L'oreal takeover

In my ethics & stakeholder management class last semester, we discussed the Columbia space shuttle disaster and the mistakes that led up to it. The day before the launch, there were unusually cold weather conditions, which called for concern among NASA and the associated engineers. A very large conference call took place between the major engineers and executives on the project to discuss what to do. People were calling in from all over the world. There was a lot of panic, so many people were trying to talk at once, but it eventually came down to a heated argument between the head manager and engineer, while the others stayed silent. NASA wanted to voice that there was too much ice present to launch, but that was overlooked and they proceeded with the launch, resulting in dire consequences.
This situation may be seen as a different type of social loafing. Usually, it comes with a connotation of laziness or lack of motivation, i.e someone not contributing in a group project. However, in this situation, the social loafing is due to a lack of organization and the presence of too many people. People’s ideas were not heard because they were outnumbered, resulting in the ‘’loafing’’ onto the management’s decision to go through with the launch. While there weren’t any attempts made to curb the social loafing, a few different approaches could have been taken. I believe the disincentives method would have worked. If the potential consequences of the situation had been reinforced, maybe the social loafing would have been mitigated. I don’t believe reciprocity is applicable in this situation. The group members most likely don’t associate besides a working professional relationship, so they were most likely not doing favors for each other in that sense.
Social loafing in an important theory as it addresses and important issue in group contexts. It also shows how this dilemma can be mitigated or avoided. By recognizing the presence of social loafing, a group can take