3 ms·
Of course there's bias. If he had rubber-stamped it there would be no story to tell. His decision would have been questioned after the fact, he would defer to
by _kb 2y ago
Of course there's bias. If he had rubber-stamped it there would be no story to tell.
His decision would have been questioned after the fact, he would defer to information from levels below, and this would recurse until responsibility had dissipated beyond and any personal attribution. The same pattern happens in every org, every day (to decisions of mostly lesser affect).
The key point—at least from my read—were the follow up actions to highlight where information was intentionally ignored, prevent that dispersion of responsibility, and ensure it didn't happen again.
- pdonis 2y ago> the follow up actions to highlight where information was intentionally ignored, prevent that dispersion of responsibility, and ensure it didn't happen again. Unfortunately, while that specific problem did not happen again, the general cultural changes that were supposed to happen had been lost 15 years later. The loss of Columbia in 2003 was due to the same kind of poor decision making and problem solving process that was involved in the loss of Challenger.