Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

12
Challenger Launch Decision Group process in the 2010156 Piyush Tyagi 2010195 Sahil Malhotra 2010197 Saket Rathi 2010279 Vaibhav Garg 2010297 Sarita Choudha 2010298 Debashish Bagg

Transcript of Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Page 1: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Challenger Launch DecisionGroup process in the

2010156 Piyush Tyagi2010195 Sahil Malhotra2010197 Saket Rathi2010279 Vaibhav Garg2010297 Sarita Choudhary2010298 Debashish Bagg

Page 2: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Challenger Disaster

Day before launch, engineers warn about O-rings

Never tested below 53ºF

Launch would be around 40ºF

Engineers’ warnings suppressed

O-ring warning never mentioned to higher-ups

“A launch should be canceled if there is any doubts of its safety” -NASA policy

Page 3: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm
Page 4: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

ANALYSIS

• Groupthink• Group decision making• Group polarization• Inter and intra group communication

Page 5: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Groupthink

Probably most famous process loss Definition: people begin to value group

cohesiveness and solidarity more than the need to consider the facts in a realistic manner.

Can lead to disastrous decisions Challenger disaster (1986) Possibly, Columbia accident (2003)

Page 6: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

The road to groupthinkAntecedents

Group is (already) cohesive Isolated Directive leader Stress Poor decision-making rules

Symptoms– Illusion of invulnerability – Moral certainty– Stereotyped view of out-group– Self-censorship– Direct pressure to conform– Illusion of unanimity– Mind guards

Defective decision making– Incomplete survey of alternatives– Failure to examine risks of favored alternative– Poor information search– Few contingency plans

Page 7: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Specific steps to avoid groupthink

Leader—remain impartial (if possible) Seek outside opinions Create subgroups Seek anonymous opinions

Page 8: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Intragroup communication

Executive Management

Employees

Learn

Start Here

New Paradigms

EndorseSelf-Discovery

EstablishCommunities ofPractice

Page 9: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Avoiding communication gap

Providing same platform for communication Same document being shared in all respective

stakeholders Signoff from all parties effected if there is an

implication felt to be implemented

Page 10: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Group polarization Original finding (Stone, 1962) seemed to

suggest “risky shift” (!!) Newer view: group polarization, not riskiness

perse Whatever way the group is leaning initially,

members tend to polarize further in that direction

Page 11: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Example from experience

Testing in software industry Multidisciplinary testing in Airbus design

Page 12: Challenger Launch Decision Mmmmm

Thank you