NASA Shuttle Case Study
For this assignment we will discuss some theories on organizational change learned during this class and how they relate to the case study of NASA (The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disaster). First we will look the images of managing change used by NASA in the case study. Then we will discuss the types of change(s) NASA under took. Next we will look at some of the challenges of change that NASA faced. Next we will discuss some of the resistance to change that NASA dealt with. Then we look at how NASA implemented change. Next we will discuss vision and change and the impact in the case study. Finally we will discuss sustaining change as it relates to the changes implemented by NASA in the case study.
Images of Managing Change
Before we look at the images of managing change that were present in the NASA case study let us review a few of the key events in this case study. The case study for this assignment looks at Challenger and Columbia NASA space shuttle disasters and the commission findings on the disasters/recommendations. Now with a short review of the case study what image(s) of change are present in the case study? From the case study the changes introduced are images of managing. These changes are both management of control and shaping. As NASA recovered from the 1986 Challenger disaster, it used the classic Fayol characterization of management such as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling to correct from the top-down the issues that had caused the Challenger disaster (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.24, 2009). NASA approached the changes that need to be enacted as a result of the Challenger and also the Columbia disasters from the change image of a director. NASA accomplished this by directing the organization and controlling the changes to achieve the desired results as suggested/directed by accident commissions (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.27, 2009).
Types of Change Undertaken by NASA
Now let us discuss the types of change seen in the case study but first what was the catalyst for the change? Of course the changes ultimately are in reaction to first the Challenger and then the Columbia accidents but what pressures prompted NASA to make changes? One of these pressures for change was mandated pressure. This mandated pressure was placed on NASA by the federal government after the release of “the Rogers Commission” and their recommendations (Palmer Dunford, Akin, pg.375, 2009). Another pressure that NASA was under was that of reputation and credibility pressures. NASA is the government’s lead agency that heads up manned and un-manned space flight and it was agency that facilitated putting an American on the moon. But in 1986 the organization that had put a man on the moon had now failed and resulted in the loss of the space shuttle Challenger and the seven crewmembers. Under these pressures NASA made Second-Order Transformational changes. NASA not only made the recommended design...