Survey: NASA Workers Afraid to Speak Up

Yahoo! News ^ | 4/13/04 | Marcia Dunn - AP

[NormsRevenge]

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -

Many NASA (news - web sites) workers feel unappreciated by the agency and are still afraid to speak up about safety concerns, more than a year after the shuttle Columbia was doomed by those very problems, according to a survey released Monday.

The 145-page report includes an assessment of NASA's culture by a behavioral science company in California, and a three-year plan for change.

"Safety is something to which NASA personnel are strongly committed in concept, but NASA has not yet created a culture that is fully supportive of safety," the report says. "Open communication is not yet the norm, and people do not feel fully comfortable raising safety concerns to management."

The report notes that excellence is treasured when it comes to technical work, but is not considered imperative for management skills.

"There appear to be pockets where the management chain (possibly unintentionally) sent signals that the raising of issues is not welcome," the report says. "This is inconsistent with an organization that truly values integrity."

Last summer, Columbia accident investigators condemned NASA's safety culture and put as much blame on poor management as the flyaway piece of foam insulation that tore a hole in the shuttle's left wing at liftoff. The shuttle was destroyed during re-entry on Feb. 1, 2003, killing all seven astronauts aboard.

In February, NASA hired Behavioral Science Technology Inc. of Ojai, Calif., to develop and administer a plan for changing NASA's culture. The company conducted a survey at all NASA locations, including the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. Only NASA employees, not contract workers, took part.

The two lowest-scoring categories were "Perceived Organizational Support" and "Upward Communication."

On more than one occasion, workers hung back at the end of a group interview session and only then expressed their views, privately, about communication barriers, BST said.

___

On the Net:

NASA: http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/index.html

[NormsRevenge]

O'Keefe is No rocket scientist, imo. ;-)

[Prime Choice]

O'Keefe is No rocket scientist, imo. ;-)

Maybe not, but he's one helluva lot better than that anal-retentive, control-freak idiot, Dan Goldin.

As for NASA employees being "afraid" to speak up, they sure didn't talk to anyone I know...

[NormsRevenge]

Let's light the candle again! ;-)

O'Keefe is not going to inspire anyone scientifically or technically. I agree Goldin was a waste of time.

Years ago, we should have been retooling. Now we have a bean counter cleaning up the messes and rationing out the morsels.

[NormsRevenge]

A piece of history rotting away..

One of the last of the giant Apollo moonshot Saturn V rockets is in disrepair after more than a quarter century on outdoor display at NASA (news - web sites)'s Johnson Space Center(JSC), a Smithsonian curator said on April 12, 2004. The 363-foot-long rocket, which never got off the ground because NASA canceled the Apollo program, is sprouting plants and mold and its corroded structure is home to an assortment of creatures, including a nesting owl. The Saturn V is seen on display at JSC in Houston as the Space Shuttle Columbia streaks overhead July 27, 1999. Photo by Reuters

[snopercod]

NASA hired Behavioral Science Technology Inc. of Ojai, Calif., to develop and administer a plan for changing NASA's culture.

Ve have vays of changing your behavior:

[NCC-1701]

Ah, the Saturn V! The most beautiful launch vehicle ever built and flown. From it's design to the paint scheme. Only had 3 engines fail in 13 flights(2 on Apollo 6 and 1 on Apollo 13), zero launch aborts, provided the means for successes in lunar flights, and allowed us to stop going around in circles and go somewhere. Those were the days!!!!! Nowadays, things are less clear. Hopefuly, we can recapture the glory days and spiirit of Apollo. Things were run better then.

[pawdoggie]

I've known a lot of people who've risked careers (and lost) in order to stand up for important principles. I have no sympathy for people who hold back in matters of life and death because their new home or their health insurance might be at risk. I don't consider the Albert Speers of the world to be heroes.

[Prime Choice]

Let's light the candle again! ;-)

I'd like to, but you may recall that the shuttle was grounded from January 29th 1986 until September 29th, 1988 following the Challenger disaster. That's 2 years and 8 months. It's now been 1 year and 3 months since the Columbia disaster. And O'Keefe is getting dinged for not rushing back why exactly?

O'Keefe is not going to inspire anyone scientifically or technically.

You'd be surprised. NASA was largely demoralized thanks to the arrogant incompetency of Dan Goldin. O'Keefe had a lot of damage to mend when he first took the lead at NASA. He has been very inspiring to many NASA folk with his no-nonsense, can-do approach to things. Morale is higher than many can recall in years.

I agree Goldin was a waste of time.

...not to mention a waste of food and oxygen.

Years ago, we should have been retooling.

Hindsight is 20/20. NASA could have ill-afforded to retool everything when Congress was only willing to pay for other efforts. C'mon...do you honestly believe the American public would have sat still while NASA did little else but retool? Hell, NASA catches flak for retooling after the need already presents itself.

Now we have a bean counter cleaning up the messes and rationing out the morsels.

O'Keefe may be called many things around NASA, but "bean counter" ain't one of them. People across HQ and the various centers know what a poor leader is, and O'Keefe ain't it.

[RightWhale]

They, some historical society, wants $4 million to spruce it up. It wasn't NASA that killed Apollo, but Congress, Sagan, and the White House. The American public is also complicit since they were no longer entertained by space exploration. That's a good Liberal technique--blame the public for being stupid.

[Prime Choice]

The 363-foot-long rocket, which never got off the ground because NASA canceled the Apollo program

NASA didn't just "cancel" the Apollo program. Congress slashed NASA's funding to the point that it couldn't afford the Apollo program.

[NormsRevenge]

Nice to meet ya, Sean. ;-) lol

[Prime Choice]

Hopefuly, we can recapture the glory days and spiirit of Apollo. Things were run better then.

Astronauts Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee would beg to differ. If things had truly been "run better" back then, those three men wouldn't have been incinerated in the command module on the launchpad.

[Prime Choice]

Nice to meet ya, Sean. ;-) lol

Likewise, Dan. ;-)

[NormsRevenge]

LOL..
I Wish I had his pension check. ;-)

[Prime Choice]

I Wish I had his pension check. ;-)

There'd be a massive downside: in order to get it, you'd have to be him! I don't think I could abide by that. LOL!

[NCC-1701]

You are correct about Apollo 1. NASA, as well as North American Rockwell shoulders the bulk of the blame for that tragedy. After that tragedy, things tightened up and became better run. Up to the flight of Apollo 13. If the crew of Apollo 13 had died as a result of what happened 34 years ago today, that would have killed NASA. As it was, through prayer, luck, and a ballet of interconnected disciplines, Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert made it back alive. I was talking about the overall successes of NASA then. Sure there were deaths along the way, no entity is safe from that. NASA has been, IMHO, one of the few things this country has had that has been more of a positive than a negative. It cost a boatload of bucks to put Apollo 11 on the moon, but compare that to the failed endeavour in Vietnam which up to that point cost 4 - 5 times the amount. If asked where I wanted my money to go, it would be NASA.

[Mr. Bird]

The company conducted a survey at all NASA locations, including the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. Only NASA employees, not contract workers, took part. The two lowest-scoring categories were "Perceived Organizational Support" and "Upward Communication." On more than one occasion, workers hung back at the end of a group interview session and only then expressed their views, privately, about communication barriers, BST said.

This would be hysterically funny if it didn't involve life-and-death occupations. Here's a tip: if your organization identifies "Upward communication" and "perceieved org support" as areas that need improvement, public surveys will probably not point you in the right direction.

They probably need to put in some sort of employee hotline, administered by a third party, which can be called to report certain issues.

[RadioAstronomer]

Don't forget me on these. :-)

[XBob]

8 - "I've known a lot of people who've risked careers (and lost) in order to stand up for important principles. I have no sympathy for people who hold back in matters of life and death because their new home or their health insurance might be at risk."

Remember the NASA missions and their priorities:

1. "preserve management's swimming pools"
2. Do your job. If it's not in your job description, you have no responsibilty for it.
3. Organize every thing so that no one is 'responsible' for anything.
4. Launch something, if you have any time left, and don't let anything stand in the way of the schedule (except the priorities above).