The Dynamics of Long Term Isolation in Space. A Mir Kiss ?

1. The Dynamics of Long Term Isolation in Space.A Mir Kiss ? Group 59

2. The Environment • A Russian isolation program from Moscow's Institute of Biomedical Problems was designed to study the effects of long haul space travel in a replica of the Mir space station. • The 200 sq Meter chamber became a laboratory for more than 80 experiments including studies on behaviour patterns and physiological adaptability.

3. The experiment included 4 Russian Cosmonauts (who had already spent 120 days in isolation) and 3 international researchers Dimitry Sayenko Japan, Norbert Kraft Austria and Judith Lapierre Canada ( only female) who had volunteered their services to spend 110 days in seclusion.

4. The Institutes preference process was vigorous as the researchers were subjected to a barrage of clinical tests prior to selection. The different multi-cultural background of the volunteers was also thought to provide significant contribution to the dynamics of the program. • The aim was to ascertain what kind of difficulties residents of the International space station might face in terms of their ability to effectively live and work together.

5. The international researchers joined the Russian cosmonauts early December 1999. The Russians had been in social isolation for over 4 months. On the eve of the millennium a very violent fight broke out between two of the original participants in the experiment and afterwards the Russian commander of the crew tried to force himself onto Judith Lapierre out of sight of the cameras. He tried to french kiss her twice but Lapierre managed to fight him off. Prior to the violent incidents the Russians had been drinking Vodka. He tried again the next morning. The next day Lapierre and her Austrian and Japanese colleagues complained about the incident to the controllers of the experiment and were told that these incidents were part of the experiment, the crew had to sort out any conflicts between them, just as they would have to if a similar incidents would occurs in an actual space capsule on its way to Mars.

6. Reasons for conflict Differentiation - the behaviour of the Russian cosmonauts which seemed so alien and inappropriate to the other participants yet completely acceptable to them could have been due to differences in culture, training, values and gender. The Russian space agency did not acknowledge the sexual harassment nature of the forced kiss blaming it on “different priorities”. Ambiguous Rules – because there had been no ground rules developed within the team, they had left themselves open to conflicts of practices and power uncertainty – a possible cause for the fight. Communication – Although they were all to communicate with each other in English, the participants had varying levels of competency in speaking the language, therefore increasing the risk of communication errors. Low Emotional Intelligence – the Russian space agency and the cosmonauts involved in the incident acted with no compassion or understanding of Lapierre’s complaint. Had they been of higher emotional intelligence – would the kiss incident have even happened? And if it had due to intoxication, would they have apologised after the alcohol wore off?

7. Lack of a power based frame – there was no-one in a position of power to mediate, arbitrate or inquire into the reasons behind the incident. For example – should the cosmonauts have been allowed vodka in such a confined space to start with, especially after being there for over 120 days? • Relationship Conflicts – did the remaining non Russian cosmonauts focus on the characteristics of the two cosmonauts involved in the incident and ignore the issues (i.e. the alcohol, the lack of training in other cultures which lead to the inappropriate kiss, the fact they had been in a confined space for a long period of time). • Stereotyping – due to the relationship conflict, did the other cosmonauts conclude that the Russians not involved in the incident were inevitably going to act the same way and barricade them in their area for that reason?

8. Power discrepancy Power is the capacity to influence others. The Russian commander was the most powerful person in the capsule for a variety of reasons: • Russian Commander • Legitimate power as a result of his position as commander of the capsule. • Coercive power, he controlled the resource that was important to the other participants’ careers; he could get others removed from the experiment. • Been in the capsule 120 days before the new participants entered the experiment, he was on “home turf”. • The return of the massive investment made by IBMP into the social isolation experiment was vested in the participants who had been in isolation the longest. This put new participants at a disadvantage in any conflict situation, • No language or cultural barriers between him and the people who were in control of the experiment • Judith Lapierre • No legitimate power, just a participant in the experiment. • No coercive power without alliances. • New participants, had only been in capsule for 28 days when the incident occurred; “playing an away game”. • People in control of the experiment had not made big investment in her. • Language and cultural barriers between her and the people in charge.

9. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVEMENT IN FUTURE STUDIES.  There can be many misunderstandings when people from different cultures and backgrounds work together, especially in an isolation experiment as seen in A Mir Kiss. Communication was vital when these seven people came together for 110 days and unfortunately lines were crossed and personal boundaries were broken. What strategies could be used for improvement in future studies like this experiment?

10. * All employees, male and female, should know all rules & policies. * Know your working environment-social and work etiquette. * Know your own comfort level as well as others you are working with. * Establish CLEAR boundaries straight away. * Let others know how you feel- Establishing a positive climate. * Everyone is responsible for stopping offensive behaviour. * No abusing of Power distance. All should be aware of personal boundaries, cross-cultural traditions, sexual harassment, how to overcome conflict with co-workers in the workplace without having to resort to Third-party intervention.

11. Resolution of Conflict • The international team requested the cabins be barred to separate the international team from the Russians as a precaution against further violence thus using separation as means to resolve but mainly prevent conflict • After the incidents that took place on New years Eve, IBMP declared that the events formed part of the experiment. • The Japanese space program convened an emergency meeting after being made aware of the events – The Japanese team member quit the program shortly after due to inaction – Removing himself from further conflict.

12. Management Intervention to resolve • The only Management intervention to resolve the conflict was the measures taken to prevent further conflict by separating two of the factions. This was done by physically placing barriers between the international team (at their request) and the Russian team. • The Japanese member of the team was replaced by a Russian researcher after he received inadequate resolution and resigned. Substituting a better cultural fit may be seen as a management action but ultimately is not a root cause resolution. • The Russian institutes reaction post-experiment was to blame cultural differences, This was deemed to be unacceptable by Mrs Lappierre and Mr Kraft.

13. Model of the Conflict Process. • Incompatible goals: Russian cosmonauts had a realistic chance of space travel as a result of participating in the experiment, the other potential astronauts were dependent on their own national space agencies, these played no major role in the experiment. • Differentiation: Even though we can not make any causal statements about cultural, gender or language differences as source of the conflict due to the massive confounding factors, these differences contributed to the conflict. • Interdependence: There was a reciprocal interdependent relationship between the participants in the study but the non Russian participants were far more dependent on their Russian colleagues than the other way around. • Scarce resources: The experiment took place in a very confined space which was shared by 7 people. The original Russian participants had the whole space to themselves before the others entered the experiment. Having to share this commodity with the new people contributed to conflict between the Russians themselves and between the Russians and the “intruders”. • Ambiguous rules: There was no informed consent from the Austrian,Canadian and Japanese subject in the actual aim of the study, which was the effect of long term social isolation on the Russian cosmonauts in the experiment. • Poor communication: Communication had broken down between the participants in the capsule, but more importantly the safety concerns of the female subject were not listened to by the people in control of the experiment.

14. Organisational Approaches to Conflict Management • Emphasise superordinate goals: IBMP researchers should have made clear that the Russian cosmonauts’ success would depend on the other participants’ successful participation. This would have given the commander a sense of responsibility for all members of his crew. • Clarifying rules and procedures: All participants in the study should have been informed on their role in the experiment before giving their consent to participate. • Reduce Value Differences: Shared experiments from the start to emphasise the identity commonalities as scientists and potential astronauts rather than cultural and gender differences. This will lead to reduced differentiation between the participants. • Improve Communication and Understanding: After differentiation was reduced the contact hypothesis states that shared experiences will reduce the conflict. • Reducing interdependence: Splitting the capsule in two did reduce the interdependence between participants but also reduced the validity of the experiment. • Increasing resources: Unfortunately the scarcest resource in the experiment, space and this is also the hardest to increase.

15. Summary A Mir Kiss? is a case study of conflict in a very particular environment; an experimental research project that simulated the most stressful work place imaginable, a space capsule traveling the greatest distance at the greatest speed man has ever traveled away from earth. The International researchers introduced psychological stress for the Russian cosmonauts and this was the subject of the experiment. The conflict inside the capsule might have been between the Russian cosmonauts and the International crew members and in particular between Lapierre and the Commander of the capsule, the real conflict is between the International crew and the organisers of the experiment. This conflict arrises out of a lack of informed consent in a experimental setup where deception was a crucial part of the conditions and could never be resolved between the participants in the experiment.