INDUSTRY FOCUS
NORMALISATION
of deviance
Potentially fatal outcomes of complacency
Nobody is perfect , and no system is perfect , so we just have to do the best we can , and hope that it is good enough . But how good is ‘ good enough ’? Or how bad do things have to be before they are not ‘ good enough ’? And is this culture of ‘ good enough ’ wise ? It ’ s certainly expedient but , if we trawl through the news headlines , we can find many instances of when ‘ good enough ’ was not good enough .
CHALLENGER – THE POSTER BOY FOR NORMALISATION OF DEVIANCE The term ‘ normalisation of deviance ’ was coined by sociologist Diane Vaughan , who led a 10-year research study into the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster of 28 January 1986 . It ’ s interesting that the most comprehensive study of this technical catastrophe was led by a sociologist , not an engineer . That was probably because – by engineering standards – nothing should have gone wrong . According to the technical wisdom of the day , all systems were fine . Well , they weren ’ t , and what Vaughan found out was that , while the technical cause of the explosion was faulty O rings , the ultimate cause was human . And not the age-old scapegoat human error . The fault was a tendency she labelled normalisation of deviance . well – they ’ d gotten used to them . They normalised the problem .
History tells us what the result of that little shortcut was – seven people dead and billions of dollars of high-tech gizmos spectacularly up in smoke .
AND IN THE WORLD OF REAL PEOPLE
You ’ d probably like to think that you wouldn ’ t make that kind of mistake , and nor would anyone you know . But think about it . Have you ever driven after ‘ just one or two ’ drinks , because you know it ’ s safe because you ’ ve done it many times , and it ’ s always been fine ? Even though every single study states that even one small drink slows your reaction time , and reduces your ability to judge distance and speed .
The short version of the story is that the engineers at NASA knew the O rings were not 100 % perfect , but they had worked well enough in previous launches , so –
Have you ever watched while one lone voice in a meeting tries to convince management that it ’ s not a good idea to cut costs by using a cheaper material or a
44