How Consultants Use SMS Tools Across Multiple Operators

How consultants use SMS tools across multiple operators is a practical question that comes up frequently in business aviation. Many operators rely on external safety professionals to help establish, maintain, or mature a Safety Management System in business aviation, especially when internal resources are limited. At the same time, consultants often support several operators simultaneously, each with different operational profiles, regulatory scopes, and levels of SMS maturity. Understanding how consultants responsibly and effectively use SMS tools across multiple organizations helps operators set realistic expectations and avoid common pitfalls.

At a high level, consultants do not “run” an SMS on behalf of an operator. Instead, they use SMS tools to support, structure, and oversee SMS activities while ensuring that accountability, authority, and decision making remain with the operator. Modern SMS platforms make this possible by allowing separation of data, clear role definition, and consistent processes across different clients without blending or standardizing safety decisions that must remain operation specific.

This article explains how consultants typically use SMS tools across multiple operators, why this model matters in business aviation, and what effective implementation looks like under FAA 14 CFR Part 5 and ICAO Annex 19 principles.

What Does It Mean for a Consultant to Use SMS Tools?

An SMS consultant is an external safety professional who supports one or more operators with SMS design, implementation, oversight, or continuous improvement. Their role may include advising accountable executives, supporting safety managers, facilitating risk assessments, conducting internal audits, or helping prepare for regulatory or third-party audits.

Using SMS tools does not mean owning or controlling an operator’s SMS. In a compliant Safety Management System in business aviation, the operator retains responsibility for hazard identification, risk acceptance, corrective action, and safety policy. SMS tools are used by consultants to document processes, organize data, and maintain consistency in how SMS activities are performed and reviewed.

Modern SMS software allows consultants to work within defined permissions, access only the operators they are authorized to support, and maintain strict data separation between clients. This technical structure supports the governance expectations found in Part 5 and ICAO Annex 19.

Why This Matters in Business Aviation

Business aviation operations vary widely. A single consultant may support a Part 91 corporate flight department, a Part 135 charter operator, and a Part 145 repair station at the same time. Each of these operations faces different regulatory expectations, risk profiles, and operational tempos.

Without structured SMS tools, consultants often rely on spreadsheets, shared folders, and manual tracking systems. These approaches increase the risk of inconsistency, missed follow-ups, and blurred accountability. They also make it harder for operators to demonstrate that their SMS is functioning as an integrated management system rather than a collection of documents.

A structured approach to using SMS tools helps consultants maintain clarity across operators while reinforcing that each SMS remains tailored to the specific organization. This is closely aligned with the principles described in discussions of what a Safety Management System in business aviation is intended to accomplish and how the four pillars of SMS function together.

How Consultants Typically Work Across Multiple Operators

Segregation of Data and Access

One of the most important principles is strict separation of operator data. Consultants use SMS platforms that create distinct environments for each operator. Hazards, risk assessments, audit findings, and corrective actions are never shared across clients, even if the operational scenarios appear similar.

This segregation supports confidentiality and ensures compliance with Part 5 expectations around documentation, record retention, and management accountability. It also protects consultants from inadvertently transferring assumptions or decisions from one operator to another.

Role-Based Permissions

Consultants typically operate under defined roles such as advisor, reviewer, or auditor. These roles allow them to view, comment on, or facilitate SMS activities without replacing the operator’s authority.

For example, a consultant may help structure a hazard analysis or facilitate a risk assessment workshop, but the accountable executive or designated risk acceptance authority must formally approve the outcome. SMS tools reinforce this separation by tracking who performed each action and who approved it.

Standardized Processes, Customized Content

Consultants often apply consistent processes across operators while tailoring the content to each operation. For instance, the steps used to evaluate a hazard may be consistent, but the severity, likelihood, and mitigation strategies will differ based on aircraft type, operational environment, and organizational culture.

This balance between standardization and customization reflects best practice in SMS implementation and is discussed in more detail in guidance on how SMS applies differently to Part 91, Part 135, and Part 145 operators.

Practical Examples of Consultant Use in Daily Operations

Hazard Reporting and Review

Consultants may monitor hazard reports submitted by multiple operators to ensure timely review and follow-up. They do not prioritize or close hazards independently unless explicitly delegated. Instead, they verify that the operator’s safety manager or leadership team is engaging with the process and that risk assessments are documented appropriately.

SMS tools allow consultants to track aging hazards, identify overdue actions, and flag trends without making operational decisions on behalf of the operator.

Risk Assessments and Change Management

When operators introduce changes such as new aircraft, new routes, or new maintenance providers, consultants often facilitate management of change discussions. SMS platforms help document these assessments consistently while ensuring that risk acceptance remains with the operator.

This approach supports both Part 5 expectations and ICAO Annex 19 guidance on proactive risk management.

Internal Audits and Assurance Activities

Consultants frequently conduct or support internal audits across multiple operators. SMS tools allow them to manage audit schedules, findings, and corrective actions separately for each client while maintaining a consistent audit methodology.

This is especially valuable for operators preparing for regulatory surveillance or third-party audits, as described in discussions of what auditors look for in an SMS program.

Common Mistakes and Misunderstandings

Treating the Consultant as the SMS Owner

A frequent misunderstanding is the assumption that hiring a consultant transfers SMS responsibility away from the operator. This creates compliance risk. Part 5 is clear that accountability rests with the operator, regardless of who provides support.

SMS tools can unintentionally reinforce this misunderstanding if consultants are given unrestricted access or authority. Clear role definition is essential.

Reusing Templates Without Context

Consultants may use templates to accelerate implementation, but copying risk assessments, mitigation language, or safety objectives between operators without customization undermines SMS effectiveness. SMS tools should support reuse of structure, not reuse of decisions.

Over-Centralizing Safety Oversight

When consultants support multiple operators, there is a risk of centralizing oversight to the point where local safety engagement diminishes. Effective use of SMS tools emphasizes operator participation, visibility, and ownership rather than consultant-driven workflows.

What Good Implementation Looks Like

In a well-functioning model, consultants use SMS tools to enhance clarity, consistency, and oversight while reinforcing operator accountability. Each operator has a clearly identified accountable executive, safety manager role, and risk acceptance authority.

SMS activities are documented in a structured way, trends are visible over time, and assurance activities are traceable. Consultants can move efficiently between operators without confusion, and operators can demonstrate that their SMS is active, tailored, and embedded in daily operations.

This approach supports scalable safety management, particularly for smaller operators who cannot justify a full-time safety manager, as outlined in guidance on implementing an SMS without hiring a full-time safety manager.

How Technology Supports Multi-Operator SMS Oversight

Modern SMS platforms are designed to support multi-operator use without compromising governance. Key capabilities include secure data separation, role-based access, audit trails, and reporting tools that allow consultants to maintain awareness across clients without aggregating or comparing data inappropriately.

Technology also supports continuity. If a consultant relationship ends, the operator retains full access to its SMS records and can transition responsibilities internally or to another advisor without rebuilding the system.

When used correctly, SMS software reinforces the intent of Part 5 and ICAO Annex 19 by supporting systematic, documented, and accountable safety management rather than informal or personality-driven processes.

Looking Ahead

As SMS adoption continues to expand across business aviation, the consultant model will remain an important part of the ecosystem. Operators will continue to rely on external expertise, and consultants will increasingly depend on structured tools to manage complexity across multiple clients.

The key is balance. Effective use of SMS tools across multiple operators supports consistency and efficiency while preserving the fundamental principle that safety management is owned by the operator. When this balance is achieved, consultants, operators, and regulators all benefit from clearer oversight, better data, and more resilient safety systems.