NASA has faced many tragedies during their time; but one can question if two of the tragedies were preventable by changing some critical decisions made by the organization. The investigation board looking at the decisions made for the space shuttle tragedies of the Columbia and Challenger noted that the “loss resulted as much from organizational as from technical failures” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 191). The two space shuttle tragedies were about twenty years apart, they both had technical failures but politics also played a factor in to these two tragedies.
When the Challenger shuttle was set to launch NASA was feeling political pressure to gain congressional support for the space program, to help gain this support the shuttle crew had a high school teacher on board, Christa McAuliffe, and millions of people were excited and tuned into watch. NASA officials were hoping that this new endeavor would help generate funding since the U.S. budget deficit was soaring and they were afraid that their budget could be cut. Technical failure was the reason the shuttle exploding after take-off but this was not the only reason. With pressure mounting, decisions made by NASA and Morton Thiokol Corporation, the contractor who manufactured the piece with the technical failure, put political agendas in front of the technical decisions, which resulted in the tragedy (Bolman & Deal, 2008).
Political Decisions and Strategies
Using the political frame to view organizations involved in both the Challenger and Columbia tragedies help shape the outcome of the investigation board. There are five propositions that summarize the perspective of a political frame: organizations are coalitions, coalition members have enduring differences, important deci...
... middle of paper ...
...naged conflicts leads to the infighting and destructive power struggle revealed in the Challenger and Columbia cases.” The organizations did not use the potential technical issues conflict as a way to address or solve a problem but instead chose to ignore the conflict, which resulted in the loss of human life.
Conclusion
Examining the political frame of NASA’s coalition during these tragedies, the investigation board questioned if changing decisions could have prevented the loss of lives in the Challenger and Columbia shuttles. The failure of effectively navigate the political framework NASA put political influences above the safety of their astronauts. To prevent future catastrophes NASA needs to map the political terrain by build coalitions based on relationships, focusing on effectively managing conflicts, and properly use the power within its’ organizations.
Casamayou, Maureen. “The Columbia Accident.” Public Administration: Concepts and Cases. Stillman, Richard Joseph. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. 105-114.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), was booming in the late 1960 's because the U.S. invested over 4.5 percent of the Federal Budget (Bolden). Unfortunately, in the recent years the Government has slashed funding for many of NASA’s projects in an attempt to cut back on the deficit and boost the economy. Despite the plummet in NASA 's budget, the program has proved that it 's prominence in the U.S., space programs like NASA continue to face difficulty in increasing its funds. Although, NASA leads Evidently, the government doesn 't think NASA is worth more than 0.47 percent of the federal budget. NASA is being underfunded and its funding should be substantially increased to make ends meet. This trend needs
Contextual analysis is made up of three basic components; intended audience, setting and most importantly purpose. Authors often times consider and work each contextual piece into the construction of their given argument. An argument is not powerful if audience preference is not a main concern, if the setting isn’t taken into consideration, or if the purpose is not relevant to the current situation. On January 28th, 1986 the shuttle challenger exploded 73 seconds into its take off. President Ronald Reagan wrote a critical speech to address the tragedy that had struck our nation that day. It is highly evident in his address that kept audience, setting, and purpose in mind. He comforts a worried public using calm tone and simple yet effective diction to convince the American nation that it’s necessary to go on and continue the space program and ultimately the scientific revolution.
Many things happened before the challenger exploded into fire. The cost of the space shuttle was around 1.2 billion. (Hanson 26+) To avoid disaster and any troubles, millions of dollars were wasted in attempt to keep the Challenger safe. Many things like Space simulation for failure, computer shut downs, engine failures, and many things along those lines. We all know that it didn't succeed. The Challenger made lift off at Cape Canaveral, Florida. In 1949, this site had been the area where the Air Force tested missiles and missile systems. Many of NASA's shuttles were launched out from here including Gemini and Apollo flights. From 1963 to 1973, the Shuttle site was changed to “Cape Kennedy” in memory of President Kennedy. The Space Shuttle was delayed six days prior to the event, due to rainfall and cold weather exceeding launch regulations. (“Challenger Disaster”). Mil...
Lack of authority and direction at NASA: The agency did not have a permanent administrator for almost four months and there was a high turnover rate among the high level management employees.
With consideration to law enforcement responses at Ruby Ridge and Waco, as a public manager, my takeaway is how critical collaboration is to the successful outcome of a crisis. Both responses had many different moving parts that appeared to function without effective collaboration. Effective collaboration could have provided a vetting capability for decisions. For instance, the rules of engagement revision made by the Federal Bureau of investigation (FBI), at Ruby Ridge, could have prevented the unnecessary death of Vicki Weaver, if the decision required higher authorization for approval.
In the article, “Challenger Disaster: Heeding the Ethical Lessons 30 Years Ago”, the story behind why the space shuttle Challenger burst into flames and what happened in the back ground is told. On that day, sorrowfully, seven people were killed including a teacher who was supposed to be the first civilian to go into space. The worst part is the explosion could have been avoided if only the managers at NASA had listened to the engineers.
On the morning of January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger disintegrated in midair as the nation watched in disbelief and sadness. The cause of the Challenger accident was determined to be a system design failure on one of the shuttle’s solid rocket boosters. Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) are a pair of large solid strap-on rockets that were utilized by NASA during the first two minutes of the Challenger’s Space Shuttle launch. The pair of SRBs was applied to provide an extra liftoff boost for the Space Shuttle during takeoff. Each SRB were located on each side of the external propellant tank of the spacecraft. Once they began to operate, “the boosters separate from the orbiter/external tank, descend on parachutes, and land in the Atlantic Ocean” (Wilson, 2006). NASA would then send ships into the Atlantic Ocean to retrieve the boosters. The boosters were refurbished so they can be used again. According to NASA officials, “the SRBs were the largest solid-fuel rocket motors ever flown, and the first to be used for primary propulsion on human spaceflight missions” (Wilson, 2006).
The diverse seven-member crew of the Challenger made it very media friendly because a civilian was going into space. The crewmembers were Commander Francis Scobee, Michael Smith, Ellison Onizuka, Ronald McNair, Judith Resnik, Gregory Jarvis, and Christa McAuliffe. NASA wanted to try a new radical approach by trying to rekindle the excitement that once had surrounded the space program. NASA thought that if an everyday American citizen were involved, they could communicate the excitement of space travel to the American public. President Ronald Reagan made the choice that the first ordinary American to travel into space would be a teacher. NASA and President Reagan thought that one of America’s teachers would be the best candidate for the trip because teachers have the ability to communicate to people and get them interested and excited about almost anything.
On January 28, 1968 the space shuttle Challenger was deployed from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. One minute and thirteen seconds after liftoff the spaceship ignited in mid air and all seven crew members were killed. The cause of the destruction of the challenger was a certain part of rubber that relieves pressure on the side of the actual rocket booster called an O-ring. When a space shuttle as used as the Challenger is about to be used for another mission there should be an even more careful with checking everything before liftoff. The Challenger could have been avoided and there was way too much evidence that shows NASA had some kind of knowledge about the consequences.
Culture at NASA was converted over time to a culture that combines bureaucratic, cost efficiency and schedule efficiency of the flights. This culture of production reinforced the decisions to continue flights rather than delay while a thorough hazard analysis was conducted. Managers were so focused on reaching their schedule targets that the foam insulation problem did not induce them to shift their attention to safety. It appears that at NASA managers overrule engineers when the organization was under budget and time pressure. In my opinion, high-level managers should avoid making important decisions based on beliefs and instead rely on specialist’s opinion.
In 1981, the world was introduced to a new mode of space transportation. The first ever space shuttle, Colombia, made a successful test landing. From this point on, space ships could be reused, increasing the number of missions possible while decreasing the cost of each mission (1). This new innovation invigorated America's enthusiasm for the space program. After the space race was over, there was very little people outside of the program desired to see. NASA became the whipping boy of politicians that were looking for tax cuts. There were few goals in the space program in the next decade and fewer were fulfilled. The entire nation seemed to be in a technological and overall feeling of malaise.
The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster was one of the biggest space flight accidents and the result of a series of engineering failures. The Shuttle disintegrated after launch on its last mission, resulting in the death of its seven crew members. [1] The disaster happened on the Challenger program’s last launch on 28 January, 1986 at launch site Kennedy LC-39B. Later analysis showed that an O-ring, a seal on the right rocket boosted failed which was the cause of the accident. This incident is studied by engineers and organisations to see how effective communications can prevent engineering failures from causing catastrophic damages and how organisational ethics can be improved.
But equally to blame, investigators said, was NASA's broken safety culture. The agency had grown complacent about the extremely dangerous and still-experimental practice of hurtling humans into space and bringing them back safely. [x] NASA failed to learn from
The political frame relies on the assumption that organizations are alliances of unique people and interest groups. The people are unique due to their different views of the world, their morals, faith and activities and the information they have given these characteristics. The political frame also assumes that all key decisions arise from the need to allocate scarce resources such as time, money and information. These scarce resources and differences amongst people are what make conflict the core of organizational dynamics and make power such a crucial asset. Finally, the political frame assumes that all objectives and conclusions are e...