A challenge to you
by Paul V. Arnold
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is one of the most emulated
organizations in the world. And for good reason. NASA means quality and
innovation. Its employees have "the right stuff." Its best practices
and training programs are the standard for corporations in any industry.
That said, it's no surprise that retired astronaut Mike Mullane recently told a crowd of
500 Society of Maintenance & Reliability Professionals members to learn from NASA.
However, his keynote address at SMRP's conference in Denver stressed learning from
the unhealthy actions and behaviors present in NASA in the early 1980s, which culminated
in the destruction of the Space Shuttle Challenger on Jan. 28, 1986.
"Challenger wasn't an accident," says Mullane, who flew on three shuttle
missions in the late 1980s. "An accident is an unforeseen act."
History links the catastrophe to failed O-rings in the right-hand solid rocket booster.
Mullane prefers to go deeper, tying it to a breakdown in teamwork.
"What kind of team do you have, and what kind do you want?" says Mullane.
"When my life is on the line, I want a team that's trained. I want a
team that communicates. I want a team that practices ownership and responsibility,
and understands the accountability that comes with responsibility.
"I want a team with great trust among its members. I want a team that
understands no matter how great things were in the past -- record profits, safety,
maintainability and reliability -- none of that makes you bullet-proof to the risks of the
future. And, I want a team filled with courageous leaders (supervisors and
non-supervisors) who aren't afraid to say, 'Hold it. This isn't right, or safe, or
the best way.'"
Mullane says the legendary NASA team lacked these critical elements in the years prior to
the Challenger flight. He says "normalization of deviance" and lack of
communication deafened NASA to warnings of defects.
"In 14 of the 24 flights before Challenger, inspections found these O-rings, which
were not to be touched by fire, were being touched by fire," he says. "The
rocket's manufacturer sent memos two years before the explosion saying, 'Your design is
flawed, it's going to fail, and people are going to die.'"
Warnings went unheeded. NASA, bowing to budget and schedule pressures, rolled the
dice. The O-rings, which received an "intoleration to deviance" label
during the design process, now were expected to show some damage. NASA believed it
was bullet-proof to failure.
Some NASA employees also knew of problems, but a lack of an open-door policy ("the
ideas of team members weren't sought") and fear (a person standing up "would
have been crucified") suppressed such thoughts.
"When a major problem occurs in such a project, it's natural to scream, 'This can't
be happening! We've invested too much time and treasure in this,'" he says.
"You look for the easy way out."
NASA changed the rocket assembly process rather than the O-ring design. The end
result was the explosion that killed seven crew members.
"You can't turn back the clock," says Mullane. "Therefore, look close
(at yourself, your company). Are you walking the Challenger path?"
This article appeared in the December 1999/January 2000 issue of MRO Today magazine.
Copyright 2000.
Back to top
Back to Editorials archives
|