Schumacher Withdraws Name From Consideration to Be Deputy NASA Administrator
John Schumacher has removed his name from consideration to become Deputy #NASA Administrator due to unexpected family health issues 1/2
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) September 2, 2017
The smart thing for the White House to do right now would be to nominate Robert Lightfoot to be Bridenstine's Deputy at #NASA 2/2
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) September 2, 2017
Wow, I disagree with that. Just one example: the imposition of strict ‘swim lanes’ on each NASA Center – outside of which no Center is allowed to ‘swim’ – is, in my personal view, the single most anti-innovation move within NASA that I’ve ever seen in my 43 years there.(As an example: I would argue that the single most productive idea that NASA has moved on which has then had the greatest impact on the space industry- what became the COTS, followed by CRS, programs; and then by extension, the commercial crew program -came from a Center other than the one in Houston (my old Center) that ‘should’ have come up with it; and the good idea had to be, for lack of a better word, imposed, and protected, from the top of NASA.)
I bring that up just as one example as to why imposing rigid swim lanes on organizations violates every principle supporting innovation. There are other examples; but, I guess my point is, NASA at this point in time needs an Administrator/Deputy Administrator ‘team’ that will implement internal NASA reforms that encourage- not discourage- innovation; and at the same time aggressively make the case to decision makers that things which have been neglected, such as the decimation (a word I choose deliberately) in space technology R&D funding the last 12 years or so, really need to be rectified, if NASA is ever again to become a hi-tech technology engine for the US economy- and space program – that it used to be.
I’m sorry but where does this swim lanes thing come from? If you nominate someone to run NASA with no management experience you clearly need someone with management experience to compensate. Otherwise you are asking for NASA leadership with no experience running a multi billion dollar agency with a workforce of ~100,000 people.
Keith, the ‘swim lanes’ refers to the recent decisions of assigning Centers to lead, support or divest from various roles. This set of decisions is meant to reduce duplication and inefficiency, and is the culmination of the TCAT and Capability Leadership activities of the past few years. The strictness of restricting field Centers from engaging in work that they had previously been able to perform has caused some angst among the workforce, but in reality work activities can continue if you coordinate with the ‘lead’ Centers. In my opinion, this is a necessary change for NASA.
I’ve never heard the term “swim lanes” used, but I was under the impression that restrictions on the activities of various centers existed for many years with the purported objectives of increased efficiency, reduction in duplication, etc. But one man’s “duplication” is another man’s “competition”. Avoidance of excessive large capital equipment cost duplication is probably not a bad thing if it actually does improve efficiency. I’d imagine either approach (fostering competition between centers or avoiding duplication) likely would be productive if managed appropriately.
Because both the swim lane problem, & the refusal to argue for, defend, support, etc., the need to reinvigorate the NASA space tech R&D budget, both came from Mr. Lightfoot.
Much more is needed now than just someone who seems, to some, to check the boxes on management experience; what’s critical is the exact type of experience that’s actually been demonstrated to be inthose boxes; and additionally, whether the person selected for Deputy Administrator not only has demonstrated a willingness for the courageous, forward-looking, reform-minded actions that NASA needs going forward, but can also convince (& help guide) an in-experienced new NASA Administrator- as well as Congressional and White House staffers- as to why those things truly need to happen. In my personal view, John Schumacher- whom I once worked for- while a good guy, did not have that necessary experience- at all- or a reform-minded outlook, or any depth of knowledge as to how all of NASA worked– and should work.
It is now critically important that whoever is Deputy must have those attributes; otherwise there’ll be failure. None of the names mentioned so far, does.
I’m not sure about that. Having each center assigned a specific specialty and focus isn’t inherently a bad idea. It avoids duplication of effort and other inefficiencies. Ames, for example, doesn’t do rocket engines, and it wouldn’t necessarily be a good idea from them to branch out and get in that business. Or (to put the shoe on the other foot) Marshall getting into aeronautics.
At the same time, it does, effectively, create monopolies and that can be a problem for innovation. A manager who can keep the centers focused on their core expertise and also encourage innovation would, I think, be a very good manager. But if you’re saying someone in particular doesn’t fit that bill, I guess I see your point.
I thought, until recently, that there was a quite sharp work demarcation amongst the centers, being logical, as it is…
There are demarcations, and each center does have a area it focuses on and core capabilities. But it isn’t necessarily sharp, and the focus can change with time.
Goddard is normally the main center for Earth-orbiting unmanned missions, but JPL has flown some (especially space-based radars.) JPL is normally the main center for planetary missions, but Goddard has done unmanned lunar missions and provided instruments for planetary missions. I’m less familiar with the human spaceflight side, and centers like Marshall, Johnson and Kennedy.
The real issue is how sharp the demarcation ought to be. That’s the old problem of avoiding duplication without letting anyone become complacent and stuck in a rut.
You can also avoid duplication of effort to a large degree by good communication. I’m sure they communicate a lot already, but teams can be made up of people at various locations pretty well nowadays. Businesses do that a lot –
they do what’s needed to utilize the right people. Of course it really doesn’t work with physical hardware and such.
It is a genuine shame that NASA will not have John Schumacher’s experience and temperament on the 9th floor at Hq. He would have been a great asset in guiding the Agency through the coming years.