Building and Retaining the

Aerospace Workforce

12–13 May 2009

Doubletree Hotel Crystal City

Arlington, Virginia

Aerospace Department 

Chairs Association (ADCA)

www.a iaa .org/even ts/ ins ideaerospace

Organized by Co-Sponsored by Offi cial Media Sponsors

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Executive Summary

Actions have been taken in response to the 2008 Inside Aerospace Forum’s recommendations in all three 

areas cited by the report of that forum. In education and social environment, these include using new media, 

expanding school STEM programs, using outside mentors as guidance counselors, increasing corporate 

support for STEM education, encouraging public-private partnerships to foster education and research, 

adjusting college curricula to focus on new interests and earlier and more “hands-on” courses, and applying 

systems dynamic modeling to increase the number of STEM students and recruit more women and minorities. 

In employee recruitment and retention, actions have been to increase and expand the use of teams, highlight 

leadership aspects, transmit “passion” to schools, develop and publish a list of “best practices,” encourage 

managers to focus on work/life balance, go “out of the box” for new hires, devise simple, comprehensive 

recognition programs, form retention teams, publicize examples of successful mentoring projects, diversify the 

workforce, begin passing on leadership to the next generation, and begin systems engineering training early in 

engineers’ careers.

In fostering inspiration, actions have been to expand corporate and professional-society inspirational 

programs, build programs to create role models, devise and conduct projects to train and educate STEM 

teachers, begin the repositioning of the engineering profession, and foster the recognition that engineering is 

critical to large social programs.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 1

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................Inside Front Cover

Overview .............................................................................................................................................................................2

Background .....................................................................................................................................................................3

I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................3

II. 2008/2009 Recommended Actions and Progress to Date ..............................................................................3

 II.1 Th e Educational and Social Environment ..............................................................................................3

 II.1.1 Summary of Findings and Actions on the Educational and Social Environment .............6

 II.2 Employee Recruitment and Retention ....................................................................................................6

 II.2.1 Summary of Findings and Actions on Employee Recruitment and Retention ..................8

 II.3 Inspiration ..................................................................................................................................................9

 II.3.1 Summary of Findings and Actions on Inspiration ..............................................................10

III. New Recommendations, Findings, and Actions ...........................................................................................10

IV. Conference Sponsor Actions ............................................................................................................................11

Appendix A: Program .................................................................................................................................................12

Appendix B: Attendee List .........................................................................................................................................17
2 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

Overview

Actions in response to the recommendations generated by the 2008 and 2009 Inside Aerospace forums on 

aerospace workforce issues can be grouped into three areas: legislative; institutional and corporate; and 

individual. Th ese actions can be taken by those who determine policies and make decisions to implement 

them. Such policymakers can be both inside and outside the aerospace sector, and should include authorities 

both within and outside the educational community. Typical actions in the three areas are as follows; others are 

detailed in the text of this report:

Legislative:

Th e sponsoring organizations and their Washington delegations should push for: 

a. Legislation that requires subject matter mastery for teachers of science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics (STEM) at the middle school and high school levels. 

b. Tuition forgiveness for those who earn STEM degrees and enter into public service positions at agencies 

such as the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, NASA, and the National Security 

Agency. 

c. Legislation to facilitate the employment of qualifi ed foreign nationals by U.S. aerospace companies, federal 

agencies, and other aerospace-related organizations. 

d. Legislation to enable portability of security clearances among aerospace employers.

Institutional and Corporate: 

e. Identify skill risks and gaps, and address them through knowledge transition practices of the type which 

have been used successfully by several companies as described in this report (e.g., mentorships and 

opportunities to engage with society) to improve the retention of young professionals.

f. Establish a young-professionals industry community to facilitate methods of retaining them in the 

industry, e.g., by enhancing the mobility of individuals to segments of the industry that off er more or 

better employment opportunities. 

g. Provide resources (time, talent, and funds) to support STEM education at all levels. Track and measure the 

impact of these resources on STEM enrollment and entry into aerospace careers.

Personal:

h. Mentor a student and/or teacher over time.

i. Participate in a professional mentorship.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 3

Th e aerospace workforce is aging, and too 

few young people are being prepared for or 

are choosing engineering and science careers. 

As a result, regeneration of our professional 

workforce is the leading challenge confronting 

the aerospace community. Th is vital concern 

was addressed by a previous AIAA-led 

Inside Aerospace Forum on 13–14 May 

2008, organized around the theme “Working 

Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of 

Tomorrow.” Forum participants identifi ed the 

key elements of the problem as an inadequate 

number of engineering graduates, a lack of 

diversity in the aerospace fi elds, and past 

industry hire-and-layoff practices. Th ese 

issues fall into two overarching themes: 

“attraction” and “retention.” To address these 

themes, the conferees formulated a set of 

recommendations for specifi c actions by 

policymakers, employers, and all stakeholders 

involved in aerospace careers and their value to 

the nation. Th ese were published in July 2008 

in a Report and Recommendations document 

that grouped them into three categories: 

educational and social environment, employee 

recruitment and retention, and inspiration. 

Background

Th e 2009 Inside Aerospace forum brought 

together leaders from the United States and 

abroad for a candid discussion that built 

on the aerospace workforce development 

recommendations from Inside Aerospace 

2008. Th e American Institute of Aeronautics 

and Astronautics (AIAA) partnered with the 

Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), the 

Aerospace Department Chairs Association 

(ADCA), the Air Force Association (AFA), 

and SAE International to continue their 

focus on the aerospace workforce, taking into 

account industry, academic, and governmental 

perspectives.

Th e principal objective of the 2009 Forum 

was to identify and assess the actions that 

have been taken on the recommendations 

of the 2008 Inside Aerospace Forum. Th is 

report summarizes the progress to date on 

those recommendations, as well as on two 

new recommendations on workforce diversity 

and systems engineering. Additionally, this 

report identifi es specifi c actions that the 

forum organizers will address. Th is report 

and the underlying subject matter will be 

reviewed, discussed, analyzed, and assessed 

during a session on this topic to be held on 

16 September 2009 at the AIAA SPACE 2009 

Conference and Exposition in Pasadena, 

California. 

Th e 2009 forum’s theme of “Building 

and Retaining the Aerospace Workforce” 

encompassed two overarching topics: 

1. Preparation and Motivation: Pre-career 

development activities must be supported, 

to ensure the availability of a skilled pool of 

fresh talent with the background necessary 

to succeed in the aerospace industry. 

2. Professional Development: Th e needs of 

those already in the aerospace workforce 

must be addressed, to retain skilled 

professionals and evolve their capabilities as 

technology progresses.

Th e 2009 forum brought together the 

viewpoints of educators, industry leaders, 

aerospace professionals, government 

representatives, and representatives of 

non-governmental organizations. Participants 

in the forum are listed in Appendix B. On the 

fi rst day, the participants addressed pre-career 

workforce development, and on the second 

day, strategies for workforce retention. Th e 

forum sessions (listed in Appendix A) covered 

the following aspects of the two central topics: 

• Inspiring and Capturing Members of the 

Workforce: (1) Rebuild the nation’s image 

of aerospace contributions to society; 

(2) Engage with future generations in 

K–12; (3) Engage within the universities; 

and (4) Focus on diversity to tap a virtually 

untouched resource pool.

• Workforce Retention and Professional 

Development: (1) Stimulate and nurture a 

passion for aerospace within the workforce; 

(2) Address the importance of recognition 

in growing and sustaining the aerospace 

workforce; (3) Assess the role of the work 

environment; and (4) Assess the role of 

mentoring and other approaches to retain a 

talented workforce. 

I. Introduction

Th e 2009 forum emphasized the themes 

“attraction” and “retention” that emerged from 

the 2008 forum. Conferees cited a number 

of supportive fi ndings and actions, including 

their own actions, which support the 2008 

recommendations. Th is section of the report 

reviews and assesses those fi ndings and actions 

as they relate to each of the recommendations 

of the 2008 Inside Aerospace report. Also, 

two new recommendations have been added, 

along with commensurate actions already 

taken or proposed, to cover issues that were 

not included in the 21 July 2008 report. Note 

also that the recommendations, fi ndings, and 

actions described in this report were developed 

by the forum participants, and do not 

necessarily represent the views of the forum 

sponsors.

II.1 The Educational and Social 

Environment

RECOMMENDATION (1): Implement 

the following strategies proposed by the U.S. 

Department of Labor’s Interagency Aerospace 

Revitalization Task Force: (i) devise measures 

to recruit and retain talent, rather than waiting 

for talent to come of its own volition; (ii) 

establish policies to address the challenges of 

enhancing STEM education and development 

of relevant skills; and (iii) improve the image of 

aerospace to young people.

Findings:

• A big mistake made in current student 

recruitment is to underestimate students’ 

knowledge and abilities; that is, to “pitch” 

too low. Students today are oft en better 

educated in aerospace subjects than their 

teachers. Th ere has been much progress in school curricula in recent years, 

II. 2008/2009 Recommended Actions and Progress to Date
4 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

but because systems tend to sustain and 

replicate themselves, major changes are 

oft en rejected, regardless of their merit. 

Institutions outside the school system—e.g., 

museums—can be more agile and oft en can 

respond faster to new subject content and 

new concepts in learning.

• Th e “America COMPETES” legislation 

enacted in 2007 allocated $30 million as a 

fi rst step in revamping STEM education, 

including teacher training. Th e 2009 

stimulus bill (the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009) did a lot more: it 

doubled the budget of the National Science 

Foundation (NSF), which includes tripling 

NSF fellowship funds and increasing 

other education funding; it increased 

the science budget of the Department of 

Energy; it continued tax credits for research 

and development; and it provided other 

funding in support of President Obama’s 

drive to give more resources to science 

and technology. Th e new reauthorization 

of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act, which was oft en referred 

to as the “No Child Left Behind” act aft er 

it was reauthorized in 2002, is expected 

to fund the promotion of science fairs in 

schools; involve scientists and engineers 

with K–12 students; create appropriate 

awards or prizes for students who choose 

STEM courses; enhance teacher STEM 

training and content; and institute other 

measures to show students how exciting 

and valuable STEM-based careers can be. 

All this is a strong message from both the 

Administration and Congress that federal 

action is being taken to revitalize the entire 

STEM education environment. But there is 

still more that can be done.

Action:

• As an example of the many programs that 

are being developed, one called “Rocket 

Science Tutors” (RST) has been established 

in California to build enthusiasm for STEM 

subjects in middle schools, with a focus on 

8th grade students. Its method is to have 

real-world engineers (the volunteer tutors 

include working engineers and retirees) 

show the connection between math, science, and aerospace engineering. Th ey use 

a carefully prepared script and lesson plan 

to make sure the students become interested and excited but are not frightened 

away. Th ey start with the California state 

standards in math and science and use 

examples to demonstrate the connection 

between them: where math is used, why 

it’s important, and how it relates to science, 

engineering, and technology. Th e focus is 

on “hands-on” experiments, mainly building and operating hardware. Th e tutors 

work in cooperation with the teachers, fi tting in and reinforcing the teachers’ lesson 

plans. RST is an aft er-school program, one 

hour per week for 24 weeks. It also includes 

career information, especially an understanding of what engineers do. Th e program 

costs $3,000 per year (about $30–$40 per 

student, mostly for laboratory materials). 

Labor is free, but hard to get. Funding is by 

individual donations as well as grants from 

several charitable organizations. Its Web site 

is RocketScienceTutors.com.

RECOMMENDATION (2): Establish 

and maintain contact with young people 

throughout their education and transition to 

the ranks of employees.

RECOMMENDATION (3): Address all 

aspects of young people’s activity: K–12 school 

curricula; extra-curricular activities; fi eld 

trips and company visits; passionate engineers 

as classroom “ambassadors”; company 

outreach programs; Web-based contact and 

communication methods; brochures and 

public advertising techniques; high school 

and college internships; career coaching by 

engineers; hands-on communication programs 

that enable students to participate “live” in 

aerospace projects; expansion of relevant 

exciting and enjoyable competitions; expansion 

of successful industry and government 

programs that encourage STEM education 

(e.g., AIA’s FIRST Robotics program; see 

below); and pre-college and postgraduate 

apprenticeships. 

Finding:

• In December 2008 the Aerospace Industries 

Association (AIA) published the results 

of a study, “Launching the 21st Century 

American Aerospace Workforce,” in which 

they documented what the AIA member 

companies had done (and were doing) to 

enhance STEM education. Th e average 

company supports 26 STEM educational 

programs; 70% of them provide employee 

and/or volunteer support to such programs; 

90% encourage their employees to volunteer 

or mentor students; 44% have STEM 

education programs geared toward women, 

and 47% have programs geared toward 

minorities. On average the companies 

invest about $8 million annually on STEM 

education programs; the larger companies 

even more. Th e FIRST Robotics program, 

cited in the report, has reached 159,000 

K–12 students, 44,000 mentors, and 28,000 

volunteers. Th e 2008 program involved 

1,501 teams from 37,535 high schools.

Actions:

• NASA and the aerospace companies have 

started using new forms of media that 

young people use (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, 

message boards) to help them identify with 

projects that are of interest to them, such as 

the Mars rovers, the Hubble telescope repair 

mission, the Google Lunar X-Prize and 

Google Mars, “green” aircraft operations, 

and activities aboard the International 

Space Station. Th is reinforces the positive 

connection with what aerospace systems do

rather than how they’re designed and built, 

and communicates in a manner comfortable to this generation.

• Several aerospace companies, dissatisfi ed 

with the diminishing quality and quantity 

of the output from public schools (in part 

the result of recent budget cuts), have created charter schools, which provide better 

college preparation in STEM subject areas. 

Here the solution is not just providing more 

money, but also doing things diff erently.

RECOMMENDATION (4): Teach 

engineering as a scholarly discipline from fi rst 

grade on, using the rationale that the future is 

closely tied to innovation, and innovation is 

the hallmark of good engineering practice.

Finding:

• President Obama was encouraged to recognize the importance of engineering in the 

educational system, as well as science. In a 

recent speech he placed “engineer” ahead of 

“scientist” and used the word “engineering” 

seven times. Th is appears to be an initial 

step in a process to actively educate the 

Administration and the Congress about the 

nature of engineering and its critical importance to the nation, encouraging them to 

recognize and emphasize the importance 

of preparing young people for careers in 

engineering as distinct from science.

RECOMMENDATION (5): Make contact 

not solely with students, but with all those 

who impact their decision making: parents, 

teachers, student advisers, career guidance 

counselors, and school administrations, among 

others.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 5

Finding:

• Because student guidance counselors in the 

public school system are usually overworked and minimally informed about 

science and engineering opportunities, as 

well as being more focused on students with 

problems and oft en involved in emergency 

situations (like getting a student out of jail), 

it has been suggested that schools maintain 

a roster of external mentors who can serve 

as guidance counselors on a volunteer basis. 

Th ese can oft en be people who are already 

mentoring individual students or serving as 

classroom “ambassadors.”

Action:

• AIAA has created a new online venture 

called “Ask Polaris” (www.askpolaris.org), 

to enlighten students, parents, and especially guidance counselors on the possibilities and prospects of aerospace engineering. 

It is a collaborative eff ort that will answer 

questions such as: “What is aerospace 

engineering?”; “What are the job prospects?”; “How do we choose the right 

school and course of study?”; and “How 

does a career in aerospace help me to ‘make 

a diff erence’?”

RECOMMENDATION (6): Emphasize 

“hands-on” courses and activities, research 

experiences, active student professional 

societies, and laboratory classes early in college 

curricula. Also continuously review college 

curricula to provide the fundamentals as well 

as to create opportunities for students to take 

non-engineering electives and experience 

other professional topics (such as systems 

engineering). Subject matter and delivery 

systems should be up to date, and should 

incorporate “hot” subject areas such as UAVs 

and “green aerospace” for environmental 

protection.

Finding:

• A nationwide survey of aerospace collegestudent attitudes was conducted to determine why they chose aerospace as a major, 

what careers they chose and why, and 

how they perceive the aerospace industry. 

Th ey chose aerospace mainly because it 

was exciting, interesting, and challenging. 

Th irty-three percent of them had their 

initial interest sparked by aircraft or space 

exploration, 62% of those were between 

the ages of 5 and 13, and 72% had already 

decided on an aerospace major by the 

time they entered college. Once in college, 

the most infl uential factors in motivating 

them to work in aerospace were engineering classes, hands-on experience, and the 

quality of their faculty. Compared to other 

industries, the primary attributes of aerospace were considered to be the educational 

opportunities and the challenge.

Action:

• At MIT, students complete their fi rst 

year with no specialization and only then 

select their major. National and global 

environments generally infl uence their 

decisions; for example this year 60% 

chose to pursue undergraduate majors in 

business administration. In the mid-1960s, 

during the Apollo program, the aerospace 

enrollment was 60-70 individuals, but 

dropped to a low of 13 students in 1972, 

when the Apollo program closed down 

and the Draper Laboratory, whose forte 

was aerospace guidance systems, left MIT. 

It then soared to a high of 136 students 

in 1987, following the Challenger failure, 

and sank again in the early 1990s during 

the “dot-com recession.” Changes were 

therefore instituted around 2000, bringing 

aerospace projects into the freshman 

year, introducing “active learning” in 

all core classes (10-minute lectures 

followed by questions and answers), 

and improving teaching quality by 

requiring faculty members to write an 

annual refl ective memorandum on their 

students’ and their own performance. 

But aerospace enrollment dropped again 

in 2008 due to enhanced student interest 

in large socio-technical issues such as 

energy, environment, healthcare, and 

transportation. Th erefore, MIT is once 

again about to introduce something new: 

a broad-based, fl exible interdisciplinary 

curriculum in all the engineering 

disciplines, including aerospace 

engineering, that is more suited to studies 

encompassing these large issues. Th is could 

be a bellwether approach for consideration 

by other universities.

RECOMMENDATION (7): Establish and 

encourage partnerships among professional 

engineering associations, colleges, industry, 

and federal, state, and local government 

agencies, to enhance the motivation, 

education, and training of young people, 

to sponsor university aerospace research, 

to support wind tunnels and other unique 

laboratories and facilities, to support 

scholarships and internships, and to provide 

hands-on student research opportunities such 

as access to government space launch vehicles.

Actions:

• Th e Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

has established eight Centers of Excellence 

(COE) that team universities with industry 

and government agencies. Th eir subjects 

are Intermodal Transport, led jointly by 

Harvard and Purdue universities; Noise 

and Emissions Mitigation, led by MIT; 

Airport Technology, led by the University of 

Illinois; General Aviation, led by EmbryRiddle Aeronautical University; Advanced 

Materials, led jointly by the University of 

Washington and Wichita State University; 

and Operations Research, led jointly by the 

University of California at Berkeley and 

MIT. Th ese public-private partnerships, 

whose goal is to prepare tomorrow’s scientists and engineers by combining critical 

research activities with advanced educational programs, involve over 260 universities and corporate affi liates. Total funding of 

the program is $355 million, of which $108 

million is in matching funds from the COE 

teams. To date the COEs have developed 

over 700 projects, supported more than 700 

graduate students, and published over 2,500 

reports, papers, and doctoral theses. Th eir 

operational agreements are from three to 

ten years, to allow students to complete 

their masters and doctoral theses.

• Th e AIAA successfully solicited two new 

cooperating organizations to help organize 

and operate the Inside Aerospace 2009 

Forum. Th e Air Force Association and 

SAE International joined forces with the 

sponsors of Inside Aerospace 2008—AIAA, 

the Aerospace Industries Association, 

and the Aerospace Department Chairs 

Association—to address the critical issues 

of aerospace workforce revitalization. Th ese 

fi ve organizations are now committed to 

working together toward their common 

workforce objectives.

• Several aerospace member companies of 

AIA support post-secondary education 

programs; e.g., BAE Systems’ “Introduction 

to Engineering Design,” in which BAE 

employees mentor fi rst-year engineering 

students; Lockheed Martin’s sponsorship 

of the “Aero Design” part of the “SAE 

Collegiate Design Competition,” in 

which the company hosts collegiate 

teams nationwide for airplane design 
6 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

competitions; Textron’s “Engineering Boot 

Camp,” where junior-level college students 

design a fl ight-control system with the 

guidance of Bell Helicopter employees; and 

Raytheon’s “MathMovesU” program, which 

awards $20,000 scholarships to 30 high 

school seniors and college undergraduates 

per year in recognition of their successes as 

STEM-studies majors.

II.1.1 Summary of Findings and Actions 

on the Educational and Social 

Environment

Findings Cited by Forum Participants:

• Young peoples’ interest in aerospace is still 

strong.

• Th ey respond to programs that cater to that 

interest and stimulate it.

• When they choose aerospace careers, it is 

because of excitement and challenge.

• School guidance counselors are overworked 

and oft en ineff ective.

• Th e need to revamp STEM education has 

been recognized by the federal government.

• Women and minorities are still severely 

underrepresented in the workforce.

• Engineer mentors can be role models even 

for disadvantaged students.

• Young people respond to familiar media 

(e.g., Facebook, Twitter).

• Aerospace companies support many K–12 

STEM education projects.

• Th ey also create and support college-level 

programs in aerospace.

• Recent career motivations are enhanced 

interest in large socio-technical issues.

• Public-private partnerships in aerospace 

have been successful.

Actions Cited by Forum Participants:

• Schools and companies are using new 

media such as Facebook and Twitter.

• STEM programs such as Rocket Science 

Tutors and FIRST Robotics are expanding.

• Corporate support of STEM education is 

proliferating at all levels.

• Public-private partnerships such as FAA’s 

Centers of Excellence are growing.

• College curricula are adjusting to students’ 

interest in “making a diff erence.”

• Colleges are introducing earlier and more 

hands-on courses.

• Schools are beginning to use outside 

mentors as guidance counselors.

• Systems dynamic modeling has been 

applied to the goal of doubling the number 

of STEM students.

• Several new programs have been successful 

in attracting women and minorities to 

STEM education and aerospace careers.

II.2 Employee Recruitment and Retention

RECOMMENDATION (8): To enhance 

workforce retention, aerospace employers 

should make available exciting opportunities 

to “make a contribution,” focus on nearterm results, allow employees time to pursue 

their own ideas, emphasize the “no-ceiling” 

implications of companies’ funding of 

advanced degrees for employees, and 

encourage active participation in professional 

societies.

Findings:

• Th ere is increasing recognition of the 

need to eliminate the “brick wall” between 

engineers and artists in order to revive the 

lost concept that engineers are creators. 

More and more, the venture capitalists who 

decide which entrepreneurs will get funding are seeking young people with ideas. 

Employers are recognizing the need to give 

latitude to their staff to encourage creativity. 

A key element in this is the revised attitude 

toward failures: instead of chastising those 

whose ideas or projects do not succeed, 

employers now recognize the value of failures as the best way to learn, not only how 

to prevent future failures, but how to open 

new pathways to successful results. More 

and more employers have begun to tolerate 

failures by their youngest engineers and 

to give them the resources to do so in the 

pursuit of greater successes later. 

• Employers are also seeking access to new 

ideas and viewpoints by having their human 

resources (HR) staff search for new middlelevel talent from outside the profession; 

that is, from sources other than mechanical, 

electrical, and aerospace engineering 

graduates. Th ey are recruiting from 

other fi elds such as energy, information 

technology, physics, chemistry, and biology. 

HR staff and managers are being urged to 

broaden their search perspectives; that is, to 

consider resumes that don’t look like those 

of the manager. Th is is a defi nite culture 

change.

RECOMMENDATION (9): Employees 

should be encouraged to develop project 

management skills and be given the 

opportunity to learn a broad spectrum of jobs 

rather than focusing on a single one. Th ey 

should receive recognition of their ability 

and their contributions to society and the 

profession. 

Findings:

• Many technicians, machinists, and maintenance, repair, and operations (MRO) 

mechanics have much of the technical and 

educational background needed to study 

engineering. Th ey can be encouraged to 

attend two-year community colleges and 

adult education programs or serve as mentors to school-student projects, allowing 

them to upgrade their employment status or 

seek company support for university attendance. Perhaps if young engineers received 

technician training they would ultimately 

become better designers because they 

would better understand the manufacturing 

and testing processes.

• Key business imperatives have been identifi ed as strategic vision and direction, an 

engaged workforce, external partnerships, 

stakeholder involvement, good relationships among leaders and staff , inspiration 

(which yields higher return on investment 

than tools or processes), and especially 

good leadership. Leaders should not foster 

“workaholics” by setting the example of 

24/7 work; instead they should encourage a life outside the work place and they 

should strive to work a 40-hour week. All 

workers, regardless of position, should be 

given at least a summary of the key points 

of the company strategy. Typically about 

two-thirds of employees do not involve 

themselves in their company’s goals, and 

nearly half are totally disconnected from 

their employer.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 7

Action:

• It has been recognized that a team-based 

culture will achieve all the good elements 

of a sound business, and is a key strategy 

for attracting, developing, and retaining a 

high-performance workforce. It also has 

been found to inspire innovation, which 

is the key to both growth and employee 

retention. Consequently, Boeing has created 

a team-based recognition program called 

“Team Day,” during which teams showcase 

their accomplishments and winners receive 

awards. Most of the teams have been engineering teams, and most have demonstrated 

how to achieve cost savings. Some have 

created retention strategies. Th e elements 

of successful teams were the factors that 

kept them together for 18 months; exciting 

work and exciting opportunities; and the 

fact that they liked each other. To maximize 

innovation, teams should be small enough 

for close communication and cost-eff ective 

teamwork. Because it is a basic system 

development philosophy that involving 

fewer people tends to reduce complexity 

and foster innovation, some employers 

believe that managers should be encouraged 

to reduce the size of the team they manage. 

“Skunk works” or “war rooms” allow team 

members to build on each other’s capabilities, and the individual connectivity off ered 

by the new communication and information technologies can further expand that 

knowledge base (see “Th e Boeing Systems 

Engineering Program” described under 

Recommendation (21) below).

RECOMMENDATION (10): Employers 

should encourage young employees to 

communicate their views to their seniors 

(both coworkers and management) before 

decisions are made, and should recognize 

that young people oft en communicate in 

part via their favorite new media. Increased 

employee involvement has been demonstrated 

to increase productivity and employee 

satisfaction.

Action:

• As noted above under Recommendation 

(3), NASA and the aerospace companies 

have started using the new forms of media 

with which young people have become 

familiar (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, message 

boards).

RECOMMENDATION (11): Th e job 

must off er a rewarding lifestyle. Employers 

should seek employees’ guidance on their work 

environment and recognize that especially 

with today’s young people, fl exibility and use of 

the most current electronic tools are of prime 

importance.

Finding:

• Human resources staff s are defi ning the 

future course of their companies by providing increasingly comprehensive work 

environment benefi ts such as career development programs aimed at employees’ personal growth, mobility within the company, 

extensive healthcare packages, retirement 

planning, fl exible working hours, vacation 

and sick leave allowances, maternity and 

paternity leave, child-care centers and/

or subsidies, tuition assistance, elder care, 

wellness programs, concierge help in 

fi nding service people, college programs, 

learning and development programs, and 

senior leadership development.

Action:

• Th e working lifestyle fostered by some new 

cutting-edge companies, notably Google, 

has been tailored to the new generation 

of young employees. Th ese companies 

recognize that vacations are important 

and should be inviolate, like the summer 

vacations of the schools the new employees 

came from. Th ey cater to the expectations of young people who prefer not to 

stay in the same place, but desire mobility (although not necessarily to another 

company). Some companies pay their 

people to sit and brainstorm new ideas; they 

don’t have to fi le formal, time-consuming 

requests for Independent Research and 

Development (IR&D) funds. Th is policy 

fosters early responsibility and ownership 

of projects, which in turn provide recognition and awards and motivate voluntary 

overtime work. Some companies let their 

employees select their own performance 

reviewers (sometimes their mentors) 

instead of their managers or supervisors.

RECOMMENDATION (12): Apprenticeships on hands-on projects, under the 

guidance of skilled mentors, can be used to 

recruit high-school and college students and to 

enhance young-employee retention. 

Finding:

• Companies are beginning to recognize 

that mentors may not be sensitive to what 

motivates the incoming young generation 

of employees; e.g., how they can fulfi ll their 

dreams when they oft en don’t know yet 

what their dreams are. Young people also 

come with a wide variety of dreams and 

interests, and mentors must be prepared to 

respond to these concerns. Because teaching is the best way to learn, the mentors also 

improve their own job performance. Even 

online short courses such as those off ered 

by the professional societies can provide 

good lessons-learned experiences. Th e 

recent resurrection of systems that employ 

upgrades of decades-old technologies, such 

as the Orion crew capsule, the J-2X engine, 

and the Altair lunar lander of NASA’s new 

Project Constellation space exploration 

system, suggests the need for mentoring 

by retired engineers who, despite their age 

discrepancy with new employees, are the 

only ones with experience in developing 

such systems.

Actions:

• Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Advanced 

Development Projects (“Skunk Works”) 

formed a Retention Team (RT) to determine what factors favored and deterred 

the retention of new employees. Th e team 

members, all of whom had about fi ve years 

with the company, were selected because 

they were passionate about their work and 

complained a lot to their managers. Th ey 

had direct access to the HR staff and to 

company management. Th ey found that the 

No. 1 problem was the employees’ communication with their managers. Th e managers 

thought it was good; the employees said it 

was bad. Th ey expected (but did not get) 

answers to the question, “How am I doing? 

Better or worse than you expect of me?” 

Th ey wanted to know that the manager 

cared, and they wanted “no surprises” when 

it came to performance-review and payraise time. In eff ect, they wanted managers 

to “Talk to us!” As a result of the RT’s study, 

the company increased communications 

training, revised overtime policy, revised 

the promotion process, arranged skiplevel meetings (with people senior to the 

employees’ managers), and reviewed hiring 

policies. It found that the RT did make a 

diff erence in employee retention practices, 

and could be of value to other aerospace 

organizations.

• Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company 

experimented with another approach to 

employee retention and engagement called 

“Reverse Mentoring.” Entry-level employees 

(less than 5 years with the company) were 
8 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

asked to “mentor” Lockheed Corporation’s 

vice-presidents and presidents at all the 

corporation’s sites to share generational 

perspectives, bridge gaps between the most 

senior and most junior employees, improve 

retention and engagement, and transfer pertinent knowledge about company practices. 

Th irty-two pairs volunteered and met for 

one hour per month (chargeable time to the 

project). Th e mentors were told the rules 

and responsibilities of their interviews, the 

topics to discuss, the questions to ask, and 

the mentoring technique. Th e most useful 

results to both mentors and “mentees” were 

on the generational, cultural, technical, and 

personal perspectives of the participants. 

Th e young mentors gained an expanded 

personal network, opportunities for leadership development, high-visibility assignments, promotions, and graduate education 

opportunities. Th e senior mentees also 

gained an expanded personal network, and 

in addition they changed policies, introduced initiatives to create a more fl exible 

work/life balance, learned to use more 

instant messaging, and learned Generation-Y values. Th e managers of the project 

learned that mentees do not have to be 

executives, more about managing the pairs’ 

interactions, and the need for an electronic 

tool to aid in matching the pairs. Lockheed 

Martin has documented their procedures 

and methodology, so this experiment could 

be of value to other companies.

• Rockwell Collins conducted an “Enterprise 

Mentoring Program” to develop a formalized methodology and tool for matching 

mentors with mentees and implementing 

a mentoring program. Of 16,000 eligible 

employees they selected 564 mentors and 

811 mentees, with 1,118 matches made over 

12 months. 75% of mentees considered the 

mentoring relationship to be a priority, and 

87% wanted to continue. 91% of mentors 

said it was a priority, and 100% wanted to 

continue. Th e tool developed by Rockwell 

Collins could be useful to other companies’ 

mentoring programs.

• Aerojet tried a diff erent approach: “Technical Mentoring,” to fi ll critical skill gaps created by emerging technologies and an aging 

workforce. Th ey set up an overhead budget 

of two hours per week; 47 pairs actually 

spent an average of 6 hours per week for 

one year. Ninety-three percent of mentors 

and mentees were satisfi ed with the relationship; 79% of mentees performed above 

expectations; and the program achieved 

87% mentee retention over 4 years.

RECOMMENDATION (13): Pay-grade 

policy should change from a fi xed, restricted 

structure to one which allows new employees 

to be brought in at the market rate and 

progress at their own pace, as determined by 

performance and responsibility rather than 

seniority in pay grade.

Finding:

• Although money is certainly important, 

there has been a gradual shift in emphasis 

to other means of compensation that are 

meaningful to young employees. Of those 

who have left the aerospace fi eld, 88% left 

for reasons other than pay. Other means 

of compensation include time off , awards, 

recognition by managers, increased responsibility, adopting employees’ new ideas and 

suggestions, opportunity for advancement 

and promotion, support for more education, professional society involvement, 

support of publications, the opportunity 

to work with really talented engineers on 

cutting-edge projects, engagement with the 

community as “ambassadors” and mentors 

to school children, and good work environment and life-style [see above discussion 

under Recommendation (11)]. 

 II.2.1 Summary of Findings and Actions 

on Employee Recruitment and 

Retention

Synergies Between Recruitment and 

Retention: 

• Early intervention 

• Importance of certain roles: teacher/

counselor, mentor/mentee 

• Excitement and passion 

• Hands-on project work 

• Extension to big socioeconomic issues; 

diversity 

• Foundational skills 

• “One size does not fi t all” 

• Commitment

Findings Cited by Forum Participants: 

• Opportunities for innovation and creativity 

should be created and maintained; failures 

should be tolerated as important learning 

experiences. 

• Mentorship is essential; the workforce must 

be engaged; employees must know how they 

can contribute. 

• Teams are an eff ective mechanism for highperformance work and employee retention.

• A satisfying work/life balance depends on 

activities outside the workplace. 

• People stay or go because of leaders; leaders 

must inspire, but also must allow freedom 

of action. 

• Online education is useful for employees 

and their families. 

• Entry-level people seek approval, so they 

need communication and feedback; they 

should receive peer-nominated awards and 

thanks for work well done; they should be 

given responsible assignments. 

• A cultural shift is needed to access the 

largely untapped labor pool of women and 

minorities at all levels. 

• More full-time STEM-oriented people are 

needed in government leadership positions. 

• Middle-level managers get too much 

direction and not enough resources to act 

on it eff ectively.

Actions Cited by Forum Participants:

• Increase the use of teams and provide them 

more recognition.

• Highlight the leadership aspects of inspiring 

and engaging young people.

• Pass on passion to schools and provide 

venues for sharing information.

• Verify that grants are getting to the right 

people.

• Publish (in Aerospace America) a list of best 

practices.

• Seek best practices via Web sites, Aerospace 

America, and forums.

• Create an “Aerospace Week,” one day 

of which should be allotted to getting 

materials into schools.

• Get leaders to focus on work/life balance.

• Get HR staff to have managers go “out of 

the box” for new hires.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 9

• Devise simple recognition programs.

• Conduct periodic surveys to seek successful 

eff orts.

• Form retention teams at all aerospace 

organizations.

• Get and publish examples of mentoring 

projects that show visible gains.

• Diversify the workforce.

• Foster an aggressive campaign to pass on 

leadership to the next generation.

• Create an “AIAA Week” to address the 

issues on recruiting and retention.

• Begin systems engineering training early 

in engineers’ careers.

II.3 Inspiration

RECOMMENDATION (14): Provide 

media focus on high-visibility aerospace 

endeavors and prospects for making a 

diff erence or achieving a dream.

Finding:

• Th ere has been a marked growth in identifying the engineering connection with 

the social sciences, especially in large-scale 

systems such as energy, the environment, 

health care, manufacturing, communications, and logistics. A number of “Engineering Grand Challenges” have been identifi ed 

in these contexts, including the organization and management of international 

programs like global climate change modeling, the International Space Station, and the 

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. 

Action:

• Th e National Academy of Engineering 

(NAE) generated a report titled “Changing 

the Conversation: Messages for Improving Understanding of Engineering.” It has 

been recognized that eff ective advertising 

is a key element in improving the image of 

engineering, but despite $400 million spent 

by the industry, the NAE report found 

little public understanding of engineering, 

a low career priority compared with other 

professions, women and minorities greatly 

underrepresented, and U.S. science and 

engineering education seriously challenged 

by foreign programs. Engineering is seen as 

“deskwork,” only indirectly related to people. Th e report concluded that the engineering community should reposition itself in 

showing how it turns ideas into reality and 

transmitting the message that “dreams need 

doing.” Specifi c steps would be to develop a 

public-relations online toolkit and to plan 

a large-scale multi-year communications 

campaign by the community as a whole to 

improve public understanding of engineering, considering funding, logistics, and 

other aspects. A good repositioning statement would be: 

“No profession unleashes the spirit 

of innovation like engineering. From 

research to real-world applications, 

engineers constantly discover how 

to improve our lives by creating bold 

new solutions that connect science to 

life in unexpected, forward-thinking 

ways. Few professions turn so many 

ideas into so many realities. Few 

have such a direct and positive eff ect 

on people’s everyday lives. We are 

counting on engineers and their 

imaginations to help us meet the 

needs of the 21st century.” 

RECOMMENDATION (15): Address the 

issue of poor STEM teacher training and lack 

of STEM understanding and enthusiasm by 

more programs like “Project Lead the Way” 

and by hands-on science and engineering 

projects that increase the teachers’ comfort 

levels in STEM subjects. 

Actions:

• A number of successful programs, many 

operated by NASA, focus on improving 

STEM teachers’ science knowledge and 

“hands-on” teaching abilities; e.g., NASA’s 

Einstein, Hubble, and Sagan post-doctoral 

fellowships and Lockheed Martin’s “Orion’s 

Path.”

• Project Lead the Way has expanded to 3,400 

schools and reaches 300,000 students in its 

program of inspiring future generations in 

K–12. In the next fi ve years it is projected 

to be in 14,000 schools and reach a million STEM students. In middle schools, 

the program off ers fi ve 9-week integrated 

units of study called “Gateway to Technology.” High school students have access to 

eight full-year courses called “Pathway to 

Engineering,” which provide the knowledge 

and skills that enable students to design, 

build, and evaluate integrated technical 

systems. In addition to the impending 

shortage of engineers (not just in aerospace, 

but in all engineering disciplines), there is 

a real shortage of engineering technicians, 

three to fi ve of whom are needed for each 

engineer. Th is is being addressed in Project 

Lead the Way by encouraging and preparing high school graduates to attend twoyear community colleges instead of fouryear universities. However, the dropout rate 

is too high in both categories, because high 

schools use lecture class formats instead of 

hands-on learning, and do not teach critical 

thinking or problem-solving; so students 

don’t know what engineering is and how 

hard college courses can be. Th e basic 

premise of Project Lead the Way is early 

curricular improvement in middle and high 

schools, with STEM content carrying full 

college credit, but courses are problem- and 

project-based and require critical thinking. 

Results to date have been excellent: 80% 

of the project’s high-school seniors plan 

college studies in engineering, technology, or computer science; and 97% plan on 

post-secondary-school education, versus 

67% nationwide. College retention rates 

range from 80% to 100%. Th e program also 

includes guidance-counselor training and 

enjoyable extra-curricular activities, but the 

main thrust is on the full curricular training 

needed to get through college. 

RECOMMENDATION (16): Celebrate 

STEM professionals; i.e., create “heroes” as role 

models in STEM subject areas, comparable to 

sports heroes, astronauts, pilots like Charles 

Lindbergh and Amelia Earhart, and other 

pioneers, trendsetters, and explorers. 

Finding:

• Students sometimes feel that they have 

no role models, especially women and 

minorities, and therefore have a hard time 

visualizing themselves as succeeding, which 

can lead to poor performance. Students do 

need role models, but mentors can oft en fi ll 

that need. Such mentors can be the parents 

of students, or be delegated by supportive 

local companies, or could even be older, 

successful students or recent graduates. 

Sometimes local media celebrities can be 

virtual role models. “Th e World in Motion” 

program, described under “New Recommendation (20)” below, has been extremely 

successful in generating and providing 

African-American engineer role models 

for underprivileged children in center-city 

school districts.
10 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

RECOMMENDATION (17): Support, 

expand, and “clone” successful programs 

like the Challenger Learning Centers and 

museums focusing on science, technology, and 

engineering. 

Actions:

• See “Th e World in Motion” program 

described under “New Recommendation 

(20)” below.

• As documented in the AIA’s December 2008 

report (see Finding under Recommendation (3), above), a number of companies 

have instituted inspirational programs for 

young people. Th e AIA’s “Team America 

Rocketry Challenge” is the world’s largest rocket contest, in which 7,000 students 

nationwide compete for $60,000 in prizes 

and scholarships; 54% of participating 

seniors plan on pursuing a STEM career. A 

number of AIA companies support FIRST 

Robotics, which has involved over 160,000 

students and 44,000 mentors. 41% of FIRST 

Robotics alumni selected engineering 

courses at college, versus a national average 

of 6%. MATHCOUNTS, a middle school 

program, has involved six million students 

in 6,000 schools; annual participation is 

250,000 students. Th e national program is 

supported by annual corporate and individual donations of $1.5 to 1.7 million; over 

$500,000 per year goes to state and local 

programs.

RECOMMENDATION (18): Create 

“X-Prize” contests for achievements in Earth 

science research and similar “making a 

diff erence” subject areas.

RECOMMENDATION (19): AIAA, AIA, 

and ADCA should work with the Department 

of Labor to coordinate all aerospace 

stakeholder organizations in combining their 

resources through a common network that 

assembles all the relevant data addressing the 

workforce issue and sets up standard criteria 

for success. 

II.3.1 Summary of Findings and Actions on 

Inspiration

Findings Cited by Forum Participants:

• Th ere is little public understanding of 

engineering.

• Aerospace companies have many 

inspirational programs for young people.

• Th ere is a shortage of role models, especially 

for women and minorities.

• Th e main issue in STEM education is 

inadequate teacher training.

Actions Cited by Forum Participants:

• Corporate and society inspirational 

programs are expanding rapidly.

• Several programs (e.g., Rocket Science 

Tutors) have created role models.

• Repositioning the engineering profession 

has begun.

• Engineering is being recognized as being 

critical to large social programs.

III. New Recommendations, Findings, and Actions

RECOMMENDATION (20): Create 

mechanisms to tap the largely underrepresented workforce pool of women and 

minorities. Th e very low percentages of 

women and minorities in aerospace, which 

are a small fraction of their representation in 

the population at large, haven’t changed in 

a decade, despite a popular misconception 

of signifi cant progress. By 2020, women and 

present minorities are projected to comprise 

60% of the U.S. population.

Findings:

• Systems dynamic modeling has been used 

in an attempt to “shock” the present STEM 

education environment, with the goal of 

attracting more women and minorities into 

the STEM pipeline. Th e objective here is to 

double their STEM enrollment by 2015. A 

systems model of the STEM pipeline has 

been launched “open source” globally, to 

give educators everywhere the opportunity to introduce innovation and change 

into the current educational systems. Th e 

current system focus on profi ciency and 

performance is largely replaced by focusing 

on student interests, building motivation 

rather than building profi ciency directly. 

Th e Web site STEMnetwork.org highlights 

the methodology used to inspire students’ 

STEM interest much earlier than current 

eff orts, which generally begin too late, when 

students are already in high school.

• An approach to increase the representation of minorities and women at all levels 

of seniority in the aerospace workforce 

has been proposed for both academia and 

industry, as follows: 

• Obtain policy statements from the CEOs, 

board chairmen, presidents, or chancellors of the top 100 universities and top 50 

aerospace companies. Th ese policies should 

state the following:

1. One of the organization’s goals is to 

achieve proportional representation at 

all levels (Trustees, Board of Directors, 

executive offi cers, faculty, management, 

staff , and students). Th at is, their gender, 

racial, and ethnic composition should 

be comparable to those of the U.S. labor 

force.

2. Nominations (versus appointments) 

for trustees, board positions, offi cers, 

department chairs, faculty, division 

heads, and managers should have 

representative numbers of men, women, 

and minorities, of equal stature.

3. Tenure clock pause and duration for 

maternity and parental leave are equal for 

men and women.

4. New hire and promotion orientation 

specifi cally details the nomination policy 

that requires diversity, tenure pause and 

parental leave, etc.
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 11

5. Financial incentives are available 

and appropriate, and are aggressively 

marketed, to women and minorities (e.g., 

scholarships, stipends, bonus pay, and 

signing bonuses).

6. Bonuses will be awarded to top 

executives for eff ective minority 

outreach.

Actions:

• Th e Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE 

International) created a curriculum called 

“Th e World in Motion,” aimed specifi cally 

at increasing the participation of AfricanAmericans in the engineering profession 

by early intervention in their pre-careers. 

Only about 10,000 black students enter 

engineering schools each year, and only 

about a third of these ever graduate. Th e 

program started in 2007 with a threeweek camp for 300 third-to-fi ft h-grade 

students from District of Columbia schools, 

unscreened for grades, skills or other 

qualifi cations. Seventy black engineers came 

to D.C. to teach “hands-on” engineering. 

Th ree camps were conducted during the 

summer of 2008 (one in Columbus, Ohio, 

and two in Washington, D.C.). Th e camp 

in Columbus served 300 5th–8th graders; 

the camps in Washington served 300 

3rd–5th graders and 300 6th–8th graders. 

Th e National Society of Black Engineers 

(NSBE) provided mentors, with a ratio 

of 1:6 mentors to children in each camp. 

Th e curricula are closely correlated with 

those of the schools. Th e motto: “We are 

alchemists; we turn children into gold.” Th e 

current roster is 4,000 students (about half 

of whom are girls) and about 400 mentors, 

who double as role models for the largely 

underprivileged children. Before camp, less 

than 5% of the children were interested in 

engineering; aft er camp: 81%. 

• Th e International Space University, based 

near Strasbourg, France, has intensifi ed the 

implementation of its credo as an institute 

where “diversity of culture, philosophy, 

lifestyle, training, and opinion are honored 

and nurtured,” as well as recognizing the 

“importance of interdisciplinary studies.” 

Its new focus on workforce development 

and inspiring the next generation centers 

specifi cally on tapping a diversity of cultures 

and seeking to achieve the full participation 

of women, as well as encouraging careerlong professional development. A third of 

ISU’s recent graduates (and 57% of those 

from the U.S.) are women. Th e ISU also 

trains all its students to be K–12 classroom 

“ambassadors,” especially at the middleschool levels.

• A program to teach women and young 

people how to fl y, created at Alexandria 

Field, a small family-owned airport in 

Hunterdon County, New Jersey, has been 

proposed as a model for other similar 

community education resource projects. 

Th e proprietor, a former teacher at Bryn 

Mawr College with a master’s degree 

in education, runs a group of aviation 

education camps for girls, all of whom 

go on to take fl ying lessons. She also runs 

“Women Take Flight” and “Leaders Take 

Flight” workshops, where besides learning 

to fl y, women and girls convert their 

oft en negative perspectives on fl ying and 

aeronautics in general to positive ones. 

RECOMMENDATION (21): Focus on 

developing systems engineering capabilities 

earlier in engineers’ careers than at present.

Finding:

• Th e conventional wisdom is that the ability 

to do systems engineering profi ciently 

requires years of experience, to learn all the 

constituent disciplines of the overall system. 

However, in recent years several universities 

have instituted courses and laboratory 

work, including research projects, in 

systems engineering, and several companies 

have begun to include systems engineering 

training for new hires along with classical 

engineering disciplines. When combined 

with mentoring, apprenticeships, and 

on-the-job training, these initiatives have 

created opportunities to feed engineers into 

the systems engineering fi eld, which oft en 

lead to project management earlier in their 

careers.

Action:

• One of the most outstanding of these eff orts 

is the Boeing Systems Engineering Program 

at the University of Southern California 

and the Missouri University of Science and 

Technology. It off ers masters degrees and 

Certifi cates in Systems Engineering. To 

date, 539 Boeing employees have graduated 

from the program, which includes on-thejob experience at 25 Boeing sites around the 

country, in addition to classwork at the two 

universities. Th ere are three core courses in 

systems engineering: Systems Architecture, 

Systems Engineering and Analysis, and 

Information-based Design; plus three in 

complex systems management: Economic 

Decision Analysis, Systems Engineering 

Management, and Organizational Behavior 

and Management. Surveys of graduates 

indicated signifi cant benefi ts to their 

abilities to do their jobs, to the success of 

their teams, and to their subsequent careers, 

with 60% strongly recommending that 

others participate in the program. 

• August 2009: Publish and make this forum 

report available to the public.

• August — Ongoing: Seek input on forum 

recommendations. Refi ne and update 

annually.

• September 2009: Follow-up panel at AIAA 

SPACE 2009 Conference & Exposition in 

Pasadena, California. 

• December 2009: Publish best practices in 

Aerospace America.

• December 2009: Host young aerospace 

professionals “retention” forum.

IV. Conference Sponsor Actions
Supported by

AIAA Public Policy Committee AIAA Education Activities Committee

AIAA International Activities Committee AIAA Corporate Member Committee

AIAA Technical Activities Committee

Organized by

Co-Sponsored by Offi cial Media Sponsors

Wednesday Keynote Luncheon Sponsored by

12–13 May 2009

Doubletree Hotel Crystal City • Arlington, Virginia

www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace

Building and Retaining the Aerospace Workforce

Appendix A: Program

Aerospace Department 

Chairs Association (ADCA)
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 13

Tuesday, 12 May 2009

0700–0800 hrs

Registration and Continental Breakfast

0800–0815 hrs

Welcome Remarks and Speaker 

Introduction by: 

David W. Thompson 

Chairman and Chief Executive Offi cer, Orbital 

Sciences Corporation, Dulles, VA, 

AIAA President, 2009–2010, and General Chair, 

Inside Aerospace

0815–0845 hrs

Session 1: Retaining Our Young Professionals 

in the Aerospace Workforce

Chaired by:

Daphne Dador 

Manager, Workforce, Aerospace Industries 

Association, Arlington, VA

Th is panel will discuss how aerospace can 

become a more attractive profession by 

emphasizing the contributions aerospace has 

made to society. It will examine the history 

(and future) of aerospace’s contributions to 

society (including civil, national security, 

and commercial sectors) and how aerospace 

directly and indirectly prepares young people 

for math and science careers. Panelists will 

also off er practical insight on how to organize 

more public and political support of our 

nation’s aerospace endeavors. Discussion may 

also include correcting misperceptions of 

the industry and developing and promoting 

aerospace professionals as role models.

Topics: Identifi cation of what is and is not 

attractive about aerospace as a profession; 

organizing public and political awareness; 

stimulating and nurturing a passion for 

aerospace among the public from an early age; 

correcting misperceptions; developing and 

promoting an aerospace engineering image; 

role models.

Moderator: 

Lon Rains

Director, Strategic Communications, 

Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, Redondo 

Beach, CA

Panelists:

Scott Pace 

Director, Space Policy Institute, Elliott School for 

International Aff airs, Th e George Washington 

University, Washington, D.C.

Greg Pearson 

Senior Program Offi cer, Committee on Public 

Understanding of Engineering Messages, National 

Academy of Engineering, Washington, D.C.

Brig Gen Paula Thornhill 

Commandant, Air Force Institute of Technology, 

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

1000–1030 hrs

Networking Coff ee Break

1030–1145 hrs

Session 3: Engaging with Future Generations 

in K–12

Chaired by: 

Merri J. Sanchez 

NASA Liaison, Air Force Space Command, 

Colorado Springs, CO, and Vice President, 

Education Activities, AIAA

Doesn’t every kid want to be a pilot or 

astronaut or to design their aerospace chariots? 

Th ey used to! Let’s use today’s technologies and 

get back to those days! Th is session addresses 

curricula and hands-on experience beginning 

at an early age and including extra-curricular 

activities and building motivation in K–12.

Topics: Early curricula and hands-on 

experience; extra-curricular activities; 

motivation building; engaging with 

infl uencers; company outreach; and classroom 

“ambassadors.”

Moderator: 

Bonnie J. Dunbar 

President and CEO, Museum of Flight, Seattle, 

WA

General Chair

David W. Thompson

Orbital Sciences Corporation

AIAA President, 2009–2010

Steering Committee Chair

Philip Hattis

Draper Laboratory

Vice President, Public Policy, AIAA

Dot Buckanin

Federal Aviation Administration

Daphne Dador

Aerospace Industries Association

Mordechai Levin

Masterfl ight Foundation

George K. Muellner

AIAA President, 2008–2009

Carole Rickard Hedden

Th e Write Stuff

Aviation Week

Merri J. Sanchez

NASA

Vice President, Education, AIAA

Patricia Sanders

Independent Consultant

Mary Snitch

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Vice President, Member Services, 

AIAA

Annalisa Weigel

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology

Ron Bengelink

International Council of the 

Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS)

Frank Bokulich

SAE International

Colin Britcher

Aerospace Department Chairs 

Association

Heidi Davidz

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne

Karl Doetsch

Athena Global

Jerry Grey

AIAA

Jim Hannam

Air Force Association

Patti Kreh

SAE International

Matt Miller

SAE International

David Newill

Rolls-Royce

Robert Schafrik

GE Aviation

S. Sanford Schlitt

Air Force Association

Session Chairs

Steering Committee

Final Program
14 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

Panelists:

Carl B. Mack 

Executive Director, National Society of Black 

Engineers, Alexandria, VA

James McMurtray 

Executive Director, National Alliance of State 

Science and Mathematics Coalitions, 

Arlington, VA

Chris Roe

Deputy Director, Business-Higher Education 

Forum, Washington, D.C.

1145–1315 hrs

Session 4: Inspiring Future Generations with 

the Legacy and Challenge of Aerospace

Keynote Speaker: 

Richard C. Liebich 

CEO, Project Lead Th e Way, Clift on Park, NY

1315–1430 hrs

Session 5: Engaging Within the University

Chaired by: 

Annalisa Weigel 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 

Cambridge, MA

Are today’s college students preparing to be 

tomorrow’s explorers? To solve tomorrow’s 

global challenges? Th is session addresses what 

is being done at the university level to recruit 

and train students.

Topics: Increasing enrollments; attracting a 

broader and more diverse cadre of students 

into engineering; more eff ective pedogogy; 

research opportunities for students; and 

partnering with industry to address specifi c 

educational needs.

Moderator: 

Annalisa Weigel 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 

Cambridge, MA

Panelists:

Patricia Watts 

Program Director, Air Transportation Centers 

of Excellence, Federal Aviation Administration, 

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ

Steven Brody

Vice President, North American Operations, and 

Lecturer, International Space University (ISU), 

Arlington, VA

Ian Waitz

Jerome C. Hunsaker Professor and Head of the 

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 

Cambridge, MA

1430–1500 hrs

Networking Coff ee Break

1500–1615 hrs

Session 6: Focus on Diversity—Tapping a 

Virtually Untapped Resource Pool

Chaired by: 

Mordechai Levin, 

Masterfl ight Foundation, Richmond, IL

Why aren’t our industry’s demographics closer 

to the national averages? We’re missing the 

benefi ts of these diverse perspectives and 

skills! Th e current and projected shortage 

of aerospace professionals will disappear 

only when women and members of other 

traditionally underrepresented groups join the 

aerospace workforce in proportion to their 

representation in the overall labor force. Th is 

session focuses on removal of barriers that 

keep minorities or women from pursuing 

aerospace careers.

Topics: Removing the barriers that formally 

or informally have a disproportionate eff ect on 

the ability of minorities or women to pursue 

aerospace careers; providing opportunities for 

minorities and women to develop as aerospace 

educators and self-identifi able aerospace 

professional role models; developing the 

interest of individuals from underrepresented 

groups in undertaking aerospace careers.

Moderator: 

Mordechai Levin, 

Masterfl ight Foundation, Richmond, IL

Panelists:

Tyrone Taborn

CEO and Publisher, Career Communications 

Group, Inc., Baltimore, MD

Nancy Hopkins 

Amgen, Inc. Professor of Biology, Massachusetts 

Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA

1615–1715 hrs

Session 7: Day 1 Wrap-Up Session—Actions 

and Assignments

Chaired by: 

David W. Thompson

Chairman and Chief Executive Offi cer, 

Orbital Sciences Corporation, AIAA President, 

2009–2010, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace

What actions are needed and who will carry 

them out to truly implement change? How 

do we regain the public image of aerospace 

as being the high-tech haven for the best and 

brightest?

Moderator: 

David W. Thompson 

Chairman and Chief Executive Offi cer, 

Orbital Sciences Corporation, AIAA President, 

2009–2010, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace

Session 2 Panelist:

Daphne Dador 

Manager, Workforce, Aerospace Industries 

Association, Arlington, VA

Session 3 Panelist: 

Merri J. Sanchez 

NASA Liaison, Air Force Space Command, 

Colorado Springs, CO, and Vice President, 

Education, AIAA

Session 5 Panelist:

Annalisa Weigel 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 

Cambridge, MA

Session 6 Panelist:

Tyrone Taborn 

Chairman and CEO, Career Communications 

Group, Inc., Baltimore, MD

1715–1730 hrs

Closing Remarks and Adjournment

Closing Remarks by: 

David W. Thompson 

Chairman and Chief Executive Offi cer, 

Orbital Sciences Corporation, Dulles, VA, 

AIAA President, 2009-2010, and General Chair, 

Inside Aerospace

1730–1900 hrs

Welcome Reception
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 15

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

0700–0800 hrs

Registration and Continental Breakfast

0800–0815 hrs

Welcome Remarks and Speaker 

Introduction by: 

David W. Thompson 

Chairman and Chief Executive Offi cer, 

Orbital Sciences Corporation, Dulles, VA, 

AIAA President, 2009–2010, and General Chair, 

Inside Aerospace

0815–0845 hrs

Session 8: Harnessing the Nation’s Resources 

to Retain Our Aerospace Leadership

Keynote Speaker: 

The Honorable Daniel Lipinski (IL-3) 

Vice Chair, House Committee on Science and 

Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, 

Washington, D.C.

0845–1000 hrs

Session 9: Stimulating and Nurturing a 

Passion for Aerospace Within the Workforce

Chaired by: 

George K. Muellner 

AIAA President, 2008–2009

Passion? Excitement? If that’s what we want 

from young professionals, make their eff orts 

challenging and rewarding. Th is session 

addresses the importance of a continuing 

emphasis on exciting work and working in a 

rewarding work environment. It really makes 

a diff erence. Employers must encourage and 

nurture involvement, innovation, professional 

networking, and personal and professional 

growth, as well as recognizing the importance 

of an appropriate work-life balance.

Topics: Emphasis on exciting work and a 

rewarding work environment that makes 

a diff erence; encouraging engagement, 

innovation, professional networking, growth, 

and appropriate work-life balance.

Moderator: 

George K. Muellner 

AIAA President, 2008–2009

Panelists:

Edward Schaniel 

CEO, Ed Schaniel & Associates, Huntington 

Beach, CA

Michael “Dustin” Elliott 

Associate, Booz Allen Hamilton, McLean, VA

Nino Polizzi 

President and Founder, Rocket Science Tutors, 

Inc., Newport Beach, CA

1000–1030 hrs

Networking Coff ee Break

1030–1145 hrs

Session 10: What Role Does Recognition 

Play in Sustaining and Growing the U.S. 

Aerospace Workforce?

Chaired by: 

Mary Snitch 

Director, NASA Programs, Lockheed Martin 

Corporation, Arlington, VA, and Vice President, 

Member Services, AIAA

If aerospace work is critical to the future of 

U.S. competitiveness, how do companies 

engage and manage their workforce for 

the long haul and give them “ownership”? 

How do managers recognize talent and 

then strategically deploy that talent within 

the organization to achieve the highest 

effi ciency? What is the role of ongoing positive 

recognition and rewards in developing a robust 

aerospace workforce? Th e panel will then 

address the importance of crediting individual 

and team accomplishments, as well as 

illustrating the value of promotion policies and 

rewards. What are proven examples of success?

Topics: Perspectives on the role and value 

of recognition and rewards in sustaining the 

aerospace workforce.

Moderator: 

Kim Adams 

Vice President, Human Resources, Enterprise 

Operations, Lockheed Martin Corporation, 

Bethesda, MD

Panelists:

Megan Sheridan 

Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin Space Systems 

Company, Sunnyvale, CA

Angela Phillips Diaz 

Special Assistant to the Chancellor, University of 

California at Riverside, Riverside, CA

Robert E. Lindberg 

President and Executive Director, National 

Institute of Aerospace, Hampton, VA

1145–1315 hrs

Session 11: Career-Long Professional Growth 

in Knowledge and Responsibility—Th e Key 

to Retention!

Sponsored by:

Luncheon Keynote Speaker: 

Joanne M. Maguire 

Executive Vice President, Lockheed Martin Space 

Systems Company, Littleton, CO

1315–1430 hrs

Session 12: Work Environment

Chaired by: 

Dot Buckanin 

William J. Hughes Technical Center, Federal 

Aviation Administration, Atlantic City Airport, NJ

Once we recruit qualifi ed professionals, how 

do we retain them, develop them, allow them 

to grow, and support them as they progress 

through the various stages of life?

Topics: Lifelong professional development; 

sustainable lifestyles; fostering creativity; 

providing fl exibility; assuring a balanced 

lifestyle.

Moderator: 

Wilson Felder 

Director, William J. Hughes Technical Center, 

Federal Aviation Administration, Atlantic City 

Airport, NJ

Panelists:

Ventris Gibson 

Assistant Administrator for Human Resources 

Management, Federal Aviation Administration, 

Washington, D.C.

Group Captain Steve Cook

Australian Air Force, National Security Space 

Offi ce, Washington, D.C.

Linda Olin-Weiss 

Vice President, Workforce Planning and Staffi ng, 

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD

1430–1500 hrs

Networking Coff ee Break

1500–1615 hrs

Session 13: Retaining a Talented Workforce: 

Mentoring and Beyond

Chaired by: 

Carole Rickard Hedden

President, Th e Write Stuff , Carefree, AZ, and 

Project Leader, Aviation Week Workforce Study

What are the most common “work busters”? 

People leave jobs because they are not getting 

what they need. Th is session will look at 

problems resulting in low retention and high 

voluntary attrition among young professionals 

and mid-career folks. Th en some solutions to 

these problems will be discussed.

Topics: Voluntary attrition among young 

professionals and a “gap” where mid-career 

folks have left voluntarily and involuntarily, 

resulting in a lack of experience from which to 

draw as today’s workforce ages.

Moderator: 

Chris Lord 

Vice President, Consulting Services/A&D Practice, 

Hitachi Consulting, Irvine, CA

Panelists:

Jacy Haefke 

Manager, Leadership and Organizational 

Development, Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids, IA

Caroline Laviolette 

Organization Development Analyst, Lockheed 

Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, TX
16 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

Sharon Clark 

Director, HR Training and Organizational 

Development, Aerojet, Sacramento, CA

Samuel Klooster 

Embedded Soft ware Engineer, Lockheed 

Martin Aeronautics Company Skunk Works, 

and Member, Advanced Development Projects 

Retention Team, Palmdale, CA

1615–1715 hrs

Session 14: Day 2 Wrap-Up Session—Actions 

and Assignments

Chaired by: 

Patricia Sanders 

Independent Consultant, Alexandria, VA

What actions are needed and who will carry 

them out to truly implement change? How 

do we regain the public image of aerospace 

as being the high-tech haven for the best and 

brightest?

Moderator: 

Patricia Sanders 

Independent Consultant, Alexandria, VA

Session 9 Panelist: 

George K. Muellner 

AIAA President, 2008–2009

Session 10 Panelist: 

Kim Adams 

Vice President, Human Resources and Diversity, 

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, MD

Session 12 Panelist: 

Wilson Felder 

Director, William J. Hughes Technical Center, 

Federal Aviation Administration, Atlantic City 

Airport, NJ

Session 13 Panelist: 

Carole Rickard Hedden 

President, Th e Write Stuff , Carefree, AZ, and 

Project Leader, Aviation Week Workforce Study

1715–1730 hrs

Closing Remarks and Adjournment

Closing Remarks by: 

Phil Hattis 

Vice President, Public Policy, AIAA, and Steering 

Committee Chair, Inside Aerospace
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 17

F. J. Abbink 

National Aerospace Laboratory 

Amsterdam, The Netherlands 

Kimberly Adams 

Lockheed Martin Corporation 

Bethesda, MD 

Brij Agrawal 

Naval Postgraduate School

Monterey, CA 

Andrew Barber 

Aerospace Industries Association 

Arlington, VA 

Douglas Barlow 

United Launch Alliance

Colorado Springs, CO 

Darcy Barrows 

Littleton, CO 

Dan Barstow 

Challenger Center for Space Science 

Education 

Alexandria, VA 

Emily Bender 

Orbital Sciences Corporation 

Dulles, VA 

Ronald Bengelink 

ICAS

Auburn, WA 

Pierre Betin 

SNECMA 

Villenave d’Ornon, France 

Katie Black 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Arlington, VA 

Richard Blais 

Project Lead the Way 

Clifton Park, NY 

Vincent Boles 

The Aerospace Corporation

Annandale, VA 

Britt Bommelije 

National Defense Industrial Association 

Arlington, VA 

Kareen Borders 

Key Peninsula Middle School 

Lakebay, WA 

Bobby Braun 

Georgia Tech 

Atlanta, GA 

Colin Britcher 

Old Dominion University

Williamsburg, VA 

Steven Brody 

International Space University

Arlington, VA 

James Brough 

FAA 

Burlington, MA 

Alan Brown 

Retired

Watsonville, CA 

Phil Bryden 

United Space Alliance 

Cape Canaveral, FL 

Dorothy Buckanin 

FAA

Galloway, NJ 

Mary Kay Byers 

National Reconnaissance Offi ce 

Chantilly, VA 

John Casani 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory 

Pasadena, CA 

Linda Castner 

Alexandria Field

Pittstown, NJ 

Sharon Clark 

Aerojet 

Sacramento, CA 

Jack Clarke 

The Aerospace Corporation 

Stafford, VA 

John Cochran 

Auburn University 

Auburn, AL 

Stephen Cook 

National Security Space Offi ce 

Washington, DC 

Ralph Coppola 

Parametric Technology Corporation 

Vienna, VA 

Robert Crippen

Retired

Palm Beach Gardens, FL 

Julie Curlin 

U.S. Air Force

Laurel, MD 

Judith D’Amico 

Project Lead The Way 

Gold River, CA 

Daphne Dador 

Aerospace Industries Association

Arlington, VA 

Heidi Davidz 

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne

Slidell, LA 

William Dean 

The Dean Group LLC

Santa Ana, CA 

Tom Delaney

IBM 

Bethesda, MD 

Charles Divine 

Divine Consulting Services 

Lanham, MD 

Bernadine Douglas 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University 

Daytona Beach, FL 

Fred Downey 

Aerospace Industries Association 

Arlington, VA 

Bonnie Dunbar 

Museum of Flight

Seattle, WA 

Alan Dunham 

National Security Space Offi ce

Centreville, VA 

J. R. Edwards 

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company

Greenbelt, MD 

M. Dustin Elliott 

Booz Allen Hamilton 

Reston, VA 

Don Faxon 

Retired

Alexandria, VA 

Appendix B: Attendee List
18 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

Wilson Felder 

FAA 

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 

Gerald Fisher 

The Aerospace Corporation 

Chantilly, VA 

Skip Fletcher 

Texas A&M University

College Station, TX 

Igor Fomenko 

FIZMAT 

Thousand Oaks, CA 

Tony Fowler 

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC 

Don Gelosh 

Offi ce of the Under Secretary of Defense 

(Acquisition and Technology) 

Warrenton, VA 

Ventris Gibson 

FAA

Washington, DC 

Jay Gore 

Purdue University

West Lafayette, IN 

James Grady 

Retired

Redwood City, CA 

Ann Graham 

National Security Space Offi ce 

Washington, DC 

Jerry Grey 

Consultant

London, Great Britian 

Bernard Grossman 

National Institute of Aerospace 

Hampton, VA 

Anders Gustafsson 

ICAS 

Haesselby, Sweden 

Fred Hadaegh 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Pasadena, CA 

Jacy Haefke 

Rockwell Collins

Cedar Rapids, IA 

Raimo Hakkinen 

Washington University

Saint Louis, MO 

Christopher Hall 

Virginia Polytechnic and State University

Blacksburg, VA 

James Hannam 

AFA

Burke, VA 

Kenneth Harwell 

Aerospace Research and Education

Tullahoma, TN 

Philip Hattis 

Draper Laboratory

Newton Center, MA 

Mark Hawthorne 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Fort Worth, TX 

Christopher Hearsey 

University of Maryland

Silver Spring, MD 

Jerry Hefner 

Retired

Newport News, VA 

Diane Hensley 

Northrop Grumman Corporation

El Segundo, CA 

Harry Hilton 

University of Illinois 

Urbana, IL 

Nancy Hopkins 

Amgen Inc./MIT 

Cambridge, MA 

James Horkovich 

Raytheon

Tucson, AZ 

Susan Janssen 

United Launch Alliance

Denver, CO 

Joseph Jockel 

IBM Global Business Services 

Kensington, MD 

Charles Kauffman 

Retired

Whitmore Lake, MI 

Sam Klooster 

Lockheed Martin Corporation 

Palmdale, CA 

David Knowlen 

The Boeing Company 

Seattle, WA 

Dimitris Lagoudas 

Texas A&M University 

College Station, TX 

Pete Larson 

The Boeing Company 

Seal Beach, CA 

Caroline Laviolette 

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics 

Fort Worth, TX 

Joseph Lee 

Retired

Alexandria, VA 

Mordechai Levin 

Masterfl ight Foundation 

Richmond, IL 

Robert Liebeck 

The Boeing Company

Huntington Beach, CA 

Richard Liebich 

Project Lead the Way

Clifton Park, NY 

Robert Lindberg 

National Institute of Aerospace

Hampton, VA 

William Lipinski 

U.S. House of Representatives

Washington, DC

Robert Loewy 

Georgia Institute of Technology

Atlanta, GA 

Chris Lord 

Hitachi Consulting

Irvine, CA 

Percy Luney 

Space Florida

Cape Canaveral, FL 

Carl Mack 

National Society of Black Engineers

Alexandria, VA 

Joanne Maguire 

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company 

Littleton, CO 

Jonathan Malay 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Fredericksburg, VA 
INSIDE AEROSPACE—AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR AVIATION AND SPACE LEADERS 19

Christian Mari 

Messier-Bugati-Safran Group

Livry-sur-Seine, France 

Takaaki Matsuzawa 

JAXA

Washington, DC 

Mark Maurice 

Air Force Research Laboratory

Alexandria, VA 

Leon McKinney 

McKinney Associates 

St. Louis, MO 

Mark Melanson 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Willow Park, TX 

Achille Messac 

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 

Troy, NY 

Matthew Miller 

SAE International 

Warrendale, PA 

Jeff Montgomery 

Civil Air Patrol

Montgomery, AL 

Alec Moore 

Aviation Week

New York, NY 

George Muellner 

AIAA

Huntington Beach, CA 

Diane Murphy 

Google Lunar X PRIZE

Playa Vista, CA 

James McMurtray 

National Alliance of State Science and 

Mathematics Coalitions 

Arlington, VA 

Leland Nicolai 

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics

Castaic, CA 

June Ogawa 

The Boeing Company

Seattle, WA 

Linda Olin-Weiss 

Lockheed Martin Corporation 

Gaithersburg, MD 

Robert Owen 

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University 

Daytona Beach, FL 

Kevin Owens 

Draper Laboratory 

Cambridge, MA 

Scott Pace 

George Washington University

Alexandria, VA 

George Paulikas 

Retired

Palos Verdes Estates, CA 

Greg Pearson 

National Academy of Engineering 

Washington, DC 

Cindy Pendley 

Georgia Tech

Atlanta, GA 

J. Kevin Perry 

SAE International 

Warrendale, PA 

Bill Petros 

Creative Images Photography 

Washington, DC 

Angela Phillips-Diaz 

University of California

Riverside, CA 

Ernie Pickell 

FAA 

Washington, DC 

Nino Polizzi 

Rocket Science Tutors, Inc. 

Newport Beach, CA 

David Poll 

Cranfi eld University

Turvey, Bedfordshire, Great Britian 

Martiqua Post 

U.S. Air Force Academy

Colorado Springs, CO 

Lon Rains 

Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems 

Redondo Beach, CA 

Steve Ramp 

National Reconnaissance Offi ce 

Chantilly, VA 

Pramud Rawat 

Retired

Columbia, MD 

Beth Reid 

National Reconnaissance Offi ce

Chantilly, VA 

Don Richardson 

Donrich Research, Inc.

West Palm Beach, FL 

Sally Richardson 

Orbital Sciences Corporation 

Dulles, VA 

Carole Rickard-Hedden 

The Write Stuff 

Carefree, AZ 

Jess Robinson 

FAA

Washington, DC 

Christopher Roe 

Business-Higher Education Forum 

Washington, DC 

John Rose 

The Boeing Company 

Huntington Beach, CA 

Jeffrey Rosendhal 

Retired

Reston, VA 

Marvin Rothenberg 

Southfi eld, MI 

Lee Sampson 

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics 

Fort Worth, TX

Merri Sanchez 

U.S. Air Force

Colorado Springs, CO 

Patricia Sanders 

Consultant

Alexandria, VA 

Edward Schaniel 

Ed Schaniel & Assoc.

Huntington Beach, CA 

Maxine Scheer 

Parsons Brinckerhoff

Los Angeles, CA 

Wayne Schroeder 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Arlington, VA 

Susan Seymour 

Strategic Assistance 

Wake Forest, NC 
20 WWW.AIAA.ORG/EVENTS/INSIDEAEROSPACE

Pragnesh Shah 

Lansdowne, VA 

Megan Sheridan 

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company

Sunnyvale, CA 

Haria Sherwood 

National Institute of Aerospace

Hampton, VA 

Philip Smith 

Space Grant Education and Enterprise 

Institute 

San Diego, CA 

Reginald Smith 

Retired

Alexandria, VA 

Mary Snitch 

Lockheed Martin Corporation

Arlington, VA 

Tony Springer 

NASA Headquarters

Washington, DC 

Sue Stafford 

Simmons College

Boston, MA 

Edward Stanton 

Alexandria, VA 

Frank Steinle 

Aerospace Testing Alliance

Tullahoma, TN 

John Strenkowski 

North Carolina State University 

Raleigh, NC 

Tyrone Taborn 

Career Communications Group, Inc. 

Baltimore, MD 

Roger Tadajewski 

Business Educational Partnerships Group 

Oklahoma City, OK 

David Thompson 

Orbital Sciences Corporation 

Sterling, VA 

Paula Thornhill 

Air Force Institute of Technology

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 

Benjamin Thorpe 

Hispanic College Fund

Washington, DC 

David Throckmorton 

Retired

Yorktown, VA 

Robert Torrani 

Connecticut Center for Advanced 

Technology 

East Hartford, CT 

John Vassberg 

The Boeing Company

Long Beach, CA 

Lisa Velte 

Analytical Graphics, Inc. 

Exton, PA 

Charles Vest 

National Academy of Engineering

Washington, DC 

Ian Waitz 

MIT 

Cambridge, MA 

Patricia Watts 

FAA

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 

Annalisa Weigel 

MIT

Cambridge, MA 

Greg Welch 

Draper Laboratory

Cambridge, MA 

Bob Wessels 

Lockheed Martin Space Systems 

Corporation

Denver, CO 

Marilee Wheaton 

The Aerospace Corporation

El Segundo, CA 

Victor Whitehead 

Consultant

Parker, CO 

John Whitesides 

George Washington University

Washington, DC

Loretta Whitesides 

Space Generation 

Washington, DC 

Michael Yarymovych 

Sarasota Space Associates 

Osprey, FL 

Rudolph Yurkovich 

Retired

Fenton, MO 
11–12 May 2010

Hyatt Regency Crystal City

Arlington, Virginia

www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace

Save the Date 

Making a Diff erence: Aerospace Leadership 

for Energy and the Environment
AIAA is the world’s largest technical society dedicated to 

the global aerospace profession. With more than 35,000 

individual members worldwide, and 90 corporate members, 

AIAA brings together industry, academia, and government 

to advance engineering and science in aviation, space, and 

defense.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500

Reston, VA 20191-4344

703.264.7500 or 800.639.AIAA (2422)

Fax: 703.264.7657

custserv@aiaa.org

www.aiaa.org 

09-0569