On January 27, 1986, NASA leaders convened a teleconference to go through the final approvals for a space shuttle launch the following morning.

NASA protocols at the time required each of the shuttle subcontractors to sign off on the launch. This teleconference was intended to be a standard, check-the-box procedure to get that go ahead.

But as soon as the call began, a Morton Thiokol mechanical engineer named Roger Boisjoly began to voice his concerns.

Six months earlier, in July 1985, Boisjoly had written a memo to his superiors laying out a potential catastrophic failure case following his investigation of one of the solid rocket boosters from an earlier space shuttle flight.

His investigation had revealed that a system of two rubber O-rings that formed a seal between two sections of the solid rocket boosters had failed in the prior flight. One ring had failed completely and the other had been damaged.

He believed that if the second O-ring had failed, the results would have been catastrophic.

His analysis suggested that the cold weather at the time of launch made the rubber hard and inflexible, which increased the risk of damage and failure.

The warnings in his original memo were largely ignored, and subsequent attempts to raise the issue for senior management ran into bureaucratic walls.

But on the evening of January 27, just 16 hours before the anticipated launch, and with the temperature due to fall below freezing overnight, Roger Boisjoly got his last chance.

He presented, in vivid detail, his data and an accounting of the mechanical risk, which had become critical in his eyes due to the forecasted low temperatures for the launch.

Initially, Boisjoly's compelling case seemed to be heard. Thiokol's Vice President Joe Kilminster said that he was recommending a "no-go" for launch due to the temperature and associated catastrophic O-ring risk.

Unfortunately, the meeting took a sudden turn when NASA leadership pushed back on the recommendation, arguing that the launch had already been delayed five times and that there was no definitive proof of a failure risk.

Under pressure, the Morton Thiokol team reconsidered their recommendation and gave the go ahead.

At 11:38 am the next morning, with the temperature a record low 36 degrees Fahrenheit, the Space Shuttle Challenger lifted off from Kennedy Space Center in Merritt Island, Florida.

Millions of people tuned in live to watch the launch from around the world.

Just 73 seconds into its flight, the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded and disintegrated, tragically killing all seven crew aboard.

Roger Boisjoly's fears had proven warranted. The O-rings had burned to ash, leaving a weak seal in the joint that caused a catastrophic chain reaction.

Historians frequently reference the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster as one of the most traumatic events burned into the American psyche. A moment that broke the illusion of untouched American technological dominance.

In a ​1996 book​, sociologist Diane Vaughn coined the term Normalization of Deviance in reference to the event and its run-up.

Normalization of Deviance is the process by which unacceptable practices, standards, or behaviors become accepted when they're repeated without immediate negative consequences.

In Vaughn's analysis, the Challenger disaster was not a simple byproduct of the poor decision-making on the January 27 teleconference, or any individual's momentary negligence, but of a slow, broad, systemic drift.

It was a normalization of deviance.

When I first came across this concept, I couldn't help but think that it applies directly to our lives.

The most dangerous habits, behaviors, and beliefs are the ones you slip into slowly, day after day:

• It's the minor repair you ignore
• It's the hard conversation you avoid
• It's the white lie you tell to cover up a mistake
• It's the missed workout when you don't feel motivated

Their damage isn't noticeable in the days. There's no explosion. No catastrophic failure. Nothing.

So, you convince yourself they're fine.

But each day, with each tiny slip, you reset your own standard to a new, slightly lower baseline. The next day, a slip that might have felt huge a few days earlier feels decidedly ignorable.

And suddenly, somewhere down the line, an explosion. Maybe not a catastrophic event, but a momentary blast of awareness. Awareness of a life that looks so far removed from what you envisioned that you can't possibly comprehend how it got there.

You think these outcomes will never happen to you. That you can prevent them by avoiding significant mistakes. In reality, catastrophic outcomes are often just the macro result of thousands of micro mistakes.

The tiny slip in standards that you accepted as normal.

Your own normalization of the deviance.

I'm convinced the ability to hold the line on your standards is what will determine the quality of your future. When you let things slide, you train yourself to accept less than you're worth.

So, where are you normalizing the deviance in your life?

Fight back. Set your standards and hold the line. Especially when it's hard.

Schedule "breaks" from those standards to give yourself room to breathe. Cheat meals from your diet. Rest days from your training program. Relaxation days away from the grind. But make them deliberate. Never allow the breaks to become a subconscious, unintentional slide.

For the rocket to function, everything from the massive boosters to the tiny rubber O-rings needs to do its job.

You are no different. The standards you set and hold will decide your future.

Act accordingly.