Search results
1 – 2 of 2Jamie O’Brien and Rebecca A. Bull Schaefer
On the evening of December 29, 1972, Eastern Air 401 (EA401) was on a routine flight from New York to Miami. Despite EA401 flying one of the most advanced aircraft at the time…
Abstract
Case overview/synopsis
On the evening of December 29, 1972, Eastern Air 401 (EA401) was on a routine flight from New York to Miami. Despite EA401 flying one of the most advanced aircraft at the time (the Lockheed L-1011), it crashed in the Florida Everglades killing 101 of its 176 passengers. Drawing from various first-hand accounts (cockpit voice recorder) and secondary evidence (news reports and online sources) of the tragedy, this teaching case provides a detailed account of the key events that took place leading up to the accident. The case describes how the pilots on EA401 were confronted with a simple scenario, a landing gear bulb not working in the cockpit, and through the distraction that ensued made a series of errors. Through many of the quotes in the text, readers gain an understanding of the impressions and perceptions of the pilots, including how they felt about many of the critical decisions and incidents during the last minutes of the flight. The case concludes by highlighting the main findings of the NTSB report.
Complexity academic level
Depending on individual course objectives, this case can take two or one day to debrief. Specifically, if this case is used in an organizational behavior course, most of the case questions could be discussed in one day. However, if this case is used in a capstone HRM or group dynamics type course on teams and team training and performance, a second day could be used to develop documentation outlining training design or performance evaluation designs.
Details
Keywords
Michael J. Lippitz and Robert C. Wolcott
The case compares two U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) programs from the 1970s and 1980s: (1) “stealth” combat aircraft, capable of evading detection or engagement by…
Abstract
The case compares two U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) programs from the 1970s and 1980s: (1) “stealth” combat aircraft, capable of evading detection or engagement by anti-aircraft systems, and (2) precision attack of hardened ground vehicles from “standoff” distances, i.e., far behind the battle lines. Conceived at roughly the same time, motivated by the same strategic challenge, and initially driven by the same DoD organization, stealth combat aircraft progressed from idea to deployment in less than eight years---an astounding pace for a complex military system---while a demonstrated system for standoff precision strike against mobile ground targets was not fully implemented. The case highlights the critical role of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), part of the DoD, regarded as one of the most innovative entities in the U.S. federal government.
The case highlights factors that facilitate rapid, successful implementation of radically innovative or disruptive concepts. Students are introduced to the organizational realities facing such projects, including issues of strategic clarity, interdepartmental competition and cooperation, executive leadership, and timing. Comparing the differences in implementation of the two programs in the case reveals issues relevant to any large organization seeking to bring innovative concepts to fruition.
Details