Name
Professor
Subject
Date
THE SPACE SHUTTLE CHALLENGER LAUNCH DECISION
Every day managers have the task of making sound decisions that can be used to ensure that the organizations meet their set goals. The decision-making process entails discovering the organizational problems and formulating the best plans and solutions to the problems. It is critical for managers to have the suitable strategies that can be used to avoid the business organization from failing. Poor decision-making techniques attract serious consequences, and all the stakeholders will either be directly or indirectly affected by the outcome. Most managers fail to understand that the key factor in decision-making is committing towards having the appropriate action on particular issues (McConnell, 21). It is simply responding to the various situations that enable the managers to set rules of decision-making that can help them stop the problem and prevent it from its future occurrence.
All organizations have established a chain of command that helps them in their daily activities. There are different levels of managers, each performing their organizational activities. NASA is a well-known organization in the world. The size of this organization has made it crucial for it to have an operational management system. The management system is comprised of top level stakeholders that make decisions regarding various space expeditions and other NASA-related issues on earth. Since its establishment, NASA has experienced two fatal accidents. One of these fatal accidents occurred on 28th January 1986 when a space shuttle exploded a few minutes after its launch. This disaster showed the flaws in the NASA managerial system as most of the people believed that the company’s executive decision-makers did not put much effort in preventing the accident from happening. The state-appointed various people to conduct research on the major cause of the Space Shuttle Challenger catastrophe. The report gather by the researchers showed that the engineers knew about the technical issues of the space shuttle, but they did not do anything to prevent its launch. The second accident occurred seventeen years later after the first accident occurred. These two accidents were not different from each other in terms of the nature of occurrence. Reports concluded that just like in the first accident, the second accident could have been prevented (Max and Moore, 42). There were flaws in the managerial body and the entire operations department. The executive decision-makers in NASA overlooked the various problems that the shuttle was having before it commenced its launch into space.
This essay focuses on depth issues that contributed to the Space Shuttle Challenger launch accident. There is more to it than a mere accident, especially the various decision-making issues that helped in revealing the incompetence of the top NASA executives. This essay will also determine the ways that could be used to prevent the Space Shuttle Challenger accident from happening. It will also seek to identify the best preventive measures that the managers can use to prevent the future occurrence of similar accidents. All the crucial decisions made have consequences, and the consequences can either be positive or negative. The best managers always seek to make decisions that will produce positive results without compromising the lives of the staff members or the credibility of the organization (Max and Moore, 42).
Administrative Model
Programmed and Non-programmed Decisions
Managers are faced with either programmed or non-programmed decisions when trying to respond to the various organizational problems. Programmed decisions are often related to previous situations that have occurred in the organization. These decisions help in setting rules that can be used in the future if a similar problem arises. Non-programmed decisions are different and unique. They are crucial consequences, therefore demanding full considerations and commitment. The NASA executive decision-makers did not pay full attention to the administrative decision-making model. The administrative decision-making model provides the necessary guidelines for the managers to use when they are faced with ambiguous and non-programmed decisions (Bell and Karl, 7). The report conducted concerning the tragic shuttle accident shows that NASA’s engineers knew about the potential risk and the technical issues of the shuttle. Reports of the investigation further explain that the NASA managers gave the green light to the launching of the space shuttle. They were filled with excess optimism that the mission to space was going to be successful despite the shuttle’s problems. The managers broke their occupational and moral duties of protecting the lives of the staff members by satisficing on the decision of launching the disaster-prone space shuttle. The managers did not use the rational procedures in ensuring that all the safety precautions have been met before ordering the start of the mission. The application of intuition in the decision-making process not only jeopardized the entire mission but also created nationwide concern on the ability of organizations to safeguard the lives of their employees.
Impulse Decision-making
The other mistake made by the NASA managers is impulse decision-making processes. The managers were very emotional about the time and money invested in the mission. They feared that the fixing of the “minor” shuttle problems would cause more delays and cost the company more money. In impulse decision making, managers ignore the various facts, and irresistible urges drive them. The failure of the NASA managers to call off the launch of the shuttle showed poor decision-making skills. Impulse decision making does not give the managers an opportunity to think critically before deciding on the way forward. The immediate result of the poor decision was non-complacency and loss of lives (Bell and Karl, 7).
Political Model
The political decision-making model is a likely cause of the Space Shuttle Challenger accident. The political decision-making model is mainly comprised of limited information and different ideologies among the managers. These issues play a major role in causing disagreements between the key managers and executives in the organization. The political model is also characterized by conflicting goals and pluralism. The information is not shared equally, and most of the information is ambiguous. The political decision-making model contains inconsistent viewpoint, making it had to come to a good decision. It is a time-consuming decision-making model, and it aids in creating a gap between the different levels of management. The engineers at NASA had known about the technical risks of the shuttle before it was scheduled to launch (Vaughan, 10).
The political decision-making model compelled the engineers to allow the mission to take place. There is usually a conflict between intellectual and leadership groups with each group competing for supremacy and recognition. The political aspect of the organization always wins the battle due to its financial and influential capabilities. The political aspect of the Space Shuttle mission led to the use of poor programs and techniques instead of following the required risk avoidance procedures. The political domain in the management of NASA was focused on achieving the set promises. The pressure to deliver the promises was a great burden on the NASA management system. The political domain of this system could not withstand the pressure of failing to produce the desired objectives. This led to bad decision making and a disaster that they will live to remember. The political domain of the NASA management system did not consider the lives of the astronauts while they were making their decisions (Vaughan, 10). NASA has always been treating the risks as small issues that are bound to happen in the space exploration process. This ignorance by the managers is one of the main causes of failures of the organizations. Every risk must be considered before making any decision. Critical analysis of the space shuttle was enough evidence for the NASA executive decision makers that the mission was not safe.
Prevention of Future Disasters
A good manager can play attention to details and treat every matter with the intensity it deserves. Managers should be able to diagnose the issues related to the decision position. They should determine the background problem of every issue before deciding on the plan or strategy. The establishment of the background problem will help the manager to form the possible answers to the identified problems. The best decisions are usually based on the available information. Managers must be very careful when dealing with the acquired information to avoid misinterpreting the information. The main job of decision making is sourcing the information. Different organizations have different objectives and managerial structures. The managers should follow the right procedures in dealing with the organizational operations unless a crucial issue forces them to change (Dimitroff and Lu et al, 15).
Better appraisal techniques can be applied to establish the right alternative to choose. Appraisal techniques also enable the managers to determine all the aspects of the available alternatives before making decisions. The appraisal techniques can help the managers to make the right choice while dealing with a managerial dilemma. Good managers are not consumed by their power or huge egos. The NASA managers can prevent the occurrence on a similar incident by following the advice of the engineers regarding fault systems. The engineers are more qualified in their profession compared to the other organizational stakeholders. The NASA managers must maintain their professionalism by not interfering with the various decisions the engineers make regarding the accuracy of their machines. The managers can also assist the other NASA employees by preventing the negative influence of the politicians and prominent people. These people are always money-oriented, and they neglect to follow the set regulations relating to employee safety.
The prevention of future NASA accidents also depends on the managers’ abilities to quantify and estimate the probability of occurrence of the risks. They must maintain a balance between the risks and rewards. This will keep them on the alert to make sound decisions based on not only the rewards but also the probability of suffering a risk by the same decision. They should not base their decisions on emotions but rather on the values of fellow employees and the impact of the decisions to the society. Managers should implement effective communication among the employees. They must also have good leadership skills as well as work toward achieving the organizational goals. The prevention of future accidents is an easy task for the managers (Sterman, 53).
Works Cited
Bazerman, Max, and Don A. Moore. "Judgment in managerial decision making." (2012).
Bell, Trudy E., and Karl Esch. "The fatal flaw in flight 51–1: Events leading up to the ill-fated challenger launch proved more of a surprise than the disaster itself for what they revealed of NASA's inability to correct obvious design errors." Spectrum, IEEE 24.2 (1987): 36-37.
Dimitroff, Robert D., Lu Ann Schmidt, and Timothy D. Bond. "Organizational behavior and disaster: A study of conflict at NASA." Project Management Institute, 2005.
McConnell, Malcolm. Challenger: A major malfunction. Doubleday, 1987.
Sterman, John D. "Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment." Management science 35.3 (1989): 321-339.
Vaughan, Diane. The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press, 1997.