Exercise 1: Why "Take Off Your Engineering Hat" Is Direct Pressure on Dissenters — Possible Solution
========================================================================================================

Janis's "direct pressure on dissenters" symptom describes a group
member being pushed to abandon or set aside a dissenting position
specifically to preserve group agreement, rather than being engaged on
the actual substance of their objection.

Robert Lund, as head of engineering, was the group member holding the
dissenting position - the engineering assessment that launching in
cold temperatures carried real, unacceptable risk. Jerry Mason's
instruction to "take off your engineering hat and put on your
management hat" did not engage with Lund's actual technical concern at
all - it didn't offer new data, didn't address the O-ring failure risk
directly, and didn't propose a way to mitigate the danger. Instead, it
explicitly asked Lund to change which role, and therefore which set of
priorities, he was evaluating the decision from - away from the
engineering judgment that had raised the concern.

This is precisely what direct pressure on dissenters looks like in
practice: not a reasoned counter-argument to the dissent itself, but a
social and structural push to simply stop holding the dissenting
position, framed as a shift in role rather than a rebuttal of the
actual underlying safety concern.

ANSWER: Mason's instruction didn't engage with or rebut Lund's actual
engineering concern about O-ring failure - it asked him to change his
decision-making role entirely, away from the one that had raised the
objection. That's a direct, real-world example of pressuring a
dissenter to abandon their position through social/structural means
rather than addressing the substance of what they raised.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This precisely maps the real quote onto Janis's own definition of the
symptom, explaining the specific mechanism (a role shift, not a
rebuttal) that makes it fit.