Keith mentioned in a previous comment that HQ reads these posts. If it is true I think that is great, that they care so much as to try to listen to us. But I do ask that they stop reading our postings like anthropologists and start reading it like empathetic leaders. Like any good leader they should not be moved at every whim of those they lead, but they should also not ignore those that follow.
I think that those of us in Gen Y (at least I am) are upset because NASA is supposed to represent high-tech, but the industry that is supposed to be ahead of everyone else is sadly about 8-10 years behind industry. Sure there are projects that are amazing in and of themselves, but the resources going into them don’t compare with the results obtained.
I read an article in the Economist by Peter Diamandis that said that the “average age of the engineers who built the Apollo was just 26”. Wow! I don’t know if that is true, but I don’t doubt that it is. Why, because young people are too dumb to not know what they can not accomplish. Am I calling the youngsters in the era of Apollo dumb, the people in their 20’s that built the dotcom industry dumb, or am I suggesting that the people in my own generation are dumb. No! I am saying that our generation sees possibilities that the older generations can’t see. Will they all become reality? Probably not, but I bet if you gave us a crack at it we could accomplish much more than those who are sitting in HQ would with all their wisdom. I remind you of the story where a large truck got stuck in a bridge, the officials came and measured the truck and then the bridge and found that the only way they could remove the truck was to blow up the bridge. They were perplexed thinking of alternate solutions as to how they could solve the problem of getting the truck out of the bridge when a child of one of the men working on the problem suggested that deflating the tires would make the truck smaller. True or not, when I first heard that story I felt humbled. With youth comes innocence, innocence doesn’t look at a problem and say “it can’t be done” innocence looks at a problem and asks “how can that be done?” . You see the difference. One is reactionary and the other proactive. We all know that proactive people are more successful than reactive ones.
INNOVATION …. STRATEGY …. Those are powerful words. Aren’t they? For me those words have such great significance that the mere mention of these words stirs me up. I am certain that many people in America and especially NASA feel the same way, or at least I hope they do. I have such high regard for the significance of these words that I wonder why NASA uses them in such a sacrilege way. Oh! Did I really just say that? Innovation and Strategy are the words that NASA uses to hide the more appropriate terms TACTICS and SAFETY. These terms are like the Ying and the Yang. They are opposites but when done in harmony together they are great.
The older generations are focused “on the mission” — TACTICS. The younger generation is trying to use new technologies to speed up processes — STRATEGY. NASA leaders are so focused on “tried and true” that they fail to see the possibilities that could happen. I am told that NASA managers have to be shown a fool proof explanation on the reasons why a new method would work before they will be motivated to do anything (sounds like SAFETY, huh?). They make it so difficult to explain the rationale as to why a new idea would benefit the institution that most people don’t even try and instead sit in their desks disgruntled at the fact that NASA is not listening. The best and the brightest, the ones that NASA should cater to, become so dissatisfied that their spirit is lost. Perhaps they do assimilate, but they no longer have the vigor that is needed to make NASA the leaders in technology. Instead they become focused on the mission and what is tangible because their wisdom shows them that dreaming is for kids.
What is worst about NASA is that their military style of “need to know” and “marching orders” which tends to create an atmosphere of oblivious individuals where only a handful of people really know what is going on and what the “mission” really is. This lack of knowledge distresses those that work for NASA because they are working and they can’t even measure the results of their work. Instead of NASA leaders actively informing those that follow of the criticality of the individuals efforts they give us marching orders that make us feel like slaves instead of valued team members. In a generation that has had all the luxuries of the hard work done by previous generations can you see how such a tactic could alienate us. For those that are military minded, I read a story in the book Blink by Malcom Gladwell about Paul Van Riper a retired Marine General who’s story is a lesson for both those in the older generation and younger generation. The group that runs war games JFCOM (Joint Force Command) wanted to try their new information technologies that could predict within a statistical accuracy the next move of the opponent’s action against a great military mind. JFCOM asked Riper to be the opposing team and Riper accepted. General Riper grew up thinking about military strategy and was a true student of war, he had a good idea of what the military should be and he surrounded himself with well trained personnel for the war game. JFCOM had the power of meticulous knowledge of what the likely tactics of the opponent would be. General Riper had confidence in his men, he knew they were well trained, and instead of giving his men specific orders he gave them strategic moves that they were in charge of. He didn’t spend the time giving exacting details on how to get things done, he just gave them their mission. The results were that the JFCOM team could not predict what the opposing team was going to do because General Ripers men would use their training and their intuitive mind to change tactics at the appropriate times. The result was that General Ripers team was adaptable and that allowed them to win the battle.
The key points here is that : Technology isn’t always better (this is for Gen Y) and that meeting tactical demands is not always the best strategy (this is for NASA management).
Why do I say that meeting tactical demands is not always the best strategy?
NASA is so focused on meeting tactical demands that contractors are penalized for exceeding results instead of being rewarded for it(obviously they are penalized for inferior results too). That creates an environment where the “bottom-line” dictates that innovation is not economical and in fact counter-productive – because exceeding expectations is BAD. Am I ok with this, NO! I am outraged! I know that resentment exists from contractors to “civil servants” – some engineers who love NASA would never work for NASA because they say that “civil servants don’t do any work” — and I am confident that it also exists from “civil servants” to contractors. It should, because instead of us working together we are working against each other. – Keith — you wanted a strategy — that was a gem. First strategy: give contractors incentive to innovate and excel. This might mean that more money is spent on one mission, but the results that follow should yield lower costs as time goes on by creating an industry whose engines are burning at the full fire that capitalist market can muster. – How is this accomplished? — I don’t know. I understand that the NAVY (submarines) is a lucrative industry, research their contracts. – And don’t give up because “the military has more money”. Think outside the box – be innovative.
What did General Riper have that NASA doesn’t always have?
He had highly trained personnel. Strategy number 2 is : spend more money on training. The more one individual knows the more they are able to produce. This is a kin to saving money in the bank for retirement. It appears to be only a “nice” thing to do but in the long run it pays off. This doesn’t have to be expensive; the internet provides a great medium to quickly transfer knowledge to the masses. With all the highly skilled individuals in NASA it shouldn’t be hard or expensive to develop online courses. Look at how the Standard Deviants teach their courses, they are exceptional.
You wouldn’t send an untrained soldier to war…would you? On the job training is good but if tactics are going to be met at the expectations we should be aspiring to, on the job training will not suffice and is no longer necessary.
Why are NASA employees (civil servants and contractors alike) distressed?
NASA workers don’t know what the “mission” really is. Generation Y members are real team players who love to be part of the team and like to be treated as equals. Treat us like equals and we will outperform previous generations.
The lack of communication and collaboration has to be improved. Generation Y has listed many sources of technology that help people collaborate. If you want more ideas on how to increase communication and collaboration read Wikinomics. Heck! Listen to Gen Y, we have plenty of ideas that would work if you listened. Heck if you want a case study that shows how effective these technologies are read about Proctor and Gamble who have used these methods to increase their profit margin by a lot (The Game Changer by A. G. Lafley), or read about Google ( I haven’t found a good book yet).
I could go on and on, but it is getting late now. Strategy? Just do it!
Another really good book is Winning by Jack Welch.
If I were NASA leadership I would request the consultation and advice of great minds like Malcolm Gladwell, Stephen D. Levitt, and many others who have proven to be innovative leaders and thinkers. Let them write a book about the experience, and make progress possible.
I would also listen to those under me, and not just the top 20% but the second 70%. As Jack Welch mentions in his book “Winning”, the second 70% are the ones that get most of the work done.
April 12th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
You take the opportunity to engage HQ and what do you do? You set up a ‘You vs Us’ situation and try and put the blame on HQ i.e.
” But I do ask that they stop reading our postings like anthropologists and start reading it like empathetic leaders.”
You then go on to devalue those of us who are no longer in our 20’s as if you can just walk in and do a better job 5 years out of college:
“… but I bet if you gave us a crack at it we could accomplish much more than those who are sitting in HQ would with all their wisdom.”
Some “strategy”. Indeed, you sound a bit like those “Anonymous” videos on YouTube that rip into Scientology:
“Listen to Gen Y, we have plenty of ideas that would work if you listened.”
All I see in your post is Gen Y chest thumping and arm waving. I see no specific project mentioned whereby you and your Gen Y team can fix something/make something better.
April 12th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Rolando: I do not want to diminsh you passion or enthusaism in ny way.
You guys can either stage a revolution and take NASA down by brute force and make them comply (not bloody likely) or you can infiltrate the status quo, learn their ways, gain their trust, and begin to make small, strategic changes. When you have a critical mass, you can start changing the way things are done on a more massive scale.
Tennis pro Jimmy Connors used to refer to age and experience like this: “When I was young I simply ran all over the court to hit the ball wherever it was. As I got older I could not run like that - so I just made sure I was standing in the right spot when the ball arrived.”
You folks need to harness the impulses and think strategically - or, in the immortal words of SNL during the 2000 campaign, to use some “strategery”. Demanding a seat at the table will get you as eat. But that does not mean that the other people at the table are going to do much more than be polite and pretend to listen - and then go ahead and do what they planned to do anyway.
The CIO at NASA ARC (Chris Kemp) is a former web entrepreneur who made a lot of money - and that usually only happens when you know of which you speak. He is 30 years old. He is widely respected and more importantly he is LISTENED TO at NASA HQ. You should be seeking his counsel on such things as you tend to discuss here.
Some of the Gen Y folks at NASA don’t like Chris because he also tends to poke through a lot of the Gen Y arm waving and smoke and mirrors gambits. That is their loss for not trying to engage him. He looks for performance as a marker or progress - not talking about doing things.
April 12th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Keith — It has never been You vs. Us. You sound bitter and skeptical of every idea that anybody proposes. Instead of looking at the Gen Y weaknesses and suggesting ways of improvement you tear down all the good ideas at the weakest thread. You are not reading like an anthropologist but an antagonist. I’d prefer anthropologist to that. I said that I respected the work you did.
If my words sound rash, I apologize. But when I see the older generations reading our posts. I see a bunch of older people laughing at us not taking us seriously.
I believe that Gen Y could accomplish a lot more if given the opportunity. I also believe that if the older generations and younger generations worked together we would accomplish even more. The wisdom of the many generations is something to be leveraged not teared down.
When it comes to computers Gen X and Gen Y are the wisest of the bunch. Why? Because we have been using it the most. Gen Y needs computers to function, Gen X might not necessarily.
When it comes to Tactics and true knowledge the Boomers and Veterans have the most wisdom. We should listen to them on those fronts, and at least I take every opportunity to ask questions.
Keith — perception change depending on the person that is looking. You see chest thumping and arm waving. I see a few sound strategies to accomplishing a great goal that we all want to see done.
I read that a lot of people don’t tell their leaders/managers what is really on their mind. The result is that most managers are clueless as to what their people are really thinking. — that is not good.
Keith I suggest that you read the post again, but this time instead of searching for the worst in my post I suggest looking for the best. Every situation has good and bad, what you see is your choice.
April 12th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Keith — Thanks for the info. I tend to agree that some of Gen Y antics are arm waving. Although not due to malicious intent, but lack of knowledge. I do however think that if an acceptable agreement is made between the many age groups that we would all be better off.
April 12th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I read this with a different perspective, that of private industry.
10 years ago, I used to commission Westinghouse gas turbine power plants. At that time, I’d been in the field of process instrumentation 20 years, but I never “demanded a seat” at the table. I earned my seat by having the right answers when they were needed.
I showed up every day, kept my nose clean, and had the right answers. In a relatively short time, I built a good reputation, and had too much work!
I am blessed to be able to work for a smaller company and to train apprentices, yes, from Gen Y. I’m also proud to say that they are a very well skilled group, and are spreading their wings. Two of them “graduated” and now work for Siemens Medical. Every year at Christmas, they come back and thank me.
The worst thing that you can do is be confrontational. Listen to what’s going on, and don’t be afraid to ask questions. Understand that serious spaceflight is a multigenerational endeavor, and do the best you can. Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither was Apollo.
Myself, I’m 52, and I’m just happy to see that there’s enough interest in space by my children’s generation.
April 12th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Dave,
I think your perspective is right on. This absolutely is a multigenerational effort and we are all doing our best to show that we can think big and still do our everyday tasks. One of the very reasons I took the job I’m in now (over a competing offer from a bigger company) is because I knew it would give me more opportunity to learn and challenge myself to grow.
Honestly, I think the “us vs. them” confrontation is being exaggerated. Everyone that I personally know that is involved, both in Constellation and strategic outlook efforts, has been incredibly collegiate and supportive. And I do mean everyone, from the new grads to the 15-year (or more) veterans and those of us in between.
April 12th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Keith — I agree that my approach might not have been the best and I agree that my generation is being impatient. I don’t however think that all of our impatience is due to our youth but because the speed NASA moves does not keep up with the speed required to accomplish OUR goals. I also agree with your comment on Jimmy Connors, but I think that while we are young we should be allowed to move at our own pace and in our own way so that we can acquire the most amount of wisdom possible (from mistakes and victories). Imagine if Jimmy Connors was constrained at youth to only making so many steps, do you think he would have ever known where the ball was going at his senior age?
Dave — Thank you for being a mentor to our young people. Not all of us have the opportunity to be mentored. I assure you that I love to ask the older group as many questions as I possibly can. At least I do when I get an audience that listen — there is a enough that listen that gives me hope.
I posted a comment without logging on and it didn’t get posted. I said in one of the comments that all generations have something positive to give to the Space Exploration effort. The younger generations (Gen X and Gen Y) are the wiser group when it comes to using computers — they should be listened to. The older generation (Boomers and Veterans) are wiser in acquired knowledge about space amongst other things — they should be listened to when it comes to this.
Keith — thanks for the info on Chris Kemp. I don’t think we can be satisfied with a few small victories (at least not for NASA’s sake), but I don’t think that we need to get everything that was mentioned in the Gen Y presentation. Read some of the books I mentioned, I have been doing my research to come up with those charts and figures.
April 13th, 2008 at 1:22 am
WRT Jimmy Connors- just remember that you are not the only ones playing on the tennis court - and right now you don’t even own the court
Every generation is impatient with the previous one. In my experience in and around NASA the younger folks who move ahead and gain authority and do things of real value accomplish this by utilizing the input of their mentors along the way - energy and experience are melded together. Young people who push ahead and trample their way toward the top usually end up being ejected before they accomplish anything of value.
How do you think Bill Gerstenmaier, Mike Hawes, and Mark Uhran started out? We’re all exactly the same age. They started at NASA fresh out of college. Look at where they are now. They have not forgotten how they got to where they are. Seek them out.
April 13th, 2008 at 3:07 am
“Generation Y members are real team players who love to be part of the team and like to be treated as equals. Treat us like equals and we will outperform previous generations.”
What person doesn’t like being treated like an equal? That’s not a generational thing.
Personally, I subscribe to the belief that I ought to give the best I am capable of regardless of circumstances. I have a job to do, and if I can do it at a level that “will outperform previous generations” I will do so whether the recipient of my labor treats me as an equal or as a subordinate.
There is a basic level of respect every person should be treated with and in that sense we are certainly equal, but people are only “entitled” to so much. Fact is, we don’t have the experience, we don’t have the knowledge, and we don’t have the understanding the others do when we walk onto that team on day 1.
Being the new guy and saying, “Here are all the things you’re doing wrong…” isn’t exactly the best way to earn the respect of your new team, especially if you haven’t put in your time in to really see what’s going on.
And to me, that’s what this idea of “being equal” translates to: respect. True respect - be it in this industry or any other walk of life - is earned. And that doesn’t happen in a day, doesn’t happen because it’s demanded, doesn’t happen by magic.
If you’re waiting to perform until somebody gives you what you think you deserve, don’t be surprised if you don’t receive it. You certainly wouldn’t get it from me, and I’m one of the “kids” just like you.
April 13th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
“WRT Jimmy Connors- just remember that you are not the only ones playing on the tennis court - and right now you don’t even own the court ;-)”
Touche!
” How do you think Bill Gerstenmaier, Mike Hawes, and Mark Uhran started out? ”
I am certain hard work and perseverance were part of what got them where they are today. I expect a lot from my leaders, because I have high regard for the positions they hold. What I detest are individuals who climb the latter for personal gratification, instead of for a call to be of greater service to everyone.
I have plenty of ideas that I know will have a positive impact on how NASA operates now. What I don’t know how to do is get past the politics and the status quo thinking. The guys you mentioned are pretty big cats. Do you honestly think they would listen to a pup? If the answer is yes, what is the format they are acclimated to listening in?
April 13th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
1. Perhaps you can start posting some of your ideas here?
2. If there is something online here, it would be a simple matter for me to draw their attention to it. 2 of the 3 people I mentioned were quests at my wedding.
April 14th, 2008 at 4:51 am
Keith — Under your advisement I have written some of the ideas that I have come up with or modified along with real business reasons for incorporating them. I did not create the charts and figures but I did provide enough sense as to why it would benefit NASA. My ideas are especially designed to create real competition and real innovation in NASA. If done correctly everyone should benefit. Some of the ideas I mention are so new that they will likely fall on deaf ears. They do however come from great success stories.
ram — my approach for identifying a problem is not the best, but I assure you that I work very hard. What I outlined were things that motivate people to work slower or not at all. We are human and we have feelings.
April 14th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
>>our generation sees possibilities that the older generations can’t see<<
Okay, name them. Not communication ideas–we’ve heard/read plenty. What about these?
–What specific ideas does Gen Y have to improve launch vehicle efficiency?
–What suggestions do you have for improving logistics?
–What strategies do you suggest for hiring new/younger workers when the agency is facing workforce downsizing in the next three years?
–What new inventions do you have to improve space exploration? Aeronautics? Earth science? Planetary science?
–What space technologies can you develop that will improve life on Earth?
–What new scientific experiments do you think should be used to study/explore the Moon, Mars, or other parts of the solar system/universe?
These are real, substantive issues that NASA needs help with today. If there is a seriously new, Gen Y-based perspectives on how to deal with them, I’m sure they would love to hear them. Marketing/communication is only one piece of the puzzle, and a rather small piece at that.
April 15th, 2008 at 12:43 am
BD — Those are some of very good questions and we should all be trying to answer them. I will think about them.
I have to disagree that communication is only a small piece of the pie. There might be a case for marketing, but communication is extremely important. It is like saying that lubricant has an insignificant role in the function of a car, yet if you take away the lubricant your car will stall. Communication might be a small piece of the pie, but it is extremely important.
If you have heard a lot of ideas about communication improvements, perhaps it is because it is a real big problem in NASA. Although it is bound to be a big problem in any large organization.
April 15th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
re: communication being a small piece
Perhaps I should qualify that just a bit. As a piece of what NASA does (and is supposed to do), communication is small. Admittedly, they could do better, as Keith points out on a regular basis, but there are technical and organizational issues to tackle as well. Communication is necessary and important, but it is also important that NASA has something to communicate ABOUT.
A gripe I hear from old hands in the space business is, “Gen Y keeps harping on communication. Are they ever going to DO anything?” There’s clearly a cultural gap here. Younger generations are more interested and adept at communicating EVERYTHING. We don’t necessarily understand, accept, or agree with the stoic, say-nothing-unless-it’s-necessary attitudes of our elders. However, some folks just want to do the job (engineering, science) and not talk so much about it–let the results speak for themselves.
April 16th, 2008 at 1:25 am
I would certainly hope that today’s Gen Y SMC presentation will be posted at opennasa.com and elsewhere - as was the earlier presentation.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:41 am
I had the advantage of coming into NASA just after the post-Apollo hiring gap. I was impatient in many ways, I’m sure. I did have an advantage of learning from the Apollo generation and I soaked as much of that up as I could. NASA is, i believe, still mostly a meritocracy. Demonstration is still the critical factor. Rolando’s (I think) post that started this thread has way too many items for me to comment on in one sitting. As a 52 year old leader like BD, I believe that my job is not to get out of the way, but to train, mentor, advise, nurture, etc newer members of our workforce. Each new generation brings new ideas and tools. Those will help transform the workplace. I still remember 1991 or so having Keith explain and show me Gopher and Mosiac on the Mac in his office. Email and the web define much of my work environment today whether i want it to or not (Webtads, Travel manager, etc!)
As a manager /leader i am very concerned about comments implying mindless following of rules. Perhaps because I didn’t follow them very well myself…
I don’t follow blogs much but am happy to talk to folks as I can. I have a Facebook profile (my kids are 17 and 19 ). I am also on the NASA network there…
April 17th, 2008 at 5:00 am
5 things in response to Mike’s post
1. I also learned the basics of payload integration from Apollo, Skylab and early shuttle folks. These were people who lived Apollo 13. John Aaron and Gene Kranz were at meetings. So was T.K. Mattingly and Fred Haise. I used to hear people complaining about software since “we used relays and solenoids in Skylab and everything worked just fine”.
2. The IT weenies at Space Station Freedom Program Office shut my Internet access off more than once - I just broke into the network room plugged it back in. They explained their actions by saying that they did not exactly understand how I got access to the “Internet” and what I was doing with that access. Too late I had learned how to email my friends in Antarctica
3. Gopher http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopher_(protocol)
“Gopher is a distributed document search and retrieval network protocol designed for the Internet. Its goal is to function as an improved form of Anonymous FTP, enhanced with hyperlinking features similar to that of the World Wide Web.”
4. Mosaic (web browser) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)
“Mosaic was the first popular World Wide Web browser and Gopher client. It was reliable and easy to install, which opened the Web up to the general public. Mosaic was the first browser to actually implement images embedded in the text, rather than displayed in a separate window.”‘
5. I named the Centrifuge Accommodation Module (CAM). Ask Mike. He was there - and he had my Ricky the Space Rat hand puppet with him …
April 17th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Mike,
I just wanted to thank you for your comments. I absolutely agree that your role is not to just “get out of the way.” I am constantly looking to those that have been there before me for the opportunity to learn.
That’s why I took the job I’m in now over a competing offer that would have stuck me doing engineering database management. One of my professors at Rice, John Muratore, told me that some of the best jobs were the ones that forced him out of his comfort zone and to learn something new. I’ve tried to take that to heart.
For those of you that don’t know him, John is the former X-38 lead and a former space shuttle chief engineer. I consider myself very fortunate to have studied flight test engineering under his tutelage.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Just some comments from a 39 year old (Gen X) who was where you are just over a decade ago. The impression I got from reading your article is that you are waiting to be given permission to do something across all of NASA. HQ doesn’t even have the power to affect all of NASA that way. Change happens at the individual level: each person within NASA has to see that what you are doing is valuable to them and the tasks sitting directly in front of them.
Take instant messaging for example, in many enterprises today IM is an invaluable tool. But its one that the IT department has little to no influence over since people generally use AIM, Yahoo, or MSN. People just started using it at work because it solved a problem (the same is going for twitter). No one went to IT and asked permission to create an enterprise wide instant messaging strategy.
When I first started working at Georgia Tech in 1990 I was already somewhat aware of the Internet and how it worked. My first job was as glorified tape monkey in the machine room. But I had access to a Sun workstation and the Internet. So I installed gopher and WAIS and started building services for students that I thought they might like. I didn’t ask permission from anyone. Within 6 months I was saving the university hundreds of thousands in software costs and giving students services they’d been screaming for. I paid my own way to IETF meetings, hacked code on my own, and lead by doing things, not by asking permission or waiting to be invited to the higher up meetings about IT strategy.
If you want to be respected, treated as an equal, and have your ideas adopted, then do or create something useful on your own. The people you are talking to manage billion dollars budgets, fly men into space on a regular basis, and build amazing pieces of technology. And they have been doing it for years. To be treated as an equal you have to show that you can do that to. Where is your “Get’s Useful Shit Done” evidence?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Agree 100% Michael.
1. Instant Messaging not only allows point to point interaction it also allows a leveling of the workforce. Alas, NASA is a hierarchical organization and often spends inordinate amounts of money and effort to retain and reinforce that structure. It would be a simple matter to create a separate IM network - isolated from the main network - for people to use for non proprietary information. But when you look at how ODIN charges many times the purchase cost of a computer to “maintain it, you have to ask if NASA actually wants to be efficient.
2. “do or create something useful on your own”. Also agree. It is one thing to poke at how bad things are. Anyone can do that. But not just anyone can fix things and improve on them. To get a seat at the big table you need to earn it. This is how the real world works outside of NASA -and inside as well. Do you really want people to be promoted because they ask to be promoted or to promote them because they have proven their worthiness? Alas, proving your worthiness takes time and effort. Gen Y is used to instantaneous feedback and action.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Justin,
John is a good friend and the absolute exemplar at getting things done! You can learn a lot from him. Say hi for me.
April 19th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
A toast: To more mavericks with a team spirit.
Mike Hawes, thank you for taking the time to write your comments. I will try to be a better leader and less of a complainer.
I felt I needed to delete the last comment. The implications were not fair.
May 12th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I wanted to share some remarks heard elsewhere:
- “Culture eats strategy for lunch” (something to ponder considering the thread above).
- “We need a 100 year vision, and then do what we need to do, step by step, in order to accomplish the construction of a beyond speed of light/time warp-capable vehicle.” (86 year old technologist responding to my questions about how we currently bound development. He went on to offer specific examples of exactly what needed to be achieved in technology and science to achieve this goal…but what he was really focusing on was the importance of a mindset and an aesthetic).
When a few people heard “100 years” they all said they would be dead and dismissed the thought (culture eats stategy for lunch again).
It made me wonder about the role or importance of an altruistic mindset, and the nature of people willing to make personal sacrifice and investement for a result they may not see in their lifetime, and willing to work toward a reward others will likely receive.
I am wondering if these qualities are key ingredients for progress, regardless of physical age or experience (?)