Organization Behavior and Management Space Shuttle Challenger

Space Shuttle Challenger Orbiter History The Challenger was initially referred to as the STA-099. The shuttle was built to work as a test vehicle for the Space Shuttle program and was named after the HMS Challenger, which was a British Naval research vessel. The HMS Challenger sailed in the Atlantic Ocean as well as the Pacific Ocean during the 1870’s.Advertising We will write a custom case study sample on Organization Behavior and Management: Space Shuttle Challenger specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More When the Challenger was built it underwent intensive vibration and thermal testing for a year. NASA awarded Rockwell, a Space Shuttle orbiter manufacturer, a contract in 1979 to build the Challenger by converting the STA-099. The Challenger arrived at the Kennedy Space Center in July 1982, and it became the second orbiter to be operation in the center. The Challenger had been designed to be a historic craft and many were optimi stic it would outlive the rest. The Space Shuttle took its maiden flight on April, 1982 for the STS-6 mission, which saw the first ever space walk in the space shuttle program. The EVA (Extra Vehicular Activity) was done by Astronauts Donald Peterson and Story Musgrave. This lasted about four hours and it was also during this mission the first deployment of a Tracking and Data Relay System constellation was done. After completing nine successful missions, on January 28, 1986 the Challenger was launched on the STS-51L and after a mere 73 seconds it exploded killing all the seven crewmembers (NASA, 2011). This paper will look at the SHUTTLE 51-L MISSION, the organization that was involved in the Challenger project, the mechanical failure of the Space Shuttle Challenger, the organizational behavior and management shortcomings that contributed to the disaster and finally make organizational behavior and management changes that can be adopted to prevent a reoccurrence of the same disaste r. Discussion NASA Program As the Challenger Space Shuttle progressed, there was an increase in the demands being placed on NASA and this resulted to an increased risk of disaster (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990). The NASA team had a false sense of security having carried out 2Kramer, James, 1987 missions, which had been successful. Prior to the launch, there were many wrangles within NASA, and managers were working in a place with heavy overload and turbulence (Kramer James, 1987). The management at NASA was characterized with a disease full of decay and destruction (Kramer James, 1987 p.14).Advertising Looking for case study on engineering? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More There was lack of a formal DSS program at NASA initialized before the launch for the shuttle operations. There were strong indications that decisions were being made through satisficing and short cuts. There were lots of compromise and operations were greatly aff ected. NASA was accused of having semi-uncontrolled decision making as they tried to satisfy the needs of the military, scientific community, industry and this led to the space shuttle being declared operational even before the development stage of the shuttle had been completed (Kramer, James, 1987). Decision making at NASA was done by default as there lacked DSS. The organizational structure at the program was political and manipulations were done to meet requirements of the political power. When the Reagan Administration declared the Space Shuttle â€Å"operational†, many employees at NASA lacked motivation and left with the impression that decision making on the project should be made by the political administration (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990). Employees began being complacent and safety of the shuttle was highly compromised, as they tried to keep the shuttle on schedule and satisfy the clients. This presents the situation at NASA prior to making the decision to launch the s pace shuttle (Dunbar Ryba, 2008). SHUTTLE 51-L MISSION (Challenger Flight) The 51-L mission was the 25th mission that NASA was going to undertake in its STS program. Shortly after launching the Challenger on 28, January 1986, the Challenger exploded mid air, destroying the vehicle and killing the entire seven crew members on the mission. This mission was aimed at deploying a second Tracking and Data Relay Satellite as well as the Spartan Halle’s Comet Observer. The mission was also going to be the first time there were observers or passengers participating in a program called NASA Teacher in Space Program ((Dunbar Ryba, 2008). S. Christa McAuliffe was one of the crew onboard and she was going to conduct live broadcasts that were going to be broadcasted to schools throughout the world (Dunbar Ryba, 2008).Advertising We will write a custom case study sample on Organization Behavior and Management: Space Shuttle Challenger specifically for you for only $16.05 $ 11/page Learn More The destruction of the Challenger and the loss of life had profound impact on the society and the way it viewed the Space program and particularly NASA. As this paper will discuss, the tragic decision that was made to allow the launching of STS 51-L was as a result of long term contributing factors that were further increased by bad or weak organizational behavior and management strategies. The outcome of this tragedy caused loss of life, resources and made people to mistrust the space program. Although the accident of the Challenger was blamed on the hardware failure of the SRB â€Å"O† ring (known as Solid Rocket Boost), the decision that was made by the management was also flawed. The decision was based on faulty organizational behavior and management and this was further aggravated by the mismanagement of initial information that suggested the launch be postponed (NASA, 2008). Other factors that besides organizational behavior and managem ent played a major role in contributing to the accident occurring. They included the demand NASA was getting from the political ruling class to deliver and launch on the scheduled day (NASA, 2008) The process of proving to the American people and the political system that there was need for a reusable space shuttle had begun in the 1960s. The Challenger was one of the ways that this could be proven and thus a lot of pressure and expectation was put on the program. Unlike the previous missions such as the Apollo, the Space Shuttle was going to be used in space operations without having a defined goal (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990 p. 3). This presents the first contributing factor in the Challenger’s accident. Without a defined role for use, the Challenger was going to be used as a utility vehicle for space operations and thus there lacked a strong support for the project, both financially and politically. In order to gain favor and political support for the project, the Challenger wa s sold and presented to the political elites as a â€Å"quick payoff† (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990 p. 8). The project also gained support by predicting that it could be used by the military as a means that could be used to enhance the national security. To the industry, it was sold as a commercial opportunity, where companies could offer clients an opportunity to visit space. Many scientists in the program told the American public that the Challenger Shuttle was going to be an American Voyage that was going to have great scientific gain (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990 p. 10). To the world, the Challenger project was sold as a partnership that was going to include the ESA (European Space Agency) as well as a means that was going to improve the relations between nations and bring together people of different nationalities, sex and races by serving as crew members during missions (McConnell, 1988).Advertising Looking for case study on engineering? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The process that was used to gain support in the economic, social and political arena for the space shuttle can be cited to be the second contributing factor that resulted to the accident (McConnell, 1988). There was use of heterogeneous engineering, which means that the engineering and management decisions in the project were structured in ways that were going to be appealing to the political, economic, and organizational factors rather than being structured into a single entity mission that was aimed at achieving specific goals (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990 p. 9). When the Space Shuttle became operational, it was faced with many operational demands from many people. It had to live up to the promises that had been given by NASA. This placed a lot of pressure on the management team as they tried to coordinate the needs of the military, political elites and the scientific community. The political pressure was to provide a space vehicle that was going to be reliable and could be reused. It w as also supposed to be difficult to achieve this as it was going to hinder the ability of creating an effective system for integration and development. It was also going to be infeasible to create a management support system that could cater for the diverse requirements. There was also a low moral within the NASA employee, which was created during the Reagan Administration when the shuttle was given the green light for operation even when the development stage had not been completed (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990). The American Congress expected that the Shuttle program was going to be financially self supportive after billions of dollars had been used to go to the moon (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990, p. 15). With this lack of support from Congress, NASA adopted and operated as a commercial business instead of a government program. It can therefore be concluded that the environment of the program prior to launching had been one mucked wih conflict, short cuts and managerial stress (Jarman Kouzmin, 1990, p.15). Mechanical failure of the Challenger Before the launching date, concerns had been raised about the integrity of carrying on with the launch when the temperatures were as lower than those expected for optimal performance. On a previous mission, 51-C, it had been noted that the booster joints were covered with soot and grease after launching on a cold weather. Tests were carried out in the laboratory on the effect of low temperatures on the O-ring resilience. It was recommended that they be replaced by steel billets and this would have meant a redesign of the field joint. By the time of the accident, the steel billets were not ready. Engineers at Alan McDonald made a presentation that detailed on the effects the cold weather was going to affect the booster performance. This was necessary because the temperatures of the launching date were expected to be lower than 350F. After the concerns were raised a meeting was convened and various heads and engineers attended. The pe ople in attendance included, engineers, top management of Marshal Space Flight Center, Kennedy Center, and Morton Thiokol. The meeting was called to discuss on the effect the cold weather was going to have on the mission especially the boosters’ performance. Engineers gave a clear presentation that argued that the cold weather would have a major effect on the joint rotator and the O- ring seating. The test carried out had only gone to a low of 530 F and this presented a problem of the unknown (Rogers’s, 1989). Thiokol provided NASA with information concerning the launch and thought that the low temperatures were going to affect the O-rings to a point they were going to be ineffective. The mission had been cancelled previously due to the cold weather and NASA was not ready for another cancellation (Kramer, James, 1987 p.23). Although information had been provided by a GDSS from another company showed that the O-rings were going to work under the predicted weather, engi neers from Thiokol were skeptical about the data they had inputted into the GDSS. This meant that NASA was relying on a GDSS that had flawed information (Kramer James, 1987). At this juncture, NASA asked for a definitive confirmation or rejection of the planned launch from Thiokol. The representatives from Thiokol responded by recommending the launch be delayed until the temperatures were favorable. NASA continued to pressure Thiokol to change their minds and NASA level three managers is reported to have retorted to the representatives, â€Å"My God, Thiokol, When do you want me to launch, next April?† (Kramer, James, 1987, p.7). It was after this that Thiokol representatives asked to be given time to rethink their recommendations. An engineer with Thiokol was asked to stop reasoning as an engineer and start thinking as a manager, which suggests that the group was placing organizational needs in front of safety of the shuttle. Thiokol representatives returned to the GDSS an d recommended that the launch be done as planned. When NASA asked if there was any objection to this no one from the GDSS objected. During the launch the O-ring were severely affected by the cold weather and this mechanical failure caused the accident and the eventual loss of the crewmembers (Kramer, James, 1987). Critical analysis of the organizational behavior and management shortcomings that contributed to the disaster The environment, organizational behavior and management which NASA and its developers operated in gave a large margin for human error. However, Thiokol and NASA had a chance to avert the accident during the GDSS meeting before the launch. The organizational behavior and management fallings can be attributed to the accident. First, the team especially Thiokol had prior knowledge that the O-ring was going to be affected by the cold weather months before the launching. However, the primary goal of the project was to meet the launch date. NASA warned about the problem , but it downplayed it. This presents the first element of the mismanagement of information and bad organizational behavior that resulted into the accident. Any suggestion and proposals of the launch-taking place were met with positive support from the management while all suggestions of delays were shot down without taking into consideration the risk involved in carrying out the launch (Turban, 1988). Third, there was a strong feeling among the people involved in the project management to live up to the promises made. Despite the fact that Thiokol engineers were skeptical about the planned launching, their management went ahead and agreed with the other members of the GDSS to continue with the launch (Turban, 1988). Fourth, there was bad organizational behavior and management on the part of Thiokol, because they agreed with the other teams although their engineers were telling them to stop the launch (Priwer, Philips, 2009). Fifth, all people involved in the top management of the project were afraid of how the political elites and the public would react if another cancellation was done. In the previous one year the launch had been postponed six times. Many in this group were starting to rationalize that if they had succeeded in the past they were as well going to succeed this time (United States Congress, 1986). Finally, the group as stated before was working with flawed data and even when Thiokol engineers began to question the integrity of this information, nobody took action. People in the GDSS meeting who were proposing that the launch be delayed were unwelcome and therefore the management had its mind made on the launching date. During the meeting, it was seen that NASA representatives were at times assertive and intimidate the other players to a point where they disregarded warnings given. The meeting is also faulted as a bad organizational behavior and management, because it was easy to downplay the personal opinions held by each member. Instead of th e speaker conversion, the meeting should have been held at a place where all members were present and maybe the outcomes would have been different. The GDSS failed the point where Thiokol asked to be given five minutes to conduct a private meeting. Before this point Thiokol had maintained that the launch should be cancelled, but after the private meeting it changed its mind. Conclusion The failure of the spaceship Challenger can be blamed on the organizational behavior. NASA has a variety of risk avoidance system. Their aim is to ensure that the missions are safe. NASA is one of the smallest federal agencies and operates under a strict budget of US$ 15 Billion (NASA, 2010). This removes any flexibility during risky situations. This agency has been known to be dependant to their history for decision making. Since their establishment in 1958, their main aim was to beat the Soviet Union spaceflights. Though their budget keeps being cut, they still stick to their mission. The cut costs made NASA realize that they could include the private business sector. This increased their pressure for success, which was also coming from the government. They had to research and develop the operations with limited time. NASA Budget in billions of American Dollar (NASA, 2010) The normalization of deviance is another short coming on the management of the NASA. This is a term, which is used to explain the way sometimes some technical flaws are not scrutinized by the various safety bodies over time. This is because they are both expensive and time consuming. Due to the pressure to produce, it is seen as absurd to spend resources on problems, which are not a risk (Launius, 1992). The postponing of the launch can be because of many reasons. Maybe the problem was the O-rings significance was not considered so much hence the problem with it was a minor one to them. The other reason would be, because the president was using the flight as a reference in his speech or maybe it was because of the much pressure, which was being exerted by both the private sector and the government. Recommendations Failures can happen no matter the safety systems applied. Though the cause of the failure was technical, the organizational failure caries a huge part in it. There are numerous things that NASA can do to avoid these types of organizational failures ever happening (Lewis, 1988). One of them is the Hierarchical power. Some of the management’s personnel at the high posts have no interest in the hierarchy. Some of them would rather not make decisions that would jeopardize their work. The congress, a body of the NASA which offers regulatory oversight, has no desires to jeopardize the central district of NASA through their decisions. These are huge obstacles to the changes that should be made in the organizational behavior and management. They should create a way in which the engineers can have the ability of by passing the hierarchy and bureaucracy before launching unsafe missions. If the engineers had had their way during the Challengers disaster, the O-rings would have been replaced or the launch postponed. Though these activities would be very costly to NASA, it would not be as expensive as losing the crew and the vehicle (United States Congress, 1986). The bureaucratic procedures should be sometimes be exempted from getting some data. This is because hunch or intuitions which the engineers might have may take a long time to be researched on and analyzed (Hall, 2003). References Dunbar, B. Ryba, J. (2008). Kennedy Space Center. Web. Hall, J.L. (2003). Space Policy. Columbia and Challenger: Organizational failure of NASA. Berkley: University of California at Berkley. Jarman A. Kouzmin, A. (1990). â€Å"Decision pathways from crisis. A contingency-theory simulation heuristic for the Challenger Shuttle disaster†, Contemporary Crises. Kramer, C. James A. (1987). The Space Shuttle Disaster: Ethical Issues in Organizational Decision Making. Mi chigan: Western Michigan University Press. Launius, D. (1992). â€Å"Toward an Understanding of the Space Shuttle: A Historiographical Essay†. Air Power History, Winter. Lewis, R.S. (1988). Challenger; the final voyage. New Yolk: Columbia University press. McConnell, M. (1988). Challenger: A Major Malfunction. London: Routledge. NASA (2010). Kennedy Space Center. Web. NASA. (2008) Spacelink Challenger Press Release. Web. NASA. (2011). The Mission and the History of Space Shuttle Challenger. Web. Priwer,S. Philips,C. (2009). Space exploration for dummies. Hoboken: John Wiley Sons. Rogers’s commission. (1989). Report Of the President Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident. Washington DC. G.P.O Turban, E. (1988). Decision Support and Expert Systems, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. United States Congress. (1986). Investigation of the Challenger Accident; Report of the Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representative, Ninety-Ninth Congress , Second Session. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. This case study on Organization Behavior and Management: Space Shuttle Challenger was written and submitted by user Aydin Flores to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Haymarket Riot essays

Haymarket Riot essays As result of the Industrial Revolution, people in America earned more money, most of which they used to open new businesses and factories. There were now many different types of machines to do the work that people had to do themselves in the past. Thus, machines rapidly replaced people. Now with less people working and getting paid, there were people that could afford what these factories were making. Most of the people working in the United States at this time were immigrants, so they were forced to work for very low wages. A working adult would be considered lucky to bring home a daily income of only $2.00. Kids on the other hand, only made about 70 cents a day for spending their entire childhood sorting through coal or performing other strenuous jobs. Most people worked between ten and fourteen hours each day with peanuts for income. As result, Chicago Illinois, as well as many other cities in the United States, fell into poverty. However, not all employees at this time were cruel and blackhearted. Most at the time though just wanted to get the most out of their employees for the least amount of pay. Soon the Labor Union movement started. People in this union wanted to ban child labor, increase pay, and to create shorter workdays. Conflict after conflict broke out spawning from the Labor Union; many of which the police were brought in to settle. By 1886, the major concern of the Labor Union was to establish an eight-hour workday. By now there were several unions, all of which could not agree with one another on how to fight for this rightfully deserved demand. Finally, the Knights of Labor, who originated in Chicago, organized a nation wide strike. However, the newspapers, business leaders, and politicians didnt agree with these actions. They said, the new eight-hour workday would promote loafing, gambling, rioting, debauchery and drunkenness (Simon). Knowing that they would be fired, workers still stood up f...

Lifestyle Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Lifestyle - Assignment Example Reaching an optimal level health is not a child’s play. It requires lots of hard work, determination, focus and enthusiasm to be called literally smart. Sound mind in a sound body can be referred to as optimal health. So it’s not ONLY about the body rather a pure nourishment of soul and mind is also primarily important. Proper nutrition is first and foremost in obtaining optimal health. Balanced amount of vitamins, proteins, iron, calcium and other elements play vital role in shaping a sound body. The use of oil and calories rich food should minimum while increasing the intake of fruits, vegetables, juices and cereals. Exercise is the next area that requires attention. We have become extremely rigid and stagnant with our life styles. So getting yourself busy in any physical activity is healthy. Remember that, mechanism is important. Proper sleep and rest is important too. In addition with exercises everybody needs rest to function properly. Make sure you get at least six to seven hours of sleep daily. If you are following the above mentioned practices then you can surely work with you mental and spiritual balance. Again I repeat, it’s not only about your body. Focus yourself in meditative prayers. Keep in touch with you strengths and also spare time for the nature. Keep in mind your short term and long term

Case NIVEA Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

NIVEA - Case Study Example Nivea is an example of a consumer-led business enterprise; this means its consumers are the ones who ultimately determine all marketing efforts by identifying their perceived wants. The key parts of a marketing mix are product (consumer-led), price (cost), placement (convenience) and promotions (communications to create awareness the product exists). All the parts have to work together to make a marketing strategy very effective. Being consumer-driven, any product must satisfy a consumer want or need; the price must be reasonable and affordable; convenience means the product can be found easily and obtainable in all distribution outlets and finally, communications to make people know a product they are looking for is available. A correct balance of the 4Ps of this marketing mix is necessary to make selling efforts a success; one key element that is lacking or out of whack makes the entire marketing useless. In this connection, the strongest P is the product of Nivea which has acquired a nice reputation over the years as a reliable and safe product for a skin care routine; consumers are not sensitive to the price as they are willing to pay a premium for it; moreover, people are also aware of the product and no need to promote it actively. Its weakest P or link is the placement or distribution channel. Product – Nivea has acquired a good reputation for product safety and quality. This is the companys greatest asset which is its excellent brand name and in this regard, it can exploit it by adopting aggressive pricing to position the re-launched product as a premium item. It may be necessary to re-define this product as good for sensitive young skin (teenagers) and not really for treatment of skin problems like acne or pimples (it is not a medicated skin product that causes adverse reactions like skin allergies, itchiness or redness); it is really intended for

Personnel Management Master Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Personnel Management Master - Assignment Example However, this relation seems to be replaced by commercials ones in the application of flexibilities at work. Employers may resort to flexibility strategies due to a series of factors such as increasing competition, market uncertainties, technological change, government policies and labour supply factors (Blyton: 1996). Flexibility at work place is characterised by dynamism and adaptability in contrast to negative rigidity that have been the case with companies in the past. The reason why employers have been opting for flexibility at work does not favour employees in terms of bargaining for their rights in the work force. This is because, the prevailing labour market characterised by high level of unemployment put employers in the driving seat in this endeavour to decide who to hire, how and under what terms. The following are types of flexibilities used by employers:- Functional flexibility: In this type of flexibility, the organisation, segment its labour force into 'core' and 'peripheral' groups. The core work force is permanently employed and is particularly employed in the firm's continuous activities and enjoys greater and generous pay pack and career development including promotion. As a payback, they provide functional flexibilities that go beyond their job description to serve the company and accept multi-skilled roles in carrying out their assigned tasks (Bain & Gareth, p3). Numerical f Numerical flexibility: In this case, the firm strategise on the number of employees it want to employee for particular tasks and in what terms in order to maximise the output and reduce labour cost. It mainly does this by dividing the peripheral workforce into three groups; the first peripheral group may consist of firm workers who carry out routine, low-skill tasks and their employment is more susceptible to fluctuation in product demand compared to core workforce. The second peripheral workforce mainly drawn form external labour market provides specialised skills which are only required by firm on temporary basis. The third group comprises of workers located in the secondary external labour market who are mainly low-skilled and carry out poorly paid functions like cleaning or garbage collection and catering (Bain & Gareth, p2). Financial flexibility: This is where the employer engages in a performance-related pay system so as to reward employees in the core workforce who meet the targeted output. It is also used to secure long-term commitment from staff to the firm and thereby countering the problem of retention brought about by other flexibilities. Temporal flexibility: In this approach, a firm will make decision on how and when to employ temporary workforce. This is done by the firm strategising on the optimal time of the season and day when their services is needed. This involves among other thing peak times and elimination of non-productive prospective workforce like mothers and socially committed individuals. This flexibility is very important to the organisations as it is used to cover for sick leaves and maternal leaves of core and permanent employees. Locational flexibility: This is the strategic locationing of the firm operations or sourcing the service from outside its premises in order to gain the technological advantage. It also involves restructuring the whole supply chain logistics. Manufacturing firms may close some of its plants and consolidate its operation in one

Implementation of Knowledge Management

Implementation of Knowledge Management 1. Obstacles to the implementation of knowledge management There are two main factors that affect implementation of KM, organizational culture and technology. Organizational Culture A pattern of shared necessary assumptions that a group has learned in order to solve their problems of outer adaption and inner integration, is a right way to be considered and therefore, to be taught to new group members as an appropriate method to look, understand, think and feel about those problems (Schein 1992:12) is a definition of organizational culture. In other words, it is a framework to perform different tasks within an organization. Culture plays a vital role in the KM initiative. Studies finding causes of KM program breakdown (Barth, 2000; KPMG, 2000) stated that organizational culture is one of the most important barriers to success than others (Tuggle, 2000). Organizational culture is a most crucial factor to create value through leveraging knowledge assets that add to organizations ability (Cole-Gomolski, 1997; Ruggles, 1998). If an organizations culture is aligned with KM then it can implement and use KM for their decision making process. When a group or individual dynamically comes in contact with each other in an organization, it leads to the creation of knowledge that can be mobilized outside the boundaries of organization. For example, a new manufacturing process can fetch changes in suppliers manufacturing method that can lead to a new way of product and process or method enhancement in the organization. Knowledge can be transferred outside from the organization and knowledge from more than one organization interacts together to develop new knowledge (Badaracco, 1991; Wikstrom Normann, 1994; Nonaka Takeuchi, 1995; Inkpen, 1996). According to Krogh, G. V., Ichijo, K., Nonaka, I. (2000) organizations physical, emotional and virtual factors are responsible for knowledge creation. An obstacle to knowledge creation is, when individuals will unable to handle new situation and information. Organizational culture focuses on sharing of knowledge and fear of innovation as well (Microsoft Corporation, 1999). Knowledge sharing can be hindered due to employees different skills, academic and technical backgrounds, languages and expectations. Language difference can cause improper verbal and written communication. An organization should allow their employees to experiment in order to learn from previous failures. Organization must build friendly environment where employees should not be afraid of committing mistakes and must encourage sharing of lessons learned in order to avoid mistakes from being repeated (Ndlela and Toit, 2001). Technology Organizations must have good IT infrastructure that supports collaboration of knowledge workers and data repositories, support computer based tools for conferencing. Furthermore, organizations should have well developed technology that can be aligned with knowledge management. Improper alignment of IT and KM can lead to implementation gap. But it is really difficult for technology structure to fully support all KM aspects, technology is a critical aspect that allows and facilitates many KM processes and initiatives (Alazmi Zairi, 2003; Artail, 2006; Davenport et al., 1998; Hariharan, 2005; Hasanali, 2002; Wong, 2005). Hansali said although technology is important but it has to be used as a tool to support KM initiatives and not as the source of initiative. If technology tools such as intranet, virtual communities of practices could be formed, that can add up to the scope and timeliness of knowledge sharing (Ardichvili, Maurer, Li, Wentling, Stuedemann, 2005). Finally, the architect ure of information system within an organization that wishes to implement KM need to provide tools that support integration of all organizational computer components. 2. Knowledge capture Knowledge capture is a term related to knowledge creation in an organization. According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), an ongoing cyclic process of socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation is known as knowledge creation. It is really vital process in knowledge management. According to Manasco, (1996), Knowledge management supports knowledge creation by utilising some mechanism, this mechanism identifies, captures and avail the knowledge. To do this it is important to find what knowledge has to be captured, why it has to be captured, what method is required to capture, how it has to be captured, how it has to be stored, how it can be retrieve and what are the ways it can be used. After answering all the above questions there is a chance in increase of KM initiatives overall success (McCampbell et al., 1999). Knowledge is created when individuals interacts among themselves or with others and with their environment. In knowledge creation when individual and enviro nment interact with each other, changes occur at both the levels, individual influences by themselves and by the environment with which they interact. Knowledge creation within an organization consists of three elements a) the SECI process (socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation), it defines the knowledge creation by conversion among tacit and explicit knowledge. b) ba, shared framework for creating knowledge. c) Knowledge assets such as inputs and outputs in knowledge creation. The above three elements need to interact among each other to form a kind of knowledge spiral that captures knowledge. The knowledge assets (input and output) of an organisation are shared in ba, but tacit knowledge which is held by individuals is transformed and improved by spiral of knowledge that consists of socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation. Garza and Ibbs (1992), suggested four techniques of knowledge capture, each is for capturing dissimilar types of knowledge:- Examining public knowledge:- it enables capturing of knowledge in order to familiarise people to understand the current thoughts and ideas on a particular subject. Interviews:- they are of two kinds structured and unstructured. Unstructured interviews enable knowledge holder to explain liberally their feelings about the key elements in their work. Structured interviews consists all the questions that of interest to knowledge capturer. In this the interviewee has to give answers of all those questions. Observation: this technique is used to capture knowledge by watching some live incident. Induction:- it allows to identify the gaps in existing rules and to analyse the cause of it by studying the case. According to me there are some other knowledge capturing methods that vary from one organization to the other, because the knowledge structure can differ between different organizations with in same industry. But still the above basic techniques will always be a building block for knowledge capture in any type of organization. 3. KM as a tool for supporting innovation Knowledge management and innovation are related to each other. Organizations have always searched for new and improved methods of doing business to acquire competitiveness. Organizations create and exploit knowledge in order to achieve advantage over their competitors this is what we call innovation. According to Roger (1995), innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption.. Innovation can also be defined as a decision making process by evolving change in technology, process and management approach. (Walker and Hampson 2003b, p238). Basically, the term innovation depends upon knowledge development. The transformation of one type of knowledge into other is known as knowledge creativity. Suppose if there is any knowledge involved in technology improvement it should be documented. According to Amidon (1997) there are two important aspects in KM as an approach to support innovation, first, knowledge is the main component of innovation and second, activities involved in managing knowledge flow and its use. Knowledge and knowledge workers are the intellectual capital of an organization. A companys KM performance is directly related to its intellectual capital, which affects its innovation (Wong, 2005). According to Egbu et al. (2001a), any organization that wants to gain competitive advantage needs to be innovative. Method related to the development of new product is called product innovation where as new ideas involved in the deployment of new and efficient method of production is called process innovation. The efforts related to innovation are to find, identify and deployment of new technologies, products and processes. These efforts are documented and available as information. This creation of information involves knowledge evolution. New knowledge motivates organizations into new kind of business in more rewarding industry, when knowledge management is influenced positively by findings of innovation. According to (Harari, 1994; Nonaka, 1994; West, 1992), organization that provides a framework to improve knowledge of their individuals is more likely to face present rapidly changing market and to innovate in the context where it wants to compete and do investment. Managers are responsible to underline their individuals skills and experiences which in turn evolve creativity. KM enables knowledge worker to contribute in facing new problems that requires new approaches of finding solutions and demand for innovative approaches. Today companies are interested in applying new logical approaches derived from contributed effort of KM and knowledge worker to give a better innovative way of success to their business. 4. Difference between Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems Knowledge management According to (Myers, 1996; OLeary, 1998; OLeary, Kuokka, Plant, 1997)., knowledge management is a process of transforming organizational knowledge obtained from available sources and associating human resource to that knowledge. In other words, KM aims to identify, create, collect, transfer and reprocess of knowledge to help organization to compete (Devedzic, 1999, von Krough, 1999). KM involves managing of knowledge according to organizations benefit. KM enhances production and production process of an organization. Knowledge will always available within organization but proper management of knowledge is of great importance for organization to achieve success. This is the reason why companies are using systematic approach for managing knowledge. According to KPMG (1998a), the aims of KM are, To improve response time, To improve decision making process by following KM initiatives, To increase productivity and profitability, Developing different business opportunities, Cost diminution, Staff retention and Increase share value. For example, KM can be used to develop or gather resources such as design, business, learning and training (Liao, 2003). KM also includes organizational learning, organizational memory and management (Thomas et al., 2001). KM can be viewed as an umbrella consisting of organizational learning that involves capturing and utilizing knowledge to create new knowledge, organizational memory that stores organizational knowledge in database repository and management that involves the management of knowledge to enhance its success by top management. To make knowledge serve the organization continuously, it has to be captured, compiled, stored and shared among human resource. Knowledge management system KMS is a type of system that automates the process of creation, collection, organization and exploitation of knowledge. In general the aim of KMS is to automate the KM processes and create knowledge out of knowledge. KMS is a combined form of IT and KM. According to Abdullah et al. , (2002), KMS is a special kind of system comprised with information technologies and communication technologies, that automates KM processes (creation, collection, organization and exploitation of knowledge) by interacting with computer systems of the organization. KM system consists of knowledge repositories, intranets, web portals and decision making tools by which individuals can access the organizational knowledge (Ernst and Young, 2001). KMS must integrate all computer components within entire organization to provide its full feature. If the entire organizations computer components are not integrated properly with KMS, it will lead to implementation gap due to which organization will not be able to c reate new knowledge by exploiting the existing one and hence the organization cannot remain innovative. Finally, I can say that KM is a concept and KMS is used for implementing this concept. The role of organisational memory in KM Knowledge is very important for an organization. Managing that knowledge is really crucial for an organization to achieve success and to be competitive. KM is a concept used for managing knowledge. Today organizations are really interested to know what they know from their past experiences. Organizations forget what they have done, how they have done and why they have done it in the past. Organizational memory keeps the track of it and shares it among individuals within organization. Organizational memory stores and magnifies knowledge by creating, capturing, accessing and reprocessing knowledge of their employees. According to Stein and Zwass (), the process by which knowledge can be brought from past to apply it on present activities, resulting in each level of organizational effectiveness. This organizational effectiveness ultimately improves the performance of organization. Walsh, J. P. and G. R. said, organizational memory is information stored in some database that comes from o rganisations history and can be used to make present decisions.

The Speeches of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Declaration of Sentiments, Solitude of Self, and Home Life :: the women’s movement

The Speeches of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, â€Å"Declaration of Sentiments†, â€Å"Solitude of Self†, and â€Å" Home Life† Not long ago, in the nineteenth century, the words that our forefathers wrote in the Declaration of Independence, â€Å"that all men were created equal,† held little value. Human equality was far from a reality. If you were not born a white male, then that phrase did not apply to you. During this period many great leaders and reformers emerged, fighting both for the rights of African Americans and for the rights of women. One of these great leaders was Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Stanton dedicated her entire life to the women’s movement, despite the opposition she received, from both her family and friends. In the course of this paper, I will be taking a critical look at three of Stanton’s most acclaimed speeches â€Å"Declaration of Sentiments†, â€Å"Solitude of Self†, and â€Å" Home Life†, and develop a claim that the rhetoric in these speeches was an effective tool in advancing the movement as a whole. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was born November 12, 1815, in Johnstown, New York. She was born unto a conservative, Presbyterian family of considerable social standing. Her father, Judge Daniel Cady, was considered to be both a wealthy landowner and a prominent citizen with great political status (Banner 3). Stanton was one of seven children, 6 of which were girls, to be born to Daniel and Margaret. Growing up in the period that she did, Elizabeth was very fortunate to receive the outstanding education that she did since it was not as important to educate daughters as it was sons. She overcame that boundary when she began attending Johnstown Academy. She was the only girl in most of her classes, which was unheard of in those days. Even when females did attend schools, they were learning about â€Å"womanly† things, like how to run a household, not advanced math and science courses, like she was in. She then went on to further her education at a very prominent educational institu tion, Emma Willard’s Troy Seminary. After that she studied law with her father, who was a New York Supreme Court Judge. It is through this training that her awareness was raised about the discrimination that women were subjected to. In 1840, Elizabeth married an abolitionist organizer named Henry Stanton, much to her family’s dismay.