Treise, Deborah | Search NASA

NASA NTRS1998

Communications Contingency Plan: Planning for Crises and Controversy

Interviews were conducted with a variety of Marshall Space Flight Center personnel and local media representatives in Huntsville, Alabama, in order to identify the current perceptions of these individuals regarding communication effectiveness between MSFC and the media. The purposes of the Phase One report are to (1) assess the need for a contingency plan for communicating in situations of crisis and controversy; (2) identify goals and objectives for the planning process; and (3) provide recommendations for future planning activities to achieve the goals and objectives outlined in Phase One. It is strongly recommended that MSFC personnel who are involved in communications with the media participate in a facilitated, strategic communications planning process in order to develop Phase Two of the Communications Contingency Plan (CCP). Phase Two will address (1) the categorizing, ranking and prioritizing of crises and controversies; (2) the development of action steps and implementation strategies for the CCP; and (3) the development of a monitoring and evaluation process for ongoing plan effectiveness.

Treise, Deborah↗

NASA NTRS1998

The Process of Science Communications at NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center

The communication of new scientific knowledge and understanding is an integral component of science research, essential for its continued survival. Like any learning- based activity, science cannot continue without communication between and among peers so that skeptical inquiry and learning can take place. This communication provides necessary organic support to maintain the development of new knowledge and technology. However, communication beyond the peer-community is becoming equally critical for science to survive as an enterprise into the 21st century. Therefore, scientists not only have a 'noble responsibility' to advance and communicate scientific knowledge and understanding to audiences within and beyond the peer-community, but their fulfillment of this responsibility is necessary to maintain the survival of the science enterprise. Despite the critical importance of communication to the viability of science, the skills required to perform effective science communications historically have not been taught as a part of the training of scientist, and the culture of science is often averse to significant communication beyond the peer community. Thus scientists can find themselves ill equipped and uncomfortable with the requirements of their job in the new millennium. At NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, we have developed and implemented an integrated science communications process, providing an institutional capability to help scientist accurately convey the content and meaning of new scientific knowledge to a wide variety of audiences, adding intrinsic value to the research itself through communication, while still maintaining the integrity of the peer-review process. The process utilizes initial communication through the world-wide web at the site http://science.nasa.gov to strategically leverage other communications vehicles and to reach a wide-variety of audiences. Here we present and discuss the basic design of the science communications process, now in operation for nearly two years. Serving scientists in Earth Science, Microgravity Science, and Space Science. Critical features of the design are illustrated, and essential skills required to operate the process are defined. Measures of success will also be presented.

Horack, John M.↗

NASA NTRS1998

The Process of Science Communications at NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center

The communication of new scientific knowledge and understanding is an integral component of science research, essential for its continued survival. Like any learning-based activity, science cannot continue without communication between and among peers so that skeptical inquiry and learning can take place. This communication provides necessary organic support to maintain the development of new knowledge and technology. However, communication beyond the peer-community is becoming equally critical for science to survive as an enterprise into the 21st century. Therefore, scientists not only have a 'noble responsibility' to advance and communicate scientific knowledge and understanding to audiences within and beyond the peer-community, but their fulfillment of this responsibility is necessary to maintain the survival of the science enterprise. Despite the critical importance of communication to the viability of science, the skills required to perform effective science communications historically have not been taught as a part of the training of scientist, and the culture of science is often averse to significant communication beyond the peer community. Thus scientists can find themselves ill equipped and uncomfortable with the requirements of their job in the new millennium.

Horack, John M.↗