Case Study of Challenge Disaster – from a Risk Management PerspectiveEssay title: Case Study of Challenge Disaster – from a Risk Management Perspective2.0 INTRODUCTION AND AIMSOrganisations nowadays face various external and internal risks such as strategic risks, operational risks, financial risk and environmental risks. Managers tend to focus on those risks with greater uncertainty like natural disasters. However, some risks also bring destructive outcome even they are predictable and controllable. The inherent risks in the management and control system are among those on the list. Because they are “built-in” risks of management and control system due to agency problem and asymmetric information, managers often ignore them or are unaware of their existences.
Consequently, most management systems may be subject to a number of problems and there will be a few that are simply too small or are not realistic.
The problem of handling management is one that many organisational engineers faced, which led to their professional and even personal decision to choose technology vs enterprise. Management has to deal with it by design, which can result in performance and cost overruns. To manage management it uses an organizational framework, which provides many organizational factors which must be handled before the process becomes profitable for the organisation. The organisational structure is based upon the basic building blocks that have been met in the present world. To do that organizational structure should develop so that the problems can be tackled easily by all involved. It is important for the management team to develop and utilize tools for managing problems by using a toolkit and the knowledge-base provided. Such tools have the advantage of providing the tools as well as the necessary knowledge to help the team perform their internal tasks when necessary. Although the team doesn’t know the implementation in advance it can be used in a way that is not only effective but also efficient when performing tasks. Even without knowledge-base, it is important that the team has been able to perform as much as has been done successfully. In this way, they can solve the problem. A successful management will focus on performance of their activities. While taking this risk the team will consider the possibility of implementing the solutions found in other parts of the management process. This is what many organisational management engineers thought as possible at first: this is the best path. However, it was the case that the management was hesitant to start their organization under these conditions due to risk. On the other hand, management did accept that this group had failed. They took some action to start their development on a project. But it took them several years before they even got this chance. Therefore, the organisational leaders who started their organisation in this way were afraid that management’s opinion of them might have changed so that their job would be different and the group might go against them. They decided the course which should be followed and which should be replaced by other projects. This was the first decision which the management did not take after the failure. Although organisational leaders in the past were ready to do what was required and to solve problems at large, management’s decision in the organization was very different. The organisational leaders did not accept the results of this process of taking the wrong approach and making it different from the management’s. However, the organisational leaders also wanted that the managers’ success would depend more on their vision, which means that other organisational issues would arise. The organisational leaders decided to take part in a long dialogue at one time or another which might involve many people. However, they were not convinced they could bring about a new solution, even in the short time they had been there. Therefore, they decided to take part in a more than a week long interaction with the managers. As the managers of these organizations, you don’t want to get into every kind of conversation every couple of hours, so you decided to go
3.8 INVITING IMPORTANT SAFETY. Management and control system do not use emergency management mechanisms to reduce risk, but by reducing the risk of disaster that they can reduce the cost of disaster recovery.3.9 SAFETY IS BASED ON RESEARCH. Risk evaluation is the primary function of management and control system in the risk management system.3.10 MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ARE INTERESTED IN AN IMPORTANT SAFETY INSTRUMENTS, INCLUDING: • The impact of economic consequences (a.k.a., a decrease of investment and earnings in a country) on the ability of management and control system to address environmental problems and to prevent certain disasters. • The impacts of external (e.g. floods) on the capacity to predict and respond to disaster. • The risks associated with climate change and/or other environmental calamities. • Managing and controlling management and control of the environment and the impact on infrastructure, economy, quality of life, infrastructure protection, water services, safety and health of citizens, and a host of other factors. • Understanding that management and control system provide an important framework for effective management to protect, mitigate and control their impact. • Developing processes for planning and implementation of risk management programmes such as risk assessments. • Creating a comprehensive and flexible framework that encompasses any risk that can be identified and appropriately managed, or any risk that is not addressed in response to the threat. • Improving management strategies and their implementation strategies to minimize the threat to society as a whole. • Collaborating with other national, private and non-governmental groups to identify the problems and opportunities to help prevent and respond to such hazards. • Monitoring economic performance to help protect public and private property and infrastructure from potential problems. • Developing the concepts of risk assessment and risk management. • Developing and implementing an inventory and reporting scheme that provides information on the risks and opportunities to reduce risks and to help in the allocation of resources. • Establishing the structure for the international, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees to provide guidance to affected governments. • Coordinating activities and conferences aimed at improving the quality of lives and the security of people and communities in the country. • Developing a framework for the monitoring of information on the activities of the national, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees concerned on the implementation of such activities. • Creating an international non-governmental group to enhance communication between and and between the agencies concerned. • Creating a range of other activities, services and initiatives on the prevention of all threats to social, economic and other health and public safety, providing information to authorities. • Coordinating and implementing other international NGOs and groups to promote and increase public participation in social justice, human rights or political issues. • Improving the coordination and implementation of international training and development efforts. • Establishing a range of national leadership institutions to facilitate and enhance training of leadership in policy-making and in military leadership. • Establishing a working group on the prevention and evaluation of external disaster and their social impact. •
3.8 INVITING IMPORTANT SAFETY. Management and control system do not use emergency management mechanisms to reduce risk, but by reducing the risk of disaster that they can reduce the cost of disaster recovery.3.9 SAFETY IS BASED ON RESEARCH. Risk evaluation is the primary function of management and control system in the risk management system.3.10 MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ARE INTERESTED IN AN IMPORTANT SAFETY INSTRUMENTS, INCLUDING: • The impact of economic consequences (a.k.a., a decrease of investment and earnings in a country) on the ability of management and control system to address environmental problems and to prevent certain disasters. • The impacts of external (e.g. floods) on the capacity to predict and respond to disaster. • The risks associated with climate change and/or other environmental calamities. • Managing and controlling management and control of the environment and the impact on infrastructure, economy, quality of life, infrastructure protection, water services, safety and health of citizens, and a host of other factors. • Understanding that management and control system provide an important framework for effective management to protect, mitigate and control their impact. • Developing processes for planning and implementation of risk management programmes such as risk assessments. • Creating a comprehensive and flexible framework that encompasses any risk that can be identified and appropriately managed, or any risk that is not addressed in response to the threat. • Improving management strategies and their implementation strategies to minimize the threat to society as a whole. • Collaborating with other national, private and non-governmental groups to identify the problems and opportunities to help prevent and respond to such hazards. • Monitoring economic performance to help protect public and private property and infrastructure from potential problems. • Developing the concepts of risk assessment and risk management. • Developing and implementing an inventory and reporting scheme that provides information on the risks and opportunities to reduce risks and to help in the allocation of resources. • Establishing the structure for the international, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees to provide guidance to affected governments. • Coordinating activities and conferences aimed at improving the quality of lives and the security of people and communities in the country. • Developing a framework for the monitoring of information on the activities of the national, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees concerned on the implementation of such activities. • Creating an international non-governmental group to enhance communication between and and between the agencies concerned. • Creating a range of other activities, services and initiatives on the prevention of all threats to social, economic and other health and public safety, providing information to authorities. • Coordinating and implementing other international NGOs and groups to promote and increase public participation in social justice, human rights or political issues. • Improving the coordination and implementation of international training and development efforts. • Establishing a range of national leadership institutions to facilitate and enhance training of leadership in policy-making and in military leadership. • Establishing a working group on the prevention and evaluation of external disaster and their social impact. •
3.8 INVITING IMPORTANT SAFETY. Management and control system do not use emergency management mechanisms to reduce risk, but by reducing the risk of disaster that they can reduce the cost of disaster recovery.3.9 SAFETY IS BASED ON RESEARCH. Risk evaluation is the primary function of management and control system in the risk management system.3.10 MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ARE INTERESTED IN AN IMPORTANT SAFETY INSTRUMENTS, INCLUDING: • The impact of economic consequences (a.k.a., a decrease of investment and earnings in a country) on the ability of management and control system to address environmental problems and to prevent certain disasters. • The impacts of external (e.g. floods) on the capacity to predict and respond to disaster. • The risks associated with climate change and/or other environmental calamities. • Managing and controlling management and control of the environment and the impact on infrastructure, economy, quality of life, infrastructure protection, water services, safety and health of citizens, and a host of other factors. • Understanding that management and control system provide an important framework for effective management to protect, mitigate and control their impact. • Developing processes for planning and implementation of risk management programmes such as risk assessments. • Creating a comprehensive and flexible framework that encompasses any risk that can be identified and appropriately managed, or any risk that is not addressed in response to the threat. • Improving management strategies and their implementation strategies to minimize the threat to society as a whole. • Collaborating with other national, private and non-governmental groups to identify the problems and opportunities to help prevent and respond to such hazards. • Monitoring economic performance to help protect public and private property and infrastructure from potential problems. • Developing the concepts of risk assessment and risk management. • Developing and implementing an inventory and reporting scheme that provides information on the risks and opportunities to reduce risks and to help in the allocation of resources. • Establishing the structure for the international, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees to provide guidance to affected governments. • Coordinating activities and conferences aimed at improving the quality of lives and the security of people and communities in the country. • Developing a framework for the monitoring of information on the activities of the national, civil and military advisory board and its members and members’ committees concerned on the implementation of such activities. • Creating an international non-governmental group to enhance communication between and and between the agencies concerned. • Creating a range of other activities, services and initiatives on the prevention of all threats to social, economic and other health and public safety, providing information to authorities. • Coordinating and implementing other international NGOs and groups to promote and increase public participation in social justice, human rights or political issues. • Improving the coordination and implementation of international training and development efforts. • Establishing a range of national leadership institutions to facilitate and enhance training of leadership in policy-making and in military leadership. • Establishing a working group on the prevention and evaluation of external disaster and their social impact. •
The purpose of this report is to provide insight of risk management and control system in the reality from the cases study of Challenger disaster. The real cause of the space shuttle Challenger accident 1986 was the flawed decision making process leading to the launch of the shuttle. The flawed decision making process was not a result of individual mistake. Rather, it was a product of problematic management and control system of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). I found this case interesting because the failure was produced by a highly regulated organisation with comprehensive control system: NASA. I believed it would be beneficial to explore the reasons behind this accident, providing real world experience in dealing with risk management.
The case study starts from presenting the background information and fact surrounding the case, following a case analysis illustrates the real cause of the accident. It is finally concluded with lessons have been learnt from the case.
3.0 FACTS SURROUNDING THE CASE3.1 BACKGROUND OF THE CHALLENGER SPACE SHUTTLE PROGRAMNASAs Shuttle program was started in the 1970s, to develop reusable craft for transporting cargo into space. Previous space craft could only be used once, then were discarded. Space Shuttle Challenger was the second shuttle in the U.S fleet after Colombia, which was launched in 1981(Greene 2004). After the spectacular success like the Apollo II moon landing, NASA’s space shuttle program became a symbolic culture icon, representing the myth of American superiority (Vaughan 1996).
The Space Shuttle Challenger flew nine successful missions before the tragedy. In the 1986 mission, the Challenger was scheduled to carry some cargo, as most like other missions. One thing made this mission unique. It was scheduled to carry Sharon Christa McAuliffe, the first teacher to fly in space, being the first flight of the new Teacher In Space Program (TISP). It certainly captured the attention of public more than any missions for years.
3.2 THE CHALLENGER DISASTERThe Space Shuttle Challenger was launched on January 28, 1986 from the Kennedy Space Centre, Florida. Less than two minutes after launch it exploded, killing all on board.
On February 3rd 1986 a presidential commission formed to investigate the cause of the accident. After 4 months of interviews and research, the Rogers commission report was published. According to the Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, “evidence pointed to the right solid rocket booster as the source of the accident.” The two synthetic rubber O-rings in the sold rocket booster failed to seal the rocket’s super hot gases from escaping out the joints, directly resulted the explosion (See Appendix 1 for the structure diagram of the space shuttle).
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry (See Appendix 2 for the details of their finding) also found the decision-making processes leading up to the launch of the Challenger were also seriously flawed. The disaster was not simply the result of technical O-ring malfunction. But rather, the decision to launch was undermined by the systemic and organizational structures at NASA, as well as by the ethical and communication dynamics of the managers and engineers involved in the decision-making processes.
In the years prior to the launch, concerns about O-ring failure were already prevalent, particularly amongst the engineers at Thiokol (the company contracted to design and construct the Solid Rocket Boosters). Such concerns, combined with weather-related worries, prompted the Thiokol engineers (headed by Robert Lund) to conduct a teleconference with managers from the Marshall and Johnson Space Centres, in order to determine whether the shuttle was safe for launch. This came just one day before the scheduled launch. In the meeting, Thiokol engineers raised their concerns that the low temperature may affect the function of O-rings and objected to the decision of launch.