you
welcome to another in the series of
guest lectures on NASA's program and
project management today we will be
discussing management issues as they
have appeared in the manned spaceflight
programs our participants are Aaron
Cohen director of NASA's lyndon b
johnson space center Henry Pohl JSC's
director of engineering I'm Joe Loftus
assistant director for plans at the
Johnson Space Center I'd like to begin
our discussion by asking each of our
participants to briefly talk about
themselves Aaron would you briefly
summarize your career since you
graduated from Texas A&M and tell us a
little about what you did before you
became a manager ok I after getting out
of Texas am I went to I went to the army
from 1952 to 1954 and then from 54 to 58
I was with RCA Radio Corporation of
America and then from 58 to 62 I was
with the General Dynamics Corporation
and then in 62 I came to the Johnson
Space Center at various jobs in Johnson
Space Center primarily in the guidance
navigation area and managing that
activity with the Draper labs and MIT
instrumentation lab at that time and
then deputy of the systems integration
office in the period of 1968 272 I was a
command service module project manager
and then from us 72 to 80 to it was the
orbiter project manager 8286 I was the
director of research and engineering and
from 86 to the current time director the
Johnson Space Center Thank You Henry
would you tell us a little bit about
yourself well I graduated from Texas A&M
two hours crafting spent two years
service I started out as a test engineer
on the red stone in Huntsville Alabama I
worked on the Jupiter on the Saturn I
got in some design work designed the
small rocket motors that were put in
wind tunnels at the Tullahoma I came
down here over subsystem manager on the
RCS for Apollo our section head from
about 64 65 aqui remember when to about
67 brace G from 67 279 division chief
from 79 to 86 in the propulsion power
division and in 86 I became director of
engineering very good Aaron would you
briefly summarize what you think are the
key things that a manager must do to
achieve success well I rethink that one
of the key things is have some in your
career have some early hands-on
experience but I think you have to start
out with saying that the key elements
are the exact elements of managing being
good manager of the programs of
yesterday or yesteryear may not be
exactly the same key elements of today
so I think you have to take you have to
understand that and they have to start
with that point the new program managers
project managers gonna have different
pressures in the olden on the other hand
I do think there's some factors that are
common one is start off I think some
early hands-on experience is important
whatever small project they may be to
carry a project through to see how
drawings are made to see how design a
design that comes about to see how parts
or machine how the process parts in the
factory how you do the testing I think
that's all very important if a person
can do that I think you set a good
foundation for a project manager of
course that is 11 item I think that's
important the other item I think is key
is very important is you need to be
patient you need to you need to
understand people and be people oriented
you need to be able to communicate with
people communicate with people both in
the in all directions down words upwards
and laterally you need to be able to
communicate the people oriented and make
people feel you want to hear what they
have to say I think you have to be able
to take criticism you've got to be able
to take criticism and not become
defensive and and do that type of thing
and I think you need to know have to
know when to compromise you need to know
when to to compromise and get a solution
rather than argue for a point that you
feel that's wrong so those I think are
some of the the key elements that make
up i think the the attributes and if
programs for yesteryear and programs of
tomorrow or similar key elements i think
in a person in becoming a program
manager project what are the major
changes that you've seen in the
management of NASA projects over the
years well I think you know the two big
programs that I managed was the proud
the command service module for the
Apollo program and Henry might want to
add a little bit on this and then the
the the arbiter the one in the 60s and
one in the 70s and I think if you had to
say the the differences are are the are
the pressures you may have the both the
little bit from the external pressures
if you go back to the Apollo era I think
the if you look at the Apollo program I
think you say they the key thing you had
to do was to look at performance I think
performance was primary schedule was
second and then cost and I think those
are the three elements of course a
program management or performance
schedule and cost and those are the
three trade-offs that a program manager
has to continually do I think in the
shuttle era you still had performance
was still very key is still I would say
number one but i think cost was
overriding schedule I think cost was
more important than scheduled in the
space station era I'm not sure I
I can tell yet I think certainly all
three are still very important and i'm
not sure i'm not sure that all the
pressures that the space station people
are going to have yet come to bear i
think costs I think cost may even
override with schedule being second and
maybe performance going oh Henry you
might want to add something to it I
agree with that I think one of the
things that we've got into now is the
lack of flexibility in cost you know
Apollo we never had enough money in
Apollo but we did have a lot more
flexibility and how we can use it than
we have oh yeah an Apollo I would say
that if you had a problem in Apollo you
and you got a problem you could go
mostly paths to get the solution and
then pick the solution you want to but
you could carry multipass for a while in
the shuttle program and the arm pro I
think what you had to do in that case
was to pick pick the solute not go
parallel paths pick the solution you
wanted and you know with good judgment
in good decision-making I hope that
decision was right but not go parallel
paths for that long and I think that's
one of the differences in the shuttle
program you couldn't even continue a
program you had to start it and then you
had to stop it because you had to take
those funds and transfer us on the glass
house and pick up that's right and get
that one up up to the even keel and then
go back and pick up the other project
and bring it along to keep everything
going on even keel and I think the the
program of the of the space station air
there's going to be a lot of pressures
and I think you can keep those
fundamentals I talked about in front of
you I think you can overcome those the
new pressures that might come about one
of the things that has been talked about
a great deal recently is organizational
cultures how would you characterize the
NASA and JSC's cultures have they
changed do they need to change well I
think again there's some very
fundamental things with culture I think
I think that at the Johnson Space Center
I think we have a culture that is I
don't know if you'd call a participative
management or they're certainly an
interactive there's an interactive
activity interaction activity that takes
place in making a decision
we have been left with the legacy that
that if you have an issue that you have
a concern you feel free to express your
concern we weigh the problem we work the
problem and if the you may not always go
the way people the answer mean always
come out the way people want it but
you're explained how you what decision
you make and and you go on from there I
think that the only culture change that
I see that may take place is maybe the
some external environment that says
there are more external pressures in
terms of overview committees but even
then if you go back in the early days we
still had a lot of overview committee so
I'm not sure I see a big change except
for the one fact at the Johnson Space
Center is that we had previously had the
one big program of a Mercury Gemini
Apollo it would come up and go away
today we have shuttle and it's going to
be with us for a long time and we've got
space station it's going to be with us
for a long time and then if we go on to
the lunar Mars initiative that's going
to be with us for a long time so I think
the culture is going to have to be able
to accept and adapt to how you handle
large multiple programs at the same time
right you have anything well there's a
couple of things that I see that has
changed with time and it's kind of
changing back now the first one we
started out with Apollo we had a few
what had called mature people and then
we had a large number of people there's
fresh out of college when the shuttle
program started then we had that
experience team that went through the
Apollo program we learn an awful lot
Apollo program and now as we start on
Space Station we're going to develop
space station with a few mature people
and a lot of young
so we're that's a good point i'm the
type of organization that we had in
there let me ask you Joe what do you
think you've been you've been even
around with what you're feeling on that
well I think as you pointed out JSC
developed a very unique kind of culture
outside observers have characterized our
decision making as being collegial and
have had difficulty understanding why we
seem to be able to do it but I think
it's because we've dealt with issues
that are very complex very technical and
in which no one person had all the
technical expertise to make a decision
so there was always this collegial
discussion and then the program manager
because he was the appointed decision
maker made the decision that's a good
point I'm glad you brought that up the
the program manager is like the border
tremor of the board he has 51 percent of
the vote and I think that is the
important thing that the program manager
has to recognize that responsibility and
he you do have to give him fifty one
percent of the vote Erinn one of the
things that might be interesting to
discuss his wyjsc uses a matrix
management system it was fashionable
when we were formed in the 60s it's no
longer so fashionable in industry but we
still use it well I think there's a
several reasons why you basically use a
matrix management you use a matrix
management for one reason is if you want
a good check and balance on the program
that's one reason why i use it in fact i
would say that was the reason why we
originally used it was because we wanted
to have a check and balance of the
various parts of the institution on the
program and that is a very good
attribute to have the other reason why
use a matrix management is because you
have multiple programs and that's the
way you handle multiple potent programs
is going to matrix management now we're
going into have to use matrix management
for that reason but the original reason
was more for the check in check and
balance there are some disadvantages as
you know make
management you don't have the autonomy
the program doesn't have the complete
autonomy and as a project manager I've
got to admit I sometimes I was very
frustrated with that but I've got to
tell you that has a project manager I
learned to love it because you do have
that check and balance and I think that
check and balance is important of course
at the Johnson Space Center I think
there's another reason why it could be
very difficult for us to eliminate the
matrix management even though some
places are getting away from it is
because we have the very intricate
interweaving of our operations activity
with our design activity and I think
that is probably the only way you're
going to be really able to do that is
with a matrix management system here at
the Johnson Space Center but I'm not
sure I'll car that fits all all all
organizations are companies today no
Henry yet yeah i think you know in our
situation matrix management gives us a
great deal more flexibility to use the
expertise that you have when you not you
don't have a great deal of depth you can
use the experts on a lot of different
programs you can use them this week on
this program next week on this program
and next month on that program over
there as problems arise in each one of
those those programs they usually don't
happen at the same time and I think
there's another message here about the
management that any organization can
work so long is this the will of the
people and the will of all of the people
to want it to work I think that's one of
the key ingredients to make an
organization work the best organization
in the world will not work if the people
don't want it to work and I think that's
one of the things that we've been able
to do here is to keep arrow body with
with a sense of responsibility as sense
to do the wont to do the job or feeling
responsible for making the hardware work
and that's been a key ingredient to
making matrix manage my work here at
this Center so I'd like to you know I
don't care what you have to say because
I know if you studied management systems
for some time and I'd like to hear what
you had to say that well I think that
as a government organization responsible
for the initiation and the continuing
management of programs we do not have as
narrow and sharper focus as you can
create in a business enterprise and I
think the complexity of our task forces
us into a matrix meaning that's the
operations element that I was gone yes
in the context and of this management
structure how would you deal with the
various elements of cost schedule and
performance as they are embodied in the
various functional elements that work
with you well of course you hit the key
of the whole program management theme of
the balance of performance cost and
schedule that is a continuing trade and
that is the you might say that is the
life a project or program manager lives
with from the from the conception of the
program to its end it's a continuing
trade off and you can ever you can never
solve you cannot marry everybody happy
but maybe we'll never make everybody
happy with those three elements let's
continue trade off you know I used to
use a very simple analogy when I used to
used to work with people they've come to
my office and I'd say okay now what I
want you to do is help me I would like
you to play like for a moment that
you're in business for yourself and you
can't afford to to give it to produce a
bad product so you want to you want to
improve it on the other hand you're in
business to make a profit and you can't
afford to put all this money into it now
now help me figure out how to do that
how to get that product out on time so I
really think it boils down to that that
one thing though I think you can't
afford to do in a man program and I
think it's true in the any unmanned
programs too is you can't afford a
failure failures are very expensive and
so other safety and reliability and
quality has got to be maintained in that
and so and there's ways to do that and
you can still balance off those three
parameters and still get a very high
quality high quality product reliable
product and safe product so it is a
tough job and there is no closed-form
solution there's by there
let me believe me there are is no
closed-form solution to to that
trade-off it is a continuing continuing
trade of those three parameters we've
talked a good bit about engineering
could you talk a little bit about how
you use your program control and your
business analysis people yeah let me do
that and let me do that in the context
of a term I call avoiding pitfalls if
you go back and you look at history of
program managers and project managers
the first pitfall the first thing that
happens is when you become a project
manager you have you for you you know
that's the greatest thing that ever
happened to you in fact my wife used to
say the greatest thing could happen Erin
is the day you became the auger project
manager and then from then on it was is
really tough but it is the before you
become but then you got to avoid the
pitfalls in the first pitfall you really
have it as a project manager is normally
cost overruns that's the first thing you
normally see is cost overruns the second
problem a project manager pitfall the
project manager has a schedule and then
you you saw normally you'll you'll solve
your they let solve the the cost problem
by either replacing the project manager
or somebody figuring out how to do it
and then the schedule gets the is the
problem you have to run into and then of
course it becomes the performance
problems of getting it done and getting
a good product but getting back to your
specific question I think in that
context the project control is the
important element in helping you avoid
those pitfalls you need to use your
contract as a good tool you need to have
the project control office help you
manage that contract you need to have a
good configuration control you need to
be able to have them give you a good
budget estimate keeping up with your
schedules and if you do that give you
that insight those are the ways over and
above the technical as you pointed out
those are the ways that you can
potentially you have the best chance of
avoiding those pitfalls and I think it's
extremely important element of it
engineering is good and is important but
believe me the business management end
of the program is vitally important to
the success of a program
and may perhaps you and Aaron could
speak to the subject of what should be
the proper relationship between the
government engineering organization and
program management organization and its
contractors yeah but could I come back
to the last question for just a minute
on program control you know one of the
things that you find about engineers is
that engineers for some reason do not
like to deal with budgets they do not
like to deal with costs they'll deal
with schedules fairly well but they
don't like to deal with budgets and
costs and frequently don't keep track of
the effort that's being produced per
length of time that they're working on
it and their costs will get out of hand
and I think that's one of the key areas
where a good program control office
comes into play is they tend to keep the
schedule the budget and and that balance
of the program in proper focus okay you
want me to take a shot linea let me
answer that the other question because I
didn't think about it like I think if
you if you go back to the Apollo 20 for
fire and I this thing all sticks in my
mind there was a statement in the report
that said that I'll paraphrase it that
the doing spaceflight human spaceflight
you have to overcome a hostile external
environment and to overcome a hostile
external environment you need teamwork
so I think that's the thing you need a
teamwork between you're the contractor
and the government I don't think there's
any question about that that you need
teamwork on the other hand you need to
have a plan an implementation plan that
you can award the contract contractor
when he does a good job but she also
need to penalize the contractor when he
does a bad job so I do think you need
teamwork and to get a good safe reliable
efficient product but she do need a way
to penalize him when he doesn't do a
good job
morning leaders yeah the only thing I
could add to that Aaron would be that
that you both need a good understanding
of the product that you're going to
prove your son you know you both need to
be working toward the same game plan and
both parties need to understand that
very very clearly and that's what you
mean by teamwork it's like that but you
got to have that it's very very critical
and also to the teamwork I mean the fact
that the way NASA operates I think
that's typical at all centers we do
pride ourselves and I think we justified
be so that we do have a technical
capability and technical excellence and
many times we have the technical
capability because of our facilities
because of the the way we have done
things that our technical t I think and
sometimes it tends to be in selected
areas greater than some of our
contractors in some areas our
contractors have better technical
capability then then we have and I think
we need to know how to utilize both of
those two full advantage that's
especially true hearing in those areas
where we've had the opportunity to go
through several programs and sequence
and then you got another contractor
that's a new honor on a straight Aaron
how would you like to talk for a moment
or two to the subject of the
relationship between the program office
and the institution of the center itself
well of course with a with a matrix
management system they're very
intertwined you know you can always
argue are the programs here to serve the
for the institution or is the
institution here to serve the program
and i think it's it's a little bit of
both I think that as we stated before
there is a support from the institution
to the to the program if you look at the
Johnson Space Center specifically we
have basically an engineering
organization under Henry we have an
Operations organization and a science
organization and then we have the
supporting functions and those are all
matrix you might say support to the
program manager and as we said before he
gets inputs from that there's
check and balance where the institution
does support the program manager but you
do have to say that the program manager
you have to give somebody that rain and
the program manager he fulfills the
criteria I said out with that we start
off this discussion on fulfills that
criteria he's justifiable having 51
percent of the vote and making the right
decision I think I could even make a
stronger case for the it for the feet to
one percent because if it was not for
the programs you would have little need
for an institution because our total
endeavor is in support of the projects
are the programs at hand and it's a
matter of how you go about doing it
that's right Aaron it might be good to
take a couple of cases in point what was
your most trying decision during Apollo
well there are a couple Joe and I'd like
to you and Henry were there too I there
was a couple one I remember very
distinctly which I probably learned one
of my biggest lessons from was I I think
the admission was Apollo 11 but i think
it was there was an inertial measurement
unit that was a little bit out of spec
not much out of spec and we were we were
thrashing around whether we should
remove that initial measurement unit and
if you know the lunar module was a
pretty flimsy and i would say flimsy but
it wasn't it didn't have a very hefty
structured was on the stack out of the
pad and we had to make a decision where
we should replace that inertial
measurement unit or should we live with
it and and we went to we talked about a
long time we went to George Lowe and we
really recommended give him all the data
but we came up with a recommendation
that says we really should not change
that at IMU out the inertial measurement
unit now there's a risk in doing it we
could live with it and he thought for a
moment and looked at us he said if you
can if we can remove that issue from the
equation we ought to go change it out so
I want to go change the IMU out so that
was a good point I was good that was a
good lesson that I learned and always
keep in the back of my
the other one was one I think it was wow
if it was Henry of one of his people in
propulsion area that came to me in as
well that was on Apollo 8 where we had
this issue on the injector of the sps
edge and where we found that it's a long
story we found that if you fired the
ejector dry with both banks of the of
the in the engine that you could have a
detonation essentially causes pressure
spike and damage the chamber and I have
one of Henry's guys i Henry bought it to
me and and here we ready to fly Apollo 8
to the moon first time we ever left the
Earth's gravity going to the moon and
the way we were going to do it is we
were going to fire both banks of those
engines when we got into lunar orbit so
we could be sure we got into a good burn
and that could have been a bad that's
the way the process was set up so these
guys brought that to me and I I got
pretty excited about it here was 11th
hour and I had a fair of it but they
came to me with a solution they said
what she could do is you could fire on
way out she could fire out a plane just
what the bank one with one engine and as
you go fire the other bank with the
other engine get back and playing not to
store your free return trajectory and
have both banks wedded so you can then
when you got you could fire both engine
be saved but I was the one who had to
call George Lowe tell him that that at
the cape and that was an interesting
experience and I did that but I think
the message there was that and I think
there's a very key message there and I
think that's probably one of the most
important important lessons to learn and
that is that you should a project
manager our manager should give the
feeling to the people that he works with
that they can bring him problems and
they can bring him any kind of problem
and that he's willing to understand that
and work with him to us to a solution
and so that was a very healthy situation
I think if you can expel that type of
feeling amongst all your people I think
you'll be very successful Henry how do
you try to create that sense in your
subsystem and injuries
you do it by giving them a feeling of
responsibility that it is their
responsibility to make absolutely
certain that their hardware is going to
fail it's going to work if they feel
like it's going to fail it is their
responsibility to bring it forward and
it's not always pleasant one of the most
difficult things sometimes is go in and
tell you boss something that you know
your boss is not going to like I I can
remember when this excuse me one night
they called me at home by eleven o'clock
at night and told me they had a pop in
the command module when they were
servicing nor RCS and I was up there are
a few weeks before an attention creaking
and popping and I didn't think too much
about it but next morning I walked into
one of my engineers that they had a pop
in the tanks that shoot they brought a
standpipe into says I just ran those
calculations last week before I stand
pipe into that was the one who we pulled
the command module up we didn't replace
the tank on it that was a pleasant thing
to head and go forward tell somebody
that we thought they school to stand
pipe into no way to get in there sure
enough they did they put it into that
that is good that's the right way i can
give you another if you got just ten
seconds another good example on the RCS
tanks they were made out of titanium 28
days into a 30 day test one story
leaking various all leak they cut that
piece out analyzed it said it was caused
from finger print that paper came across
my desk I looked at it it looked fine I
signed it sent it on its way sent one of
the engineers out to look at those tanks
he came back says henrik we can't let
him get away with that there was not a
fingerprint I said why he said he'd take
a monkey to get in there put his finger
in there
make a long story short we wouldn't put
10 tanks and test after much arguing
over it but he wouldn't give up every
day he came in at least once it says
Henrik we have to do something about
that that was not a random failure and
so finally I got the nerve to go forward
tell the program manager that we had a
problem and when I did we got 10 tanks
and tests and ninety eight hours in the
test three of them blew up just broke
wide open of course then you didn't have
to worry about it anymore we fixed it
but it is through his integrity and his
concern and him not letting it die that
kept us from having a problem on the
first Paula Paula fight and somehow that
needs to be reinforced every day of
every week you know if you don't do your
job and you don't do it good the bird
will fly and so I see that is one of our
major jobs as managers is to convince
the people that we're working with every
day that it's their responsibility to
understand their hard work and if they
see something that they feel is not
right bring it forward and talk about it
if you don't get the answer you want
that day you bring it forward again and
try to convince the people that you're
right in the final analysis it after you
do that two or three times then you go
back and you do it the way that you've
been directed to do it but you make
every effort to convince them that
you're right we've taken some examples
from Apollo do you have one or two
similar cases and settle progress of
course the thing we didn't talk about
which i think is important as decision
making
and decision making is a very important
a time and timely decision making is
even more important in that didn't by
definition not by Tommy decision making
i'm not i don't really mean that you
have to make decision right away it's
got to be timed properly sometimes it's
right away and sometimes you wait and
sometimes you don't always have all the
information you need to make the
decision but sometimes you need to make
the decision without all the information
and the fact that you've the fact that
you've made a timely decision think the
fact that you waited you have a good
chance to be right a couple of items in
the orbit program that come to mind one
was one was early in the program we had
to decide what type of landing system to
use and it was a technology issue which
we were going through in terms of what
was the right technology to pick and we
were looking at that time back in the
early part of the program of 72 time
period whether we should go with the
microwave landing system now let it make
the decision today would be pretty
straightforward but in that time period
it was pretty hard to decide whether you
should go with the microwave landing
system and I didn't have all the
information you know I didn't have it
but I thought it was timely to do it and
we I didn't really want to pay the money
to pick up all the technology
development and take that risk on the
other hand the performance looked awful
good so weighing that I made the
decision to go with the microwave
landing system it turned out to be the
right decision we went with it's been
very successful and it's been one of our
better systems another one is we were
arguing one evening about the reversed
on me this one was a good decision we
were arguing one time about the number
of structural test articles we need it
and my budget was pretty tight and the
engineering people came in and said we
needed I forgot how many structural test
articles and and I looked at the budget
that would cost do that and I said no
we're going to cut cut five of them
three or four or five or something like
that
and I made that decision now it turns
out that it was a timely decision they
came back to me about two months later
and they really had a very good
technical briefing of why technically
from a safety point of view they really
needed the edit articles and I put them
back in the program and didn't hurt
anything because I didn't make a timely
decision was able to pick up those out
of test articles that ties in two things
one that people were afraid to come back
is Henry pointed out to tell you that
you were wrong and number two I made a
timely decision which gave me time to to
fix the problem so I think there's two
ends of the spectrum and I think Aaron
that's one thing that we have to be
constantly balancing against a correct
decision you know sometimes we can get
in the trap or a mold of feeling like we
might make a mistake and a lot of times
the greatest mistake of all is not
making a decision well I think that's
right and I do think the other thing is
I think you have to be able and be able
to accept the criticism and the fact
that you made a bad decision and reverse
yourself if you have to i think that's
another absalon characteristic we've
talked right up until now about the
details of managing a project that both
you and Henry have also managed line
organizations and I'd like you to
comment on what you perceive is the
differences in the management of a line
organization versus a product there are
a lot of similarities there's no
question there are a lot of similarities
in managing the project in managing the
line organization I think the biggest
difference is I see and I'd like to hear
what you have to say in Henry I say
after I finish but I I think the biggest
difference I see in managing a line
organization that it does take a lot
more time with your people in a line
organization certainly a center director
and certainly as a director of research
and engineering than it does in managing
a project takes a lot more time you
still have trade-offs as managing
institution versus managing a project
it's not as strong on the cost and
schedule
performance as much as is on parameter
parameters but like parameters so
there's a lot of similarity and I think
the fundamental but I do go back to say
to you that the fundamental that way
that we start off this discussion the
fundamental characteristics I think are
about the same general I think you're
right right on here and the the major
difference that I see between being a
project manager and being a director of
a lion organization is that you have the
administrative responsibilities your
people as a lion organization we're
generally a project manager spends very
little time in the administrative
responsibilities with their people first
off they don't have a large number of
people that they have to supervise
directly they have a lot of people that
support them but they don't have to
worry about the administrative part of
it and that's a large part of trying to
keep the spirit up the the can-do
attitude up in an organization and that
responsibility of 40 followers online
organization tility head say about that
well I think Henry's point I is the one
that comes to my mind is is that line
organizations management's primary
responsibility is the development of
their people and the people are then
used to support the programs so it's a
it's much more of a paternal kind of
management as opposed to objective
achievement kind of management
what do you see to be the the most
significant issues that we're going to
face in the next five to ten years or
well I think as far as a NASA is
concerned NASA specifically I think we
need to continue to maintain our
technical excellence I feel that we need
to continue to bring on good people we
need to continue to train our good
people we need to give them the right a
working environment in terms of
facilities in terms of laboratories we
want to stay a technically proficient
organization and I think that's probably
the fundamental thing for all NASA
centers we want to be sure they have the
right capability to maintain their
educational proficiency their formal
education whatever field it may be I
think that's important I think we need
to issue and I personally have talked
many times I think we need to have
successful programs I think failures are
very devastating and we need to be able
to maintain the momentum whether it's a
man program whether it's a man program
we need to have successful programs and
we need to minimize our risks are
failures on the other hand we can't be
afraid to do something we've got to be
bold we've got to be aggressive so we
can't let that shadow the way we do
things so I would say those are to me
the most significant challenges that we
have in the future the other I guess the
final point is with the advent of the
thing I talked about for multiple
programs large programs things we'd like
to do in the future I think we need to
become even more productive than we are
we have been in the
past and that's in all areas Andrey what
do you see is the meet you I agree with
aarón totally there's two two key areas
one is developing confidence and
maintaining confidence in our people you
know you have to have confidence in
yourself you have to be able to know
where you're coming from in order to
direct and manage a program and that
takes time to develop especially with
the young people I would say five seven
eight years to develop that confidence
in themselves and I think we've been
blessed with that I also think that we
have to continue to look at more
efficient ways and better ways of doing
business to eliminate duplication it is
not possible for us to continue doing
business the way we are and support all
of the programs that's on the plate and
do all the things that we are to be
doing you know we're just now to the
point of where we can make space a fun
place to work and play in and there's a
lot more work out there that needs to be
done and we can get around to so I see
that is the two major areas that we have
to work on Aaron what should young
engineers or other professionals just
starting out on their careers in NASA do
to prepare themselves for positions in
management well I think first and
foremost whatever their field is as you
pointed out whether it be in the
business management area whether it be
in the human resources area or whether
it be in the technical engineering
science area operations area I think you
need a good formal background I think
you cannot get away from a good formal
background in education I think that's
extremely important I think as we start
off this discussion i do think trying to
get some early hands-on experience in a
total systems aspect of a program is
very beneficial and I think that ought
to be in the hardware area if you
and even in the analysis area if you can
or some some type of hands-on experience
whether it be in the engineering area of
science area operations area or even in
as i said the human resource or business
management I think it's very important
to get hands on and start it from the
grounds of the ground up sound like
that's extremely important and I think
the other attributes as I said before
the patient's the integrity honesty and
being able to communicate are the really
the attributes for a young person if he
wants to to make it happen you might say
in a successful program management arena
and would you want to comment on I'm not
too sure i can add a whole lot toward
hearing that came up with i usually can
always find something dead into
something but that's the that's the key
things that you have to develop
confidence in yourself and one way a
person goes about doing that is being
able to take a project and do it so you
get a feel for what it takes to do that
job and then you get a feel for what it
takes to do a little bit toward your job
and a little bit bigger job and I'm a
firm believer on a person starting out
at the bottom and an organization and
learning the trade and working the way
up through the through the system and I
think it's those first years the
foundation that you get during those
first few years there's extremely
crucial to doing a good job having the
tools to do a good job down let me tell
you into this Joe you've been around a
long time but you seem you've seen it
all happened what's your take on it well
I think I'm a subscriber as you and
Henry are to the early hands-on
experience and I think there's a reason
for that in the sense that once you have
become expert in something yourself when
you move into positions where you deal
with subjects that you're not so
knowledgeable about the content you have
learned how to recognize the
of an expert because it has
characteristics or tool marks and it
helps you in evaluating the decisions
you have to make we've talked about our
relationships with the contractor and
within the various elements within the
center one of the things that it might
be worthwhile to talk to Aaron about
program management as we're doing it in
the station is our relationships with
our headquarters and our sister setters
well I think that's a good point I'm
really glad you address that I think it
gets back to really what I said before
on item I said before is teamwork
there's no question that teamwork is
really is really the element i guess the
underlying element of all success I
think we've got to have teamwork with
our with our centers but the centers
within NASA and we certainly have to
support the program directors and the
assoc administrators and headquarters
because they are really the people that
are setting the stage for the whole
program and I think we need to have
teamwork with them and for them and with
the center's I think that's extremely
important and I think I've seen that
come a long way I think we have come a
long way in that regard I think we all
recognize that's going to be the element
of success both our man programs and our
unmanned programs and I think we're
demonstrating that more and more every
day with the leadership we have of the
center directors and the Sochi
administrators and with the
administrator and deputy administrator
so I think it's extremely important
every how do you see the relationship
amongst the various directors of
engineering at the Centers
III don't know quite how to answer that
because i don't know how it used to be
that good but i tend to agree with aarón
that the thing that we have to have is
honesty integrity teamwork you know
you've got to have those three and
you've got to have us sincere desire to
try to do what is right for the program
you know you can't let too many other
things creep in and as long as we can
keep our focus on trying to figure out
what is really the best thing to do and
get on and do it and make a decision you
know I think that's one of the most
important things that we can we can do
Erin I think we've covered most of the
points that come to my mind as to what
one should address in program and
project management but perhaps you would
like to summarize what you think of as
the key tools that the manager has to
achieve his objectives well the one
thing that a manager doesn't like or two
things a manager doesn't like one is a
surprise and the other as a failure and
that surprise could be in the budgetary
the schedule area are the performance
area and the same thing with the failure
whether it be a test failure or whether
it be something more significant so I
think the with those underlying issues
and those underlying stipulations I
think you have to have the intelligence
and the staying power you might say
which is what I would say is almost a 24
hour day 7 day a week job to keep on top
of those parameters so that you don't
get surprised you don't have a failure
and it's just by working the details
have people that are willing to bring
you those that information and have
people that willing to help you make
those decisions whether it be your your
your own people or your contractors that
help you make those decisions so I think
if you can if you can set that type of
work if you can if you can put that type
of energy into it and you can get that
type of people around you not have yes
people around you but have people that
will bring you the problems and bring
you the potential solutions I think
you've got a very very high probability
of avoiding the pitfalls of the type of
things that would cause you to to fail
Henry do you have any further coming
program managers got to be tough as
nails I mean you've got to you you've
got to not feel intimidated or not let
the system overwhelming there's lots of
decisions that are tough tough decisions
decisions that's going to make
absolutely no one happy that has to be
made and they have to be made a timely
fashion and it takes someone with a
great deal of fortitude to be able to
make those decisions and make them in a
timely decisive kind of a way and I
think that's one of the most important
ingredients that a project manager has
to have that tends to differentiate a
project manager from a director of
engineering or division chief for some
of those other kinds of jobs there's
lots of unpopular decisions that has to
be made and someone has to make it in
that decision generally falls on a
project manager
for our last observation Aaron I'd like
to address you to address the question
that says we're losing the generation
that has had this experience of mercury
gemenese Skylab Apollo shuttle and some
people express a concern as to whether
we will have the management capability
and depth as we go into the future well
I think we are losing we have lost a lot
of people that regard the time has
caught up with us in that regard or
times caught up with some of the people
on the other hand I really think from a
more positive point of view I think that
we do still have a lot of people around
good people around we do have education
programs we do recognize I think the key
elements of good program management and
the key elements that are going to
require a person to have the tools to be
a good program manager or a good
engineer or a good scientist or business
management I think we recognize those
and I would say this I would say that
the people that I see the young men and
women coming out of the universities
today I'm pretty high on them I look at
what some of the young people we've
hired and we're hiring quite a few as
I'm sure all centers are i think i have
no question in my mind i really have no
question in my mind that they will be
able to step up to the challenge of the
large new programs that i hope that that
we're working on that will come to pass
in the future which i think will come to
pass in the future and i just have no
question my mind that we're going to
have the right people we got the right
attitude we got the right leadership all
the center's feel that way so I just I
feel that we keep going down the path
we're going with the emphasis we have
that will have the capability to do the
big programs in the future Henry would
you like to come in I didn't agree with
air and a hundred percent I think we
need to remember that we went to the
moon with a young team of people you
know we had a few experienced people and
a lot of kids out there and not a one of
them let us down the ones that we're
getting today
or the country's finest you know they're
much better educated than we were they
have a much better foundation start out
they work just as hard they have the
same kind of worth a death at we had and
I think when the time comes for them to
take over this responsibility they will
not let the country down I'm confident
of that I don't think you can give them
too much responsibility to quick right
now Aaron Henry thank you very much and
this concludes this discussion of
program and project management in a
manned space flight program setting you
thank you and goodbye
you