-tral response, indicating that they are notsure whether their fellow pilots will haveany influence on them.

5. Supervisor Influence

The survey reflects that Superior In-fluence was an important construct, andadvise that more complete research beconducted in the future. Twenty-eight per-cent of the respondents agreed that theirsupervisor expects them to take online learn-ing, whereas a 38% majority were neutraland 34% did not believe that their supervi-sor will expect them to take online learn-ing. The positive response clearly indicatesthat 28% of the respondents assumes thattheir supervisor might expect that theyshould take online learning, whereas themajority of the respondents provide neu-tral response, indicating that they are notsure whether their supervisor will have anysay regarding the interest for online learn-ing, and one-third of them eliminated thepossibility of superior influence for onlinelearning.

Thirty percent of the sample did notagree that their supervisor will require

online learning, 38% were neutral and 32%believe that their supervisor might requireit in future. The positive response indicatesthat one-third of the respondents do thinkthat in the future they will have no choice,since their supervisor will demand it;whereas a slight majority of the respon-dents provided a neutral response, indicat-ing they are not sure whether their super-visor will need it in future. One-third of therespondents do not believe their supervisorwill require it in the future. A survey of theowner operators may provide valuable in-sights and is suggested for future research.Figure 6 indicates that pilots think their su-pervisor will require online learning, but theyare not quite certain.

6. Efficacy

Seventy-four percent of the sampleagreed that they would feel comfortableusing online learning, 14% were neutral andonly 12% assumed that they would not feelcomfortable using online learning. The re-spondents’ average age was 43. We ex-pected this generation of pilots to havemuch less confidence in using online learn-ing. Since the great majority of respondents

Figure 6. Histograms for the peer influence construct

Q13

5.04.03.02.01.0

Q13Fr

eque

ncy

40

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.07

Mean = 3.6

N = 50.00

Q14

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q14

Freq

uenc

y

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.34

Mean = 3.7

N = 50.00



assumes that they would feel comfortableusing online learning, we believe the nichemarket of business aviation pilots is morereceptive for this product than previouslybelieved. Sixty percent felt confident theycould connect to online learning; 10% wereneutral and 30% assumed that they wouldnot feel confident. The confidence at be-ing able to connect online indicates a highconfidence and/or expectation of being ableto use online learning anytime, anywhere.

7. Facilitating Conditions Resources

Forty-two percent of the sample didnot agree that there would be computer

resource constraints for online learning,whereas 38% were neutral and 20% be-lieve there will be resource constraints. Thenegative response clearly indicates that themajority of respondents do not think theywill face any resource constraint in usingonline courses. This may be interpreted asthe pilots’ belief and expectation that theirexisting personal and work computers areadequate for online learning.

Sixty-six percent of the sample didnot agree that computer resources will beunavailable when they need to use them totake online learning, whereas 22% wereneutral and only 12% believe there will beenough computer resources to get online

Figure 7. Histograms for the supervisor influence construct

Q15

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q15Fr

eque

ncy

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.52

Mean = 3.8

N = 50.00

Q16

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q16

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.41

Mean = 3.9

N = 50.00

Figure 8. Histograms for the efficacy construct

Q17

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q17

Freq

uenc

y

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.36

Mean = 5.1

N = 50.00

Q18

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q18

Freq

uenc

y

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.72

Mean = 4.6

N = 50.00



when they need. The response to this vari-able indicates a confidence and/or expec-tation for anytime, anywhere online learn-ing.

CONCLUSION

This study explored the emerging op-portunities and changing expectations con-tained in the vision of online learning forthe business aviation pilot. It introduced andcompared the concepts, perceptions andattitudes of online training for pilots and itsrelevance. The constructs Efficacy (EFF),Compatibility (COMP) and Perceived Use-fulness (PU) are clearly seen as the topthree determinants, respectively, of the pi-lots’ perceptions of what quality online train-ing will provide. The responses to Facili-tating Conditions Resources (FCR) andEase of Use (EU) constructs revealed ahigh degree of confidence in available re-sources and personal ability to performonline learning.

The number of new pilot jobs createdin the next decade is conservatively ex-pected to grow at more than 40%. In addi-tion to planned growth, the need to replaceaging business aviation pilots as they retire

will also be significant. Training needs willtherefore grow exponentially, as will theexpectation by regulatory agencies andcustomers that future aviation training adoptthe best of emerging technologies and tech-niques.

The attitude of today’s business avia-tion pilot is changing rapidly. Two impor-tant factors that are pushing this changeare (1) the different training needs requiredby modern glass-cockpit aircraft, and (2)the quickly changing awareness by the av-erage pilot of new technologies, especiallythe Internet. Owners and operators of thebusiness aviation industry will experienceincreasing financial pressure, as globaliza-tion and substitute products provide cheaperaircraft charters for the customer andcheaper training for pilots. To remain com-petitive and maintain leadership in businessaviation flight training, SimuFlite has anopportune position to combine its well-es-tablished training knowledge and tech-niques with the cutting-edge technologyof CAE to provide interactive distancelearning.

Pilots’ expectations of online learn-ing are high, but not overly demanding ofcurrent and emerging technology. More

Figure 9. Histograms for the technology facilitating conditions construct

Q19

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q19Fr

eque

ncy

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.43

Mean = 3.5

N = 50.00

Q20

7.06.05.04.03.02.01.0

Q20

Freq

uenc

y

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.36

Mean = 3.0

N = 50.00



importantly perhaps are the pilots’ attitudesand beliefs brought out in the research,which clearly shows trends in the accep-tance of and confidence in online learning.It is very important that the online trainingexperience be highly interactive, with au-dio, visual and tactile features. It must alsobe very flexible, and easy to understandand use. Lessons should be modular andnot only provide required training goals butalso permit the pilot to explore deeper ifdesired. Real time and/or a virtual class-room environment were considered veryimportant to commercial aviation pilots. Theadvantages of interactive online learningwill be realized when broadband Internet,wireless protocol and pilot familiarity con-verge, and a critical mass of use and ac-ceptance is achieved.

Initially, to grow to the level of onlinetraining described above, a business unitsuch as CAE SimuFlite can use currentinteractive technology such as Simfinity tooffer lesson modules that also combinesome audio, video and textual training si-multaneously. Before implementation, how-ever, pilot reactions must be tested. Pilotinterviews show that pilots are highly re-ceptive to online training but have a “showme” attitude. To introduce too limited a prod-uct likely will turn pilots away and make itmore difficult to attract them in the future.

The business aviation industry ispoised to undergo a fundamental change inthe delivery of flight training to its pilots inorder to accommodate cost and schedulepressures. The aviation training companiesthat intelligently embrace integrated dis-tance learning to compliment flight trainingwill be able not only to provide a more per-sonalized and differentiated product, butalso to survive the inevitable technology-driven changes.

REFERENCES

Azjen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions:A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl& J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control:From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of plannedbehavior. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, 50,179-211.

Biggs, J.B., & Collis, K.F. (1982). Evalu-ating the quality of learning – TheSOLO taxonomy. New York: AcademicPress.

Butters, G. (1999, Dec). Learning atlightspeed. Business 2.0. Retrieved Feb-ruary 16, 2003 from: www.business2.com/art ic les /mag/0,1640,13310,FF.html

CAE Company Overview. (n.d.). RetrievedJanuary 28 from: http://cae.com/en/about/index.shtml

CAE Press Release. (2003). CAE to de-velop seLearning™ courseware forALSTOM power plants. January 22.Retrieved February 18, 2003 from:www.cae.com/en/newsroom/2003/shtml/power_01222003_ref066.shtml

CAE SimuFlite. (2002). CAE SimuFlitePremiers Boeing Business Jet Train-ing Program with CAE Simfinity™Technology. September 10. RetrievedFebruary 19, 2003 from: www.simuflite. c o m / p re s s / 0 2 _ 11 p r. h t m l C A E SimuFlite

CAE SimuFlite. (n.d.). Power systems andsimulation. Retrieved February 19, 2003from: www.cae.com/en/power/index.shtml

CAE SimuFlite Company History. (n.d.)Retrieved February 19, 2003 from:w w w. c a e s i m u f l i t e . c o m / p re s s /history.html



Cyber terror the way of the future. (1999).AAP General News (Australia). July13. Retrieved February 19, 2003 from:www.elibrary.com/

Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness,perceived ease of use, and user accep-tance of information technology. MISQuarterly, 13(3), 319-340.

Delio, M. (2000, Aug). Report: Online train-ing ‘boring’. Wired. Retrieved February16, 2003 from: www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,38504,00.html

Greenburg, P. (2001). CRM at the speedof light. McGraw Hill.

Herold, D.M., Davis, W., Fedor, D.B., &Parsons, C.K. (2002). Dispositional in-fluences on transfer of learning inmultistate training programs. PersonalPsychology, Winter.

Hsu, S., & White, J. (1998). Developingholistic technology-based trainingprograms. Retrieved February 17, 2003from: www.viats.org/papers/session5a2.htm

Karp, M., Condit, D., & Nullmeyer, R.(1999). F-16 cockpit/crew resourcemanagement. (AL/HR-TR-1999-XXXX, in progress). Mesa, AZ: AirForce Research Laboratory NBAABusiness Aviation Fact Book (2002).Retrieved January 28, 2003 from:w w w. n b a a . o rg / f a c t b o o k / 2 0 0 2 /section4.htm#02

Karp, M.R., McCurry, W.K., Turney, M.A.,& Harms, D. (2000). Aviation educa-tion for future airline pilots: An inte-grated model. Retrieved February 17,2003 from: www.viats.org/papers/session5d4.htm

Leher, H.R., Moore, P.J., & Telfer, R.A.(1999). Approaches to learning: Isthere a better way to prepare futurepilots? Retrieved February 17, 2003from: www.viats.org/papers/session5d1.htm

Mauro, R., & Barshi, I. (n.d.). Using anInternet-based decision research sys-tem in aviation training research. Re-trieved February 17, 2003 from:www.viats.org/papers/session5c2.htm

Moore, G., & Benbasat, I. (1991, Sept).Development of an instrument to mea-sure the perceptions of adopting an in-formation technology innovation. Infor-mation Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222.

Rose, R.G. (2001). Practical use of pilotpersonality profile. February 8. Re-trieved February 18, 2003 from:www.avweb.com/news/aeromed/181606-1.html

Sand, K., & Schoenfelder, J. (1998). Simu-lation coupled with CBT creating acomprehensive training tool that in-creases transfer. Retrieved February17, 2003 from: www.viats.org/papers/session5a4.htm

Selvaratnam, S. (2002). Tool to create e-learning content. Computimes Malay-sia, November 11.

Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learn-ing. International Journal of Educa-tional Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365. Retrieved February 19, 2003 from:http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/issues.html

Small, R.L., Lakowske, S.D., Breese, J.,& Callejo, G. (1999). A future directionin pilot training. Retrieved February17, 2003 from: www.viats.org/papers/session5d2.htm

Stokes, S. (2000). Learning space enlivensonline training. Infoworld, July 24.

Taylor S., & Todd, P. (1995, June). Under-standing information technology usage:A test of competing models. Informa-tion Systems Research, 6(23), 144-176.

Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). Mapping a routetoward differentiated instruction. Edu-cational Leadership, September.



Trapp, R. (1997). Internet users ‘wide opento fraud.’ Independent, Sept 3, C39.Retrieved February 19, 2003 from:www.elibrary.com/

United States General Accounting Office.(1999). Aviation safety: Research sup-ports limited use of personal computeraviation training devices for pilots(GAO Report No. RCED-99-143).

Washington, DC: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, July 12. Retrieved Feb-ruary 19, 2003 from: www2.faa.gov/nsp/nsp/GAO_PCATD.txt FAA 1999

Wentling, T.L., Waight, C., Strazzo, D., File,J., La Fleur, J., & Kanfer, A. (2000).The future of e-learning: A corporate andan academic perspective. NCSAKnowledge and Learning SystemsGroup, September.

APPENDIX A

Survey Instrument for Commercial Pilots

1. The online learning will be of no benefit to me.

2. Using the online learning will improve my ability to get prepared for check ride.

3. The advantages of the online learning will outweigh the disadvantages.

4. Overall, using the online learning will be advantageous.

StronglyDisagree Neither AgreeNor Disagree

StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7



5. Using the online learning will fit well with the way I take ground training.

6. Using the online learning will fit into my work style.

7. Instructions for online learning will be hard to follow.

8. Using online learning will require a lot of mental effort.

9. Using online learning is often frustrating

10. I expect online learning would be clear and understandable.


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7



12. I expect it would be easy for me to become skilful at using online learning to getprepared for check ride.

13. My friends would think that I should prepare for check ride through online learning.

14. My fellow pilots would think that I should use online learning to get prepared forcheck ride.

15. My supervisor would think that I should use the online learning to prepare for checkride.

11. I expect online learning to be flexible to interact with.


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7



16. I will have to use online learning to conduct ground training because my supervisormay require it in the future.

17. I would feel comfortable using the online learning on my own.

18. If I wanted to, I could easily connect to get prepared for check ride through onlinelearning on my own.

19. There will not be enough computer resources for everyone to use for online learn-ing.

20. I won’t be able to use computer resources for online learning when I need it.


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


StronglyAgree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7



APPENDIX B

Acronyms

AERO Aviation Education Reinforcement OptionAICC Aviation Industry Computer-based Training Committee StandardsAT&T American Telegraph & TelephoneCBT Computer Based TrainingCEO Chief Executive OfficeCRM Customer Relationship ManagementDVD Digital Video DiskERP Enterprise Resource PlanningFAA Federal Aviation AdministrationFMS Flight Management SystemFOQA Flight Operations Quality AssuranceHDTV High Definition TelevisionHTBT Holistic Technology Based TrainingIBM International Business MachinesIDRS Internet-based Decision Research SystemJAVA Programming Language Developed for the WebMGT ManagementNASA National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationPRM Partnership Relationship ManagementSOLO Structure of the Learning OutcomeUS United StatesWML Wireless Markup LanguageXML Extensible Markup Language

Mahesh S. Raisinghani is a faculty member at the University of Dallas, Graduate School ofManagement, where he teaches MBA courses in e-Business and information systems. Raisinghaniwas the recipient of the Presidential Award and the King Haggar Award for excellence inteaching, research and service. His previous publications have appeared in Information andManagement, Information Resources Management Journal, Information Strategy: An Executive’sJournal, Journal of Global IT Management, Journal of E-Commerce Research, Journal of IT Casesand Applications and International Journal of E-Business Research, among others. He serves onthe editorial review board for leading information systems publications and is included in themillennium edition of Who’s Who in the World, Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers and Who’sWho in Information Technology.

Mohammed Shah Alam Chowdhury is an adjunct faculty member at the University of Dallas. Heserved as assistant professor of business administration at Jahangirnagar University andChittagong University. He served as manager in the IT industry of Bangladesh. He has extensiveexperience in consulting, training and re-engineering at various SMEs in Bangladesh. He hasseveral research publications in academic and professional journals and served on an editorialreview board for the Journal of Business Administration. He is a member of Sigma Iota Epsilon.



Chris Colquitt is an aviation and aerospace professional, with more than 28 years of experience.After earning a BS in aerospace engineering from the University of Texas at Austin, he served asa pilot and officer in the United States Navy. After seven years in the Navy, he joined AmericanAirlines and flew their flagships all over the globe. Later, he accepted a position as a systemsmatter expert for the U.S. Air Force KC-10 Pilot training program with Raytheon and a systemsengineer for the U.S. Navy’s new F18 Simulator development. While earning an MBA from theUniversity of Dallas in Irving he flew as a pilot for Piedmont and trained and evaluatedprofessional pilots at CAE SimuFlite. Currently he is on contract with NASA as a research pilotand aerospace engineer.

Pedro M. Reyes is an assistant professor in the Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University.He received his PhD in operations management, an MBA in operations management, an MS ininformation systems and a BS in mathematics from The University of Texas at Arlington. Hiscurrent research interests are in integrated logistics, supply chain management and operationscontrol. Reyes’ research publications are included in Production and Inventory ManagementJournal, Journal of Global Information Technology, Knowledge and Process Management andApplied Mathematics and Computation.

Nilofar Bonakdar Kadivi is a visiting scholar at Mountain View College, Dallas CountyCommunity Colleges. She serves as a full-time faculty member responsible to teach in anddirect the Department of E-Commerce. She has four years’ experience teaching in the field of e-commerce and Web design. She holds a BS in economics from Azad University, Tehran, Iran, andan MBA in e-commerce from the University of Dallas.

Joseph M. Ray is a program manager for Pintail Technologies. He has extensive experiencemanaging and developing complex software projects at several startup companies as well asseveral Fortune 500 companies. He has been involved in software systems in a variety ofdomains, including supply chain management, defense, finance and the semiconductor industry.Additionally, he has worked as a technical trainer, teaching hands-on software developmentclasses. He holds an MBA in e-Business and a BS in computer science.

Jose E. Robles is a customer project leader at Nortel Networks. He has extensive experience inthe definition, implementation and re-engineering of customer service business processes. Whileat Nortel Networks, Robles has served in various positions, ranging from Technical Services &Support to Service Introduction and Validation. Prior to service at Nortel Networks, Roblesserved in the U.S. Air Force. He holds a BBA in business management, MBA in informationsystems management and finance, and a Master of Management in e-commerce.

Distance Education in the Business Aviation...

Documents

Transcript of Distance Education in the Business Aviation...