Should you build or buy Aviation Safety Management System (SMS)?
Aviation Safety Management System software runs an operator's hazard reporting, risk assessment, corrective action, and audit trail in one workflow tied to aviation safety regulations. Airlines, charter operators, and other certificated operators buy it to satisfy mandated SMS requirements and show regulators a documented safety process.
Buy a packaged SMS unless you already run a disciplined internal workflow platform; the FAA accepts homegrown systems, but the vendor's regulatory monitoring and audit trail are what most operators are actually paying for.
Build it, buy it, or bridge?
When building makes sense
Building your own SMS workflow is not just tolerated, the FAA writes its own guidance around it. Advisory Circular 120-92D states there is no one-size-fits-all method for complying with the requirements of Part 5, and a consulting guide built on that AC recommends small operators use simple forms or spreadsheets for hazard reporting and tracking instead of full-scale software systems. That's a regulator explicitly telling small operators that a spreadsheet-based hazard log, a simple risk matrix, and a quarterly safety review meeting can satisfy the requirement. Building makes the most sense for a single safety manager wearing multiple hats, where the discipline to run a consistent process matters more than the software running it. As headcount and hazard volume grow, the manual tracking that worked at ten reports a year starts to strain, and that's the point to reconsider a packaged tool.
When buying makes sense
Buying a packaged SMS platform earns its cost once an operator is large enough that manual tracking becomes its own risk. Centrik, Ideagen Aviation Safety, and VOCUS SMS package the hazard-reporting, risk-assessment, and audit-trail workflow that the FAA's own guidance says can be run on spreadsheets, so what you're paying for is convenience and regulatory-change monitoring rather than a capability spreadsheets structurally lack. That convenience is worth real money against the cost of a compliance gap discovered during an audit, especially once hazard volume outgrows what one person can track reliably in a shared file. Operators with a capable IT function and the discipline to maintain a spreadsheet-based process well can reasonably stay there longer than a vendor would like, but the packaged platform removes the ongoing burden of tracking regulatory changes yourself.
The desk read
Build-versus-buy analysis for Aviation Safety Management System (SMS) is being written. In the meantime, the framework that drives every B4 call is on the B4 Index page.
Frequently asked
Does the FAA require operators to use dedicated SMS software?
No. FAA Advisory Circular 120-92D states there is no one-size-fits-all method for complying with Part 5's SMS requirements, and small operators are specifically guided toward simple forms or spreadsheets rather than full-scale software when their operation is small enough to manage that way.
When does a spreadsheet-based SMS stop being adequate?
Usually when hazard volume and headcount grow past what one safety manager can track reliably by hand, or when tracking regulatory changes across the sources you monitor becomes a job in itself. There's no fixed threshold; it's a judgment call about whether the manual process is still catching what it needs to.
What's the actual value a vendor SMS platform adds over spreadsheets?
Mainly convenience and regulatory-change monitoring: automatic alerts when a rule affecting your operation changes, structured audit trails, and a workflow that scales without redesigning your own tracking system. None of that is a capability spreadsheets structurally lack, which is why the FAA accepts either approach.
Can a single safety manager run an SMS without dedicated software?
Yes, and FAA guidance is written with exactly that operator in mind. A running hazard log, a simple risk matrix from AC 120-92D, and a short recurring safety review meeting satisfy the core requirements for a small, focused operation.