Advising The Next President
Sean O’Keefe reflects on high-profile positions, recent appointment to advise next US president, Daily Orange
“O’Keefe’s next challenge will be having a spot on the National Academy of Public Administration’s (NAPA) Presidential Transition panels. As one of six panel members, O’Keefe will help advise the next U.S. president on issues involving public governance and public management. … The six members on the panel come from very diverse backgrounds, O’Keefe said, but they all have one common denominator: they have previously served in a public capacity.”
Keith’s note: O’Keefe tells me that he and his fellow panelists serve in an honorary capacity and that they will provide advice across a broad range of issues. Whether the TBD administration listens to what they have to say, well, that is another question.
It’s not clear from the article whether Mr. O’Keefe’s advice will be on topics related to NASA.
He just told me that it will be a broad range of things – we was Sect’y of the Navy, Dep Dir of OMB etc.
Is there a source ranking the NASA administrators? I expect Sean O’Keefe would rank about the middle of such a list, along with James Beggs.
James Webb, of course, would IMO rank at the top.
Actually I would say Okeefe was one of NASA’s better Administrators. Remember he sold the idea of returning to the moon and moving onto the planets at the same time he set Shuttle on the return to flight and kept ISS on a proper trajectory and led NAsA to a recovery from the Goldin Faster Better Cheaper-all while straightening out NASA’s budget. He was first class, second only to Jim Webb in my book. Remember it was his successor, Dr. Griffin, that sent the train off the rails.
Working on NASA programs for 33 years, and 25 of that at a NASA field center, I think that during that time, OKeefe was the best NASA administrator.
One reason was he knew what he knew, and knew what he didn’t know. Unlike his successor.
Well put, indeed. The idea that a ‘rocket scientist’, aerospace engineer, or astronaut would automatically be a good administrator is a tragic delusion. NASA is a govt agency so it is no surprise that it ran best as an organization under the direction of persons (Webb, O’Keefe) trained/schooled in the skills of administration. Of course some scientists, engineers, and pilots become effective managers but the vast majority do not because they lack the skill set and are not inclined toward acquiring it.
Another factor to keep in mind is who the top person has in their #2 & #3 positions. Webb had Robert Seamans (engineer) and Hugh Dryden (scientist, former NACA director). Webb, too, knew what he knew and knew what he didn’t, but like O’Keefe he had competent experts at his elbows and he listened to them.
The current set of President, Administrator and AA have been dismal. Amazing how the US human space program has gone in the crapper over the last 10 years. It started earlier than the current set but the current set has done absolutely nothing to put it on track. If we had a major accident on ISS in the near future (knock on wood), that would complete the circle.
You are quite right that scientists, engineers and astronauts are not automatically good administrators. That idea is, in my opinion, absurd. But it also true that managers and politicians are also not automatically good administrators. The difference in the required skills and attitudes is less obvious, but I think it is quite real.
He didn’t know enough not to cancel the final Hubble servicing mission (later reinstated by his successor). If ANYTHING NASA did was worth taking a risk for, servicing the Hubble had to rank at or near the top.
He was following the advice of the CAIB.
I may be missing something, but where did the CAIB say the Hubble servicing mission should be canceled? IIRC they said that, once the problems that caused the loss were corrected, the Shuttle could continue to be used, though only for those missions which clearly required its unique capabilities, until a replacement vehicle was operational.
Marburger + O’Keefe combined vision with transformative leadership. NASA would be a far stronger agency now had those two continued to serve through the second term on the W. Bush administration.
VSE was dead on arrival when it hit the halls of congress.
Congressional approval of VSE followed with the 2005 NASA Authorization Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…
And AFTER they made those votes and O’Keefe went to capital hill and testified that NASA and contractors would be losing 14,000 jobs were they still thrilled? Or did O’Keefe get offered his “dream job” in one of the states that was just about to see Michoud turn into a ghost town because of the VSE’s call of “no new rockets”?
Suddenly O’Keefe is gone, the spiral design is gone. No new rockets is gone. We get the 60 day study and now EELV’s are to dangerous to launch or even consider and way to expensive and we get TWO new rockets.
VSE was GONE. Congress fought COTS cargo and Commercial crew every step of the way .. two VERY prominent articles in the VSE.