People Really Like To Work At NASA
2019 "Best Places To Work Agency Rankings". @NASA is ranked the best place to work – again. FYI @JimBridenstine #NASAhttps://t.co/RXL3YGrj7m pic.twitter.com/kHej5ydxDi
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) December 17, 2019
2019 "Best Places To Work Agency Rankings". @NASA is ranked the best place to work – again. FYI @JimBridenstine #NASAhttps://t.co/RXL3YGrj7m pic.twitter.com/kHej5ydxDi
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) December 17, 2019
And that is part of NASA’s problem. Instead of retiring and allowing younger workers into positions of authority they hang on longer than they should to their jobs, slowing down the agency’s ability to adapt to the changing external environment. The average age at NASA relative to other high tech firms, or a new firm like SpaceX, illustrates it well.
Isn’t the underlying problem that a large fraction of NASA”s management person-hours are spent on federal bureaucracy, and not on the mission (what would be the bottom line in industry)? Let the old folks handle that stuff, just make certain there are sharp, young managers in charge of, you know, “doing things.”
But remember, before you are able to start “doing things” you need to submit the proper paperwork, which than needs to be reviewed, approved, and then the approval reviewed before a final review before permission is granted to “do things”. It’s how a bureaucracy works, and you better make sure you don’t leave a box blank…
Gee whiz! Is there ANY news that’s actually good? 🙂
I don’t think that’s a problem with the age of the work force, so much as the nature of career “paths”. In practice, someone either get promoted into management or his career is viewed as a dead end. In some cases, the idea of “up or out” promotions make that official. And, once someone is promoted into management, going back to doing useful work is considered a demotion. So it’s not really possible for people to allow “younger workers into positions of authority” without giving up their careers entirely. It’s not like the chair of an academic departments at a university, or (as I’ve been told) many boards of directors, where it’s a rotating position and no blame is associated with rotating off.
Yes, it’s a weakness of the bureaucratic model, the need to be moving up or be moved out. Which returns to the problem this survey shows, the plugged pipeline that has resulted because folks like working at NASA and won’t move out by retiring. At least Universities have the emeritus track to allow professors to retire while keeping them around.
Sure, working for NASA is great. The NASA brand makes your job very prestigious to your family and friends. Civil service has many perks, most special being job security, while the contractors are treated as “too bad we have to let you go, but the program ended”.