appl.nasa.gov

ASK Magazine • Issue Eleven

MARCH 2003

INTERVIEW

Cathy Peddie

Academy Sharing Knowledge

The NASA source for project management
There’s a whole reservoir of knowledge out there 

that I didn’t know to tap.

—Judy Stokley, from her “My Schooling In Leadership” (p 10)
appl.nasa.gov

Table of Contents

ASK 11 March 2003

STORIES

6 Thank You, Judy

After about a month of trying to figure out ways to get around it, I finally had to accept 

the fact that these cuts were real BY ROY MALONE

10 My Schooling in Leadership

I used to work seven days a week. I don’t do that now, and the people who work for me 

seem to get more done BY JUDY STOKLEY

12 Give It to Chuck

Chuck would do anything I asked—and then some things I didn’t dare to ask.

Whatever needed to be done, he’d do it BY FRANK SNOW

18 Start-Up

Certain activities are crucial to a mission’s success. I needed to understand the mission

and become a salesperson for it while building my team BY KEN SCHWER

21 Back to Basics

One of the teams caught my eye. I confidently predicted that this team would achieve 

the highest score on the exercise BY OWEN GADEKEN

22 Scheduling in the Real World 

How long could we have a spacecraft out of thermal vac and still have confidence 

that it would work when launched? We didn’t know BY MARTY DAVIS

SPECIAL FEATURE: KNOWLEDGE SHARING 

14 The Story of JPL Stories

What did I hope to capture that wasn’t already being expressed? 

It was personal experience, I realized BY TERESA BAILEY

FEATURE: SPEED MERCHANTS

26 A Conversation with W. Scott Cameron and Terry Little

The big three when it comes to a project are cost, quality and speed. They’re all negotiable 

PRACTICES

30 PERT Charts Take Precedence

Enthusiasm for accomplishing the next goal was reborn each time we looked at 

the graphics on our wall BY RAY MORGAN

INTERVIEW

34 ASK Talks with Cathy Peddie

Switching from project management to program management, Cathy Peddie 

of the John Glenn Research Center gained another view of the big picture

IN THIS ISSUE • 3

Mining the Forum

BY TODD POST

CONTRIBUTORS • 4

FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK • 5

Project Planning and

“The Three Little Pigs”

BY DR. EDWARD HOFFMAN

REVIEW BOARD • 39

LETTER FROM THE 

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF • 40

The Dream and Its Demise

BY DR. ALEXANDER LAUFER

ON THE COVER Solar soaring: The Helios

Prototype during its first flight test NICK GALANTA
2 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

WELCOME TO THE ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT

Leadership (APPL) and ASK Magazine. APPL is a

research-based organization that serves NASA program

and project managers, as well as project teams, at every

level of development. In 1997, APPL was created from an

earlier program to underscore the importance that

NASA places on project management and project teams

through a wide variety of products and services,

including knowledge sharing, classroom and online

courses, career development guidance, performance

support, university partnerships, and advanced

technology tools.

ASK Magazine grew out of APPL’s Knowledge

Sharing Initiative. The stories that appear in ASK are

written by the ‘best of the best’ project managers,

primarily from NASA, but also from other government

agencies and industry. These stories contain genuine

nuggets of knowledge and wisdom that are transferable

across projects. Who better than a project manager to

help another project manager address a critical issue on a

project? Big projects, small projects—they’re all here in ASK.

Please direct all inquiries about ASK Magazine editorial

policy to Todd Post, EduTech Ltd., 8455 Colesville Rd.,

Suite 930, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (301) 585-1030; or

email to tpost@edutechltd.com.

APPL DIRECTOR AND MANAGING EDITOR 

Dr. Edward Hoffman 

ehoffman@hq.nasa.gov 

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Dr. Alexander Laufer 

allaufer@askmagazine.org

www.edutechltd.com/NASA/Laufer/index.htm 

EDITOR

Todd Post

tpost@edutechltd.com

ASSOCIATE EDITOR

Jody Lannen Brady

jbrady@edutechltd.com

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS

W. Scott Cameron 

Terry Little 

KNOWLEDGE SHARING MANAGER 

Denise Lee

dlee@edutechltd.com 

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Michael Derocher

mderocher@edutechltd.com 

DESIGN

Hirshorn Zuckerman Design Group, Inc.

www.hzdg.com 

SENIOR PRINTING SPECIALIST

Dave Dixon

ddixon@hq.nasa.gov 

STAFF
YOU MAY RECALL A STORY FROM THE LAST ISSUE ABOUT

how ASK provided the impetus for two project managers

from different NASA centers to come together to solve a

problem (See ASK 10, “So This is Knowledge Sharing,”

by Susan Motil). In this issue, we offer another story

about knowledge sharing. This one occurred at the

APPL Masters Forum.

Masters Forums, held semi-annually, bring together

the best project managers from NASA, other government agencies and private industry for three days of

knowledge sharing, mostly in the form of stories. Few

ASK readers may realize it, but many of the stories we

publish originated at the Masters Forum. It makes sense,

as ASK is only one piece of the Knowledge Sharing

Initiative. Perhaps you saw the article in the Washington

Post (11/29/02) about the interrelatedness of the

Knowledge Sharing product line: ASK, Masters Forums

and Transfer of Wisdom Workshops. (More on the

Transfer of Wisdom Workshops next issue.)

In February ’02, Roy Malone of Marshall Space Flight

Center attended a Masters Forum and heard Judy Stokley,

a program director in the Air Force, talk about using some

innovative approaches to address a governmentmandated drawdown of her workforce. Stokley was able

to accomplish the drawdown while finding creative ways

to minimize the impact on the people she had to let go.

Facing a mandated drawdown at Marshall in his

Logistics Department, Malone reflected on what Stokley

had done and adapted some of her ideas. The story he

wrote for us this issue shows how.

Roy Malone’s story, “Thank you, Judy,” is also an

important story because it shows the breadth of the

APPL Knowledge Sharing Initiative. The Malone story

demonstrates how APPL not only facilitates knowledge

sharing within NASA but also across government

agencies. One of the hallmarks of the Knowledge

Sharing Initiative is the variety of project practitioners

who have participated in either the Forum or ASK.

Those of you familiar only with ASK will recognize the

space we’ve given to non-NASA contributors, most

notably Terry Little and Scott Cameron.

Along with Malone this issue, we have a story by

Judy Stokley, “My Schooling in Leadership.” Several

years ago, Stokley enrolled in a class at the Defense

Systems Management College and the experience

completely changed her thinking about what it means to

be a leader. Stokley’s story shows that if you approach a

learning opportunity with an open mind, you may come

home with something better than expected. We hope the

same has happened to you by reading ASK.

This issue we also have several stories about

planning. Here again, there is a Masters Forum connection. At the August 2002 Masters Forum in Tysons

Corner, Virginia, we asked some of the best project

managers we know to appear on a panel to swap stories

about planning. Ken Schwer was one of those panelists,

and his story from the Forum appears here. Marty Davis

was a member of the panel and his story is here. Terry

Little and Scott Cameron’s dialogue about how speed

impacts a project stemmed from this planning panel at

the Masters Forum.

Masters Forums are always a great source of

material for ASK, and we have struck a rich vein this

issue. Hope you enjoy. •

Mining the Forum

The APPL tree of knowledge 

bears fruit once again

IN THIS ISSUE Todd Post

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 3
CONTRIBUTORS

4 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

TERESA BAILEY has been a librarian at the Jet Propulsion

Laboratory for more than 20 years. In addition

to performing typical library functions such as

cataloging and reference work, she is the

Program Development Coordinator for the

JPL Library and she coordinates the JPL

Stories series. Currently a doctoral student at the Fielding

Institute, Teresa is researching the role of aesthetics in organizational learning and knowledge management.

W. SCOTT CAMERON is Capital Systems Manager for the Food &

Beverage Global Business Unit of Procter &

Gamble. He has been managing capital projects

and mentoring other capital management practitioners for the past 20 years at Procter & Gamble

within its Beauty Care, Health Care, Food &

Beverage and Fabric & Home Care Businesses.

MARTY DAVIS is the Program Manager of the Geostationary

Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) at

the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

(GSFC) in Greenbelt, Maryland. The recipient

of many honors, he received NASA’s highest

award, the Distinguished Service Medal, in

1995. He has also received the NASA Outstanding Leadership

Medal (1991) and the NASA Exceptional Service Medal (1979).

He has worked at NASA since 1962.

DR. OWEN GADEKEN is a Professor of Engineering

Management at the Defense Acquisition

University where he has taught Department of

Defense program and project managers for

over 20 years. He retired last year from the Air

Force Reserve as a Colonel and Senior

Reservist at the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

DR. EDWARD HOFFMAN is Director of the NASA Academy of

Program and Project Leadership. He is responsible for the development of program and

project leaders and teams within NASA. He

develops training curricula, consulting services,

research projects and special studies in

program and project management.

DR. ALEXANDER LAUFER is the Editor-in-Chief of ASK Magazine

and a member of the Advisory Board of the

NASA Academy of Program and Project

Leadership. He is also a visiting scholar in the

Civil Engineering Department at the University

of Maryland at College Park and Dean of 

Civil and Environmental Engineering at Technion-Israel

Institute of Technology.

TERRY LITTLE is currently the Director of the Kinetic Energy

Boost Office of the Missile Defense Agency.

Before that he was the head of the Air Force’s

Center for Acquisition Excellence. He is one of

the Air Force’s most seasoned program

managers. He entered the Air Force in 1967

and served on active duty until 1975. In 1997 he was promoted

to the grade of SES.

ROY MALONE serves as the Deputy Director in the Safety and

Mission Assurance (S&MA) Office at the NASA

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). He is

responsible for planning, directing and coordinating the safety, quality assurance and reliability activities for the Center and its assigned

Programs and Projects. Prior to his assignment in S&MA, he

served as the MSFC Logistics Services Department Manager.

RAY MORGAN has recently retired as Vice President of

AeroVironment, Inc., where he established the

Design Development Center in 1980, serving as

Director until April 2000. He oversaw more

than 75 projects and the development of over 50

unique vehicles, including over 35 Unmanned

Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) during his tenure at AeroVironment Inc.

TODD POST is editor of ASK Magazine and works for EduTech

Ltd. in Silver Spring, Maryland. In April, he will

speak about ASK and the rest of NASA’s

Knowledge Sharing Initiative (KSI) at the 

E-Gov Knowledge Management Conference 

in Washington, DC. His article about ASK

and KSI was published in the January / February 2003 edition 

of Program Manager.

KEN SCHWER is currently the Project Manager of Solar

Dynamics Observatory, the first Living With A

Star mission. Other assignments have included

work with the Hubble Space Telescope First

Servicing Mission and the Geostationary

Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES)

Program. While at GFSC, he has been honored with the NASA

Exceptional Achievement Medal, GSFC Flight Projects Mission

Impossible Peer Award and Aviation Week Laurel Award.

FRANK SNOW has been a member of the NASA Explorer

Program at Goddard Space Flight Center since

1992. He was the Ground Manger for the

Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE), and

project manager for the Reuven Ramaty High

Energy Solar Spectroscopic Explorer (RHESSI)

and the Galaxy Explorer (GALEX). He began his career with

NASA in 1980.

JUDY STOKLEY is presently Air Force Program Executive

Officer for Weapons in Washington, D.C. She

is responsible for the cost, schedule, and

technical performance of a portfolio of air-toair and air-to-ground weapon programs. These

programs represent the leading edge of

weapons technology.
THE ONLY PROBLEM WAS THE HUNGRY WOLF THAT CAME

along one day and knocked on the door. The wolf asked

to be let in, and the pig quite reasonably replied, “Not by

the hair of my chinny, chin, chin.” Unfortunately, the

wolf simply huffed and puffed and blew the straw house

down, and pig number one had to shake his bacon to get

to the second pig’s house.

The second pig had nominally improved the quality

of construction by using wood. Once again, however, the

pigs were forced to scurry when the wolf’s resolve

proved stronger than the structure. In the end, our pigs

were saved by the foresight, concern for quality and use

of top materials by the third pig, who had built his house

of brick. The wolf could not get into the house and the

pigs survived, presumably to live happily ever after.

At first glance, the lessons are obvious. Be industrious, plan for future threats and never short change

quality specifications. On further review, the difficulty

and risks of project planning are much more complex.

Imagine the story without the wolf. Suddenly, the

third pig becomes a goat. His mug appears on the cover of

newspapers exposing and criticizing the flagrant and

excessive costs of the brick house. Pigs one and two are

lauded for exceptional and efficient construction management, while pig three is used as a case study in mismanagement. The wolf is so vital to the definition of success

that one might be led to wonder if pig three contracted

with the wolf to harass and threaten the others.

In any event, the uncertainty of future events makes

project planning a slippery endeavor. Was the third pig a

better strategic and tactical planner, or just lucky? Did

the use of risk management techniques indicate the

probability of marauding wolves? Was the selection of

brick based on a cost benefit analysis of the situation?

One will never know. That sort of background information wasn’t included in the fairy tale.

One thing we can say for certain is that experienced

project managers realize that environmental realities

figure prominently when determining what risks

jeopardize a project. To what extent they plan for a wolf at

the door probably depends on what experience they have

that a wolf will show up there. The dilemma all project

managers face is deciding which risks are too costly to

plan for, and which ones are too costly not to plan for. •

Project Planning and “The Three Little Pigs”

Remember the fairy tale, “The Three Little Pigs,” and how the

first pig built a house of straw? Nice, light, cost-conscious straw

FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK Dr. Edward Hoffman

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 5

TED FRYMARK
6 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

byRoy Malone

THIEN-KIM PHAM
IT WAS A CLASSIC CASE OF DENIAL. I DIDN’T WANT TO dividers to ask people in the cubicles around us, “Hey,

believe my budget was being cut by 12 percent. I didn’t buddy, what’d you get?” It was that kind of thing, just

want to believe I had to lay off people. terrible. I didn’t want to put the contractors who worked

I had gone to my boss to try and make a case for why for me through a similar scenario.

I needed the money, and she said, “Sorry, Roy, but the So now the shoe was on the other foot, as they say.

Center’s budget has been reduced, and you have to figure I was department manager for logistics services at

out a way to work through these new budget challenges.” Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and I had

I went to the Chief Financial Officer to make a case, and contractors for whom I was responsible. These were the

heard the same thing. After about a month of trying to people who manned warehouses, stored material for the

figure out ways to get around it, I finally had to accept the projects and moved furniture around the Center. These

fact that these cuts were real. I would have to cut $1.1 were taxi drivers and bus drivers. These were people who

million out of my $9.3 million budget. fixed lab equipment and who procured flight hardware

Part of the reason I struggled with this situation was for programs and projects.

because I had gone through a big downsizing myself I didn’t treat them any differently than I treated my

when I was a government contractor about ten years civil servants. Since taking over the Logistics Services

earlier. I didn’t get laid off, but it made me feel like the Department, I had dedicated myself to making the

government didn’t care about people, and as a contractor I contractor a full member of the organizational team. I

saw how productivity went down after the cuts were made. spent time going out to visit with these guys. I went

Back then, they got everybody together in a big around to the locations where they worked and shook

room and handed us all a pre-labeled envelope. We took hands with them. I included them in the Logistics

our envelopes back up to our cubicles to open them. Services Employee of the Quarter program. I took the

Inside, a note said, “Thank you for your services, but truck drivers out to lunch and talked with them about

they’re no longer required,” or “Thank you for your what was going on, and I took action on their input.

services; we’d like to continue to use them.” After we had This was going to be hard, very hard, for me. I didn’t

read our notes, we began peeking our heads over the enjoy the taste of biting this bullet.

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 7

Budget cuts, no matter how you slice them, mean somebody is usually left bleeding. 

In this story, Roy Malone of Marshall Space Flight Center explains how he dealt with

cuts at the Logistics Department where he managed
Food for thought

Around this time, February 2002, I headed out of town

for the NASA Masters Forum, sponsored by the

Academy of Program and Project Leadership. The

Forum is where the best of the best project managers in

NASA and industry get together for a couple of days of

knowledge sharing, and this one came at a particularly

good time, providing me with a welcome distraction

from the budget cut. The first night’s speaker was an Air

Force program director, Judy Stokley, who told a story

about how she had implemented a number of reforms

on one of her programs with remarkable results,

including a painful downsizing of contractor personnel

and civil servants.

What inspired me about this was that she took a

“humanitarian” approach. She partnered with the

contractor to figure out how to minimize the impact on

people. She didn’t release them all at once, for example,

but gave them time to find other jobs. She talked about

how she met with all the employees in an open forum

and answered questions about why this was happening

and what was going on. The thing that struck me was

she got personally involved. When I was a contractor and

we had our big downsizing, the government just told the

contractor to go work it out. In Judy’s case, it was

apparent that the government cared

about what happened to the people

who would lose their jobs.

I didn’t know if I could do the

same thing in my case, but it gave

me food for thought. When I got

back home, I came up with a plan.

If I could apply some of the things

that I learned from Judy and leverage the Marshall

Space Flight Center Values in my decisions, I would

be successful in this painful process.

Inspiration realized

The first thing I did was put into action the MSFC values

of “teamwork,” “innovation” and “people.” I met with the

contractor to talk about innovative approaches to the

reductions. We sat down together to see if we could find

money from other places, non-people areas, so that we

could reduce the number of people we would have to lay

off. For instance, we were able to turn some vehicles in

that we didn’t need. I also challenged the contractor to

be a little bit more careful with the supplies, materials

and repair parts money. Instead of having three

additional sets of belts on hand for a vehicle, maybe they

could get by with only two. Maybe they didn’t need to

reorder as soon.

One of the ground rules that we established up

front was the importance of continuing to provide

products and services in an excellent manner so that we

minimized the impact of the downsizing on our

customers—in keeping with the MSFC values of

“customers” and “excellence.”

The way I look at it, you jeopardize your credibility

as a manager if you’re not open with folks, so I went

public about the cuts we were facing. A lot of people

thought I was crazy. They believe that once you

announce layoffs, you should get the people out the

door immediately so that you reduce the amount of

mischief that can happen. Judy Stokley announced her

reductions six months in advance; people had six

months with a paycheck to find other jobs. I didn’t have

six months, but I was able to give my contractor a threemonth warning.

I really believed that this approach was in keeping

with center values to treat other people with dignity

and respect, but I needed to strike a balance between

the “people” value and the “customer” value. You take

a chance when you give notice about a reduction in

force. You run the risk of everybody getting agitated

and their work performance going down. When people

are worried about their jobs, it’s hard to come to work

and give 100 percent. The longer you string it out, the

more worried and upset people are going to be. Maybe

the good people will leave, and only the least effective

ones will remain. These were legitimate concerns, but it

seemed to me there was a way to treat workers fairly at

the same time that I reduced the potential impact to

our customers.

Here I borrowed from Judy and the MSFC values

again. Judy held monthly forums, where she met with

her entire team for “no holds barred” question-andanswer sessions. Like Judy, I had people who were angry,

and I allowed them to vent in these meetings. They saw

furniture arriving, brand new furniture. How come the

Center had money to buy new furniture, but not enough

8 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

{ I didn’t enjoy the taste of 

biting this bullet. }
to pay the people who receive and

deliver it? That was one of the

questions that I got. They wanted to

know why we were building a new

recreation facility for our civil servants

and contractors. Why in the world would we build

something like that when we were laying off people?

I had to do a lot of educating about how money

came to the Center. Some money comes directly from

Headquarters and goes to programs and projects, I

explained. Money to pay the salaries of contractors

comes out of a different pot.

I made myself available on four separate occasions

to meet with them, and I didn’t refuse any questions.

For the most part, I was able to explain just about every

one of their questions. I was completely upfront with

them about the money I had to work with, and I

explained to them all the things that I was trying to do.

The bottom line is that I was sincere. When I addressed

them, I said I was worried about every one of them.

I knew they had families to support. I knew they had bills

to pay. I told them that I was doing everything in my

power to minimize the impact on their lives.

They saw that I was concerned and that I cared

about them. They didn’t blame me personally for the

budget cuts, but they would have been furious to know I

was concealing something from them. What they wanted

from me was honesty, and that’s what I gave them. I think

it helped that I used to be a contractor. I knew to a certain

extent how they felt, since I had gone through one of

these reductions myself, and I really did care about these

people. That’s the truth, and that helped all of us get

through the budget cuts with the least amount of damage

to the contractors, to me and to the agency.

In the end, the impact from announcing the layoffs

early was minimal compared to what most people thought

would happen. The ones who stayed on continued to be

productive. They felt that they were treated fairly, and

they saw I wasn’t trying to work this all by myself.

I welcomed their input and encouraged their partnership. In the short term I may have taken a risk in being

candid about the budget cuts, but in the long run I

believe it was the right thing to do for everyone. With a

balanced take on my Center’s values, I was able to treat

people with dignity at the same time that I maintained

excellence of service and kept my customers satisfied. •

LESSONS

• Knowledge is recyclable. Organizations benefit when

experienced practitioners share their stories liberally and

the right people hear them.

• Be honest with your team about bad news. A lack of

integrity makes a bad situation worse.

• Manage through your organizational values. They are

just not a concept that you post on the wall. If used

when making tough decisions, they can act as guideposts

in your road to success.

QUESTION

Time is the most precious resource a manager has. What types 

of situations merit expending additional effort to enhance the

probability of a long-term benefit?

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 9

{ What they wanted from me 

was honesty, 

and that’s what I gave them. }

From the ASK ARCHIVES...

My new job looked great on paper, head of logistics up in the office and adding the names. People also got

services at Marshall Space Flight Center, but I had to their picture on the wall, a certificate and lunch on me.

wonder when I arrived if they expected me to manage an Our Employee-of-the-Quarter program was so

office or perform miracle cures. Morale was so low I felt like successful that I expanded it to include contractors.My

I needed a life support system to keep it from expiring thinking all along has been to involve everyone in the

altogether. reforms, and that includes the contractors as well as the

To emphasize that we were starting out fresh, I did civil servants.

something they had never done before at Marshall. I Getting extraordinary things done in an organization

implemented a departmental Employee-of-the-Quarter is hard work. Leaders have to recognize contributions to

program for people to see that doing good work would be the effort or they will never motivate people to perform.

rewarded. We did it the McDonald’s way, putting a plaque 

THIEN-KIM PHAM

—Roy Malone, ASK Magazine, Issue 2
10 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

WHEN I STARTED OUT IN MANAGEMENT I TRIED TO KEEP

track of every detail on a project. In fact, I always say,

“It is a good thing that wisdom comes with age” because

I don’t believe I could physically take the hours I used 

to work.

I used to work 7 days a week. I remember one year

I didn’t take a weekend off for 12 months because 

I thought I had to do everything. I don’t do that now, and

the people who work for me seem to get more done. I got

to this place by learning to trust the people working with

me. It wasn’t that I didn’t have the confidence in the

people who worked with me before; I just didn’t know

how to leave them alone.

In the early ‘90s, I took some courses at the Defense

Systems Management College (DSMC). One teacher

there taught a course in Human Relationships, and it

changed my life. The course was about leadership and 

how to communicate with the people on your team.

Unfortunately, most of the other 20 or so people in the

class ignored the instructor or, worse, made fun of what 

she was saying. They called it the “touchy feely” class.

Understand this was 10 years ago; I think that today 

there would be more openness in accepting this kind 

of knowledge.

I loved what the instructor was saying, and I

absorbed it like a sponge. It was the first time I even

knew such stuff existed. I had chosen a technical career

and spent my adult life studying technical issues,

including all my training courses after I went to work for

the Air Force. I took the Myers-Briggs personality test for

the first time in the class. DSMC had tapes in the media

library on communications and I listened to them all. I

started reading all the books on leadership that I could

I’ve learned more and more to trust that if I am working with the right people

and I set up the right structure that they can make everything happen

“I just want to make sure you get things done.”

My

Schooling 

LEin ADE

THIEN-KIM PHAM
THAT VISION THING

It seems to me that people are leaders when they have a When you work for someone like that, you know that

compelling vision. They really believe it, and it comes out her vision is who she is. Every now and then in our lives,

of them like poems come from the great poets. It’s part we get to work with someone like that. We know where

of their soul, part of how they think about the world. we are headed and that it’s got to be a good place or else

They haven’t had a committee get together to write them this person would not be leading us there. So, that is

a vision statement on a plastic card—it is part of their what I think leadership starts with—a person who has a

core being, and you can just tell. vision that is the core of her soul and beliefs.

—Judy Stokley, ASK Magazine, Issue 9

get my hands on. I went at this with the same fervor I

had gone at advanced calculus in college.

Since 1992, I have read a roomful of books on

psychology, people, and leadership; before 1992,

I hadn’t read one. I said to myself, “My God, there’s a

whole reservoir of knowledge out there that I didn’t

know to tap.”

I always tease the people down at DSMC that they

really created me. I became a different person after going

there, but not for the reasons they might think—not

because I went to all their management classes, but

because they launched me on a new path to understanding

the meaning of leadership.

I still see a great many people who treat leadership

courses as trivial, and they spend almost no time learning

how to communicate and how to motivate people. They

think the best use of their time is learning how to analyze

cost and schedule variances on a

project. Honestly, you are going to

have a zillion people who can do

that. There are going to be far fewer

people around to show you how to

be a leader. •

LESSON

• True leaders learn from varieties of

experience.The best leaders are those

who are reflective and willing not only to “learn” from their

experiences but to “unlearn” old ways of thinking.

QUESTION

What is something you have “unlearned” during your career

that has impacted your leadership style?

{ I got to this place by

learning to trust the people who work 

with me. }

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 11

RSHIPby Judy Stokley
12 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP GIVE IT TO CHUCK by Frank Snow

A PRICELESS ASSET TO ANY PROJECT IS THE CAN-DO PERSON.

This is the person who can cut through bureaucratic

red tape, get a reluctant party to cooperate or obtain

the needed widget. As schedules become tight, this

person’s value only increases, since they seem to

thrive on pressure. When I was the Ground System

Project Manager for the Advanced Composition

Explorer (ACE), Chuck Athas, who had extensive

experience with large NASA and DoD systems, was

officially my scheduler and planner, but he was also

my can-do person.

In the beginning of the ACE project, Chuck, the

subsystem managers and I put together an extensive

plan/schedule for the ACE ground system.

The plan, supported by a large commercial package,

provided a detailed three-year schedule to deliver a

mission operations center at Goddard Space Flight

Center, a data analysis center at Caltech University, a

spacecraft integration and test system, support of the

payload processing at Kennedy Space Center, acquisition of the data through the Deep Space Network

and the ground transport of the data to the NASA

centers and nine instrumenters located throughout

the world. I thought maintaining this

plan would be a full-time job for

Chuck, but Chuck just mumbled

something about DoD projects,

billions of dollars, and asked for

additional work. This was the first and

last time, I ever questioned Chuck’s

ability to complete an assignment.

Chuck would do anything I

asked—and then some things I didn’t

dare to ask.All I had to do was put it out

there that we had a problem. For

example, when people were not meeting

a particular deadline, I could send out

emails and phone messages and they

would conveniently not be around to

respond. I could say to Chuck, “Go and

find out what’s happening,” and he

would be on it right away.

A Boeing Delta II expendable launch vehicle

lifts off with NASA’s Advanced Composition

Explorer (ACE) observatory on August 25, 1997,

from Cape Canaveral Air Station.
If someone was slacking off or had issues they

didn’t want to fess up to, Chuck could turn things

around just by virtue of his personality. I saw him work

this way and it was magical. He never resorted to being

confrontational, but boy could he lay a guilt trip on

you: “You have to get it done. What do you mean?

You’re committed to this. The whole program is going

to collapse.”

It was impossible to argue with Chuck. He would

say, “Let me help you. I’ll do anything.” When someone

would say, “I don’t have the time,” Chuck would come

back with, “I’ll do it; what do you need done?” “Well, I

have to get my daughter out of daycare.” Chuck’s answer

was, “I’ll get your daughter out of daycare.” Whatever

needed to be done, he’d do it for you. Anything.

I used Chuck to keep in contact with a Goddard

engineer named Chris. Chris was one-of-a-kind, an

absolute genius, and usually spread out over 15 to 20

projects. Chris was helping us to modernize our ground

data transport, a critical element in the ground system.

The implementation of this system was a constraint to

launch. If Chris couldn’t solve this problem, then I

would be forced to request a launch delay from the ACE

Project Manager, Don Margolies.

I would send Chris e-mails, leave him

phone messages, try contacting his supervisors—nothing. I can’t say that he was

definitely trying to avoid me, but he was

probably trying to avoid me. Other project

managers were more effective acquiring

Chris’s support. I needed to reprioritize his

“To Do” list so that ACE was at the top. I

knew that if you could physically get hold of

Chris he would do your work; so it was

Chuck’s job to go over there, get hold of

Chris and bring him back to me. I used to

say to Chuck, “Find Chris because I

absolutely need him,” and Chuck would go

to Chris’s building and search the hallways

or sit outside the office door until Chris

showed up. I don’t know how Chuck

convinced Chris to come see me, but he

always did.

Chuck was also like the master sergeant

in the army (he reminded me of the old TV

sitcom, Sergeant Bilko) who had the inside

knowledge of how to get supplies.

Somehow things showed up and nobody

understood how they appeared. They

certainly weren’t coming through procurement. He was trading, I suspect. I know he

used up a lot of the little things that we get

for projects like decals and posters. One

time we needed six or seven headsets for

communications on mission simulations.

As the simulations approached, they still

had not been delivered. I called Chuck and

told him the problem, and he got it

resolved. To tell you the truth, I didn’t

know how he got them. And to be honest,

I didn’t want to know.

Anything that needed to be done—

and he didn’t care what it was, he would

attack with the same gusto and unflappable

drive to succeed. Chuck epitomized the

concept of team spirit. He would perform

any task that supported the success of the

project and quickly became the project

expert in anything I gave him. Quite often

the “little” things in a multimillion-dollar

system of hardware and software can bring

the system to a grinding halt. I used Chuck

to ensure that “little” things never strangled

the ACE ground system.

“Don’t ask, don’t tell.” That was the

best way I found to deal with Chuck. Was

there anything he couldn’t make happen?

Probably something. But with Chuck on

the team I felt like I could ask for Cleveland

and the next day he would show up with

the deed. • 

LESSON

• A project manager must trust his team. As the overall

team leader you must allow team members to take the

lead on issues in which they clearly have the expertise to

get the job done.

QUESTION

How do you know when a team member should be at liberty to

challenge the status quo without asking for your approval?

All I had to do was put it outthere that we had a problem.

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 13 Quite often the “little” things in a multimillion- dollar system of hardware and software can bring the system to a grinding halt.

Seeing the light

Frank Snow employed the unorthodox skills of Chuck Athas on the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) project.

ACE launched on August 25, 1997, and has been an outstanding success for NASA. Scientific instruments on

board the observatory are studying the Sun, providing researchers back home on Earth with breakthrough

knowledge about sun spots, solar wind, and the composition of matter in the interstellar medium. Visit the ACE

project page at http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/ace/ace.html to learn more about the project.
A FEW YEARS AGO, I ATTENDED A NATIONAL CONFERENCE

on knowledge management. Larry Prusak gave the

keynote address. He distilled what was important about

knowledge management in a single word: storytelling.

He went on to say that our most important knowledge

isn’t in a database and it’s not in a computer application;

it’s in our stories.

As a librarian, I’m aware that public libraries have

traditionally been places that provide an opportunity for

storytelling, poetry readings and other forms of

community expression. It hadn’t occurred to me that my

library at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) could

serve that same purpose.

One day, I was talking about all of this with Willis

Chapman, my division manager, and he finally said, “So,

why don’t you do storytelling in the library?”

I responded, “Well, okay,” but I had no idea how storytelling would work in the library, or what it would look

like. Not much had been written on the institutional

benefits of stories when I started thinking about my

storytelling project in 1999. There was no guide to

follow, no handbook on how to get things started.

I thought about the idea for a few months, trying to

imagine what it would be like to host JPL Stories. Up to

that point, I had heard bits and pieces of stories during

lectures and talks at the lab. I knew about the pioneering

work done at JPL from formal reports and discussions at

conferences. What did I hope to capture that wasn’t

already being expressed? It was personal experience,

I realized. Beyond the well-documented specs of a

project, I hoped to create a platform for sharing firsthand experience of what it is like to work on a NASA

mission.

I decided to set up a few basic criteria. We needed

storytellers, that much was certain. But what time would

we have our program? And how often? How long would

it run? Step-by-step, I figured out that we would have

the programs in the late afternoon near closing, when

the library was slow. And, even though we’re blessed

with an abundance of old-timers who have accomplished incredible things here, if we wanted to build

community we needed to make our program something

that everyone in the community could feel a part of.

When I scheduled stories, I would try to mix career types,

ages, and levels of tenure.

I put out a call for storytellers in our center

newspaper, The Universe. No one—not a single person—

responded.

I realized that I had been too ambiguous. No one

knew what to make of my ad. Storytelling, what does she

mean? When people thought about storytelling they

thought about reading a children’s book in front of an

audience; it was hard to make the conceptual leap from

that to telling a personal story about a JPL experience. So,

I started talking. My plan was to talk to some people in

management about the program to try to get more

direction on my recruiting effort. Willis Chapman’s

support was instrumental here in generating interest and

gaining buy-in for the program by upper management.

I had one of my first meetings with Larry Dumas,

then JPL’s Deputy Director. I put together a list 

of possible discussion points

because I had been advised to be

well prepared before talking to

someone in upper management.

I had also been told to expect

only about five minutes of

time, but it didn’t turn

out that way.

SPECIAL FEATURE: KNOWLEDGE SHARING

The Story of JPL

by Teresa Bailey

14 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP
Stories

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 15

“Our most important

knowledge isn’t in a

database and it’s 

not in a computer

application. It’s in 

our stories.”

Lessons from the past:

Dr. William Pickering

tells stories from the

early years at the Jet

Propulsion Laboratory.

PHOTO COURTESY OF

NASA/JPL/CALTECH
16 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

Our meeting was casual. We went over my list,

and discussed ways that I could promote the program

and recruit storytellers. Then he told me, “I would like 

to be your first storyteller.” It turned out that he 

had been kicking an idea 

around in his head for some 

time. A lot of his job as Deputy

Director dealt with organizational

change because we were in the

middle of the shift from large

missions to faster, better, cheaper,

smaller missions. He was responsible for bringing about major

changes that disturbed a lot of people, and he 

found himself thinking about the things that shouldn’t

be changed—such as core values and work ethics.

He knew already what he would call his story: “Things 

to Keep.”

We set up a date. In the beginning, I had a modest

budget (today the program has no budget). I used the

money to work with a designer to create a “look” for the

program. I sent out flyers and posted them, and put

announcements in our center papers. I got a lot of

feedback: People wrote to tell me that the library was too

small, that the time of day wasn’t good for people who

have to commute, that we should be recording the talks.

I even got one crank call asking if we would be serving

milk and cookies.

But all that didn’t discourage me. I realized that my

goal was to reach the community and the community

was responding to the program. I might have shaken

them up a little, but I had reached them.

And people came. I was amazed to see more than 70

people show up for our very first program. That wasn’t

the only surprise. We assumed that the audience would

enjoy the stories if we could convince them to come. But

we didn’t anticipate just how warmly they would

respond. People came up to me and thanked me. They

told me that the story had given them a feeling of

connectedness and belonging.

JPL Stories is entering its fourth year. The series is

enthusiastically supported by the library staff and a core

team keeps the program on track, including Mickey

Honchell, who transforms our space each month, Tony

Reynolds who provides multimedia support and Barbara

Amago, who helps with programming and stands ready

to step in and direct the program if needed.

In the last three years, 60 to 80 people have come

each month to listen. We’ve heard about missions

deemed successes and missions deemed failures. Dr.

Bobby Williams told us about landing the NEAR spacecraft on an asteroid, and Tom Gavin about “What Could

Go Wrong” on a project. We’ve listened to a parable

(“Green Eggs and Ham – JPL Style”) that expressed what

it’s like to be a space discoverer—the struggles and the

disappointments, but also the reason to keep going in

the face of setbacks. Dr. Edward Stone has told us about

his “Journey of a Lifetime” with the Voyager Spacecraft

and Dr. William Pickering about JPL’s early years. All our

programs were stories told from a personal point-ofview, and all were stories that have shared knowledge

and experience not typically

captured in a formal report.

When I began working on

JPL stories, I had to do a lot of

selling as I made cold calls to find

storytellers. I used to have to go

into a long explanation of the

program and its benefits to the

center. I don’t have to do that

anymore. On feedback forms circulated at the end of

each program, we receive recommendations for future

storytellers. When I call someone now to talk about the

program, they’ve invariably heard about the program

and are interested in participating.

I like to think that by providing a venue for JPL

employees to come together as a community and by

sharing the experiences of individuals within that

community, we’re doing our small part to help make JPL

a dynamic, engaging place to work. •

“I even got one crank call asking if 

we would be serving milk and cookies.”

“There was no guide to follow, no handbook 

on how to get things started.”

SPECIAL FEATURE: KNOWLEDGE SHARING CONTINUED
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 17

What strikes me first is the excitement of

seating myself within an audience of JPL

workers from all areas of the Lab, coming

together for a common experience—to

listen, learn and relate. Most of the time

I don’t know whether I’m sitting next to

a former project manager, a library

worker, or a relative of the speaker—and

pleasantly, it doesn’t matter.

The format of the presentations are

relaxed, lack technicality, and are often

humorous. The audience hears of

blunders, or near blunders, on a regular

basis. Of successes and near successes.

And of competitions we didn’t know

existed. Most are aware of the science,

technology, and mission endeavors, but

sometimes we forget (at least I do) that

there are human beings driving and

enduring these advancements. I’m

reminded of that during the stories.

— Rebecca Nash

It’s important to know how we got where

we are, and it’s extremely valuable to

hear it from someone who was there. All

engineers value hindsight, even if it’s

only to prevent repeating mistakes. The

library’s program of JPL stories provides

this hindsight along with the anecdotal

details that show us what kind of place

JPL can be.

I believe it’s the stories and

engineering explanations from senior

engineers that start with “Well, the

reason it’s this way dates back to...” that

have provided me with a sense of the JPL

community. It gives me an idea of how

much more we should try to accomplish,

if we wish to follow in their footsteps.

— Scott Bryant

There is something wonderful about

going down to a library, sitting with my

friends among the books, and hearing a

master storyteller weave a tale. Besides

being entertaining, it is a great way to

learn...the process taps into a crucial

capacity the human animal has for

imparting wisdom from older generations

to younger ones through storytelling.

— Jay Breidenthal

The Audience Responds

Larry Dumas, then deputy

director of JPL, talks about

traditions worth preserving at

the inaugural session of JPL

stories on February 24, 2000.

PHOTO COURTESY OF NASA/JPL/CALTECH
18 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

“I WANT YOU TO TAKE CHARGE OF THIS PROJECT,”

said my supervisor.

In this case, it was a project that entailed starting

from scratch, not picking up the reins of an established

mission from a previous management. It wasn’t a small

project, either, but one with a half-billion dollar budget

and great scientific expectations. This was the challenge I

faced in the fall of 2001 when Dr. John Campbell, the

head of flight projects at NASA Goddard Space Flight

Center (GSFC), asked me to become the project manager

of the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) mission.

I seem to have the “luck” of being entrusted with

start-up situations. In fact, the last few projects I’ve

managed have in a sense been started from scratch. So,

though the project was new, I had an idea of where to

begin and what to expect.

November 2001

In the pre-formulation phase—prior to payload selection—

certain activities are crucial to a mission’s success. I

needed to understand the SDO mission and become a

salesperson for it while building my team. I also began

strategizing how to build the organizational structure.

When recruiting people, they ask a lot of questions

and need to know the answers before making a commitment to the project. Is the mission interesting? How will

the project operate and be organized? Will you, the

project manager, be someone I can receive support from

during the years required to bring the SDO dreams to

reality? As the leader of the mission, you need to be

prepared with the answers for questions of this nature.

December 2001

Rather than contract out the work, GSFC wanted to do

the SDO mission in-house in order to maintain

engineering core competency. This included developing

by Ken Schwer
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 19

the spacecraft and ground systems with civil servants

and support contractors. Even though GSFC likes to

keep one mission in-house for core competency, a good

and sound implementation plan is required for NASA

Headquarters approval.

Prior to the holidays, the SDO study lead was asked

to present an in-house plan to the NASA Associate

Administrator for Space Science, Dr. Edward Weiler, for

approval. Even though I was new to the scene, I volunteered to finalize the plan and make the presentation to

Dr. Weiler. Being responsible for the development of the

mission, I felt it was important for me to personally

deliver the message. Therefore, I spent many hours

preparing for this high level meeting.

On December 20, I gave the SDO presentation; the

study lead, Jim Watzin, provided detailed support. The

meeting lasted an hour and went extremely well. Dr.

Weiler agreed with our approach and gave his approval

to proceed. It was a great feeling of accomplishment to

arrive successfully at a key, early milestone for SDO.

January 2002 

A project manager is only as good as his/her staff, so it

was important for me to concentrate on selecting my

core team. Since the clock to SDO launch had started, I

needed key individuals on board to make progress.

“Hand picking” the core team is an important part of

establishing a teamwork environment. I wouldn’t leave

staffing key positions to chance.

I knew that it was important to work with the

functional supervisors and not bypass them when it

came to staffing. I needed their approval and cooperation

if SDO was to be successful. To accomplish this, I spent

many hours each week sitting down with individuals and

small groups to go over the project and to solicit their

support—again and again and again. As a result, I

became a better salesperson, and I was able to select my

core team with the support and approval of functional

management. At this point, there were approximately ten

people on the project.

February 2002

The one-on-one meetings were helpful; however, I now

needed to get everyone on the same page with respect to

the SDO opportunity. Therefore, I conducted an allhands meeting with GSFC’s engineering functional

supervisors. Here, I described the mission, organization,

challenges, and exciting work that lay ahead of us.

The functional managers left the all-hands meeting

with a solid understanding of SDO and the resources

needed from their areas. This was important because I was

competing with other projects for the same resources.

Of the many presentations I have made at GSFC,

this all-hands meeting gave me the “most bang for the

buck.” My organization grew quickly and this enabled us

to further define SDO. At this point, I had filled all core

management (science, project, systems engineering,

instrument, ground system, and flight assurance) as well

as several lead spacecraft and ground system engineering

positions, with approximately 25 people on the project.

March 2002

Dr. Barbara Thompson, our Project Scientist, came up

with the idea of taking our new team to the Maryland

Science Center for a Science Kickoff event. The morning

started with the entire team watching the Solar Max

IMAX film. I now refer to this as “the SDO recruitment

film.” After the film, a group of solar scientists spent the

rest of the day presenting the types of science that SDO

will enhance and conducting a question-and-answer

session. This energized the team. It was an outstanding

opportunity for engineers to understand the science and

dreams of SDO.

The SDO team embraced Dr. Thompson’s motto,

“Get good people on board and spoil them so they never

want to leave.” To demonstrate the extreme importance

of the SDO mission, our customer—the theme director

for NASA Headquarters’ Sun-Earth Connection (SEC),

Dr. Richard Fisher—spent the entire day with us participating in discussions.

Later in the month, the team building continued at

a retreat held offsite from GFSC. The SDO systems

engineering leads developed and conducted the retreat.

The morning was spent bringing the team up-to-speed

regarding the guiding principles and challenges for the

mission. After lunch, we held roundtable discussions
that focused on requirements, initial concepts and 

architectures, implementation options and instrument

challenges. Like the Science Kickoff, this event provided

an opportunity for collaboration.

April 2002

I took my core team to NASA Headquarters for a 

pre-formulation status meeting with our customer.

The purpose of this meeting

was two-fold: introduce and

provide exposure for my 

team, and show our customer 

the outstanding work and

progress we had made in 

such a short time. This

meeting planted the seed for

establishing good communication channels and working

relationships with our

customer. At this point, all key

subsystems were in place, and we had approximately 45

people on the project.

May–July 2002

NASA received instrument proposals and my team

reviewed them for spacecraft accommodation assessments. In June, my core team was invited to the NASA

Langley Research Center where we participated in

discussions with the technical management panel

responsible for evaluating the instrument proposals.

We were able to listen to their comments and offer our

own insights.

Once we completed our instrument accommodation study, we presented our results to our customer.

Involving the project team during this process was

beneficial for all. We learned about potential instruments

and we were able to provide insight to our customer.

August 2002

The moment arrived: the SDO instruments were

selected, and we were off and running. Eight months

into the project, we were ahead of most projects our 

size at this phase. We were already highly organized 

with an experienced and focused team.

Project teams are often

pulled together around the

time of instrument selection.

By this point on our project,

the complete SDO formulation team was in place—

approximately 70 people,

plus our instrument organizations. The team felt pleased

with their progress and our

customers were more than

satisfied. (They have since

recommended our process as a model for other projects.)

We officially launched the formulation phase,

knowing that next few years would be busy with many ups

and downs, surprises and challenges. This is project life. •

LESSONS

• Spend your greatest efforts early in the project on

identifying and recruiting the most suitable candidates

for your team.

• Building a team is done simultaneously with formulating the requirements and selling the project.

QUESTION

How do you cope with situations on a project where your

influence on selecting the most suitable people is limited?

20 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

Get good people 

on board and 

spoil them 

so they never 

want to leave.

LOOKING AT THE SUN

Scheduled for launch in 2007, the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO)

aims to increase our understanding of solar variability and its affect on life

here on Earth—from influencing climactic changes to producing

geomagnetic storms. The observatory will measure solar parameters and

monitor and record aspects of the Sun’s variable radiative, particulate and

magnetic plasma outputs deemed to have the greatest impact on Earth

and its surrounding heliopshere. 

Though SDO is the first mission under the Living with A Star Initiative,

in some sense it’s a follow-on to a previous project. But instead of taking

pictures once every 15 minutes (the current rate), SDO will record pictures

once every 10 seconds, sending 150-megabites of data to the ground 24

hours a day, seven days a week. For more information about the Solar

Dynamics Observatory, visit http://lws.gsfc.nasa.gov/sdo.htm
SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I WAS LEADING A TEAM-BUILDING

workshop for an Army program office at Aberdeen

Proving Ground, Maryland, and I had divided the group

into five-person teams to compete against each other in a

desert survival simulation exercise. The purpose of the

exercise was to stress the importance of up-front planning

and teamwork in successful project management.

I carefully watched the groups as they held their

initial planning meetings before starting off across the

simulated desert. One of the teams caught my eye since it

seemed much better organized and more team-oriented

than the rest. This team rapidly chose a leader and then

subdivided the remaining tasks so that each person had a

meaningful role. They had a high energy level with all

team members participating during the planning meeting.

I confidently predicted (to myself) that this team would

achieve the highest score on the exercise.

One of the tasks confronting each team in the

exercise was to calculate and then purchase the supplies

they would need for their desert journey, allowing for

contingencies such as extreme heat and sand storms. As

the groups started out, I kept my eye on my “favored”

team. I was quite surprised when midway through the

exercise, they ran out of supplies and “died in the desert,”

achieving the lowest score of the teams competing.

In the debriefing, I discovered that this team had no

members with mathematical aptitude, so they had only

made a “rough guess” at their need for supplies. They had

a smoothly functioning team but were incompetent to

perform one of their required tasks.

I then had a flashback to the last Air Force missile

development program I worked on before making my

career change into

project management training. As 

“The team’s enthusiasm 

was excellent—but their 

experience was minimal. a branch chief in

that program office, I had mid-level military and civilian

”

team members working with me, each with several years

of experience in their field. On a return visit to the

program office a few years later, I was shocked to find a

very junior officer as the branch chief with young

lieutenants and recently hired civilian college graduates

making up the team. The team’s enthusiasm was

excellent—but their experience was minimal.

This same scenario is repeated again and again as our

organizations lose their most experienced people through

downsizing and early retirements, and then attempt to

compensate by creating teams of newer and less experienced replacements. The trouble is that technical competence and specialized experience are often very hard to find

and recruit in a competitive job market. Such experience

also takes time to develop within the organization.

Basically, experience counts. We need to accept the

significance of that statement, and act on it. It’s one

thing to discover the need for expertise through

simulated deaths in a simulated desert—but when it

comes to many government projects, it’s often real lives

that are on the line. •

LESSONS

• Before embarking on a new and challenging project,

make sure you have the “basic building blocks” of

expertise in place. It takes good, technically competent

people to get a good product from a team.

• Project organizations must be proactive in recruiting

and developing the specialized expertise they need to

stay at the cutting edge in their field.

QUESTION

How can you be sure your team has the expertise it needs 

to succeed?

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 21

The calculus of cooperation

Teaming is so common in today’s project management environment that

most of us assume it comes naturally. We further assume that when presented

with meaningful and challenging work, project teams will naturally engage in

productive activity to complete their tasks. This assumption is expressed in

the simple (but false) equation: Team + Work = Teamwork. Although this

equation appears simple and straightforward, it is far from true for most

project organizations. Simply stated, most teams are dysfunctional by nature.

To overcome these restraining forces and use the potential power of the

team, greater emphasis must be placed on establishing and maintaining

group cohesiveness. This relationship is expressed in the revised (true)

mathematical equation: Team + Work (on the Team) = Teamwork.

—Owen Gadeken, ASK Magazine, Issue 7

BackBasics By Dr.Owen Gadeken

to
SCIN THE HEDULING

REAL WORLD BY MARTY DAVIS

22 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

Keeping an eye on the storm: 

GOES weather satellites capture an image of

Hurricane Fran as it begins its destructive journey

north along the East Coast in 1996. 

A DECADE AGO WHEN I CAME TO THE GEOSTATIONARY

Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) program, we

had one limping spacecraft, plus a satellite rented from the

Europeans. I had to start by assuming, essentially, that we

had no resources in orbit.

GOES is by no means an inconspicuous program.

Every night when you watch the weather on the evening

news, you see GOES satellite pictures. My customer, the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

requires two operating satellites, with a spare ready to 

be put into operation when an existing satellite goes out 

of service. Clearly, we needed to build our first two satellites

and get them launched as fast as we could.There was money

available, and a contractor lined up to do the work. Easy 

so far, from a scheduling point of view: Build the spacecraft

and launch it.
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 23
24 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

But what do you do when events beyond your So, I sold my customer on the idea of having an oncontrol dictate when you launch a spacecraft? orbit spare. That meant I could build the third spacecraft

Back in those days the people who built launch vehicles and launch it as soon as it was ready. We built the first

were doing a lot of launches.Thus, we expected long launch two as fast as we could, and then tailored the third one

queues. The idea of launching a spacecraft the moment it to when we wanted it to pop out and get ourselves in the

was needed didn’t seem very realistic. In addition, storing a launch queue. Thus far, we are still talking about a fairly

backup for extended periods of time seemed too risky.There easy scheduling scenario.

were certain detectors that we couldn’t check at room We assumed one failure out of every five spacecraft;

temperature; we would have to go back in the thermal one of the five satellites budgeted was for insurance. In

vacuum chamber. How long could we have a spacecraft out the end, all five succeeded. We never had that launch or

of thermal vac and still have confidence that it would work spacecraft failure. The second spacecraft had trouble

when launched? We didn’t know, and it made us nervous to with a momentum wheel and we took it out of service

think about putting things in storage for two or three years, after three years—two years short of its expected operathen trying to get hold of a thermal vac chamber, then tional lifetime. On the other hand, the one we launched

hoping to fit into a launch queue. in 1994 still operates.
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 25

Things began to get complicated as money became

less available. Isn’t that how it always is? To save $4 to $5

million dollars, we launched a spare earlier than planned,

so that we could reduce the number of contractors. It left

us with two on-orbit spares. How many spacecraft are

you going to have on-orbit before you get criticized for

having too many? But we also worried about experienced people being available for the launch, and we were

right to be concerned in this regard; thousands and

thousands of people have been laid off in the aerospace

industry in the past 18 months.

What else did we have to figure into our scheduling?

To put it simply: fuel. Eventually, a working satellite 

runs low on fuel and its usefulness as an operational

spacecraft diminishes quickly. We have to retire the

satellite or use it for some other function where it

is not mainline operational. How long will these 

satellites continue to perform? Will they go all the way 

to fuel depletion? I don’t know. But you look pretty 

funny trying to take one out of service that is 

working well, and you would look even funnier if you put

too many of them up and used up their lifetimes 

orbiting as hot spares.

All this comes into play in the way you schedule the

effort to build a spacecraft, to store it on the ground, and

then to put it in orbit so that you get it up there before

you need it—not knowing when you’re going to need it.

It’s a guessing game and the best you can do is to try to

balance all the resources. Here’s the average timetable we

work with: five years ground storage, two years on-orbit

storage, five-year operational lifetime. But what lifetime

do you use for a planning schedule? Is it the five years?

Or is it an estimate of fuel depletion?

Sometimes you make a schedule that you use for

budget purposes to get the money you need, assuming

the five-year lifetime, and then anything you get beyond

that is gravy. But do you get accused of lying to Congress

or Office of Management and Budget when you do that?

That’s something we face as we do schedules for an

ongoing program like this. NOAA can no longer go back

and say, “This is what we need,” and get all the money

they need for satellites because Congress says, “Look,

they're working fine. You’ve solved your problem.”

Congress isn’t planning as far ahead as we need to. If you

want to look at a long-term program, this is it. We have

launch dates slated through 2021.

What I want to get across here is that when you get

a multiple-unit situation like we have in satellites, and

you have something like on-orbit performance to

evaluate, the scheduling becomes complicated and it

requires ongoing attention in order to make adjustments

for changing situations.

Periodically we evaluate the health of the on-orbit

assets and revise our schedule as necessary. When we

make revisions, does it appear to an outsider that we

don’t know what we’re doing? Yes, is the answer. I call

this “scheduling in the real world.” •

LESSONS

• Balance best- and worst-case scenarios when scheduling.

This may make scheduling more complicated, but it will

yield a more realistic, sustainable project timetable.

• If established approaches aren’t likely to achieve

desired results, challenge the status quo and be willing to

take calculated risks.

QUESTION

How have you planned for uncertainty on a project? 

WATCHING THE WEATHER

Flash floods, hail storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes—all severe

weather conditions worth keeping an eye on. Since 1975,

NASA has produced that eye for the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NASA’s latest series of

geostationary operational environmental satellites (GOES)

provide high spatial and temporal resolution images from a

vantage point of 22,300 miles above the earth, as well as fulltime temperature and moisture profiles of the atmosphere.

Together, two satellites produce a full-face picture of the earth,

24 hours/day. For more information about the GOES project,

visit http://goes2.gsfc.nasa.gov/

THE IDEA OF LAUNCHING A SPACECRAFT THE MOMENT 

IT WAS NEEDED DIDN’T SEEM VERY REALISTIC.
26 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

We’re all interested in quality,

but if we can’t deliver a project on time,

quality becomes a moot point.

The subject of speed came up at 

NASA’s Masters Forum of Project Managers 

held in Tysons Corner, Virginia last August.

During a panel discussion about planning,

Scott Cameron of Procter & Gamble and 

Terry Little, then head of the Air Force’s Center for

Acquisition Excellence, discussed approaching

projects with speed as the primary focus. In this

excerpt, Scott and Terry share examples of how

speed affects the way they manage projects in their

initial phases, and they suggest why speed might be

important in how you manage yours.

We invite you, after reading these excerpts 

from the panel, to tell us about how you address

speed on your projects.

ASK: Let’s start with the obvious: why the

emphasis on speed?

CAMERON: In the Consumer Products

business, being first to the market or hitting a

defined marketing window with a quality

product requires us to always look for ways to

improve or reduce our execution schedules.

As such, we’re often called “speed merchants.”

LITTLE: I have found that when you

establish speed as your single focus, you go

back and look at how you do business with a

clean sheet of paper. It’s not hard to understand why speed counts when it comes to national

defense. In the Air Force, we have a fairly structured

system of procurement, oriented towards not making a

mistake. We have a highly detailed, highly structured

proposal evaluation for most big projects that typically

lasts, give or take, a year. On a few of my projects, we

have found ways to cut the yearlong process down to as

little as 3 or 4 weeks. How can we accomplish that?

Looking at our requirements in capability terms, not

specific numbers, is part of the solution. We tend in the

Air Force to be too detailed in requirements. Yes, there

are times where speed isn’t as critical or you take what

you can get—however long it takes, that’s how long it

takes. But I would judge that for the vast majority of

projects, speed really does count, even when it’s not

explicit. The key is this: When you have a single-minded

focus on something like speed, it encourages creative,

innovative thinking.

A CONVERSATION WITH W. SCOTT CAMERON AND TERRY LITTLE
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 27

CAMERON: I would just reiterate that. One time However, I’ve found that when you make it clear to

when I began work on a new project, we benchmarked someone that they have become the critical path, the

similar projects which indicated the best schedule we reason a project will succeed or fail, then they begin

could anticipate achieving was 24 months. Our to come up with very creative solutions that they

marketing window was only 17 months to execute the probably never realized existed. Sometimes it comes

project. We aligned the team to do it in 17 and they down to asking, “Can you meet this schedule?” and

accomplished the task. “Will you put your career on the line?” Then the

answers you get back are far different than the norm.

ASK: Those are clearly impressive results. How do you Then a team aligns, and it decides to challenge the

get a team to “align” like that? traditional barriers.

CAMERON: I think Terry’s point says it all, as the LITTLE: Everyone has to share the common goal,

schedule was the single point of focus. The project speed, and it has to be a goal that drives their behavior

manager also took the time to align all the factional team and their contribution. Focusing on one issue, such as

members and their hierarchy, as well as our contractors speed, comes down to deciding what you’re not going 

and suppliers, to this importance of speed. He also to do. You can’t expect a contracting officer who is

worked with the team and hierarchy to determine the wedded to “let’s avoid any sort of protest from the

cost impact of going this fast. contractor, let’s make sure that we’ve got a fireproof

Our ability to achieve this schedule was threat- contract” to work that problem and the speed problem

ened throughout the duration of the project. at the same time. It won’t happen. So you’ve got to
have, as an essential element of a functioning team, a

shared, common objective—speed, we’ll say—for

which everyone accepts accountability. Without that,

you’ll never get anything from the engineer, from

finance, from procurement, from the lawyer, and so

forth, because they each have a different objective. You

can call it a team, because you happen to work in the

same location or you are on the same work chart, but

it is not a team if every single member of the team

doesn’t share a common objective.

ASK: How is quality affected by a focus on speed?

CAMERON: There are tradeoffs. The big three when

it comes to a project are cost, quality and speed. They’re

all negotiable. If speed is the most important, then the

question is: what does that do to cost, what does that do

to quality? From a consumer product standpoint,

putting a lousy product out there fast means you’re

going to fail in the marketplace. So, if quality is the

number one vector, then how do you balance cost and

speed? Again, it’s all negotiable.

Some of the biggest obstacles I’ve faced in managing

a “speed” project are the technical engineers and their

desire to have everything perfect from day one. They’ll

say, “We just need a couple more days.” But a couple

more days could be critical if you’re trying to hit a

marketing window.

Sometimes you may not need perfection. Like I’ll

pick pet food. Do dogs and cats really know what the

container looks like? Do they care? It’s what’s inside

that pets care about, but when you go through market

studies, it’s always: “What’s the quality of the container?”

Maybe you won’t have the perfect container if you go for

speed; maybe you live with something secondary and

then six months after your product has rolled out, you

come up with a new and improved container.

Quality is the most important aspect of any project.

If you put an inferior product into the marketplace it will

fail. But, like anything else, there are probably more

negotiations on those three—cost, quality and speed—

than you give yourself credit for.

LITTLE: I think it’s important to clarify that speed

isn’t necessarily the preeminent concern of every project.

But when speed is critical, it’s important to have a clear

set of priorities in order to decide what does and doesn’t

require the attention of your team. There is a misconception, I think, that if you emphasize something like

speed or like cost, that everything else goes in the toilet—

that if you focus on speed when you’re developing a car,

you’ll deliver a lemon in the end. My observation is 

that people working the problem won’t let that happen;

that what you give up is very modest in comparison to

what you gain.

What you’ve got to do, I am convinced, is to

“unlearn,” to use Alex Laufer’s term, all of our processes

that are not oriented toward speed or credibility, but 

are oriented toward not making a mistake, playing it

safe. When you take on a problem, there is plenty 

of room out there for all kinds of extraordinary 

alternatives that will both increase speed and increase

credibility. There really are. We have seen some of 

those work.

ASK: Could you give an example?

LITTLE: A lot of our processes that we have, both

procurement and post-award, are built on lack of

trust. That’s essentially what it is. When you hand

somebody an 11-page specification rather than a 100-

page document, however, you are sending a clear

signal that you trust them to do the right thing. In

general, we don’t do that because we don’t trust, or the

system won’t allow us to trust; I’m not sure which. But

my own belief is that, as an individual project manager,

you can go a long way in that direction by starting not

with the notion that someone has to earn your trust,

but starting with the presumption that they’re trustworthy until proven otherwise. It allows things like an

11-page specification.

28 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

When you have a single-minded focus 

on something like speed,it encourages

creative,innovative thinking
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 29

My biggest disappointment in the past has been

when I have given project managers the opportunity to

innovate, and they don’t know what to do with it. They

demand processes, rigidity, templates, and prescriptions. It is as if you give them a blank check and they

write it for a dollar.

CAMERON: To come back to your question about an

example, one type of project comes to mind: site

clearance. Unfortunately, we have had a few brands that

haven’t made it and we have had to clear out everything

we’ve put in. Site clearance to me is pretty simple. You

walk in the room, you see the equipment making the

product, and you say, “Here’s my spec: I want all of that

gone,” and you’re ready to bid the job. Somebody might

accuse me of oversimplifying it, but that’s pretty much

what you want done. The interesting thing is, when you

go out and you ask people to write the site clearance

specification, it comes back 400 pages long. I think

Terry’s point is right on: often what’s required is

unlearning of old thinking. If speed is your priority, you

should approach the job differently.

ASK: How do you address risk in a speed-first approach?

CAMERON: There’s one thing I always tell people

when they’re managing a speed project, and that is to

remember “speed kills,” too. The project manager must

understand where the gas and the brake pedals are

located as the project is executed. The project manager

has to have the experience to use the proper pedal

because there are times when speed can kill a project.

Not every portion of a “speed” project has to be executed

as fast as possible, thus the project manager must understand how and when to operate each pedal.

LITTLE: I think in the Department of Defense one

comment I hear frequently is that you get the behavior from

project managers that you reward. I don’t know about

NASA, but if you want project managers to be risk-takers

in the sense of taking a modest risk to achieve an extraordinary gain or an extraordinary improvement, then the

system is going to have to be rewarding of that behavior.

CAMERON: I had one project where I thought I was

going to be appointed the project manager. It turned out

it was a five-site rollout. You had 26 weeks to start up the

fifth site. The first site had to start up week 18. We hadn’t

ordered any equipment. We weren’t funded, but the end

date had been set. We only knew two of the five sites.

Aside from those “minor details,” it was a fairly defined

job. I’m joking, of course.

I went in to my boss and expected him to say, “We

want you to be the project manager.” What he actually

said was: “We want you to be the project manager but

you have to answer one question: Will you stand by

your decisions?” Because this was an extremely

aggressive schedule, there was no time to second guess

my decisions or even take significant time to make

decisions. I had to deliver a quality product—let me be

very clear about that—I couldn’t put swill out there

and meet this schedule. At the end of our discussion,

my boss said, “I will give you a night to think about it.”

It was as though that was the only criterion—my

willingness to stand by my convictions, because I had

to drive speed. In that job, the project manager was

going to be rewarded for speed.

So Terry’s point is well made: you are likely to get

exactly what you reward. If it is complacency, if it’s

status quo that you reward, then that is what you are

going to get. In this job, I would be rewarded for quality

and speed. And I delivered it.

LITTLE: I will offer just one more thought. I just

completed an informal, non-scientific assessment of

a few successful Air Force programs, big ones. At the

root of every one of those programs there was one

element in common, and it wasn’t adequate funding

or stable requirements or good systems engineering.

The common element was a program manager on the

government side who challenged the status quo, took

risks and persevered. It was a project manager who

was a leader. •

There’s one thing I always tell people

when they’re managing a speed project,

and that is to remember “speed kills,” too
30 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

PRACTICES by Ray Morgan

Managers have to effectively communicate people’s roles in the overall project.

In fact, this is one of the primary jobs of a project manager, and most of the tools

available for project management are really forms of communication

PERT Charts Take

Figure 1
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 31

MOST PROGRAM/PROJECT AND TASK MANAGERS USE THE the chart on a simple computer drawing program, rather

Gantt chart format for their graphic display of project than using project management software, allowed us to

plans and actual accomplishments. It is a simple tool to use representative graphics prior to an event actually

use, and displays a lot of information on a computer occurring and to insert digital photographs of events as

screen. Most modern, commercial computer programs they were accomplished. Since it was updated infreallow one to show interdependence, resource allocation, quently, the automated features of a canned project

and roll-up of tasks and subtasks on the Gantt chart, at management program were outweighed by the value of

varying degrees of clarity. flexible use of graphics. Also, most automated PERT

From the standpoint of communicating the overall chart programs do not show a time scale.

picture of what needs to be done, when and why, to both Having access to a large, color plotter enabled us to

the project team and our customers, however, I’ve found make banner-sized depictions of the program and place

the PERT chart to be better. PERT stands for “Program them on the walls of our shop and hangar for all the

Evaluation and Review Technique,” but the charts are team to see. The chart was much more than window

also called “network diagrams” and “precedence charts.” dressing, as we often referred back to it in team meetings

Probably, the latter terms are more descriptive of the to help redefine the importance of a current task and to

charts’ functions. see how it fit into “the big picture.” This became a very

In our solar aircraft development program, we valuable tool for the team.

used two types of precedence charts extensively for With pride, we saw blocks filled in with actual

communication of program/project plans. The solar pictures of our accomplishments (as well as programaircraft development was a part of the Environmental matic re-adjustments when necessitated by problems).

Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology program Enthusiasm for accomplishing the next goal was reborn

(ERAST), managed by NASA’s Dryden Flight Research each time we looked at the graphics on our wall. The fact

Center. A top-level program chart, spanning eight years, that these charts were actually updated, and did not just

is shown in Figure 1. become faded wallpaper, made them more evocative to

This type of chart was extremely useful for the team. What’s more, this top-level view of the

communicating the overall program milestones leading program was invaluable in “selling” the program to our

to the end goals. It shows the Level II project elements customers in the Agency food chain, as well as members

that make up the overall solar aircraft program. Creating of Congress and the public at large.

Precedence
PRACTICES CONTINUED

Figure 2

32 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

Figure 2 illustrates the use of the precedence chart

at a working level. This particular example shows the

chart as used in the field with the Helios flight test team

during our attempt to reach 100,000 feet above sea level

in 2001. This chart goes down to Level IV from a

program standpoint (Level III from a project view).

While much of the effort to organize the precedence

chart is manual manipulation (when using typical

project management software that runs on a desktop

computer) and requires some “grunt work” on the part

of the manager, this manual approach provides more

flexibility in organizing the chart in meaningful ways.

This same chart also illustrates how the project

manager can group tasks to the next higher level (see 

the large blue outlines), such as procedures, software,

etc. In addition, the key milestones are evident within

the red diamonds (ops brief, tech brief, etc.). The task

manager for each set of sequential tasks is shown 

in green letters at the top of each string of tasks.

The software automatically calculates the critical paths

(shown in red), and the responsible persons for tasks 

on the critical paths have their names shown clearly in
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 33

red as well, to emphasize their situation to the team.

We were able to show a group of “Nice to Have” tasks in

the lower right corner, which would be worked if people

became available.

In essence, a complete virtual model of the project

is shown in one large sheet, and it is much more

meaningfully organized than if we had just printed out a

large Gantt chart with several hundred items listed

sequentially. This model allows the project manager and

subordinate task managers to visualize and formulate

plans, and see graphically how they work.

We put our chart on the side of a large container

right in the hangar, next to the flight test crew and the

airplane. When posted, it becomes a valuable, graphic

depiction of the work plan, interdependencies,

milestones and people on the critical path (as well as

which ones may need help). It also allows the team to

mark it up interactively, adding tasks that come up when

necessary and crossing/signing-off tasks as they are

completed. We usually incorporated these changes into

the computer model and reprinted it once or twice

a week during flight tests.

In summary, the PERT or precedence chart (a.k.a.

network diagram) provides both a virtual model for

project and task managers to refine their plans as well 

as an excellent graphic depiction of the plans and 

project status to the team and their customers. It is 

more work than the standard Gantt chart, but it is

extremely helpful in the effective execution of the

project. The precedence chart graphically clarifies the

plan, and allows team members to see themselves as

integral to the project. •

Riding High

“Before too long, solar aircraft will

be capable of subsonic flight in the

stratosphere. A new industry is on

its way,” says Ray Morgan—and he

should know. Morgan has been a

pioneer in the development of nextgeneration aircraft since the 1970s.

He has been integrally involved in

NASA’s efforts to develop sustainable

solar-powered aircraft on the

Pathfinder and Helios projects (Helios

is pictured on the cover this issue). According to Morgan, the NASA

Environmental Research and Sensor Technology (ERAST) program

is successfully developing a new type of propulsion for aircraft, one

uniquely appropriate for the 21st century. Soon, because of this

program, many missions now requiring rocket launches or jet

aircraft will be accomplished more economically in terms of dollars

and environmental impact.

TOM TSCHIDA
34 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

UEET IS A NATIONAL PROGRAM TO DEVELOP THE CRITICAL

technologies for low emission propulsion systems whose

results will be used by the U.S. aerospace industry for

further development of the next generation of turbine

engines. Ms. Peddie has also been a project manager for

high mach turbine efforts, and for several microgravity

experiments on the Space Shuttle and on the Space

Station Freedom. Prior to coming to NASA, she served

in the United States Air Force as a Flight Commander

responsible for supervision and mission direction of a

12-person crew. She was responsible for the command

of three $55-million satellites and a $1-billion ground

station. She was handpicked to bring online a new

satellite operations center in 1989 and helped establish

the first operating procedures.

Ms. Peddie enjoys being a mentor for the Women in

Engineering Program at the University of Akron, a

mentor for the NASA K-12 program and a panelist for the

Women in Science Program at Cuyahoga Community

College. She is a native of Makakilo, Hawaii, and in her

spare time enjoys oil painting, golf, kayaking and yoga.

After years as a project manager, you’re working now as

a deputy program manager. Was that an easy transition

to make?

When I accepted my current job, my boss told me that I

would notice a big difference between project and

program management. Honestly, I thought that he was

full of bunk. How different could it be? But after a couple

of years, I would say that he was absolutely right! Working

on the project level, no matter how large the project, I was

able to focus on a particular area; I never had to worry too

much about the bigger picture. Now as a program

manager, I always have to worry about the big picture.

What does ‘big picture’ mean in your case?

You know the classic definition of project management:

balancing cost, schedule and technical issues. I never

realized that programs have a fourth dimension, which is

politics. There are the typical politics between different

organizations, whether they are NASA centers, divisions,

branches or whatever; and there are politics, I think, in

the classical sense of dealing with Congressmen and

Senators, with Headquarters and how Headquarters

deals with OMB and Congress. I’m also aware now 

of international politics—the politics of how our country

deals with commercially sensitive technologies and 

INTERVIEW 

Cathy Peddie

Cathy Peddie is Assistant Manager of the Ultra Efficient 

Engine Technology (UEET) Program Office at the NASA 

John H. Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 35

international security. Our program is highly visible. We

often get singled out in a Congressional line item. We’ll get

calls from the offices of a Senator or Congressman, and I

have to be aware of the heightened sensitivity to those

types of phone calls and questions that we get asked.

We’re talking about airlines and airplanes here. When

people think of NASA, they think of space. Does it ever

surprise people that your work focuses on aircraft

engines, rather than spacecraft?

Actually, NASA’s roots are in aeronautics, not in space.

We didn’t become the space people until the 50s. Having

worked on the space side, I know that space generates

excitement. People automatically think, “Oh cool, astronauts.” When I talk, instead, about aeronautics, they

assume my work can’t be exciting. In fact, I had someone

tell me once, “Well, let’s face it. Turbine engines are

boring. There is nothing sexy about them.”

Is that perception a problem, when it comes to getting

support for your work—from Congress and within the

Agency? Is it something that affects the way you work?

Oh, yes. We’re working on that perception, at least in our

program office. We have a very aggressive outreach

effort. We have “Engine 101” information online and, for

kids, a little character that looks like a turbine engine. It’s

our fun way of trying to teach the public about engines.

When people point out that aeronautics is a

“mature industry,” our challenge is to show then why we

need to continue our research in technology. Here’s a

personal example of that: my mom. I love my mom, but

my mom couldn’t care less about a turbine engine.

Recently, she found out she has the start of a cataract. I

pointed out to her that our program focuses on

emissions reduction, which helps the ozone layer. I

explained to her that my work on turbine engines could

reduce the number of cataracts in the world. That

stunned my mother. Attempting to talk about our work

at a level that an individual can relate to is very important

in our office. We always try to do that.

I know that you do a lot of outreach work for the

program. Is that something that comes naturally for you?

I actually started doing things like that in my community

long before I came to NASA. So, when I came to NASA

and realized there was a speakers’ bureau and mentorship programs, I got involved because I love to talk to

people, especially kids. These were all things that I did in

my personal time because it always jazzed me. There is

nothing more exciting than having someone come up to
36 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

you and go, “Wow, what you do is so cool.” You know, if

you speak their language, if you talk with them on their

level and skip the lecture on turbine engines, I think that

actually helps them to understand. Whenever I would

speak at an event, I would have adults come up to me

and say, “Oh my God, we need more role models like

you. The kids really listened.” I never considered myself

a role model, but I have realized that if you can tell a

young person what it is really like to be an engineer,

there’s a better chance they’ll consider going into math

and science.

You’ve told us about communicating your mission to

people outside the program. How about within a

program? You’re currently deputy assistant manager for

two programs. How much communication exists between

the various projects you oversee? 

When I first came to the UEET program, the projects

were like separate islands; they didn’t speak to one

another. Somehow we had to figure out how to get the

islands to come together into a single continent. Why

does this matter? Well, when you’re under a tight

budget, and one project manager spends all of the

money, it’s a significant problem for all the other projects

involved. You can’t have people saying, “Oh, I didn’t

know that my colleague over there needed money.”

Yes, we hire project managers to look out for their

projects. That’s their job. But my job is to look out for

the health of the overall program. I have to figure out

how to convince these project managers that they need

to cross boundaries. I need to convince them that, in the

end, it’s in their own best interest to communicate and

cooperate. I think we have moved the islands closer

together, but they certainly are not one voice.

What have you done to work on the problem?

One thing we’ve tried is holding off-site retreats where

we put teams through physical situations that serve as

metaphors for work situations. We put people in a

situation where they have to team or communicate or

organize or plan. After they experience these issues in

real time, we try to relate it back to the job. We ask if

there are situations back at NASA where the same sorts

of scenarios occur. It’s amazing how people will draw the

connection.

For example, let’s say we wanted to work on

communication. We would talk first about the subject.

Then we might go outside and give a team some wood

and tell them that they have ten minutes to build a

house. Let’s say that one of the team members runs off,

without talking to anyone else, and starts building the

house—when they come back here to work, they’ll

remember that. “Oh, yes, I remember when Todd ran off

and started building that house without me. Now, here

at work, I would really appreciate it, Todd, if you sat

down and talked with me ahead of time.” That’s an

example, I think, of combining approaches. We talk

about the need for communication, but it’s one thing to

say the word; it’s another to experience it.

Our office manages a lot of teams, and we’ve had a

lot of teaming issues. We made some people uncomfortable, initially. How do you address interpersonal issues

without your engineers thinking, “I can’t believe you’re

wasting my time with this touchy-feely stuff”? But this

year, when we discussed holding another experiential

retreat, people were pounding on my door. This year

they said, “When are we going? We can’t wait to go!”

Have you seen results?

From last year to this year, I see a marked difference in

our environment here at work. People are more collegial.

INTERVIEW CONTINUED
Communicating by Walking Around

ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 37

They will help one another out. There is more laughter

in the meetings. I see more of a willingness to say, “Hey,

I’ll lend you money this month as long as you get me

money next month.” A year ago, that offering never

would have come on the table.

On an individual level, we’ve seen changes, as well.

At one of our retreats, one of the questions that we asked

was, “If you were being used to the best of your capabilities, what would you be doing in this program?” We got

different responses from people. In following up individually, we found that while somebody was perfectly

willing to do a particular job, they might have more

expertise or more of an interest somewhere else. We’re

very open to shifting people around.

Have you done that on a project—shifted someone’s

duties because of this sort of communication?

Yes, we have. For example, we brought in someone to do

our project schedules. I found out at the retreat that she

is certified in configuration management. We desperately

needed that in one of our new start-up projects. So, we

still need her help in schedules, but we have asked her to

help set up the configuration management of this project.

Now she’s a lot more gregarious in our meetings.

Now she is jumping at the table, trying to give us new

ideas. I think for her personally, it’s making her feel more

valued. And the project benefits at the same time.

I think if you’re a smart enough manager and you

get to know your team and read the environment right,

you can play to people’s strengths and weaknesses. You

don’t have to have lunch with them every day, but it’s a

mistake for any manager, whether you’re heading up a

project or a program, to neglect getting to know the

people working for you.

If you had to sum up the most important thing you’ve

learned during your tenure in program management,

what would that be? 

Work smarter, not harder. It sounds like a cliché, I know,

but I’ve evolved from when I came into this job insisting

that program management is no different from project

management. I realized that I had to make a change in

my work style. I don’t believe I work as hard as I used to.

I don’t need to work harder—because I work better.
38 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

Too often our culture here is to fire and then aim. I

used to jump into action. Now, I stop and think. I stop,

take a breath and think. I still have the urge to leap into

action, but I’ve learned that taking a moment to assess

the situation helps me to reach a better resolution than

if I just jumped right into action. That’s the difference in

my style.

I still work in an environment with deadlines and

the need for action. Sometimes I make people angry

when I say, “Excuse me. I’m sorry I’m slow, but can we

think about this for a minute? Why are we doing this?”

That really irritates some people around here, but I

believe we need to slow down and talk before we act.

So “faster” isn’t always “better”? 

Again, what I’ve found is that “harder” isn’t always

“smarter.” Like many other people, my line of work

means that I have to live the definition of multi-tasking.

When we managed one program, I noticed that 10- to

12-hour days became the norm. Then as we moved to

managing two programs, it became more like 12 to 14

hours a day, with weekends thrown in, and we started

seeing a lot of burnout. We had to start dealing with

some significant personnel issues—health problems,

interpersonal conflicts, marital difficulties.

A friend of mine came up to me about that same

time and told me how frustrated she was in her job as a

project manager. She told me that she felt like she was

on a treadmill going nowhere fast. And I realized that she

was right, that when our jobs make us feel as though we

are going nowhere really, really fast, it means that we’ve

let things go out of balance.

Now when I see people out of balance, I always try

to remind them that unless they take care of themselves,

they won’t be of any value to us. If they hurt themselves,

or have to miss work, or whatever because of health

problems, not only will I feel bad as a human being, but

as a program manager I realize that one of my resources

won’t be available for me. So, my advice to people always

is to take care of themselves first. As soon as they can

take care of themselves, then they’ll be able to accomplish whatever it is that we’ve asked them to do.

Do you see yourself as a person who has achieved balance

herself?

I see myself as a person striving for balance. When I

injured myself several years ago, one of my doctors said,

“No medication for you. You’ve got to heal yourself.”

“What?” I asked him. I wanted him to give me that

magic pill, but his prescription was to get balance in my

life. Instead of medication, he suggested yoga, meditation

and all of that.

At the time, I questioned his advice, but now I see

that his “prescription” helped me heal more than just my

injury. When I worked on weekends and worked all

those long hours, I threw my life out of balance. Now,

I’m finding you can still be successful without giving up

everything else. •

INTERVIEW CONTINUED
ASK 11 FOR PRACTITIONERS BY PRACTITIONERS 39

JOHN BRUNSON is currently assigned to the Systems

Management Office with the Marshall Space

Flight Center. He is also a member of the

Agency’s Program Management Council

Working Group. Previously, he was Project

Manager for three separate microgravity

payloads that flew on various Spacelab missions. His career in

the space industry began in 1980 as a technician working on the

first Space Shuttle.

DR. MICHELLE COLLINS works in the Spaceport Engineering

& Technology Research Group at Kennedy

Space Center. She has over 20 years experience

in aerospace spanning engineering, R&D and

project management. She is on the Florida Tech

Engineering Accreditation Board, the National

Fire Protection Association’s Technical Committee for Halon

Alternatives and the United Nations Environmental Programme

Halon Technical Options Committee.

HECTOR DELGADO is Division Chief of Process Tools and

Techniques in the Safety, Health and

Independent Assessment Directorate at the

Kennedy Space Center. In 1995, he served as

Senior Technical Staff to the NASA Chief

Engineer at NASA Headquarters in Washington,

D.C. He has received many honors and awards including the

Exceptional Service medal, Silver Snoopy Award and various

Achievement Awards.

DR. OWEN GADEKEN is a Professor of Engineering Management

at the Defense Acquisition University where he

has taught Department of Defense program

and project managers for over 20 years. He

retired last year from the Air Force Reserve as a

Colonel and Senior Reservist at the Air Force

Office of Scientific Research. He is also a member of the

Advisory Board of the NASA Academy of Program and Project

Leadership and is a frequent speaker at project management

conferences and symposia.

DR. MICHAEL HECHT is project manager and a co-investigator

for the Mars Environmental Compatibility

Assessment (MECA). He has been with NASA

since 1982 at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory

(JPL). In his previous assignment with NASA’s

New Millennium Program, he was instrumental in defining the “microlander” that was adopted as

NASA’s New Millennium Program Deep Space 2.

JODY ZALL KUSEK is a Senior Evaluation Officer at the World

Bank. She is currently involved in supporting

the efforts of seven governments to move to a

focus of performance-based management. She

has spent many years in the area of public

sector reform, serving the Vice President of the

United States, the U.S. Secretary of the Interior and the U.S.

Secretary of Energy in the areas of Strategic Planning and

Performance Management.

DONALD MARGOLIES was Project Manager for the Advanced

Composition Explorer (ACE) mission, launched

in 1997 and still operating successfully. He

received the NASA Medal for Outstanding

Leadership for his work on ACE and a NASA

Exceptional Service Medal for the Active

Magnetospheric Particle Tracer Explorers (AMPTE) mission.

DR. GERALD MULENBURG is the Manager of the Aeronautics

and Spaceflight Hardware Development

Division at the NASA Ames Research Center in

California. He has project management experience in airborne, spaceflight and ground

research projects with the Air Force, industry

and NASA. He also served as Executive Director of the

California Math Science Task Force and as Assistant Director of

the Lawrence Hall of Science.

JOAN SALUTE is the Associate Director of Aerospace at Ames

Research Center. She has managed many

NASA projects including those involving flight

testing of thermal protection materials,

commercial technology, commercial applications of remote sensing and remote sensing

science projects. She has been at Ames for 20 years, and was

awarded the Sloan Fellowship to attend Stanford Graduate

School of Business in the fall of 2002.

HARVEY SCHABES is currently assigned to the Systems

Management Office at the Glenn Research

Center. He started his career with NASA in

icing research, and since then has served in

numerous organizations in support of the

Space Station Program.

CHARLIE STEGEMOELLER was selected in 1997 as Manager of

the Johnson Space Center (JSC) Human Space

Life Sciences Programs Office. He is responsible for the programmatic and tactical implementation of the lead center assignments for

Space Medicine, Biomedical Research and

Countermeasures and Advanced Human Support Technology.

He began his career at NASA in 1985 with JSC Comptroller’s

Office as a technical program analyst.

HUGH WOODWARD served as the Chairman of the Project

Management Institute (PMI) for consecutive

terms in 2000 and 2001. He was elected to the

Board of Directors in 1996, and before being

elected as the Chair, served terms as vice chair

and in several other key leadership roles. He is

a program manager for Global Business Services with the

Procter & Gamble Company.

REVIEW BOARD
LETTER FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Dr. Alexander Laufer

40 APPL THE NASA ACADEMY OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT LEADERSHIP

CHUCK: So, what have you been doing since you left the

university?

DAVE: I finally landed a job at a big-name construction

company. I’m Manager of Planning and Control—and

I’ve gotten everything computerized to the max. We’ve

got the latest programs galore for range estimating and

whatnot, you name it.

CHUCK: We’re doing something like that ourselves. I

handle planning and scheduling for my company. The

computers do everything for you: finance,

payment, accounting with subcontractors,

bid checking and comparison of subcontractors’ bids. Hmmm, when you think about

that, this conference is child’s play.

DAVE: Yes, it really seems a waste of time.

CHUCK: Hey, that reminds me...do you remember Hank,

the guy in our class? He works as a project manager with us.

DAVE: You don’t say...well, even at school he had

managerial airs.

CHUCK: After six months of work he’s already two

months behind. I visited him yesterday with the latest

plan updates, and what do I find? The original plan,

already turned yellow. I told him there was a new one, he

should take the old one off the wall. Tell me, why do we

bother preparing updates? 

DAVE: Listen to this one: We had a big project—four

schedulers working on it. Full details. Due to time

pressures, site representatives couldn’t be involved in the

planning. Close to execution we finally had a meeting

with the project manager. At the end he got up and

walked off. I stopped him on the way out and said, “Wait

a minute. You forgot the plans.” “Oh,” he answered,

“keep them in your office.”

CHUCK: One of my project mangers went one better

than that. He came running after me to the car carrying

the plans I had brought him. “You forgot these,” he said.

Then they’re all surprised when things don’t run

according to schedule. They simply ignore the updates.

DAVE: We peer as far as possible into the future, and work

out the fine details, just the way the textbook said to. And

what do they tell us? They don’t understand it. Every

detail is spelled out for them—what else do they need? 

CHUCK: Know what this one project manager

does to me? I work like crazy, my superiors are

pleased as punch, but when I come to see the

project manager all I get is a sour face. The

plans are too late to do any good for the first

week, not relevant; so the plans for the rest

don’t fit either, and he can’t use them. Why was

I late? Because I worked on his plans, that’s why! 

DAVE: They don’t learn from experience. Everything is

trial and error all over again. Well, looks like they’re

calling us back in. Another lecture.

CHUCK: What now?

DAVE: “Project Planning and Scheduling—The Dream

and its Demise” by Alex Laufer.

CHUCK: I think I’ll take the afternoon off. I’ve had

enough experience with these clever Ivory Tower guys.

Besides, I don’t know what “demise” supposedly

happened to the “dream” of scheduling. Scheduling’s

never been better.

DAVE: Yeah...when I think back on what the company

looked like before I joined and how things are now,

with all the computerized stuff; it’s like night and 

day. If we could just find a program to replace those 

project managers... •

The Dream and Its Demise

Chuck and Dave, two planning & scheduling engineers, meet at a project

management conference and end up discussing the tricks of their trade

Every detail is 

spelled out for 

them—what else 

do they need?
IN MEMORIAM

STS-107

Michael Anderson

David Brown

Kalpana Chawla

Laurel Clark

Rick Husband

William McCool

Ilan Ramon
XX-XXXX-X-XXX-XX