The Consequence of Communication Failure Essay Example for Free

The subject of Communication Failure EssayIn the history and evolution of professional communication practices, there argon several instances that entertain greatly impacted our representing of the necessity for clear and effective technical communication. Few, however, have had such eye-opening impact that they continue to be discussed decades after their occurrence. Two such incidents to have reached this height ar concerning the Three Mile Island nuclear plant and the contest shuttle set in motion. (Martha Cooper. Three Mile Island. 1979. The Washington Post. Web. 3 July 2012) (Martha Cooper. Three Mile Island. 1979. The Washington Post. Web. 13 July 2012) In March of 1979, the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear major power plant of Middleton, PA faced near meltdown. People feared an unseen enemy radiation. B. M. Dunn had most vital teaching to the possibility of this incident prior to its occurring. Dunn relayed this information to D. F. Hallman. Hallmans memo and the involvement of those who did or did not forgather it have been under a microscope since this historical event.On January 28, 1986, another incident of failed communication occurred. The Challenger musculus quadriceps femoris shuttle was set to launch and indeed it did, but it did not make it to the intended destination as it exploded in mid-air. Prior to the launch, Roger Boisjoly had make efforts to address an issue of a possible equipment malfunction that had been pointed taboo by. Unfortunately, nothing was done to ensure the avoidance of this malfunction. In both instances, catastrophe could have been prevented. There were attempts made to address serious concern on both parts.There remains no question that or sothing to a greater extent could have been done. However, a question of great weighting and of ongoing discussion is whether that missing link lies in the communication processes, the documents themselves, or the actions of those involved in the chain of communication. A take of Nuclear Proportion In a relatively short memo written by D. F. Hallman, manager of Plant Performance function at TMI, he relays the concerns of B. M. Dunn. A problem with the practices and procedures of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant is addressed.Dunn is the manager of the requirement Core Cooling System Analysis department of Babcock Wilcox (BW), the same company that designed the nuclear nuclear reactor for the Three Mile Island power plant. (Mathes) Short, Sweet, and to the Point? Quite frankly, this memo leaves much to be desired, devoted the weight of the situation. In its entirety, it is a few brief paragraphs addressing the situation and a few questions that need to be answered promptly. It is slimly formal and lacks the urgency in tone necessary to move the reader to action.There are, however, some references attached that provide the information in much detail. These attachments aside, Hallman seems to have minimal concern for the efficiency of the a ctions required. (Hallman) Upon some background research, it is clearly seen that Hallman was not the correct person for Dunn to contact with such vital information. For a decisiveness such as this one, the concerns should have been sent to another department, one with the authority, ability and experiential knowledge to understand the gravity of the situation.Can one blame Hallman for not knowing? Could it be that he was aware of the proper destination of such information and failed to relay it there? Some questions are left unanswered. A Matter of Astronomical Consequence (Associated Press. Space Shuttle Challenger Wreckage Entombment About. com Web. 13 July 2012) (Associated Press. Space Shuttle Challenger Wreckage Entombment About. com Web. 13 July 2012) Roger Boisjoly wrote a memo addressing his concern with the possibility of O-rings that were vital in the safe launch of the Challenger space shuttle.Boisjoly was an engineer for Morton Thiokol, the manufacturer of those very O -rings. His memo was well written, with a clear layout and was tell to the proper recipient for effective action in such circumstances. The subject matter is clearly utter in the heading. After proper notation of the parties involved, Boisjoly writes with clarity of intent and the necessary tone to relay the unassumingness of such a scenario.Textbook Effective In this memo, he does well to stress the fact that he believed this O-ring corrosion whitethorn lead to a catastrophe of the highest order loss of human life. How else could one set such urgency? Boisjoly admits an honest and very real fear that if immediate action was not interpreted to solve the problem with these O-rings, this entire shuttle mission stands in jeopardy of losing a flight along with all the launch pad facilities. The choice of words seems very intentional and appropriately weighty given the possible outcome. (Boisjoly) So what was done with this information? Apparently, it was merely dismissed as being non-crucial to flight success.The sunrise of the shuttle launch was particularly cold and this played a major factor in the execution of instrument or failure of these O-rings but this too was addressed by Boisjoly. Could he have done more to ensure that necessary action was taken to address the situation? Concluding Thoughts It seems very clear that from these devil archetypes of communication one stands as lackadaisical or complacent and the other effectively and appropriately written. It may very well be that Hallman was not the appropriate recipient for the previous memos.It may also be said that Dunn was responsible for insuring the proper destination of this information. Whatever the case, this memo written by Hallman was ineffective both in composition and in handling. In contrast, Boisjoly wrote clearly and effectively. Why is it that the proper actions were still not taken? The bottom of this question may not ever be reached but it is a clear example of the need for se rious handling of informationfor both the writer and the reader. Without these two factors, we may have yet to see the worst examples of failed communication.