There is no shortage of research studies and publications describing the “wage gap” between men and women. There is no question that the gap exists - the question is, what can we do to close the gap?
At JSC, there seems to be equality in the “top” jobs that women and men hold. Take a look at MCC - you are just as likely to find a female flight director as a male.
NASA has been working toward increasing public understanding of what it does and why it is relevant to the public. NASA has created a message which intends to bring this understanding home and succinctly encapsulate everything that it does. While I am a large advocate for creating a guiding coalition, creating vision, communicating the vision, encourage action and celebrating short-term wins for internal change (see Kotter’s Harvard Business Review Article, “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail“), externally, I believe NASA should focus on output.
I recall seeing historic television clips of Apollo astronauts in parades rolling through the streets in convertibles. These were heroes accomplishing extraordinary tasks. While I was not involved in this program, it seems to have been a celebration of feats performed and needed no script. The voice of the Apollo program was not the NASA spokesperson, it was Walter Cronkite. NASA focused on achieving its mandate and let everyone else do the talking.
Interesting item pointed out to me today is Project Virgle. Though in many cases, this appears to be an April Fools joke, there are some items that spur much debate.
I have taken the liberty of posting to that group the fact that we, here at Open Nasa, do truly believe in the importance of engagement. The benefits associated with working across many generational, educational, and industrial lines are astounding and I hope that those who read through Project Virgle’s group discussion will visit this site and provide the feedback/opinions/dreams that we hope to integrate into NASA’s Mission.
On April 12th, 1961, some Russian dude named Yuri became the first man in the history of the world to go into space.
47 years later, haven’t we moved on? Isn’t this old news? Why are we still celebrating? Does this explain 120 parties in 40 countries on 7 continents around the world?
For those who don’t know, VASMIR is an acronym that stands for VAriable Specific Impulse Rocket. For those still a bit confused, it’s a plasma rocket. The design of this rocket started with research in the 1960’s and 1970’s. The research was focused on creating and sustaining a “sun-like plasma substance here on earth”. To create this sun-like substance, material has to be heated to sun-like temperatures, which is in the neighborhood of 5,800 Kelvin (or 9,980 degrees Fahrenheit). Of course, there’s not a container on earth that can hold this substance, so work was done on constructing massive electromagnetic fields to hold it.
Fast-forward a few years, a Ph.D. and the start of an astronaut career, and you have one Dr. Franklin Chang-Diaz, taking this idea of massive electromagnetic fields and transforming it into the next-gen space propulsion system. The unique thing about VASMIR is it’s simplicity in concept (of course, the physics and mathematics behind it are a bit more complicated). Essentially, Dr. Chang-Diaz is taking some inert gas, using strong magnetic fields to transform this gas into a plasma by stripping away electrons and allowing nature to follow its course. This course includes some electrons and ions swirling at various angles, gaining momentum, and finally transferring that circular motion into axial (or longitudinal) motion. At this point, Sir Isaac Newton takes over with basic laws of motion (”equal and opposite reactions and such), and the bigger, heavier ions produce small amounts of moment on the engine, thus propelling it forward.
I have a friend who was recently identified as a NASA Future Leader in some publication that is supposed to be arriving in my mailbox soon. I’m horrified… the agency should be ashamed that it is trying to make such an allegation!
Why am I so upset?
I was in the Space Technology-5 (ST5) Mission Operations Center (MOC) at Goddard Space Flight Center. I’d been preparing for that day for two years, ever since we found out that someone was crazy enough to actually pay to launch this mission after all. Although I had other roles, my primary responsibility had been to develop the software tools that we would use to maneuver the three spacecraft into particular formations over the 90 day mission.
Of course, what you don’t know is that ST5 had always been the mission where if something could go wrong, it would. Launch day was no different in that regard. The state vector that we received indicated that our initial formation was all screwed up: the spacecraft were in the wrong order, were separating more quickly than expected, and the rocket body was in the middle of it all! The sun sensors were telling us that ST5 had managed to discover a second sun! Oh, and all the tracking data were either in an unexpected format or completely unusable, and radar passes couldn’t distinguish one spacecraft from another!
There’s an article on NasaWatch.com that I found rather interesting. Basically, it’s a response to the attention the Gen Y presentation has been gaining over the past few weeks. More interesting to me, however, is the responses given to this article from Gen X’ers and older. In particular, there’s the notion that instead of finding something broken or missing and fixing or inventing it, we’re complaining about not being in NASA leadership, programs, and the like. While it would be undeniably cool to hold any leadership position at NASA at the tender age of 27, all of us are, among other things, realists. We do understand and comprehend the concept of corporate ladders and hierarchies. We understand that Gen X, the Boomers, and those before them have already paid their dues to be in the positions they currently hold, and that we must do the same before we get to the same positions. As I stated in my last post, the Gen Y presentation points to a larger issue. It’s bigger than leadership positions, inclusions into decision making, and such. It’s about NASA as a whole lacking in the communications department.
One thing I believe everyone here should realize is that NASA has been, since it’s conception, a government organization. Thus, it adheres to certain government models (structure, executions of plans and procedures, and communications). On the whole, our government tends to hold information very close to the vest until that information has been combed, scrutinized, structured, and approved for release. NASA, being first and foremost a government entity, also follows this model. What we (Gen Y) are asking for is that NASA modify it’s external communications model by becoming more transparent to the public. After all, being a government organization means we are a public organization. We are funded only by the taxes the American people agree to pay; thus, we are responsible, first and foremost, to the public we serve. How does NASA serve the public? Well, everyone today is in love with GPS enabled cellphones, navigation systems in vehicles, satellite TV, advances in the medical field, environmental research, the list goes on and on. However, if you were to go to your neighbor and inquire about what they know about NASA, I would guess that the list would be rather short. Can this be rectified? Absolutely. How do we go about doing this? That requires change, and changing an organization requires individuals to do something that most people are very uncomfortable with, and that’s change themselves.
Just a few hours ago I found out about the Gen-Y presentation and opennasa.com. I must say that I am extremely excited that there are like minded people that are working at making NASA great. I got introduced to the presentation from one of my project leads (who has listened to me bring up many of the same things mentioned in the presentation) and I must say that I really like it; however, my lead brought up a good point. He stated that the presentation was very “hip” but that the presentation style was likely to get very little attention from NASA management. It falls under what I call “know your audience”, the presentation was a great presentation for young people and I am certain that anybody our age will love it (as I and many others did and will). Yet, older generations are more acclimated to having things presented to them more formally with charts and figures. I expect that NASA management will consider the presentation as “selfish” as Mensah stated in “The Larger Picture” because the NASA culture is military in nature. In their minds a good soldier does what they are told and doesn’t sass back. Don’t try telling them we are not in the miliatry because they will likely think you are being “selfish”.
Anyway the point to this post is to suggest that we should create a new presentation geared towards conveying the pressing issues that are blatantly apparent to Gen Y to the older generation leaders in a way that they can understand and not feel we are being “selfish”. I have read Wikinomics and that book has many good case studies that could be used in the presentation. I am certain that the users of opennasa.com are aware of much more information that would help make a compelling argument that will motivate our leaders to not only listen to us but agree with us.
“FITZPATRICK!!!” He’d call, running up and grabbing my facemask with a giant fist of hard, burly knuckles, “you’re running around like a blind dog in a meat house, son!”
Eloquent words recalled from my days prowling the defensive backfield as a free safety on the high school football practice fields. My coach would make it a point to yell from the complete opposite side of the field, making everyone stop in their tracks to watch his 260-pound frame barrel down on me to inform me that:
Recent Comments