...reasons suggested. Recent research has shown that more young adults are moving back home with their parents. This has been the case in the past and now it’s no different. There are several reasons for why young adults have returned home after leaving. In a presentation by Dr. Brooks she clearly states that children failure to launch because the lack of social and emotional development which causes them to dependent on their parents to help meet their needs (2014). According to Dunn (2012), as the economy struggles, it becomes more difficult for young people to gain their independence. According to Fry (2013), the rise in young adults living with their parents has to do with a combination of economic, educational and cultural factors. There are several reasons why young adults remain at home or return home after leaving. Dr. Brooks states that young adults having trouble leaving home because of developmental issue. She continues to talk about the author Tim Elmore that talked about artificial intelligence and how the developments of many children are affected by technology (Brooks, 2014). Dr. Brooks said the reason why young adults in their 20s and 30s failure to launch and are still living home primarily because of stunt in development (Brooks, 2014). According to Dr. Brooks, Tim Elmore’s book shows that young adults are not really as mature as they seem to be acting (2014). The Problem here is that that the maturity they pretend to have make them seem ready for independence when...
Words: 650 - Pages: 3
...Topic: Failure to Launch Question/Prompt: Discuss at least 2 reasons research is suggesting for young adults still living at home. This new phenomenon—young adults still living in their parent's home well into their late 20's to early 30's—is proposed to be a result of many different reasons. Spend some time reading what experts suggest about this trend and address at least 2 reasons suggested. Contrary to popular belief “boomerang kids “or kids who fail to leave home, as they are called did not start during the “great recession” as numbers show. Research shows that this phenomenon has been increasing in number between the years of 1980 to 2008 (Adams, 2012). There can be several reasons that can be attributes to this. The go to reason as of late has been the bad economy and often a lack of jobs that provide substantial income, but research shows that there are often other reasons that contribute to the failure to launch. Two key reasons are the high rate of divorce and increase in single parenting in the last quarter of the twentieth century that also changed the parent/child dynamic, furthering the mutual emotional dependence of boomers and their offspring (Adams, 2012). In many other cultures its commonplace for children to live at home even after marriage. However it has not always been commonplace in America. Our custom has been to raise the kids and send them off to college, work or military. There has been a large shift in our culture and it points to other reasons...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...development stage now. The income statement shows that Merck has spent almost two billions dollars annually for the last three years on research and development of new compounds; in particular, Merck spent $2,068 million in 1999. By licensing Davanrik, Merck would be able to save this amount of money and a lot of time to replace the patent. Then, it will be able to re-enter the market and gain revenue quickly. A decision tree analysis was constructed to help valuing the drug licensing decision. The maximum bid price that Merck should offer LAB should be lower than or equal to the total expected value of the project, which is $14 million. The expected value of the licensing arrangement is calculated based on the probability of success and failure of each stage during the FDA approval process; but it is not the cash flows that Merck or LAB will receive in the future. Therefore, $14 million is the maximum bid price that Merck should offer to license Davanrik. Merck has available resources to complete...
Words: 1593 - Pages: 7
...shows the cash flows and probabilities at all stages of the FDA approval process. 3. Should Merck bid to license Davanrik? How much should they pay? Is this the STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM? 4. What is the expected value of the licensing arrangement to LAB? Assume a 5% royalty fee on any cash flows that Merck receives from Davanrik after a successful launch. 5. How would your analysis change if the costs of launching Davanrik for weight loss were $225 million instead of $100 million as given in the case? 6. WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION? Exhibit TN-1 Decision Alternatives |Phase I |Phase II |Phase III | |Testing for Safety |Testing for Efficiency |Testing for Long Term Use | |Success |Depression |Success | |Failure |Weight Loss |Failure...
Words: 521 - Pages: 3
...'A LEADER SHOULD KNOW HOW TO MANAGE FAILURE' Former President of India APJ Abdul Kalam: India Knowledge at Wharton: Could you give an example, from your own experience, of how leaders should manage failure? Kalam: Let me tell you about my experience. In 1973 I became the project director of India's satellite launch vehicle program, commonly called the SLV-3. Our goal was to put India's "Rohini" satellite into orbit by 1980. I was given funds and human resources -- but was told clearly that by 1980 we had to launch the satellite into space. Thousands of people worked together in scientific and technical teams towards that goal. By 1979 -- I think the month was August -- we thought we were ready. As the project director, I went to the control center for the launch. At four minutes before the satellite launch, the computer began to go through the checklist of items that needed to be checked. One minute later, the computer program put the launch on hold; the display showed that some control components were not in order. My experts -- I had four or five of them with me -- told me not to worry; they had done their calculations and there was enough reserve fuel. So I bypassed the computer, switched to manual mode, and launched the rocket. In the first stage, everything worked fine. In the second stage, a problem developed. Instead of the satellite going into orbit, the whole rocket system plunged into the Bay of Bengal. It was a big failure. That day, the chairman of the Indian...
Words: 473 - Pages: 2
...Problem Statement: 1) Launch the Product or wait for in-house manufacturing Problem Statement: 1) Launch the Product or wait for in-house manufacturing * Competitive Pricing - Price of imported ‘Child & Me’ will be less than the competitors even if we launch now * High growth Market -CAGR 15% of nutritional drink segment * High Loyalty- Mothers do not want to try new products which are related to child’s health * Early Mover advantage- Only 2 brands at present * Competitive Pricing - Price of imported ‘Child & Me’ will be less than the competitors even if we launch now * High growth Market -CAGR 15% of nutritional drink segment * High Loyalty- Mothers do not want to try new products which are related to child’s health * Early Mover advantage- Only 2 brands at present Why Launch now Why Launch now * Higher Profit Margin due to reduction in manufacturing cost * Reduced Lead time ; Better Forecasting ; Lower Inventory * Higher Profit Margin due to reduction in manufacturing cost * Reduced Lead time ; Better Forecasting ; Lower Inventory Cheaper than competitors even if imported with 50% margin Cheaper than competitors even if imported with 50% margin * As ‘Launch now‘ has greater benefits than ‘Wait for in-house Mfg’ * Thus, Launch the Product Now and build In-house Mfg. Capability parallely * As ‘Launch now‘ has greater benefits than ‘Wait for in-house Mfg’ * Thus, Launch the Product Now and...
Words: 562 - Pages: 3
... Florida in July 1982, bearing the name "Challenger." Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger was named after the British Naval vessel HMS Challenger that sailed the Atlantic and Pacific oceans during the 1870s. Challenger launched on her maiden voyage, STS-6, on April 4, 1983. That mission saw the first spacewalk of the Space Shuttle program. The NASA had planned for a six day flight, and their mission was to release and retrieve one satellite to study Haley’s comet, and to launch another satellite that would become part of the space communications network. Challenger was originally set to launch from Florida on January 22nd. But delays in STS-61-C and bad weather caused it to reschedule to January 23rd, 24th, 25th, and 27th. On January 28th 1986, the space shuttle was set to take off, but the launch time was delayed due to problems with the exterior access hatch. So, after the huge delay, the space shuttle was finally launched at 11:38 am EST. The space shuttle broke apart 73 seconds into its flight. The Challenger fell into pieces over the Atlantic Ocean near Florida. Most of the fragments were recovered from the ocean after searching for weeks. Along with the...
Words: 5390 - Pages: 22
...context surrounding the January 1986 teleconference? What impact might that have on the group’s decision making process? The Challenger Launch decision on January 28th 1986, proved to be one of the crucial decisions ever made as it lead to one of space science's most talked about disasters. The Challenger launch project was faced by a major financial constraint owing to the ongoing Vietnam War. Thiokol won the contract to build the SRBs since they asked for a lower emolument that their competitors and also provided an innovative modular design for the SRBs that would ease the transportation. There were many reasons NASA was pressured to launch, one being the need to launch the 51L space shutter without any delays so the launch pad could be restored in time for the next mission. Also, any delay in the mission would only result in negative publicity through the media. Under such pressurised circumstances, NASA and Thiokol could not look in the right direction and lacked consensus. So, communication breakdown was perhaps the major contributor in the decision making process here. It is evident that Thiokol was not prepared for the Teleconference since it did not have all the necessary statistical inputs required to arrive at a conclusion. This lead to an internal communication failure within Thiokol. The primary factor for such a communication failure was the lack of structured data and no proper way of seeking the data. Apart from this there was NASA and Thiokol were not on the same...
Words: 1338 - Pages: 6
...Space Shuttle Challenger Case I have read and studied the Space Shutter Challenger Case thoroughly and I believe that the most important failure of the case study was due to many factors which include personality, communication and motivation among the members of the group. In terms of personality, I believe the part of the failure was due to the mix of strong and weak personalities among the group. The stronger personalities which included Mason and Wiggins used direct pressure to influence Lund in to agreeing with their decision. Mason told Lund to take off his engineering hat and to put on his management hat. I believe that Mason and Wiggins used their strong and domineering personalities to influence Lund. This is a contributing factor to the failure of the space shuttle launch. Another aspect of the failure of the case is due to the poor communication between the Thiokol engineers and management. The Thiokol engineers had expressed their concerns to management about the reliability of the O-Rings being used on the space shuttles but a review committee concluded that they were safe to use and if a problem did arise there were secondary O-rings in place. In the flights leading up to the challengers departure, there was evidence that there were serious problems with the O-rings. On the eve of the launch, the weather forecast was unusually cold for Florida weather, with temperatures in the low twenty’s. Thiokol expressed concern that the O-rings would not work properly...
Words: 662 - Pages: 3
...has two O-rings, working in series. This means that when the primary O-Ring fails the Secondary O-ring will protect the system from the outside, increasing the reliability of the system. Or at least that was the intent of the design; which worked during testing. The main problem was that all testing was conducted at warmer temperatures between 65 – 80°F and the launch day was about 50 degrees colder than the temperature during testing. In preparation to the Challenger mission testing on the SRB system was performed and it was noted during testing that the O-rings eroded to an extent. It was also noted that the erosion was not to the point of failure, therefore NASA decided the risk was minimal. The problem with this approach was that the erosion noted during test was, as stated above, at temperatures higher that launch the ambient temperature. Temperatures as the one experienced at launch caused the O-rings to contract further compromising their sealing value. With a good Risk Board NASA might have studied the O-Ring failure mode and extrapolate the behavior of the O-Rings at the ambient temperature of the launch. The...
Words: 1351 - Pages: 6
...On the 1st February 2003, a critical systems failure on the space shuttle Columbia on its re-entry to the earth’s atmosphere. This caused the disintegration of the shuttle leading to the death of all seven crew members. 1. Describe NASA's apparent approach to risk management after Challenger but before Columbia. On January 28, 1986, the space shuttle Challenger broke apart in 76 seconds after launch, killing all of its 7 crew members. On the day of launch engineers were concerned that the temperature was too low to launch (-2.2 C lowest launch temperatures recorded) and that there was too much ice on the shuttle. O-rings would not perform correctly at this temperature. NASA management was told of this issue but it was deemed an acceptable risk and launch went ahead. After the incident, a new safety office was created to allow better communication and risk assessment. NASA’s apparent approach to risk management at this time was probable risk management1. For the space shuttle, linear analysis might be sufficient between probability, impact, and frequency2, with probability addressing how likely the risk event or condition is to occur, impact detailing the extent of what could happen if the risk materialized, and frequency meaning likelihood of occurrence of an event whose values lie between zero and one. 2. What additional risk measures would you recommend to NASA? Justify your recommendations? Firstly, NASA may need to change the organizational attitude...
Words: 613 - Pages: 3
...HOW TO RE-LAUNCH A PRODUCT SUCCESSFULLY SHREYA. S. PUNTAMBEKAR MBA- I MARKETING B ROLL NUMBER: 36264 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………..3 2. CURRENT SCENARIO………………………………………………………...4 3. THE PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE………………………………………...……..6 4. THE MARKETING MIX AND ITS IMPORTANCE…………………...8 5. SO WHY RE-LAUNCH?.......................................................................12 6. PRODUCT FAILURES…………………………………………………………16 7. PRODUCT TAMPERING……………………………………………………..31 8 THE STEPS TO RE-LAUNCH 8.1 STP ANALYSIS……………………………………………………………….34 8.2 THE RIGHT USE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS……………………..…36 8.3 ADAPT TO CHANGE………………………………………………….…...37 8.4 THE RIGHT USE OF PUBLIC REPLATIONS………………………38 8.5 REDESIGNING THE PRODUCT-THE WHAT & HOW…………41 8.6 THE FINAL STEP-THE RELAUNCH………………………………….44 9. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………….46 10. REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………..47 1. INTRODUCTION Many people think of a product launch as an event, something that happens with a big bang. The purpose of a product launch is to build sales momentum. A winning product launch delivers sales momentum for your company. But there are very few companies who get it right. A wrongly directed product launch can hamper it to the extent of having to take that product off the market completely. Sometimes, sudden changes in the market also hamper the biggest...
Words: 10275 - Pages: 42
...The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster occurred on January 28, 1986, when Space Shuttle Challenger (mission STS-51-L) broke apart 73 seconds into its flight, leading to the deaths of its seven crew members. The spacecraft disintegrated over the Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Cape Canaveral, Florida at 11:38 EST (16:38 UTC). Disintegration of the vehicle began after an O-ring seal in its right solid rocket booster (SRB) failed at liftoff. The O-ring failure caused a breach in the SRB joint it sealed, allowing pressurized hot gas from within the solid rocket motor to reach the outside and impinge upon the adjacent SRB attachment hardware and external fuel tank. This led to the separation of the right-hand SRB's aft attachment and the structural failure of the external tank. Aerodynamic forces broke up the orbiter. The crew compartment and many other vehicle fragments were eventually recovered from the ocean floor after a lengthy search and recovery operation. The exact timing of the death of the crew is unknown; several crew members are known to have survived the initial breakup of the spacecraft. The shuttle had no escape system, and the impact of the crew compartment with the ocean surface was too violent to be survivable. The disaster resulted in a 32-month hiatus in the shuttle program and the formation of the Rogers Commission, a special commission appointed byUnited States President Ronald Reagan to investigate the accident. The Rogers Commission found NASA's organizational...
Words: 2145 - Pages: 9
...Lab 11 Assignment Part 1: Exploring the Moon I- How many Apollo missions were there and what years did they take place? 1. Apollo 1 on January 27, 1967 2. Apollo 7 on October 11, 1968 3. Apollo 8 on December 21, 1968 4. Apollo 9 on March 3, 1969 5. Apollo 10 on May 18, 1969 6. Apollo 11 on July 16, 1969 7. Apollo 12 on November 14, 1969 8. Apollo 13 on April 11, 1970 9. Apollo 14 on January 31, 1971 10. Apollo 15 on July 26, 1971 11. Apollo 16 on April 16, 1972 12. Apollo 17 on December 7, 1972 Apollo 2 and 3 (these were no craft named) Apollo 4 (Also called AS-501) on November 9, 1967. Apollo 5 (also called AS-204) on January 22, 1968. Apollo 6 (Also called AS-502) on April 4, 1968. There were 17 in total. II- How many of the missions orbited the Moon and how many landed? Which ones? * Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 orbited the Moon and returned. * Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and Apollo 17 landed on the Moon. A total of 6. III- Unfortunately, there was an accident early on. Which mission was it? The mission that suffered a tragic accident was Apollo 1. Part 2: Venus I- How many Venera Missions (Russian) were there? Over what time period did these missions occur? Did any of the crafts actually land on the surface? What happened? * Venera 1 in 1961 - Venera 8 in 1972 * Venera 2 and 3 in 1965 - Venera 9 and 10 in 1975 * Venera 4 in 1967 - Venera 11 and 12 in 1978 ...
Words: 1570 - Pages: 7
...Failure is still inherently emotionally charged; getting an organization to accept it takes leadership. There was “ineffective leadership” that “failed to fulfill the implicit contract to do whatever is possible to ensure the safety of the crew.” discouraged the risk to the space shuttle of the foam insulation impact. “The history of NASA indicates that they’ve done it before,” Gehman said. Some of the report’s recommendations were aimed at fixing that organizational flaw, he said. Only leaders can create and reinforce a culture that counteracts the blame game and makes people feel both comfortable with and responsible for surfacing and learning from failures. (See the sidebar “How Leaders Can Build a Psychologically Safe Environment.”) They should insist that their organizations develop a clear understanding of what happened—not of “who did it”—when things go wrong. This requires consistently reporting failures, small and large; systematically analyzing them; and proactively searching for opportunities to experiment. Leaders should also send the right message about the nature of the work; Leaders must ensure that the right approach to learning from failure is applied in each. All organizations learn from failure through three essential activities: detection, analysis, and experimentation...
Words: 1582 - Pages: 7
