The Challenger And Columbia Shuttle Disaster: Nasa

1637 words - 7 pages

NASA Shuttle Case Study
Introduction
For this assignment we will discuss some theories on organizational change learned during this class and how they relate to the case study of NASA (The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disaster). First we will look the images of managing change used by NASA in the case study. Then we will discuss the types of change(s) NASA under took. Next we will look at some of the challenges of change that NASA faced. Next we will discuss some of the resistance to change that NASA dealt with. Then we look at how NASA implemented change. Next we will discuss vision and change and the impact in the case study. Finally we will discuss sustaining change as it relates to the changes implemented by NASA in the case study.
Images of Managing Change
Before we look at the images of managing change that were present in the NASA case study let us review a few of the key events in this case study. The case study for this assignment looks at Challenger and Columbia NASA space shuttle disasters and the commission findings on the disasters/recommendations. Now with a short review of the case study what image(s) of change are present in the case study? From the case study the changes introduced are images of managing. These changes are both management of control and shaping. As NASA recovered from the 1986 Challenger disaster, it used the classic Fayol characterization of management such as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling to correct from the top-down the issues that had caused the Challenger disaster (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.24, 2009). NASA approached the changes that need to be enacted as a result of the Challenger and also the Columbia disasters from the change image of a director. NASA accomplished this by directing the organization and controlling the changes to achieve the desired results as suggested/directed by accident commissions (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.27, 2009).
Types of Change Undertaken by NASA
Now let us discuss the types of change seen in the case study but first what was the catalyst for the change? Of course the changes ultimately are in reaction to first the Challenger and then the Columbia accidents but what pressures prompted NASA to make changes? One of these pressures for change was mandated pressure. This mandated pressure was placed on NASA by the federal government after the release of “the Rogers Commission” and their recommendations (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.375, 2009). Another pressure that NASA was under was that of reputation and credibility pressures. NASA is the government’s lead agency that heads up manned and un-manned space flight and it was agency that facilitated putting an American on the moon. But in 1986 the organization that had put a man on the moon had now failed and resulted in the loss of the space shuttle Challenger and the seven crewmembers. Under these pressures NASA made Second-Order Transformational changes. NASA not only made the recommended design...

Find Another Essay On The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disaster: NASA

Risk Analysis of the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster

1208 words - 5 pages temperature was below freezing on the morning of January 1986 when the space shuttle Challenger prepared for its tenth launch. Unfortunately, the space shuttle Challenger met a tragic fate that morning. This disaster was the first one for the NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), responsible for the nation's civilian space program and for aeronautics and aerospace research. Problematic It is really important to find a good

The Columbia Space Shuttle Essay

1671 words - 7 pages of the space shuttle. The Columbia space shuttle was important to space exploration because it used new technology that changed space travel, completed missions that other spacecraft could not, and brought new people into space. NASA received a contract to build the shuttle on July 26, 1972 as a prototype named the Enterprise (Dunbar “Space Shuttle” 1). Construction began on March 25, 1975, in Rockwell International’s assembly plant in Palmdale

The Space Shuttle Challenger Tragedy

1307 words - 5 pages 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

Challenger and Columbia case study

1985 words - 8 pages situation within the organization. Not many organizational disasters are as public as the Challenger and Columbia incidents. As horrific as these events were, they also offer a unique opportunity from which many lessons can be learned. As a part of the government, NASA has always been operated through hierarchical management structures and communication systems. In a hierarchical organization employees are ranked at various levels. Persons of

The Challenger Disaster

1665 words - 7 pages The Challenger disaster of 1986 was a shock felt around the country. During liftoff, the shuttle exploded, creating a fireball in the sky. The seven astronauts on board were killed and the shuttle was obliterated. Immediately after the catastrophe, blame was spread to various people who were in charge of creating the shuttle and the parts of the shuttle itself. The Presidential Commission was decisive in blaming the disaster on a faulty O-ring

The Challenger Disaster Explained

1250 words - 5 pages The Challenger disaster of 1986 was a shock felt around the country. During liftoff, the shuttle exploded, creating a fireball in the sky. The seven astronauts on board were killed and the shuttle was obliterated. Immediately after the catastrophe, blame was spread to various people who were in charge of creating the shuttle and the parts of the shuttle itself. The Presidential Commission was decisive in blaming the disaster on a faulty O

The Challenger Disaster

3672 words - 15 pages disasters in our space program's history occurred. Many people were watching at the moment because it was the highly televised space mission. For the first time, a civilian was a member of the crew that was to be shot into space. This civilian was the winner of the "Teacher in Space" contest, Christa McAuliffe. The disaster: the explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger, (Compton's, 1). The STS 51-L mission was to deploy the second Tracking and

NASA’s Greatest Downfall: The Challenger Disaster

1070 words - 5 pages delays, temperature projections were unusually low ranging from 26 degrees to 29 degrees in Florida where the shuttle launching was to take place (Robison et al 62). This created concern for NASA and Morton Thiokol, the company where the rocket boosters for the Challenger were made, regarding the functionality of the rocket boosters. Morton Thiokol engineers cautioned the company to delay the launch, so they contacted NASA and explained their concerns

Organizational Theory Applied to the Challenger Disaster

1009 words - 4 pages decision to launch the Challenger came from pressures put on the NASA program by the media and congress. Feeling these pressures NASA passed on these pressures toward their contractors: Morton Thiokol and Rockwell International, headed by Jon Peller. The Challenger disaster could've been prevented had these key players acted in the best interest of the safety of the launch instead of the integrity and funding of the NASA program.Congress was unhappy

Challenger Disaster: The Challenger tragedy was as much a failure of decision-making as of technology

1386 words - 6 pages easy or popular. This trend supports freezing on an attractive decision. In the Challenger case, lift-off was clearly more desirable than delay. A launch decision meant that the flight schedule could be kept, that the public would not be disappointed and that the shuttle program would score major points with the public. Also, any mention of likely system failure would have suggested the need to spend more money, a conclusion NASA found offensive

The Challenger Disaster - Responsibility of Morton Thiokol Inc

1245 words - 5 pages hindered responsibility among individuals within the organization and of the organization itself. In this respect, when viewed as a problem of responsibility, the Challenger disaster presents a much more insightful lesson on the nature of decision-making in a large organization such as NASA. While it seems clear that the decision that led to the explosion of the Challenger was made by those lower-level managers who chose to ignore the objections of

Similar Essays

Nasa Management Failure And The Columbia Space Shuttle Disaster

779 words - 3 pages Introduction The Columbia space shuttle disintegrated on re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere in February of 2003. The astronauts on board had completed a two week mission and were returning home. The program was halted for the next couple of years while the disaster was investigated. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board reported on what if found to be the cause of the tragedy. After take-off a piece of insulation foam fell off and hit the

The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster Essay

2863 words - 11 pages 1.0 Introduction Seventy three seconds into its 10th flight, on January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger broke apart over the Atlantic Ocean, killing the seven crew members on board [1]. The Challenger was the second space shuttle constructed by NASA and had completed nine successful missions prior to the disaster. Following the accident, the shuttle program was suspended for 32 months as President Ronald Regan appointed a Commission

The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster Essay

1298 words - 5 pages catastrophe, that still one occurred. Not disregarding the fact that this particular mission was taking the first ever teacher into space. When asking Gerald Wilson about the Challenger disaster his first words to me were “that was the space shuttle that the teacher was on.” Not only did NASA, The United States and Morton Thiokol fail trained astronauts, but they failed an innocent teacher. One of the standard practices necessary in order to

Nasa's Incompetence: The Challenger And Columbia Shuttle Disasters

1538 words - 6 pages shuttle safety hazards as well as redesigning the faulty booster joint for NASA approval. Shortly before the two year anniversary of the disaster, NASA officials declared that the Commission’s recommendations for organizational change had been successfully implemented. Unfortunately, the explosion of the space shuttle Columbia nearly three decades later and a subsequent investigation revealed that the changes made in the wake of the Challenger