Zonk Aircraft Accident in Retrospect Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Analysis: What Went Wrong at Zonk
Hypothesis: Determining the Possible Causes
Alternative Hypothesis: A Different Way of Looking at the Case
In Retrospect: What Could Have Been Done
References

Abstract

Audits and similar checks are viewed as indispensable elements of the aircraft production process for understandable reasons. As the infamous case known as the Zonk accident, when maintenance checks are neglected, the consequences may be dire. Particularly, the safety of passengers and the members of the airplane crew may be jeopardized. Furthermore, the case can be viewed as a graphic example of the fact that fraud and financial schemes must be prevented at all costs in the realm of airplane manufacturing; otherwise, people’s lives will be in danger. Thus, carrying out regular audits and promoting corporate ethics is crucial to facilitate the safety of the key stakeholders.

Analysis: What Went Wrong at Zonk

Promoting safety is crucial for any organization, yet it is especially important for the companies where compliance with the relevant rules defines the well-being of the key stakeholders, including not only customers but also staff members (Florio, 2016). In case of the Zonk Airline Company, the unwillingness to follow the established safety regulations resulted in numerous deaths and injuries as a result of an airplane crash.

One must admit, though, that the lack of proper corporate ethics and the inability of the organization to establish control over the production process are not the only factors that triggered the disaster. Apart from the identified issues, the lack of an appropriate HRM strategy should also be mentioned. For instance, the fact that the new pilot lacked the required training and was not familiar with the aircraft can be viewed as the second most important factor in causing the accident. However, it could be argued that, by making the newly hired pilot fly the plane, Zonk was trying to conceal its fault with its corporate ethics and standards (James, 2015).

Hypothesis: Determining the Possible Causes

Seeing that Zonk was making use of its old aircraft the condition of which could not be defined as working, it would be reasonable to assume that the organization was experiencing financial difficulties at the time. In other words, the firm was trying to make ends meet by hiring the staff that could hardly fit the profile of qualified employees, as well as using the products of which it should have disposed by then. With the specified information in mind, one should consider the people that managed the use of the company’s resources responsible for the catastrophe (Brossman, 2016).

The case provides a plethora of information about the lack of competence in managing the available resources, including the financial ones. Particularly, the list of deferred maintenance items that were registered before the plane took off shows that the aircraft was in no condition to be used. Furthermore, the fact that the flight was termed by the company managers as the opportunity to gain a significant amount of revenues points to the fact that the aircraft, as well as other resources, including human ones, was viewed solely as an opportunity to earn quick money in an attempt to hold the failing company together before it reached the brink of bankruptcy (Sadgrove, 2015).

Alternative Hypothesis: A Different Way of Looking at the Case

Despite the fact that the intrinsic issues within the organization coupled with negligence and the need for a quick financial profit can be considered the primary cause of the accident, and the managers are most likely to be the ones to blame, other people that contributed to the tragedy need to be taken into account. For example, the pilot can be considered as the person that could have been responsible for the crash.

At this point, though, one must mention that none of the official pieces of evidence indicates that the pilot was to blame for the catastrophe. Indeed, the available records show that the pilot was responding adequately to the information provided by the Air Traffic Control personnel. Therefore, the pilot’s possible fault is merely an assumption.

That being said, there were indications that the pilot was rather sleepy. Moreover, witnesses confirmed that the pilot seemed rather perplexed before the flight and was obviously rushing. Therefore, it could be assumed that the pilot might have made the decisions that triggered the disaster. In addition, the weather may have had a significant impact on the outcomes of the flight.

In Retrospect: What Could Have Been Done

Conclusion

The Zonk case represents the instance in which the lack of control over quality and the inability to use a proper HR strategy causes a tragedy. If an audit had been conducted and the problems with the plane had been identified, the issue could have been easily prevented. Therefore, major changes must be made so that similar disasters could be avoided in the future.

Recommendations

A change of the corporate ethics as the means of eliminating the instances of fraud should be viewed as the first step toward an improvement. The company’s HRM framework also needs to be revisited so that competent people could be hired. Last but not least, the system of checks must be improved so that problems could be identified with the help of audits at the earliest stages and reported to the corresponding authorities accordingly. Thus, Zonk will be able to redeem itself and increase the safety levels significantly.

References

Brossman, C. (2016). Building a travel risk management program: Traveler safety and duty of care for any organization. New York, NY: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Florio, F. D. (2016). Airworthiness: An introduction to aircraft certification and operations. New York, NY: Butterworth-Heinemann.

James, L. (2015). Sustainability footprints in SMEs: Strategy and case studies for entrepreneurs and small business. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Sadgrove, K. (2015). The complete guide to business risk management. Franham, UK: Gower Publishing, Ltd.

Click Here To Order Now!