NASA Transition Binder Is Now Online With Bonus Theme Song Track
NASA Transition Binder, NASA HQ
“NASA’s historic and enduring leadership and cutting edge roles for the nation fall within three major strategic thrusts: discovery, exploration, and development. NASA’s activities make advances that contribute to fundamental national purposes and goals that align to the core focus areas of our Mission Directorates (Science, Human Exploration and Operations, Space Technology, and Aeronautics Research). In addition, the Agency has a number of activities and support areas, including those in its Mission Support Directorate that enable NASA’s missions. NASA’s strategic landscape continues to be characterized by six major elements: …”
Keith’s note: This 95.6 MB, 366 page PDF document even has an opening video and theme song.
.jpg)
Oh, yea. Everyone’s job is SOOOOO important.
Like so much published by any agency the first pass in any review is simple translation.
I do a fair amount of writing and can’t imagine an editor passing on this crap. And a publisher? Only the GPO.
But you get the sense reading that these guys have waaaayyy too much time on their hands and that they spend it obsessing over “management”.
Maybe cleaning house makes sense. If I were in the transition team (they didn’t ask, me alas, but then I’m kinda busy) I’d throw that crap on the desk and ask them “seriously? this is how you run an Agency? Get the f*** outa here. Sheesh.”
“Catchy theme song, though”.
I fell asleep around page 40. This reminds me of those lawyer shows where the evil corporation buries the prosecutor in boxes of discovery evidence hoping to hide the one damning memo. One can only hope the transition team sees through the data dump and finds the nuggets of truth like the mirage that is journey to Mars and the needlessness of SLS and orion
I just posted that same thought… .what single line is in that report they want to bury…
It’s not necessarily a single line, or any damning evidence. Burying people with details is a proven strategy to accomplish two other goals. You can avoid arguments about debatable points when the whole point is really moot. (E.g. if you picked one of two equally good approaches and someone wants to lecture you about how he would have picked the other.) You can also avoid “big picture” questions. With 366 pages of what NASA does and how NASA does things, questions like “why are you doing that?” or “why do you do things that way” tend to get lost in the flood of details.
Yes. But do you think they do this with purpose? Or is it a symptom of a mindset, one clearly on display at Keith’s post on the farewelll event?
Both. In these sort of situations, I don’t believe a “they” exist. I’m sure a lot of people were involved. The writing style and editing make me sure lots of people were involved; only a committee can write that poorly. I’m also sure a large number of those people were perfectly honest and innocent of any ulterior motives; including _everything_ can be considered a responsibility and due diligence. Some (probably most) just wanted their own work or projects mentioned, because if they were left out, it could hurt them when next year’s budget is drafted. But, given the size of NASA, I would be shocked if no single person recognized the way a flood of details could drown out debatable details. It’s pretty obvious and convenient, and NASA employs fairly smart people. Even that, however, doesn’t make me think there was some sort of conspiracy or plans made in a dark, smoke-filled room. Just maybe some encouraging others to be verbose or not doing as much editing as they might have.
The truly sad thing is that in this we have already lost another 4 years, lost most previous years of build up and the following 4 plus years of political transitioning and misguided vision. For a Humans to Mars enthusiast, this means that no serious ramp-up towards getting humans there will occur for at least another 6 to 10 years. In that time we will see the decommissioning of the ISS and no replacement provided; similar to what just happened to the Space Shuttle, and you see where that put our countries space capabilities today. And again, the biggest and ongoing problem with the space program is the lack of a focused, sustainable and adequately and unwaveringly funded vision and goal. Is Mars becoming a four-letter word for NASA once again?
It seems to me I go to NASAWatch to get a more concise info on the space agency goals and policies as having to go through 366 pages is quite daunting (maybe I’m too lazy). The idea of a theme song is a huge turnoff (at least for me). Nothing wrong with songs but those are for entertainment.
What is that rule about good news bad news? Depending on who’s ox gets gored…
Bury it in a 350 page report?
This is a reference for people who will be involved in the transition and may not have a good working knowledge of NASA, key people, center specialties, etc. It’s not a book to read cover to cover. It’s actually quite well done. If you’re in aerospace, government, or part of any large organization and can’t handle a 366 page reference document… you’re probably not good at your job. Sorry.
I guess I’m not clear on the intended audience. This would, potentially, be a useful reference for the new administrator, deputy administrator, etc. Especially if an outsider is appointed. But a high-level summary would be equally useful for them, and I don’t see one in that document. If it’s intended for the transition team, not the new top-level management, then I think the document goes into way too much detail on things that don’t matter for the transition itself.
“It’s a phone book, not a novel.”