Organizational structure and crisis management in NASA's Apollo 13 mission

Apollo 13 analysis and diagnosis using the 1995 film "Apollo 13" starring tom hanks

Apollo 13 analysis and diagnosis

Executive summery

The exploration of the space brought a lot of excitement. The super power countries, each has sought to establish its dominance and security by exploring the space. NASA is the United States agency for exploring the space. This report has evaluated the Apollo 13 incident in view of the film that was released of the same. The discussion centers on the two groups that is the ground and space teams.

The exploration of the space began in the late 1950s. It started after the Second World War ended. It was as a result of the United States and the Soviet Union having a cold war (McCray 2013). The space exploration hence provided the arena for this competition. Hence, this was the basis for the need for an organization that would foster the challenge toward exploring and controlling the space. The United States, therefore, established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). It is the agency which is responsible for research and management of science and technology of the space (McCray, 2013). The Apollo space trip is one of the trips to the space that NASA has had.

Macro analysis

The NASA team that managed the Apollo 13 has a special form of structure of organization. There are various policies under which the organization works. These guidelines are aimed at making the management of the process efficient and effective (McCray 2013). Moreover, it also follows a streamlined listing of responsibilities of the whole organization and that of articulate advantages. The NASA space center in Florida is considerably the most active center. It supports the organizations operations management and also the techniques and procedures of launching off variety of rockets and the spacecrafts.

Organization structure

The organizational structure of the teams involved in the management and running of the organization are quite distinct. The ground team is consisted of various departments operating under one overall manager and the deputy manager of the multi-mission ground system and service program office (Gorn & Aldrin 2005). Directly under these are the branch services managers. These include the manager for Ops, the manager for the program planning and implementation, the manager for the mission interface, the manager for configuration management and the program office assistant. With all these people in charge, the ground is well managed. Moreover, there are the organizational departments of the ground team as well. These include the computing, communications and configuration section, the navigation and mission design section, mission planning and sequencing department, mission control, data management and accountability and spacecraft analysis department, instrument operations system section and the mult-mission integration, test and deployment department.

Organization hierarchy diagram

Policies and procedures

The NASA institution has a strict adherence to the policies and procedures that it holds dear and very much promotes. Such policies that NASA prioritizes include the health and safety of its employees, contractors other tenants and resident agencies (Gorn & Aldrin, 2005). Any threat, harassment or disruptive actions that cause any form of harm are prohibited. Second policy is that all contractors, workers and resident agencies must comply with workplace regulations and applicable state laws. The authority is exercised according to the national aeronautics and space act. The other acts governing the security policy, occupational health and office procedural requirements are also upheld.

In NASA, there is also the NASA Employees Benefits Association, which manages the welfare of the employees. Under this association, there are some policies that govern the conduct of the worker and the authority. The procedures of the work and work details are also read out to the workers or posted to them so as to facilitate the relations of the working atmosphere. Bylaws that are set have to be evaluated by the director's board. The procedural organization of the NASA follows the hierarchy of organizational structure. The procedures also recognize the practice of chain of command.

Communication channels

The backbone of NASA, just like every other organization, is communication. NASA has several dependable space communication and navigation system networks. All the space missions are coordinated from the ground hence without effective communication mechanisms, difficulties arise in the operations. These communication channels are in various forms such as the telemetry system of tracking and commanding. This is required by every spacecraft to transfer vital data to the systems on the ground so as to manage the space operations accordingly. Moreover, it is useful for transmitting all human voice communications with the flight missions and transferring data over all earth and other space science missions (Goodloe, Person & International Symposium on NFM, 2012).

NASA's communication channels and navigation information are provided by three integral networks. These include the Near Earth Network (NEN), the Space Network (SN) and the related Tracking And Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) and the Deep Space Network (DSN) (Gorn & Aldrin, 2005). When the communication fails, there are bound to be detrimental results. The networks providing services to NASA offer video feeds for the major spaceflight missions, promoting transparency.

Micro analysis

Based on the 7s framework model, the Apollo mission had difficulties because of the strategies involved in linking the ground and the space teams. In both teams, there was a discrepancy as the strategy applied in coordinating the mission had a gap at some point. The communication breakdown was a creation of poor strategy on part of both teams planning (Mahler, 2009). The Apollo team of NASA faced more strategy and planning difficulties as the hit the craft got could have been manageable.

Problems identification Force field analysis with the hardware and the repairs needed were not done. Moreover, the international space stations are usually heavy on schedule, therefore it is important to consult (Mahler, 2009). Safety issue is important; therefore there should be installation of force gauge to determine the force of craft propulsion.

Recommendations

In view of the Apollo situation, I wish to recommend that the strategy of coordinating the space and ground team be changed, moreover, the force field is limited. Hence the ground software and hardware should also be upgraded regularly. The space shuttle programs from the international space stations also are significant. It should be considered to determine the landing for the spacecraft. Also the safety union of NASA should be made more independent so as stop the incidences of critical missions elements.

Conclusion

NASA has progressed significantly with its purpose to engage the outside world. Therefore the crash landing of the Apollo should not discourage the efforts that it has made towards success. The mission should continue with much precaution in place.