THE NASA DECISION-MAKING ENVIRONMENT

This research examines the decision-making environment within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). In part, this examination is based on Case No. 25, ôThe NASA Space Shuttle Disasterö (Marx, Stubbart, Traub, & Cavanaugh, 1987, pp. 829-844).

NASA is an organization that owes its beginning to a political crisis in the United States. Early Soviet space successes further fueled Cold War fears among the American population; fears that were maintained at high levels by American politicians at the best of times.

The success of the Soviet Sputnik program caused the American government to rush head-long and ill-prepared into a ôme tooö effort that resulted in both embarrassing failures and modest successes. In the wake of these efforts, NASA was formed to provide some cohesiveness to the American space program, which, in turn, was intended to restore American confidence and salve a wounded national pride.

President John F. Kennedy, who campaigned in part on the basis of a false claim of a ômissile-gapö that placed the United States at a dangerous disadvantage in relation to the Soviet Union, was compelled to do something in this area after his election, even though the United States was well ahead of the Soviets militarily. Further, the Kennedy Administration, soon after assuming office, was forced to accept responsibility for the ôBay of Pigsö fiasco in Cuba. A program to land a man on the moon,

. . .
ency (CIA) and to be quite different from such organizations as the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Each of these three organizations receive funding based on promises and claims made to the executive and legislative branches of government. Many of the CIAÆs failures are every bit as monumental as many of the failures experienced by NASA. While the CIAÆs executive guidance is as ill-defined as that for NASA, the reasons are different. In the case of NASA, the presidential administrations would like to generate a lot of public support by tanking credit for NASA successes, without spending much money (relatively) on the effort. Thus, the presidential administrations shift the authority and the responsibility to NASA, so that, while they will be in a position to take credit, they can also adroitly side-step any blame. By contrast, in the case of the CIA, the political administrations fervently do not want to know what the agency is doing because so much of its is contrary to American law. As a consequence, both the CIA and NASA operate in environments that are designed to encourage failures. The big difference between the two environments is that the CIA can and usually does hide its failures, while NASAÆs failures are expo
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Union Address, TVA TVAÆs, Science Foundation, Florida Trend, Reagan Administration, NASA CIAÆs, Management Budget, Alternatives Recommendations, Soviet Sputnik, Kennedy Administration, union address, executive legislative, space shuttle, reagan administration, florida trend, executive legislative branches, presidential administrations, legislative branches, goals adopted, program goals, science foundation, legislative branches government, national science foundation, credit nasa successes, marx stubbart traub,
Approximate Word count = 1616
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)