As some might know most of the modern and commercial aircrafts do have a set of redundant systems and components.
Two engines, two or more hydraulic systems, segregated hydraulic tubes and electrical wires, redundant sensors, etc.
The main reason for that is to provide a safe and alternative mean to keep the machine flying until an emergency landing procedure is performed in case of a system/component fail.
Additionally, a backup system or component can also save the mission because the aircraft can "safely" be dispatched if the Master MEL (subject for another post) allows that.
But although redundant systems and components serve as backup, most of them work concomitantly.
And based on that basic premise, why similar and usual activities performed on the ground should also have redundancies?
The answer is simple: to avoid the repetition of a maintenance error.
The probability of two different people make the same mistake is lower unless the procedure is wrong and lead to that.
Other than that, it is advisable mapping the activities that are susceptible to repeated errors and applying some best practices to prevent simultaneous failures in redundant systems and/or components.
One of the most applied best practices is avoiding the same person performing maintenance tasks and routine checks on aircraft’s redundant systems and components.
Additionally, I would suggest a step back. Whenever writing any technical publication or working instruction, you might also have a robust and dual check process, including but not limited to check-lists. The checkers and approvers must have most attention and understand the work scope on its essence.
Procedures and illustrations can be a big barrier against maintenance and operation mistakes.
Think about that!
Regards from Brazil!
Picture: https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/10/1/55