Organizational failures and communication breakdowns in the Challenger disaster

Challenger Disaster

Is any one part, group or organization responsible for the disaster?

On January 28, 1986 the space shuttle Challenger exploded minutes after it took off from the launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. At the heart of this disaster, were a number of challenges surrounding: NASA and the different subcontractors they were working with. (Space Shuttle Challenger Case Study n.d.) to fully understand the overall scope of these issues requires examining: the communication, leadership / stress associated with the project and the influence of the media. Together, these different elements will provide the greatest insights, as to the role of these organizations in contributing to the disaster.

Communication

At all the levels inside NASA and at the different subcontractors they were working with, there were significant breaks downs in communication. This took place both inside the organizations themselves and the way that they were interacting with NASA. What happened was top level managers and supervisors, were often overlooking the concerns of engineers. This is because, many of these issues were not considered to be a significant threat and there was no sense of urgency, to communicate any kind of information (to the highest levels). (Space Shuttle Challenger Case Study n.d.) Over the course of time, this became problematic as a number of different design flaws were contributing to the overall risks surrounding a shuttle launch. These elements played a role in the disaster, as NASA personnel were not aware of: the dangers in the O. rings from the cold weather that was experienced prior to the launch. (Space Shuttle Challenger Case Study n.d.)

The Influence of the Media

Given the high profile nature of the program, meant that there were considerable pressures to be ready for the next shuttle launch. This is because, the various managers and executives wanted to maintain a favorable image of the program in the minds of the general public. The only way that this can be accomplished is through: not having these problems leaked to news media. As a result, there was pressure that was placed on: employees and managers to overlook some of the design issues. (Space Shuttle Challenger Case Study n.d.) the reason why, is because all of the negative press they would receive, if there were delays from design flaws. Once this occurred, it meant that there would be increased amounts of scrutiny over the program and its mission objectives. To avoid these kinds of situations, everyone was encouraged to remain quiet about obvious design issues on the Challenger. (Space Shuttle Challenger Case Study n.d.)

Clearly, there were a number of factors on the organizational level that contributed to the Challenger disaster to include: a lack of communication, no leadership / increased amounts of stress surrounding the project and the influence of the media. These different elements are important, because they created a culture that allowed the design flaws in O. rings to go unnoticed. This is despite the fact that engineers had concerns about: them going back to the 1970's and they were worried regarding how they reacted to cold temperatures. As a result, this means that all of these organizations played a part in contributing to the disaster.