How Would You Characterize the Broader Context Surrounding the January 1986 Teleconference

1. How would you characterize the broader context surrounding the January 1986 teleconference? What impact might that have on the group's decision making process?

The teleconferencing call was organized as there was a potential issue in Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) technology. The steel case of SRB was divided into segments joined and sealed by O-rings. The issue was a known issue and earlier the flights have been successful regardless of the issue, but it was a major concern as the SRB technology design which includes secondary O-ring have shown erosion of primary O-ring. If the primary O-ring is eroded then the secondary O-ring instead of acting as a back up could actually reduce the chances of joint sealing. Erosion of primary O-ring was increasing flight per flight and so is the risk. This prompted NASA to increase the criticality of rating of primary O-ring. This criticality escalation was not communicated properly within Thiokol, the contactor firm for SRB technology. Boisjoly, the engineer and expert on booster seal joints was performing post flight analysis understood the gravity of the situation and raised a red flag within the organization. As a result an unofficial task force is created to solve the O-ring problems, but unsatisfied with the progress and attitude of task force towards the problem Boisjoly wrote a memo to his boss Bob Lund warning the grave consequences of uncorrected O-rings, especially in low temperature launches as it make rubber O-ring harden and difficult to seal. Due to this one teleconference is arranged between Thiokol and NASA on January 27, 1986 at 5.45 EST and then a second subsequent call at 8.45 EST to include broader audience. The call was made on the eve of launch and this was the first time when Thiokol was raising serious concerns on the flight of shuttle. Also the Challenger flight was delayed seven times earlier and there was pressure on NASA to maintain congressional funding.

There was a visible element of bias from NASA's side to make launch successful without any delay which make them question the validity of analysis done by Thiokol. This might lead to group think as the in a group with NASA, Thiokol individuals may make riskier decisions than they would have taken themselves. The view which is popular might thrive in the teleconference call. NASA as they are more inclined towards the launch may be able to push their views. On the other hand the Thiokol which has most of its concern on observation

...