Smoking Gun Essay
Memos within a company serve several purposes. They may be used to report meeting agendas, policies, internal reports, or short proposals. Memos may also be used as a tool to inform staff, management, or executives of important information. Two very good examples of this are the memos written regarding the 1978 Three Mile Island Disaster, and the 1985 Challenger Explosion. Both of these disasters were forewarned by employees and addressed by memos to superiors. Bert M. Dunn of Babcock and Wilcox Company wrote a memo to his management to inform them of a potential operator error occurring at the nuclear power plants that needed to be addressed. R. M. Boisjoly of Morton Thiokol, Inc. wrote a memo to the executives of his company informing them of a potential disaster that could occur on NASA flights. Although both memos discussed the severity of the situations, they were ignored by superiors. After careful examination of both memos, it is very clear that both of the memos had flaws. With the severity of the situations at hand, the memos should have been written in a more direct, professional tone with better word choices.
The memo written by Bert M. Dunn of the Babcock and Wilcox Company regarding the Three Mile Island disaster is very confusing at times. The tone of the memo did not point out the urgency in which the matter should have been addressed. The memo was written in a very technical manner and gave entirely too much detailed information. The last line of the memo states “I believe this is a very serious matter and deserves our prompt attention and correction”. This should have been stated at the very begging of the memo to grab the reader’s attention. The subject line should have also been more attention grabbing. It simply states, “Operator Interruption of High Pressure Injection”. This subject does not grab the reader’s attention or state the severity of the situation. In the body of the memo, the tone seems to be very nonchalant. It describes, in a very technical way, the errors that the operators at the nuclear plant in Toledo, Ohio had performed. Through all of the technical information, one looses the sense of urgency when reading the memo. It does not seem that any points were strongly stressed in the letter. The author did state what action needed to taken, but there was not emphasis placed on the urgency.
The memo written by Roger Boisjoly of Morton Thiokol, Inc. regarding the Challenger explosion had a very direct approach with a condescending tone. The author does an excellent job at grabbing the reader’s attention. The subject line states “SRM O-Ring Erosion/Potential Failure Criticality”. With a subject line written in that manner, it stresses the urgency of the memo. In the first paragraph, of the memo the author states that the memo is written to address the seriousness of the current O-ring erosion problem. Again, this is stressing the urgency of the memo and states his purpose for publishing the memo. In the body of the memo, Mr. Boisjoly takes on a more condescending, non-professional tone. He makes two statements that could be taken as if he was questioning authority. First, “The mistakenly accepted position on the joint problem was to fly without fear and failure and to run a series of design evaluations which would ultimately lead to a solution or at least a significant reduction of the erosion problem”. This statement seems as if he does not respect the authority of the company leaders, and the decision they made regarding the joint problem. He is stating very boldly that the company made a mistake. The second comment was “An unofficial team (a memo defining the team and its purpose was never published) with leader was formed on 19 July 1985 and was tasked with solving the problem”. In this statement, it seems as if he is chastising management for not informing the staff of the purpose of the...