# 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, develo p 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 gene ration, 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 thre e 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:
Legislation that requires subject matter mastery for teachers of science, technology, engineering, and a. mathematics (STEM) at the middle school and high school levels.
Tuition forgiveness for those who earn STEM degrees and enter into public service positions at agencies b. such as the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, NASA, and the National Security Agency.
Legislation to facilitate the employment of qualifi ed foreign nationals by U.S. aerospace companies, federal c. agencies, and other aerospace-related organizations.
Legislation to enable portability of security clearances among aerospace employers. d.

Institutional and Corporate: 

### Identify skill risks and gaps, and address them through knowledge transition practices of the type which e. 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.
Establish a young-professionals industry community to facilitate methods of retaining them in the f. industry, e.g., by enhancing the mobility of in dividuals to segments of the industry that off er more or better employment opportunities.

Provide resources (time, talent, and funds) to support STEM education at all levels. Track and measure the g. impact of these resources on STEM enrollment and entry into aerospace careers.

Personal: 

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

Participate in a professional mentorship. i.

### 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:

Preparation and Motivation: 1. 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.

Professional Development: 2. 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. There 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 planto 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 ison “hands-on” experiments, mainly building and operating hardware. Th e tutors work in cooperation with the teachers, fitting in and reinforcing the teachers’ lesson plans. RST is an aft er-school program, one hour per week for 24 weeks. It also includescareer 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 partthe 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 thenature 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 thepublic 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 aerospaceengineering?”; “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 motivatingthem to work in aerospace were engineering classes, hands-on experience, and the quality of their faculty. Compared to otherindustries, 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 ofIllinois; 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 criticalresearch 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 opportunitiesto “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 whodecide 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) staffsearch 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 andadult education programs or serve as mentors to school-student projects, allowing them to upgrade their employment status orseek 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 of24/7 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 receiveawards. 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 teammembers to build on each other’s capabilities, and the individual connectivity off eredby 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 thefuture course of their companies by providing increasingly comprehensive work environment benefits 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. They cater to the expectations of young people who prefer not tostay 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 ownershipof 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 torespond 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 theNo. 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” whenit 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, revisedthe 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, improveretention 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 expandedpersonal network, opportunities for leadership development, high-visibility assignments, promotions, and graduate education opportunities. Th e senior mentees also gained an expanded personal network, andin addition they changed policies, introduced initiatives to create a more fl exible work/life balance, learned to use moreinstant 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 “EnterpriseMentoring 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 different approach: “Technical Mentoring,” to fill 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 satisfied 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 advancementand 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 mentorsto 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 effective 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:

• There 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 edin these contexts, including the organization and management of internationalprograms 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 “Changingthe 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. The 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 toimprove 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 projectedto be in 14,000 schools and reach a million STEM students. In middle schools, the program off ers fi ve 9-week integratedunits 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 ProjectLead 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 plancollege 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 2008report (see Finding under Recommendation (3), above), a number of companies have instituted inspirational programs for young people. Th e AIA’s “Team AmericaRocketry 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 issupported 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): Createmechanisms 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, togive 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: One of the organization’s goals is to 1. 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.

Nominations (versus appointments) 2. 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.

Tenure clock pause and duration for 3. maternity and parental leave are equal for

men and women.

New hire and promotion orientation 4. 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 Financial incentives are available 5. and appropriate, and are aggressively

marketed, to women and minorities (e.g., scholarships, stipends, bonus pay, and signing bonuses).

Bonuses will be awarded to top 6. 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 callyat 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 eprogram 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 participationof 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 graduatedfrom 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 ActionsSupported 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