Some people in comments there think that Keith Cowing is making too big a deal of NASA’s inability to keep up with who does and doesn’t work for it, and even who still remains on the preferred side of the dirt.
I agree that, in itself, it is a pretty trivial issue, in the context of the much bigger problems at the agency, and it’s certainly one that most people don’t do well with, or many bureaucracies. But I’ll bet that there are some organizations that get this kind of thing right, because they have an organizational culture to get everything they do right. This isn’t, after all (to use the hackneyed and inaccurate expression) rocket science. If NASA can’t do something as basic as this, why should we trust it with billions of taxpayers’ dollars to build manned launch systems? Particularly when, even if they meet their own program goals, they will have such trivial capabilities (a few people to space a few times a year)? And if NASA can’t do something as basic as this, it might be for the same reasons that they have trouble developing new cost-effective launch systems.
Anyway, the evidence so far indicates that we shouldn’t trust them to do so.
Of the organizations that get everything they do right, which is the biggest and how big are they?
I don’t know. I would suspect that Walmart is right up there, at least as far as attempting to do so. There are any number of business books that have case studies, true or false.
Are you implying that there aren’t any?
Also, I didn’t say that they get everything right — just that they attempt to do so, and are largely successful. One doesn’t get the sense that NASA (or any government agency) even tries.
I was really just thinking how non-monolithic NASA is (due to how large it is, as well as other factors, such as the multiple center organization) Whoever is running is NED is pretty far removed from the teams that work directly on the Shuttle. I think the latter group tries to get everything exactly right.
Whoever is running is NED is pretty far removed from the teams that work directly on the Shuttle. I think the latter group tries to get everything exactly right.
So your point is that NASA hires slackers for things that aren’t important? Or what?
And the teams that work directly on the Shuttle may try to get everything right, but they’ve lost two vehicles and fourteen crew. Maybe that’s just because it was hard, but that’s not what the accident investigators indicated. There are intrinsic cultural and incentive issues within a government agency that can overwhelm the best intentions of any individual within them, no matter how talented or dedicated.
Just coincidentally, there are letters to the editor in my local paper today complaining about how WalMart screwed up when they converted a regular WalMart into a Super-Walmart. The conversion took six months. The grand opening was this week. The letters all generally agree: 1) the Super-Walmart has less non-food inventory than the original version, 2) too much of the food they do carry is junk food compared to a normal super market, and 3) we have lots of good supermarkets already, so people want their discount store back the way it was. Ooops.
Just coincidentally, there are letters to the editor in my local paper today complaining about how WalMart screwed up when they converted a regular WalMart into a Super-Walmart.
That’s nice.
I’m not sure how valid letters to the editor are as a reflection of…anything. I’d be more interested in the bottom line of the store after the conversion.
I’m sure Walmart rightly agrees with you – time will tell.
Amusingly, NASA Watch has an equivalent, sort-of anyway: Walmart Watch!
It demonstrates that there can be intrinsic cultural and incentive issues within a corporation that can overwhelm the best intentions of any individual within them, no matter how talented or dedicated.
“walmartwatch.com/blog/archives/wal_mart_employee_morale_at_rock_bottom”
Take this comment with a grain of salt — I’m not denying that there are plenty of valid criticisms you can make of government agencies, and their inferiority to corporations. I know only a few people at NASA — none of them are slackers, but they probably don’t have the intensity they would have if a mission or lives were on the line. They treat NASA more as an alternative to a university job, and they are being sensible, given their duties and the stakes. Someone who knows more about shuttle operations than me can comment about that part of NASA.
I know very many good people at NASA, but by and large, they are overwhelmed by the environment.
Rand,
Do you have any observations regarding how true that is at Ames? At the recent NewSpace conference, Mr. Worden seemed to think that it wasn’t (as?) much a problem at ARC.
I can certainly understand his suggestion about some of the other centers.
I can’t speak to how things are at different centers.
It’s also good to bear in mind that most corporations are not what they would be if markets were truly free. Labour regulations and corporate governance laws influence the way corporations work. Large corporations can be very bureaucratic too. I think that the more regulations you have, the more corporations become like government organisations. I don’t know to what degree such regulations affect Walmart.
All the more reason why it’s ridiculous to think Big Media, for example, must be politically conservative because it’s run by corporations.
All bureaucracies are conservative by temperament, regardless of whatever political ideology they might support. Middle managers in a Communist Party organization will have more in common with their counterpart at Microsoft or the Pentagon than they or their counterparts will ever be willing to admit.
I’d nominate Disney Resorts. The whole Disney company is just too big and incoherent. But the people running places like Walt Disney World seem to have their act together.