Essay Instructions: This report must focus on Joe Kilminster and the ethics of the launch. I will be emailing you more directions.
The book is called "The Challenger Launch Decision" Author is Diane Vaughan. The report is focused on a character that I chose from the book, his name is Joe Kilminster. The report must focus on him. I have more detailed instructions to email whoever is doing this. Below is a brief description of the assignment.
Students are expected to read, understand and report a critical review of a real world event. They are to: (1) Look for examples of professional ethics (compliance or violation), (2) Cite their professional perspective using a selected standard or code of conduct, and (3) publish a report which will include but is not limited to:
?V Introduction
?V Problem Statement
?V Purpose Statement
?V Objective of the Report
?V Review of Literature
?V Findings and Conclusions
?V Recommendations
Here is the source for this order:
HOW TO COMPLETE THE WRITTEN REPORT DISCUSSING THE ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND/OR ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS INVOLVED IN THE CHALLENGER LAUNCH DECISION
A Case Study and Character Review of (Joe Kilminster)
SAMPLE TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION ?K?K?K3
Problem Statement ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K4
Purpose of the Study ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K.?K?K?K?K?K.?K5
Objectives of the Study?K ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K.?K6
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K...7
Supporting Chapters ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K..7
Additional Pertinent Material ?K?K?K9
Summary of the Literature 10
III. FINDINGS ?V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11
Findings & Conclusion from the Search of the Literature 11
Recommendations 12
APPENDIX ?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K.14
REFERENCES?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K?K.16
INTRODUCTION:
This pamphlet has been developed as a primer to assist in the development of your case study written report. After you have selected and been approved for your case study character you may ask yourself ??How problem identification begins and what process or procedures apply as I work to define and ultimately derive a recommendation to the specific example in the case study??? You may also wonder (or wander a bit as well) how to begin collecting factual evidence and then how to best interpret those facts. This pamphlet will help you with that effort and precludes but does not exclude the necessity to seek help from other texts to accomplish your creative writing assignment.
The approach will be one of emphasizing the basic application of procedures in a methodical manner ?V we will rely on a bit of common sense as well. One might say that the only thing common about common sense is that it is uncommon ?V nonetheless your experiences to date will almost certainly affect your findings and the report you write ?V the review of your written product will measure you on how well you develop your position and explain it. Your worldview is part of who you are and as we work to expand your experience base you will be challenged to qualify and/or quantify your conclusions.
You should use factual evidence gathered from reviews of literature, however the basic fact gathering phase of this ??investigation?? could work as a critical review of a real-time, and real-world event. You will effectively become a ??Blue Ribbon Panel?? of one, reviewing the facts against the law (as you know and understand it) -- tasked to look beyond mere compliance ?V asking ??Is this ethical??? Hopefully and soon you will begin to see a professional level of integrity or standard beyond mere regulatory compliance ?V a goal of this course.
Your objective is to provide a complete and objective report, concisely written with a focus on the professional integrity of the individual character study and even the organization within which they functioned. Your objective is to write your findings and conclusions in a compelling manner so as to hopefully reduce future risk in the management of complex technologies. Strive to look beyond the individual meeting (or failing to meet) the ??letter of the law?? and use your understanding of canons of ethics, such as that provided by the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) and other professional societies, as a guideline for your determinations.
Feel free to use any and all material available to you. In addition to your directed readings you will find a virtual gold mine of information relating to the actions which led from the selection of Morton-Thiokol as the supplier of Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) for the Space Transportation System to the actual launch of the STS-51L mission. You only need to reference enough material to support your hypothesis, findings, conclusions and recommendations. Along your journey you should look and hopefully recognize not only the emotions but the facts surrounding the critical decisions leading to the actual catastrophic event. Asking questions along the way will help you focus your case study, ??Are the assumptions leading to the launch of STS-51L based on science, fact or a wish and are the decisions made in a consistent manner with laws, regulations and professional codes of ethics???
Your review during this case study should use a systematic approach to collect and analyze information so as to accomplish a critical investigation guided by theory and hypothesis about a presumed relationship between an individual, the technology they were involved with, the environment it was operated in, the mission they were tasked to perform and the overall management of that activity. The following five steps are considered as an appropriate scientific method to accomplish your systematic approach to this review:
1. Identify the problem
2. Review information
3. Collect data
4. Analyze data
5. Draw conclusions
6. Make Recommendations
As you begin your case study the nature of the problem must be defined. We will accomplish this by selecting one individual involved in the decisions which led to the launch of STS-51L. This could be at the early stages of SRB development or as late as the fateful night before the actual launch during the highly publicized telephone conference. Using this framework we will begin to focus from the general to the specific, first considering the ??big rocks?? then following them into the smaller issues as the data leads us. Ultimately you will need to look at the finer ??grains of sand?? in the very foundation of this event. Here you will be challenged to systematically collect and organize your material so that you can make accurate and objective observations. Although the temptation will be great, you should not begin your search looking for a ??nugget?? of knowledge, that ??AH HA!?? moment where an epiphany hits you across the forehead. This is where your problem statement will help you stay on a straight course through the vast expanse of information.
As you analyze your collection of factual data your mission is to compare it to a standard of ethical conduct in the field of engineering or the practice of managing technologies. You are not required to use the NSPE code however, since you are somewhat familiar with it by now you might consider it as a primary source and use any other examples you find necessary. (Should you find fault or deficiency with the application of a specific code.) The conclusions you make after the analysis should be based on the data you outline in your review of literature and stated as a finding of factual evidence.
Although this is not a research project, per se, you may find it helpful to use some of the tools used in conducting ethnographic research. Ethnography is a written account of anthropology dealing with scientific descriptions of individual cultures. Anthropology is a science that deals with the origins, development, and characteristics of humankind, including such factors as customs, beliefs, and cultural development. To project this into our review we can describe our ethnographic review as:
The process of providing a holistic and scientific description of
systems, processes and phenomena within their specific contexts.
Since ethics have evolved from customs, practices and beliefs during the development of our modern day culture I hope that you can begin to see, more clearly, the way ahead. Our study will focus on individuals and organizations which consist of defined groups of people interacting in a structured manner. Are they behaving ethically? This is a question you may pose in your report. Keep in mind that organizations are composed of cultures made up of perspectives. You most certainly have heard the statement, ??perception is reality?? -- If an individual, or organizational, perspective is that due process has been accomplished during deliberations, are they in fact ethical from a professional management of technologies point of view? Have they violated, law, regulation, codes of ethics or even more ill-defined standards of practice and techniques (best practices) used over time?
In the early, (conjecture) phase of your investigation, you will find it useful to develop a hypothesis or hypotheses. Keep in mind; you are working towards a conclusion which should include recommendations. A hypothesis is a ??guess?? at the solution to a problem or situation. As you collect data during your study, hypotheses will be formed and even modified. You may only have one as you begin, however the data may lead you to others which compel you to modify, discard and introduce new hypotheses. There are no limits to the numbers. Don??t be surprised if your ??guess?? changes as you review the literature (factual evidence).
Now, it is time to get started ?V follow these steps to begin your effort:
?? Complete your directed readings
?? Review any supporting references you find necessary
?? Make a few notes along the way relating to individual or organizational professional ethics ?V collect reference material for quotes, and hypothesis supporting citations
?? Select a character to review as part of your case study
?? Identify a professional ethics related problem with that characters actions and make a statement about it (you may also comment about the institutional or overall organizational issues while discussing this character)
?? Write an introduction section to your identified problem
?? Identify the specific purpose and objectives or your report
You are now ready to begin writing section one of your reports.
SECTION I:
Writing the Introduction, Problem Statement, Purpose and Objectives of your Case Study
This section will be the most challenging. Starting a journey without a clear idea of where you are headed will certainly cause you to trace a circuitous course to your final destination. If you use this pamphlet as your guide you will be able to assemble the key components of your written report in a systematic manner ?V building upon the sections until you have a final product, deliberately working toward the final objective. You will find it impossible to do this without reading the material ?V some have tried and failed ?V one more ??hulk?? in the ??bone yard?? won??t make either of us happy.
As you absorb the directed reading assignment you will begin to see areas of interest, eventually selecting a problem area for your case study. This will be an aspect of the overall case study which you wish to focus on. A ??brainstorming?? approach will help you in the beginning ?V make notes along the way as you read your reference materials ?V this will help you as you begin writing. Using 3x5 cards may help you in this endeavor. Any method that helps you collect facts, catalog the material and begin the assembly of your written report will do ?V this effort is about product not style, although the amount of effort you make reflects in your written product and minimizes the effort I need to put forth to keep you on the course you charted in this section.
You may find yourself selecting a character before you have finished the directed reading or other reference materials of your choosing. Keep in mind you will be evaluating your selected objectives against the reference material in section III of this report ?V keeping yourself on course throughout this process is a discipline you may find challenging.
In the brainstorming phase you should try to search out possibilities, looking broadly and attempting to suppress biases or preconceived notions as much as possible. After searching as broad a background as possible in the general problem area, you should then start evaluating the information you have gathered, sorting and organizing it. As you begin narrowing your problem area, there are several pertinent questions you should ask. These questions are addressed in the problem and data question paragraphs below.
To help you self-assess whether you are ready to begin accomplishing your written assignment, use the checklist below to begin to assimilate the components of the introductory section of your report.
Produce a draft copy of the:
1. Title page
2. Introduction ?V a background ??executive summary?? of the subject to be discussed
3. Problem statement
4. Purpose of your case study (This is a concise statement relating to the coursework as outlined in the syllabus. It should include your selected character of ethical study and how you intend to relate the subject??s behavior to a professional code of conduct
5. Objectives (Questions to be answered or hypotheses should be listed here)
Developing the Title
After you have decided on an ethical area of interest for your case study, your next step is to clearly and concisely develop the title. Titles are usually stated as a declarative sentence or phrase. Usually "A Study of" is omitted from the title to aid in conciseness. The journalism questions Who? What?, When? And Where? are helpful in determining when enough information has been included. (See attachment 1)
Introducing the Problem
In establishing the background of the problem for your study, using a ??funnel approach?? will be helpful, this means moving from a broad to narrow focus. In the beginning a brief, broad overview is helpful to establish the setting of the problem. This leads to the need for the study as indicated by the factors in the setting you establish in your introduction. The need can then be narrowed as you ??zero in?? on your specific points to be reviewed in the study. If the above steps have been followed, they should establish the format of deductive reasoning which will help establish the rationale of your case study. Once the rationale is established, the finest point of our funneled approach is drawn out by adding the usefulness. The case is then made for the study which leads us to a concise statement of the problem. Literature sources should be cited to verify statements and information. This helps establish the theoretical construct or foundation of the study. (See attachment 2)
THE FUNNELED APPROACH TO PROBLEM DEVELOPMENT
A broad overview of the background and setting of the problem lays the
foundation for the need of the study which is established by relating
factors creating the problem. The importance of the study
is signified by indicating theoretical value, groups, and
people affected which leads to the overall reasons
for the study called rationale. This is the basis
for usefulness in our study of ethics, and
how it affects management of
complex technologies
Developing a Problem Statement
The problem statement should summarize in a few words why the study is being done. Care should be exercised at this point to ensure that the problem is within your capability and can be accomplished with the resources available. In other words, is the scope of the study realistic? Careful attention should be directed at this point to ensure that the title and the problem statement agree. One problem plaguing many studies is the lack of consistency between the title, problem, and purpose, review of literature, findings, and conclusions. All components must agree as to direction and guide the reader from the problem through its solution.
You may have noticed in the lectures a few questions posed to stimulate thought about ethical behavior. By asking yourself questions such as these you can begin to zero in on identifying a case study problem statement. Questions that are relevant to the subject under review will help you identify a problem to make a statement about. The most important characteristic of your problem statement is that it must provide adequate focus and direction for your case study. The selection of a ??problem?? involves reading, discussing and conceptualizing facts, specific interactions, and results of decisions either supported or unsupported by professional standards of conduct. By selecting one person in the study of the Challenger launch decision you will have narrowed your focus to a specific sequence of events that were affected by this case study character and reviewed with a specific perspective searching for examples of professional ethics and how they affected the eventual outcome. (See attachment 3)
Establishing the Purpose
Up to this point, we have been establishing the problem or the reasons why the study needed to be done. With the statement of the purpose we clearly indicate what we intend to do in our study. It should be a clear, concise, goal statement giving direction to your future actions. This can be broken down into specific indicators of direction using statements of objectives, questions, or hypotheses. (See attachment 4)
Objectives, Questions, and Hypotheses
Specific direction is given to the study through the objectives, questions, or hypotheses. Objectives should be written in measurable terms which can be used to determine the achievement of those objectives. Questions should be asked in such a way that the answers will adequately achieve the purpose in mind. Hypotheses are your ??guess?? and if stated should ultimately use factual evidence to support why you think your opinion is valid.
If the objectives, questions, or hypotheses achieve the purpose, then they will also address the problem provided that the problem and purpose are in agreement. The review of literature and the writer??s experience, along with my counsel, should provide the background for the development of the objectives, questions, or hypotheses, should you chose to use them.
By posing questions you can compel the reader to ponder the outcome of influences at the 1. Organizational Level; 2. Supervisory Level; 3. Preconditional Level; or in the immediate area under study, the 4. Individual Act. These four main tiers are used to help mishap investigators, researchers and those accomplishing a case study to look beyond the immediate act in search of the source of the event. This may only be a superficial piece of information -- ??mining?? deeper toward the root with a investigative perspective to contributing factors best describes the influences which led to the final outcome. In this manner we will hopefully better understand the erosive effect of subtle variations, deviance or abandonment of the canons of professional conduct in the operation of high-risk technologies.
Problem Questions
Problem areas in technical fields of endeavor often manifest themselves as hazards, or threats to safe and reliable operations. You will sometimes notice these ??problems?? surrounded by high profile mishaps such as the catastrophic loss of the STS Orbiter ??Challenger??. As you search to develop your problem statement ask yourself; is the problem I am studying significant enough to define? Has the problem been studied before and do you intend to agree or disagree with previous assessments or ??conventional wisdom??? What were the results in previous reviews? Is the problem broad enough for study, yet narrow enough to be able to reach a conclusion and solution? Is the terminology used in the problem formulation specific, understandable and clearly stated? Is the problem clearly related to prior studies? Can I relate this problem to an area of ethical study within our coursework?
Data Questions
As you digest the directed reading ask yourself are the needed data readily available and accessible to address my chosen character of study and to develop a problem statement? If not, what additional sources of data are needed? Does the data already exist for the basis of a solution to the problem or will new information be needed? (FYI ?KThe directed reading does contain enough information for you to develop your case.) You may choose to seek additional sources to support your hypotheses ?V this is your prerogative. You may choose ANY source as a professional code of conduct. You may even use multiple sources to develop an integrated code that you hypothesize would have better served the individuals/organization as they struggled with questions posed by unexpected outcomes in the management of the Space Transportation System. (See attachment 5)
Assumptions, Limitations, and Scope
Caveats may be necessary to help you better define the case study. They may be listed as assumptions, limitations, and scope of your study.
Assumptions may be needed to indicate ideas, theories, or facts which must be considered valid in order to conduct the study. They should be well recognized as valid or have other empirical bases to establish their acceptance. The use of reference citations should accompany any assumption other than yours or which you have chosen to support a hypothesis or position.
Limitations are factors which are recognized to exist and may affect your ability to be 100% sure of the accuracy of the case study. An example would be; in the conduct of your forensic review of the Challenger mishap you have no control over discovering new facts. These should not be confused with the scope or size of the case study, number of participants, etc. This should also not be used as an excuse for failing to use multiple sources which may offer contrary statements of fact, reviewing factual evidence in an objective manner or calling into question a premise made by others who have studied this case and drawn questionable conclusions from the selected evidence. (See attachment 6)
Final Words on Section I:
With this first section complete you are now ready to report your review of literature. That review should be constructed to support the purpose and objectives outlined in this section.
SECTION II:
The Review of Literature
Under Construction
SECTION III:
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
Under Construction
CONCLUSION:
Index, References Charts and Tabs
Under Construction
Attachment 1 - Titles
Examples of Titles are listed below to help you select and define your work:
A Comparison of Selected Characteristics of Engineers involved in NASA Management of Space Transportation System Orbiters (1978 to 1986) and how these observations relate to Professional Standards Conduct.
-or-
Program Management Patterns of Behavior within NASA; Ethical or Not?
-or-
The Influence of NASA??s Organizational Culture on Individual Integrity in the Management of High Risk Technologies.
Attachment 2 - Introduction:
On January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger was launched from the Kennedy Space Center for another routine mission ?V it lasted 73 seconds before a spectacular explosion doomed the ill fated flight -- all seven perished and a nation was stunned.
In the wake of the tragedy, a Presidential Commission searched for answers. The technical reason for the Challenger??s disintegration was pinpointed to a failed seal in the aft field joint of the right Solid Rocket Booster (SRB). The investigation also delved into the events leading up to the launch of Challenger in an effort to uncover the logic, methodology, and actions of the individuals involved and their organizations.
The Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) is manufactured for NASA by a contractor, Morton Thiokol Inc of Utah. MTI has held the SRB contract since the shuttle program inception and was heavily invested in that technology with production facilities, specialized personnel and management expertise of complex technologies. The commitment to space exploration and meeting schedule demands induced MTI and NASA personnel to mismanage early warning signs of potential SRB problems. In the summer of 1985, new information acquired from a post flight inspections, prompted MTI, at NASA insistence, to establish a special task force (O-Ring Investigation Task Force) of which Mr. John Smith was a member, in an attempt to fast track solutions to growing concerns over seal reliability. Thiokol??s internal processes, directives and commitment to the seal technology, thwarted the Task Force??s charter and actions. Thiokol management was attempting to be preemptive by establishing the Task Force, yet the existing policies and business climate supported by management, were in direct conflict with the stated goals of the task force. This conflict places Mr. Smith and the O-ring team in an ethical dilemma of meeting their charter while supporting the unwritten goals and policies of the organization.
This type of conflict sometimes occurs in organizations and is not unique to an individual market segments like space exploration. Established ethical precepts like those of the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) provide a standard for engineers to subscribe to. Yet in actual practice, the daily events that an engineer encounters are not always as black or white as the Code of Ethics from the NSPE portrays. The case of Mr. Smith and the O-Ring Investigation Task Force provides an opportunity to investigate the ethical dilemma that engineers can be unwittingly placed in when organizational conflict is present.
How does an engineer maintain his/her ethical standards when their organization has conflicting policies or goals and how does an Engineer conduct themselves when their ethical standards are assaulted by conflict stemming from corporate polices and a dynamic marketplace? This paper will attempt to answer these questions by utilizing the activities associated with the O-Ring Investigation Task Force. The evaluation can serve as a potential guide for the practicing engineer.
Attachment 3 ?V Problem Statement
Example of Problem Statement:
Because of the complexity of integrating NASA personnel with contractors, including engineers, scientists and managers in heavily matrixed organizational structures, an ethics focused study of professional behavior is deemed necessary. The need for continued study in correlating organizational culture, individual personalities and professional codes of conduct is viewed as a valuable lesson learned for all current and future managers of technologies to prevent future recurrence of undesirable and catastrophic events. This study will be of value in assisting students in their attempt to better understand the differences between academic situations with textbook ??perfect solutions?? and the pressures often felt in high-pressure and resource limited real-world scenarios. This information will be valuable as a reference for administrators, directors, supervisors, managers, and individuals working with high risk and complex technologies.
Attachment 4 ?V Purpose Statement
Examples of Purpose Statements:
The purpose of this case study is to review patterns of behavior of Morton-Thiokol contractors as demonstrated in their interaction with managers at NASA and compare those observations to the canons of ethics, as addressed by the IEEE, and applicable to licensed professional engineers.
- or -
The purpose of this study is to determine the applicability of the basic core values as stated in the NSPE Code of Ethics, and how they were applied to management of Space Transportation Systems at NASA by program managers.
Attachment 5 ?V Objective/Question/Hypothesis
Example of Objectives:
The objectives of this study are to: (1) Identify and study _______ (key person in the launch decision of the Challenger) (2) List, according to importance, selected examples of professional ethics supported by a professional society such as the NSPE. (3) List, according to importance, selected examples of professional ethics or logic which fail to meet the canons of the NSPE. (4) To compare the findings of others reviews and identify significant differences which may exist between perceptions held by these different reviews. (5) Determine, what kind of leadership training program should be provided to ensure cultural bias is removed from the integration of two cultures managing a common complex technology.
Example of a Question:
Would an ??ethical?? engineer allow the use of a flouroelastomer O-ring seal as a primary and/or secondary sealant against hazardous conditions in a man-rated vehicle when they knew it would be used in temperatures outside of its functional operating envelope?
Example of a Hypothesis:
There is no significant relationship between membership in a professional society, such as the IEEE, and personal integrity when faced with job related scheduling pressures which may affect whether that individual retains or loses their primary source of income.
Attachment 6 ?V Assumptions/Scope
Example of a Personal Assumption:
For the purposes of this case study, the following assumption was made by the investigator: That engineers could provide accurate performance data of the basic operational characteristics of Viton (V747) fluoroelastomers in varying temperatures.
Examples of Scope Statements:
This case study addresses the following violations of the codes of professional conduct as viewed by the NSPE.
-or-
The only subjects discussed were those reviewed in the directed reading.
-or-
The case study was limited to a comparison which could be administered in a limited context of material available in the OSU library.
-or-
The questions of ethics were only asked of those licensed professionals involved with the launch decision of the Challenger.
