The challenger disaster that took place in January 28 has led to the explosion of the shuttle itself and the death of all the crew members including the chosen teacher. A real disaster that occurred due to some wrong decisions and overriding some important information from professional employees within the company is considered a real catastrophe. Applying pressure on senior management team of the company that has developed the rocket in order to change their opinion about launching can be considered to be another catastrophe. All these misjudgment actions from the NASA team and the Morton Thiokol team have lead to the challenger real crisis.
Whistle blowing A whistle blower is a person who reveals some wrong actions done by his employer or the company he works for in an investigation or to some authority and in some cases to public and press. This is mainly the case of Boisjoly who reveled during the commission investigation all the information he had regarding the problems that they discovered within the shuttle and the way the NASA reacted towards the problem and the way Morton Thiokol ignored the problem and refused to scrub the launch and went with the launch that caused the explosion of the challenger and the death of the seven crew members.
The Essay on The Problem Of Nokia Company
Nokia has a long history of successful change and innovation, adapting to shifts in markets and technologies. From its humble beginning with one paper mill, the company has participated in many sectors over time: cables, paper products, tires, rubber boots, consumer and industrial electronics, plastics, chemicals, telecommunications infrastructure and more. Most recently, Nokia has been best known ...
Whistle blowers are heroes in the eyes of some people and they are betrayers in the eyes of other. From here rises the conflict of whistle blowers. Looking at the whole idea of whistle blowing we can easily say that this act has its harms and its benefits. Concerning benefits this would be the end of the any wrongdoing by any employer, management team or employees and this means consequences of wrong acts would be eliminated.
As for the weakness or the harm of such practice it would cause terminations for the employee who performed the whistle blowing act, the work environment if he continued would be hard because the employer and the fellow employees will always think of him as the betrayer who took the secrets of the company publicly. Conclusion Challenger exploded 73 seconds after its launch and this means that the problem was massive and it needed to be addressed. People watching the launch and families who lost beloved ones needed to know what really happened and who was responsible for their great loss.
Children who were watching their teacher joining the crew needed to know what the reason that this person died was. From all what preceded the truth should have appeared and the company should not treated Boisjoly a whistle blower because he showed the world what really happened and didn’t take into consideration the image of the company in the eyes of people and government. Failing to produce quality products and putting lives on the edge is not something that can be ignored and from here we can easily say that whistle blowers are heroes and not betrayers.
Question 1:Do you regard Boisjoly as a disloyal employee or a heroic whistle blower? Why? Boisjoly in my opinion is not a disloyal employee. Although I agree to the saying that secrets of work should not be announced to anybody outside the company but is mainly when there is something regarding progress and success key elements and not wrongdoings that causes problems. In the case of challenger, seven people died from the explosion. The company was aware of the problem and they decided to ignore it and go on with the launch of the challenger.
Boisjoly reported the problem and tried to convince the Morton Thiokol to scrub the launch but NASA had their way to convince the management to ignore everything and launch challenger. This led to the crisis. Families of the crew who died on challenger had the right to know what happened and this is what Boisjoly did and this is not betrayal but showing the truth behind a crisis. What he did also will definitely help the company make sure not ignore problems and solve them first in order not to reach this situation again.
The Term Paper on Company Description of Dewhirst Group Plc
Dewhirst Group Plc manufactures and distributes clothing and toiletries. Operations are carried out in the United Kingdom, Malaysia, Morocco and Indonesia. Manufacture of clothing accounted for 91% of revenues for the year ended 14th Jan 2000 and toiletries accounted for 9%.Competitor AnalysisDewhirst Group Plc operates in the Diversified Apparel Mfrs. sub-industry, which is a sub sector of the ...
Question 2: Did Morton Thiokol treat Boisjoly fairly? Why or why not? Explain We can easily say that the company was not fair in the way they treated Boisjoly after what happened and they have blamed him for the situation the company was facing. The environment they made him work within where he was looked at as a betrayal who took the secrets of the company out to the public and press was hard for him. They did not feel that what they did caused a disaster and they need to take responsibility for their actions. They only felt betrayed by Boisjoly and this is unfair by all means. They have treated him in a way that led to his resignation at the end because the work environment was no longer acceptable for him.
Question 3: what if anything, ought Morton Thiokol managers have done differently? Explain Looking at the problem and the disaster that occurred due to some wrongdoing from the management team of Morton Thiokol we can say that they should have considered their engineers report, they should have scrub the launch of the challenger and not accept the pressure that NASA performed on the management team to ignore the report and go on with launching. If they have done so they would have been able to overcome the disaster, solve the problem and launch challenger on latter date. The management team failed to take the right decision.
