THE LOSS OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA: PORTAGING THE LEADERSHIP LESSONS WITH A CRITICAL THINKING MODEL

THE LOSS OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA: PORTAGING THE LEADERSHIP LESSONS WITH A CRITICAL THINKING MODEL

R. Niewoehner, C. Steidle (2008).  THE LOSS OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA: PORTAGING THE LEADERSHIP LESSONS WITH A CRITICAL THINKING MODEL . 17.

Business schools have long valued case studies as a tool for both broadening a student’s perspective, and provoking them to deeper consideration of complex situations. The challenge with case studies is assuring the portability of the lessons; we don’t expect students to see situations imitating those they’ve studied, hence the goal must instead be habits of mind and principles of action which the student can portage to the circumstances of their professional lives. This paper evaluates the suitability of Richard Paul’s Critical Thinking model as a template for evaluating engineering enterprise thinking habits and organizational behavior, using the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report[1] as a case study. Specifically, the authors sought to answer the following questions: “Does the Paul model of Critical Thinking provide a beneficial vocabulary and construct for evaluating complex technological case studies?” and, “Does the structure of Paul’s model enhance the portability of the lessons?” The authors determined that with minor refinement, Paul’s model provides a powerful vocabulary for complicated case study analysis, and that familiarity with the model provides students and case study participants with both a mechanism for analysis and a means for portaging lessons to other professional situations and organizations. 

Authors (New): 
Robert Niewoehner
Craig E. Steidle
Pages: 
17
Affiliations: 
United States Naval Academy, USA
Keywords: 
Critical thinking
Space Shuttle Columbia
case study
Year: 
2008
Reference: 
Gehman, H.W. et. al., Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Report Volume 1[CAIB], August 2003. : 
Paul, R.W. and Elder, L., Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle, NJ, 2002. : 
Paul, R.W. and Elder, L., Critical Thinking: How To Prepare Students For A Rapidly Changing World, Foundation for Critical Thinking, Sonoma, CA, 1995.: 
www.criticalthinking.org [accessed 15 Dec 2007] : 
Paul, R.W. and Elder, L., A Miniature Guide to Scientific Thinking, Foundation for Critical Thinking, Sonoma, CA, 2003.: 
Paul, R.W., Niewoehner, R.J., and Elder, L., A Miniature Guide to Engineering Reasoning, Foundation for Critical Thinking, Sonoma, CA, 2006. : 
Moore, David T. Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis, Joint Military Intelligence College, Occasional Paper 14, May 2006, pg. 2. : 
Tufte, Edward R. Visual Explanations, (Graphics Press: Cheshire CT, 1997), pg. 45ff.: 
The CAIB expresses this as a lamentation: “Organizations with strong safety cultures generally acknowledge that a leader’s best response to unanimous consent is to play devil’s advocate and encourage an exhaustive debate. Mission Management Team leaders failed to seek out such minority opinions. Imagine the difference if any Shuttle manager had simply asked, ‘Prove to me that Columbia has not been harmed.’,” pg. 192. : 
Go to top
randomness