Once Again NASA's Space Station "Team" Doesn't Talk Among Itself
NASA Solicits Ideas for International Space Station Research
“NASA wants to know how you can improve the International Space Station as a technology test bed. NASA’s International Space Station National Laboratory and Technology Demonstration offices are asking for proposals on how the space station may be used to develop advanced or improved exploration technologies. NASA also is seeking proposals about how new approaches, technologies and capabilities could improve the unique laboratory environment of the orbiting outpost.”
Keith’s note: Nowhere in any of the supporting documents is CASIS mentioned. CASIS makes no mention of this on their website. No mention at NASA’s ISS website here, or at the ISS National Lab website. No one involved with the ISS National Lab, CASIS, SOMD, JSC, or elswhere seems to be at all interested in a cohesive, coordinated approach to the utiliztion of the ISS – one whereby all NASA operated and funded entities work together.
Keith’s update: This announcement is now linked on the ISS National Laboratory page and the ISS Technology Demonstrtions page. However, CASIS still ignores it.
These types of problems typically reveal a lack of leadership. In this case one should look at HQ and the ISS Manager
Fred, you can look at those managers but try looking above those managers even more. When no one is held accountable, utilization becomes a fragmented free-for-all. The priorities of each sub-group overshadow the activities to form a single cohesively structured group.
My bet is that every one of the leaders and managers are strongly convinced that they are doing the ‘right thing’ for their own turf gains and to satisfy their aims, irrespective of the actions of other groups. Ask any one of these managers. Every one of them will tell you that their approach is the best approach and the right approach and they will do it with an attitude and conviction.
There is no evidence to indicate that these circumstances will change any time soon. Usually the only thing that will change this dysfunctional status-quo is a powerful external event, such as another group making a break through or somehow fundamentally shifting the paradigm.
npng, not sure what managers you are referring to but HQ does have the authority to hold HEOMD and the ISS Manager accountable. Charlie as the administrator does have some authority to hold all those below him accountable and develop a focused utilization strategy. As for when, you are correct cause he’d have to wise up, so on that point you are correct not anytime soon.
“HQ does have the authority to hold HEOMD and the ISS Manager accountable.” The ISS Program Manager is for all intents and purposes a Headquarters employee and reports directly to the AA For Space and Exploration. Particularly in this case, Gertenmayer and Suffredini are particularly close.
If Gerst and Suf are close as you say, then are you also saying that they are incompetent?
Why would whether they are close or not matter with respect to their competence? The subject here is utilization. By their own admission some time ago, they said they got so focused and pre-occupied with assembly ops that they sort of forgot to look at utilization – that is not competence. Maybe if they’d been a bit less close and a bit more dissimilar in background and experience one would have told the other they needed to start looking at the post-assembly time period in time to have done something about it, five years ago. Competent management looks at the past to learn from it, the present to know where the program stands, and the future to make sure they are establishing the right path and plan and that their decisions today support their future goals.
This is BTW the problem with NASA’s lack of strategic vision. They don’t know where they want to go so they don’t know what they ought to be doing.
It appears that managers in all major employers suffer from Cranium-in-rectum ittius. All expect employees to “carry the ball” while they stand back and watch, offering no help when needed,then they wonder why production is down.
Another case of managers buying their time to retirement…don’t rock the boat.