5 ms·

> Also, the korean culturalism developed when the overly formal/seniority centric cockpit of Korean Airlines was identified as a key contributor to a poor safet

> Also, the korean culturalism developed when the overly formal/seniority centric cockpit of Korean Airlines was identified as a key contributor to a poor safety record with some korean airlines. identified by whom? with what credibility? The whole point of the article is refuting that hypothesis. You've done nothing but restate that thought, without adding any more weight to it.

ghshephard 13y ago
Some citations regarding cockpit culture issues - I recall reading about them before Gladwell's book. Gladwell just put his own (somewhat hyperbolic) twist on them. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/business/new-standards-mean-korean-air-is-coming-off-many-shun-lists.html http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/business/new-standards-mea... Here is an excellent article on the safety issues with Korean Airlines in the 1990s - much of it, btw, conflicting with the OP's description. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB933090613281869060-search.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB933090613281869060-search.ht...
notahacker 13y ago
Identified by both the (US) National Transportation Safety board and Korean Air themselves, both of whom have considerably more credibility than Gladwell or Korean bloggers who get their accident stats wrong when trying to put him right (two passengers died on Flight 902, not "nearly half") Here's a article about how bad the situation was in the late 1990s, published nearly a decade before Gladwell got in on the act. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/575544.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/575544.stm It's generally believed that South Korean airlines have addressed a lot of those problems through changes to the organisational culture and better training, but after a crash which initially looks like a significant error by the flight crew, it's not wholly unreasonable to ask if the pattern is re-emerging.

ghshephard 13y ago

Some citations regarding cockpit culture issues - I recall reading about them before Gladwell's book. Gladwell just put his own (somewhat hyperbolic) twist on them. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/business/new-standards-mean-korean-air-is-coming-off-many-shun-lists.html http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/business/new-standards-mea... Here is an excellent article on the safety issues with Korean Airlines in the 1990s - much of it, btw, conflicting with the OP's description. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB933090613281869060-search.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB933090613281869060-search.ht...

notahacker 13y ago

Identified by both the (US) National Transportation Safety board and Korean Air themselves, both of whom have considerably more credibility than Gladwell or Korean bloggers who get their accident stats wrong when trying to put him right (two passengers died on Flight 902, not "nearly half") Here's a article about how bad the situation was in the late 1990s, published nearly a decade before Gladwell got in on the act. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/575544.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/575544.stm It's generally believed that South Korean airlines have addressed a lot of those problems through changes to the organisational culture and better training, but after a crash which initially looks like a significant error by the flight crew, it's not wholly unreasonable to ask if the pattern is re-emerging.