This is a Project Managment Question from Case study \"The Space Shuttle Challen

Question

This is a Project Managment Question from Case study "The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster"

Risk Managment plan Question

- would there have been a better way to handle risk managment planning at NASA assuming 16 flights per year, 25 flights per year, or as originally planned, 60 flights per year? Why is the number of flights per year critical in designing a formalized risk management?

Risk Control Question:

- If you were on a jury attempting to place liability, whom would you say was responsible for the Challenger disaster?

Thanks in Advance

Explanation / Answer

Before attempting the risk management question, let us define in basic terms what it simply means.

Risk is something which can arise anytime anywhere. Risk is basically any instance which is exposed to danger. There is risk in business, which is risk of losses and closure of business. There is risk in life, which is risk of dying due or any misfortune accident, etc.

Thus, Risk Management is any situation where such risks are properly managed; possible arrival of risks are pre-planned and analyzed, so that when they actually arrive, the risky situation can be dealt with no or minimal damage.

For better understanding, let us take one industry in general. Finance.

In the financial world, risk management is the process of identification, analysis and acceptance or mitigation of uncertainty and such risky instances in investment decisions. Essentially, risk management occurs when an investor or fund manager analyzes and attempts to quantify the potential for losses in an investment and then takes the appropriate action or sometimes even inaction given his investment objectives and risk tolerance.

Risk management occurs everywhere in the financial world spectrum. For instance, It can occur when an investor buys low-risk government bonds over riskier corporate bonds, when a fund manager hedges his currency exposure with currency derivatives, and when a bank performs a credit check on an individual before issuing a personal line of credit in the form of loan or other related products. Stockbrokers use financial instruments like options and futures, and money managers use strategies like portfolio and investment diversification to mitigate and/or effectively manage risk.

Inadequate risk management can result in severe or unwanted consequences for companies, individuals, and for the economy. For example, the subprime mortgage meltdown in 2007 that helped trigger the Great Recession stemmed from poor risk-management decisions, such as lenders who extended mortgages to individuals with poor credit, investment firms who bought, packaged, and resold these mortgages, and funds that invested excessively in the repackaged, but still risky, mortgage-backed securities, which eventually proved fatal.

Now, similarly, in our case 'The space shuttle CHALLENGER disaster', there was always risk of the mission failing. If certain risk management steps would have been precisely taken, the mission would have been successful, or at least dealt with minimum harm.

If you go through the case study precisely, you will know that the failure was caused by the failure of O-ring seals used in the joint that were not designed to handle the unusually cold conditions that existed at this launch. The seal's failure caused a breach in the SRB joint, allowing pressurized burning gas from within the solid rocket motor to reach the outside and impinge upon the adjacent SRB aft field joint attachment hardware and external fuel tank. This led to the separation of the right-hand SRB's aft field joint attachment and the structural failure of the external tank of the shuttle. Aerodynamic forces broke up the orbiter, which was catastrophic.

The crew compartment and many other vehicle fragments were eventually recovered from the ocean floor after a lengthy search and recovery operation carried out. The exact timing of the death of the crew is though unknown, but several crew members are known to have survived the initial breakup of the spacecraft. The shuttle had surprisingly no escape system, and the impact of the crew compartment with the ocean surface was too violent to be survivable.

The disaster resulted in a 32-month hiatus in the shuttle program and the formation of the Rogers Commission, a special commission appointed by United States President Ronald Reagan to investigate the fatal accident. The Rogers Commission found NASA's organizational culture and decision-making processes had been key contributing factors to the fatal accident, with the agency violating its own safety rules. NASA managers had known since 1977 that contractor Morton-Thiokol's design of the SRBs contained a potentially catastrophic flaw in the O-rings, but they had failed to address this problem effectively. NASA managers also disregarded warnings from special engineers about the dangers of launching posed by the low temperatures of that morning, and failed to adequately report these technical concerns to their superiors.

This tells us that the accident could have been easily be averted if there was effective risk management done and efficient decisions would have been taken post-risk management.

The number of flights is critical in the cases of NASA, because more the flights, more the need of effective and efficient risk management and decision making processes to be precise.

Lives are involved. Millions of dollars are at stake. Many other important attributes are involved in a single flight. If, like in the case of the challenger, such silly mistakes are done in a situation of grave danger and importance, then it is even more stupid to increase the number of overall flights launched by NASA.

Officials at NASA were warned, and they acted unheard. How worse can it get? Less number of flights, means more people involved in planning and executing risk management and proper decision making in that particular mission, which is indeed much needed.

Thus, considering the number of flights proves vital in designing the risk management process.

Now talking about Risk Control, it is a step of the hazard management process that involves dealing with the risk in question. Risk control is generally carried out in a hierarchical way, wherein the elimination of the risk is considered optimal (and at the top of the hierarchy), whereas personal protective equipment is considered to be the least effective option, and therefore sits at the bottom on the given hierarchy. Controlling risk is a key aspect of maintaining a safe workplace, here NASA. Risk assessment is the first step toward effective and proper risk control. It includes identification of risks, degree of risk, personnel at risk and why they, or the situation, are at risk.

Risks must be controlled according to the following steps:

Now, if I was a jury, would obviously blame the NASA itself, as in the above answer and the part of the case given, it shows obvious flaws in the O-rings’ of the shuttle, which is a part wholly advised and used by the main engineers and officials in NASA. There is history of such rings being unadvisable, but NASA acted deaf. Many special engineers have voted against the launching of the shuttle in the cold weather condition, as those rings cannot handle such cold pressure, but these warnings were disregarded by NASA. Even the Roger's commission found directly flaws in organizational structure and decision making processes of NASA, and they had eventually broken their own rules, which resulted this catastrophic event

There is a list of flaws against NASA's side regarding this mishap. Some of them are noted above. Thus, there is no second thought, at least on my side, before blaming NASA.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.