Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Leadership”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1) Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2) Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3) Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1. Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2. Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3. Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗
NASA NTRS1985

Emerging aerospace technologies

The United States Government has a long history of promoting the advancement of technology to strengthen the economy and national defense. An example is NASA, which was formed in 1958 to establish and maintain U.S. space technology leadership. This leadership has resulted in technological benefits to many fields and the establishment of new commercial industries, such as satellite communications. Currently, NASA's leading technology development at Ames Research Center includes the Tilt Rotor XV-15, which provides the versatility of a helicopter with the speed of a turboprop aircraft; the Numerical Aerodynamic Simulator, which is pushing the state of the art in advanced computational mathematics and computer simulation; and the Advanced Automation and Robotics programs, which will improve all areas of space development as well as life on Earth. Private industry is involved in maintaining technological leadership through NASA's Commercial Use of Space Program, which provides for synergistic relationships among government, industry, and academia. The plan for a space station by 1992 has framed much of NASA's future goals and has provided new areas of opportunity for both domestic space technology and leadership improvement of life on Earth.

Ballhaus, W. F., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Achievements of the DOT-NASA Joint Program on Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies: Application to Multimodal Transportation

This report presents three-year accomplishments from the national program on Commercial Remote Sensing and Geospatial Technology (CRSGT) application to transportation, administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) in collaboration with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The joint program was authorized under Section 5113 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). This is the first national program of its type focusing on transportation applications of emerging commercial remote sensing technologies. U.S. DOT's Research and Special Programs Administration manages the program in coordination with NASA's Earth Science Enterprise's application programs. The program focuses on applications of CRSGT products and systems for providing smarter and more efficient transportation operations and services. The program is performed in partnership with four major National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation (NCRST). Each consortium focuses on research and development of products in one of the four priority areas for transportation application, and includes technical application and demonstration projects carried out in partnership with industries and service providers in their respective areas. The report identifies products and accomplishments from each of the four consortia in meeting the goal of providing smarter and more efficient transportation services. The products and results emerging from the program are being implemented in transportation operations and services through state and local agencies. The Environmental Assessment and Application Consortium (NCRST-E) provides leadership for developing and deploying cost effective environmental and transportation planning services, and integrates CRSGT advances for achieving smarter and cost effective corridor planning. The Infrastructure Management Consortium (NCRST-I) provides leadership in technologies that achieve smarter and cheaper ways of managing transportation infrastructure assets, operation, and inspection, and integrates CRSGT advances for achieving infrastructure security. The Traffic Flow Consortium (NCRST-F) provides leadership to develop new tools for regional traffic flow management including heavy vehicles and intermodal flow of freight, and integrates CRSGT advances for complementing and extending the reach of ITS user services. The Safety, Hazards and Disasters (NCRST-H) provides leadership for deploying remote sensing technology to locate transportation hazards and improve disaster recovery, and integrates CRSGT advances for application to protect transportation systems from terrorism. The DOT-NASA team is proud to present this report of accomplishments on products and results emerging from the joint program for application to transportation practice.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Social roles and the evolution of networks in extreme and isolated environments

This article reports on the evolution of network structure as it relates to formal and informal social roles in well-bounded, isolated groups. Research was conducted at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. Data were collected on crewmembers' networks of social interaction over each of three winter-over periods, when the station is completely isolated. In addition, data were collected on the informal roles played by crewmembers (e.g., instrumental leadership, expressive leadership). The study found that globally coherent networks in winter-over groups were associated with group consensus on the presence of critically important informal social roles (e.g., expressive leadership) where global coherence is the extent to which a network forms a single group composed of a unitary core and periphery as opposed to being factionalized into two or more subgroups. Conversely, the evolution of multiple subgroups was associated with the absence of consensus on critical informal social roles, above all the critically important role of instrumental leader.

NASA Program Biomedical Research and Countermeasur↗
NASA NTRS1992

Vision 21: The NASA strategic plan

The NASA Strategic Plan, Vision 21, is a living roadmap to the future to guide the men and women of the NASA team as they ensure U.S. leadership in space exploration and aeronautics research. This multiyear plan consists of a set of programs and activities that will retain our leadership in space science and the exploration of the solar system; help rebuild our nation's technology base and strengthen our leadership in aviation and other key industries; encourage commercial applications of space technology; use the unique perspective of space to better understand our home planet; provide the U.S. and its partners with a permanent space based research facility; expand on the legacy of Apollo and initiate precursor activities to establish a lunar base; and allow us a journey into tomorrow, journey to another planet (Mars), and beyond.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1992

Ninth Annual NASA/Contractors Conference on Quality and Productivity. World Class Excellence: The Journey Continues. Conference presentations

The topics covered include the following: The George M. Low Trophy; total quality assessment and measurement; using award criteria to improve organizational effectiveness; results--keeping an eye on the bottom line; capturing customer satisfaction; moving from management to leadership; leadership versus management; transforming the management team; leadership success stories; success stories in the quest for excellence; small business successes; education success stories; government success stories; tools and techniques for total quality management (TQM) integration; planning and organizing for TQM integration; successful stories for implementing system level TQM/CI tools; assessing TQM results; establishing an environment for continuous improvement at NASA; empowerment; synergism of partnering; and partnerships in education.

Templeton, Geoffrey B.↗
NASA NTRS2000

The Evolution of Networks in Extreme and Isolated Environment

This article reports on the evolution of network structure as it relates to the formal and informal aspects of social roles in well bounded, isolated groups. Research was conducted at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station over a 3-year period. Data was collected on crewmembers' networks of social interaction and personal advice over each of the 8.5-month winters during a time of complete isolation. In addition, data was collected on informal social role structure (e.g., instrumental leadership, expressive leadership). It was hypothesized that development and maintenance of a cohesive group structure was related to the presence of and group consensus on various informal social roles. The study found that core-periphery structures (i.e., reflecting cohesion) in winter-over groups were associated with the presence of critically important informal social roles (e.g., expressive leadership) and high group consensus on such informal roles. On the other hand, the evolution of clique structures (i.e., lack of cohesion) were associated with the absence of critical roles and a lack of consensus on these roles, particularly the critically important role of instrumental leader.

Johnson, Jeffrey C.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Office of Equal Opportunity Programs

The NASA Glenn Office of Equal Opportunity Programs works to provide quality service for all programs and/or to assist the Center in becoming a model workplace. During the summer of 2004, I worked with Deborah Cotleur along with other staff members to create and modify customer satisfaction surveys. This office aims to assist in developing a model workplace by providing functions as a change agent to the center by serving as an advisor to management to ensure equity throughout the Center. In addition, the office serves as a mediator for the Center in addressing issues and concerns. Lastly, the office provides assistance to employees to enable attainment of personal and organizational goals. The Office of Equal Opportunities is a staff office which reports and provides advice to the Center Director and Executive Leadership, implements laws, regulations, and presidential executive orders, and provides center wide leadership and assistance to NASA GRC employees. Some of the major responsibilities of the office include working with the discrimination complaints program, special emphasis programs (advisory groups), management support, monitoring and evaluation, contract compliance, and community outreach. During my internship in this office, my main objective was to create four customer satisfaction surveys based on EO retreats, EO observances, EO advisory boards, and EO mediation/counseling. I created these surveys after conducting research on past events and surveys as well as similar survey research created and conducted by other NASA centers, program for EO Advisory group members, leadership training sessions for supervisors, preventing sexual harassment training sessions, and observance events. I also conducted research on the style and format from feedback surveys from the Marshall Equal Opportunity website, the Goddard website, and the main NASA website. Using the material from the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs at Glenn Research Center along with my previous research, I created four customer satisfaction surveys. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Chin, Jennifer L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Adaptive Planning: Understanding Organizational Workload to Capability/ Capacity through Modeling and Simulation

In August 2003, the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) established the Adaptive Planning (AP) initiative [1] with an objective of reducing the time necessary to develop and revise Combatant Commander (COCOM) contingency plans and increase SECDEF plan visibility. In addition to reducing the traditional plan development timeline from twenty-four months to less than twelve months (with a goal of six months)[2], AP increased plan visibility to Department of Defense (DoD) leadership through In-Progress Reviews (IPRs). The IPR process, as well as the increased number of campaign and contingency plans COCOMs had to develop, increased the workload while the number of planners remained fixed. Several efforts from collaborative planning tools to streamlined processes were initiated to compensate for the increased workload enabling COCOMS to better meet shorter planning timelines. This paper examines the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP) directed contingency planning and staffing requirements assigned to a combatant commander staff through the lens of modeling and simulation. The dynamics of developing a COCOM plan are captured with an ExtendSim [3] simulation. The resulting analysis provides a quantifiable means by which to measure a combatant commander staffs workload associated with development and staffing JSCP [4] directed contingency plans with COCOM capability/capacity. Modeling and simulation bring significant opportunities in measuring the sensitivity of key variables in the assessment of workload to capability/capacity analysis. Gaining an understanding of the relationship between plan complexity, number of plans, planning processes, and number of planners with time required for plan development provides valuable information to DoD leadership. Through modeling and simulation AP leadership can gain greater insight in making key decisions on knowing where to best allocate scarce resources in an effort to meet DoD planning objectives.

Hase, Chris↗
NASA NTRS2010

An Overview of the NASA Aeronautics Test Program Strategic Plan

U.S. leadership in aeronautics depends on ready access to technologically advanced, efficient, and affordable aeronautics test capabilities. These systems include major wind tunnels and propulsion test facilities and flight test capabilities. The federal government owns the majority of the major aeronautics test capabilities in the United States, primarily through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defense (DoD), however an overarching strategy for management of these national assets was needed. Therefore, in Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 NASA established the Aeronautics Test Program (ATP) as a two-pronged strategic initiative to: (1) retain and invest in NASA aeronautics test capabilities considered strategically important to the agency and the nation, and (2) establish a strong, high level partnership with the DoD Test Resources Management Center (TRMC), stewards of the DoD test and evaluation infrastructure. Since then, approximately seventy percent of the ATP budget has been directed to underpin fixed and variable costs of facility operations within its portfolio and the balance towards strategic investments in its test facilities, including maintenance and capability upgrades. Also, a strong guiding coalition was established through the National Partnership for Aeronautics Testing (NPAT), with governance by the senior leadership of NASA s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) and the DoD's TRMC. As part of its strategic planning, ATP has performed or participated in many studies and analyses, including assessments of major NASA and DoD aeronautics test capabilities, test facility condition evaluations and market research. The ATP strategy has also benefitted from unpublished RAND research and analysis by Ant n et al. (2009). Together, these various studies, reports and assessments serve as a foundation for a new, five year strategic plan that will guide ATP through FY 2014. Our vision for the future is a balanced portfolio of aeronautics ground and flight test capabilities that advance U.S. leadership in aeronautics in the short and long term. Key to the ATP vision is the concept of availability, not necessarily ownership; that is, NASA does not have to own and operate all facilities that are envisioned for future aeronautics testing. However, ATP will enable access to capabilities which are needed but not owned by NASA through strategic partnerships and reliance agreements. This paper will outline the major aspects of the ATP strategic plan for achieving its mission.

Marshall, Timothy J.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Chapter 8: Strategies for People, Partnerships, and Productivity

Multiple U.S. and international respondents defined leadership as "producing the next generation of scientists." BER could lose its international leadership irrevocably without a pipeline of the best and brightest talent to engage in the program's mission areas. Competition for this talent is international and increasingly intense between public and private institutions in rapidly emerging science and technology areas relevant to BER. The quickly evolving and highly competitive nature of ensuring next-generation scientific leadership raises important questions:

Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Com↗
NASA NTRS2001

Psychosocial issues in long-term space flight: overview

Anecdotal evidence of the individual and interpersonal problems that occurred during the Shuttle-Mir Space Program (SMSP) and other long-duration Russian/Soviet missions, and studies of personnel in other isolated and confined extreme (ICE) environments suggest that psychosocial elements of behavior and performance are likely to have a significant impact on the outcome of long-duration missions in space. This impact may range from individual decrements in performance, health and well being, to catastrophic mission failure. This paper reviews our current understanding of the psychosocial issues related to long duration space missions according to three different domains of behavior: the individual domain, the interpersonal domain and the organizational domain. Individual issues include: personality characteristics that predict successful performance, stress due to isolation and confinement and its effect on emotions and cognitive performance, adaptive and maladaptive coping styles and strategies, and requirements for the psychological support of astronauts and their families during the mission. Interpersonal issues include: impact of crew diversity and leadership styles on small group dynamics, adaptive and maladaptive features of ground-crew interactions, and processes of crew cohesion, tension and conflict. Organizational issues include: the influence of organizational culture and mission duration on individual and group performance, and managerial requirements for long duration missions. Improved screening and selection of astronaut candidates, leadership, coping and interpersonal skills training of personnel, and organizational change are key elements in the prevention of performance decrements on long-duration missions.

Review, Tutorial↗
NASA NTRS1998

Psychosocial issues affecting crews during long-duration international space missions

Psychosocial issues can negatively impact on crew performance and morale during long-duration international space missions. Major psychosocial factors that have been described in anecdotal reports from space and in studies from analog situations on Earth include: 1) crew heterogeneity due to gender differences, cultural issues, and work experiences and motivations; 2) language and dialect variations; and 3) task versus supportive leadership roles. All of these factors can lead to negative sequelae, such as intra-crew tension and cohesion disruptions. Specific sequelae that can result from single factors include subgrouping and scapegoating due to crew heterogeneity; miscommunication due to major or subtle language differences; and role confusion, competition, and status leveling due to inappropriate leadership role definition. It is time to conduct research exploring the impact of these psychosocial factors and their sequelae on space crews during actual long-duration international space missions.

Non-NASA Center↗
NASA NTRS1985

Training managers for high productivity: Guidelines and a case history

Hughes Aircrafts 13-year productivity study clearly identifies management as the key link in the entire productivity chain. This fact led to the establishment of a long-term series of seminars on personal, managerial, organizational, and operational productivity for all levels and sectors of line and staff management. To inspire the work force to higher levels of productivity and creativity management, itself, must first be inspired. In turn they have to clearly understand the productive and creative processes, fashion an effective productivity improvement plan with sound strategy and implementation, create an optimal environmental chemistry, and provide the outstanding leadership necessary to propel their organizations to achieve full potential. The primary goals of the seminars are to (1) ignite that spark of inspiration, enabling productive action to follow, (2) provide participants a credible roadmap and effective tools for implementation, and (3) develop a dedicated commitment to leadership and productivity throughout the management team.

Ranftl, R. M.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Selection for optimal crew performance - Relative impact of selection and training

An empirical study supporting Helmreich's (1986) theoretical work on the distinct manner in which training and selection impact crew coordination is presented. Training is capable of changing attitudes, while selection screens for stable personality characteristics. Training appears least effective for leadership, an area strongly influenced by personality. Selection is least effective for influencing attitudes about personal vulnerability to stress, which appear to be trained in resource management programs. Because personality correlates with attitudes before and after training, it is felt that selection may be necessary even with a leadership-oriented training cirriculum.

Chidester, Thomas R.↗
NASA NTRS1988

The 1989 long-range program plan

The President's National Space Policy of 1988 reaffirms that space activities serve a variety of vital national goals and objectives, including the strengthening of U.S. scientific, technological, political, economic, and international leadership. The new policy stresses that civil space activities contribute significantly to enhancing America's world leadership. Goals and objectives must be defined and redefined, and each advance toward a given objective must be viewed as a potential building block for future programs. This important evolutionary process for research and development is reflected, describing NASA's program planning for FY89 and later years. This plan outlines the direction of NASA's future activities by discussing goals, objectives, current programs, and plans for the future. The 1989 plan is consistent with national policy for both space and aeronautics, and with the FY89 budget that the President submitted to Congress in February 1988.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Ulysses - An ESA/NASA cooperative programme

Cooperation between ESA and NASA is discussed, noting that the Memorandum of Understanding lays the framework for this relationship, defining the responsibilities of ESA and NASA and providing for appointment of leadership and managers for the project. Members of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and ESA's ESTEC staff have been appointed to leadership positions within the project and ultimate control of the project rests with the Joint Working Group consisting of two project managers and two project scientists, equally representing both organizations. Coordination of time scales and overall mission design is discussed, including launch cooperation, public relations, and funding of scientific investigations such as Ulysses. Practical difficulties of managing an international project are discussed such as differing documentation requirements and communication techniques, and assurance of equality on projects.

Meeks, W.↗