1.1 Case analysis module: hughes aircraft  (Page 4/4)

Frank Saia has discovered that an employee under his supervision, Donald LaRue, has been skipping tests on thecomputer chips. Since LaRue began this practice, they have certainly been more on time in their shipments. Besides, both LaRueand Saia know that many of the“hot”parts are actually for systems in the testing phase, rather than for ones that will be put intoactive use. So testing the chips for long-term durability that go into these systems seems unnecessary. Still, LaRue was caught byQuality Control skipping a test, and now Saia needs to make a decision. Upper management has provided no guidance; they simplytold him to“handle it”and to keep the parts on time.

He can’t let LaRue continue skipping tests, or at least he shouldn’t let this skipping go unsupervised. LaRue is a good employee, but he doesn’t have the science background to know which tests would do the least damage if they were skipped. Hecould work with LaRue and help him figure out the best tests to skip so the least harm is done. But getting directly involved inskipping the tests would mean violating company policy and federal law.

Scenario 2:

Margaret Gooderal works in a supervisory position in the environmental testing group at Hughes Aircraft. Hersupervisor, Donald LaRue, is also the current supervisor for environmental testing. The group that LaRue and Gooderal togetheroversee test the chips that Hughes makes in order to determine that they would survive under the drastic environmental conditions theywill likely face.

Rigorous testing of the chips is the ideal, but some chips (the hot chips) get in line ahead of others.Gooderal has found out that over the last several months, many of these tests are being skipped. The reason: Hughes has fallen behindin the production schedule and Hughes upper management and Hughes customers have been applying pressure to get chip production andtesting back on schedule. Moreover, LaRue and others feel that skipping certain tests doesn’t matter, since many of these chips are being used in systems that are in the testing phase, ratherthan ones that will be put into active use.

A few months after Margaret Gooderal started her new position, she was presented with a difficult problem. Oneof the“girls”(the women and men in Environmental Testing at Hughes), Lisa Lightner, came to her desk crying. She was in tearsand trembling because Donald LaRue had forcefully insisted that she pass a chip that she was sure had failed the test she wasrunning.

Lightner ran the hermeticity test on the chips. The chips are enclosed in a metal container, and one of thequestions is whether the seal to that container leaks. From her test, she is sure that the chip is a“leaker”—the seal is not airtight so that water and corrosion will seep in over time anddamage the chip. She has come to Gooderal for advice. Should she do what LaRue wants and pass a chip she knows is a leaker?

Case Analysis Exercises:

1. Identify key components of the STS

2. Specify the problem:

2a. Is the problem a disagreement on facts? What are the facts? What are cost and time constraints onuncovering and communicating these facts?

2b. Is the problem a disagreement on a critical concept? What is the concept? Can agreement be reached byconsulting legal or regulatory information on the concept? (For example, if the concept in question is safety, can disputantsconsult engineering codes, legal precedents, or ethical literature that helps provide consensus? Can disputants agree on positive andnegative paradigm cases so the concept disagreement can be resolved through line-drawing methods?

2c. Use the table to identify and locate value conflicts within the STS. Can the problem be specified as amismatch between a technology and the existing STS, a mismatch within the STS exacerbated by the introduction of the technology,or by overlooked results?

3. Develop a general solution strategy and then brainstorm specific solutions:

3a. Is problem one of integrating values, resolving disagreements, or responding to situationalconstraints?

3b. If the conflict comes from a value mismatch, then can it be solved by modifying one or more of thecomponents of the STS? Which one?

4. Test solutions:

5. Implement solution over feasibility constraints