NASA New Vision Statement - Not so Popular

OK, I'll take a stab at it:

1. "To reach for new heights". OK, exactly what does this mean? Does it mean to explore further from Earth in terms of distance? Or maybe in terms of difficult challenges? Or is it just some simple altruism that no one can argue with?

2. The statement has nothing whatsoever to do with Space, nor Aeronautics! This vision could equally be applied to the NSF, the NIH, and probably just about any research institution.

3. It focuses on all of humanity, rather than the people who are footing the bill (Americans). This is not necessarily bad, just an observation. Also, there is nothing about providing a good value.

Another aspect that people may be wary about is a shift in NASA’s direction away from specific missions and hardware to political expediencies (such as favorite congressional districts and contractors), general R&D, Workforce Diversity, and Education. Again, these are not necessarily bad. They are just different.

People’s general malaise may also be related to their perception of C. Bolden. Helping Muslim countries increase their self-confidence comes to mind.

Perhaps the malaise is related to always promising, continually shifting, and only belatedly accomplishing major goals (“increasing the awesome” in the world).

What I find interesting is that we all pretend that what NASA does can be easily modified by changing their Vision, Strategic Plans, and political direction. Well, yes you can cancel existing work (though sometime even this takes more than a year). But starting something new from scratch (OK, I am thinking of a major HSF or Science mission, not a new STEM event) takes 10-15 years.

I guess people have a hard time knowing what the vision really means.

1. It's a truly awkward mouthful of words.
2. It's uninspiring.
3. It's meaningless.

Other than that, it's fine.

Typical politico-legal statement.
Speak much - say little.

Their vision statement kind of tells what's really wrong with NASA. There's no vision at all.

Sounds like it was written by a committee intent on pleasing political masters first and foremost.
Sadly it captures NASA's current malaise and lack of inspiration of the current admin.

Perhaps they should have one of those NASA naming contest type of things.

Writers and poets need to get involved. PASSSION, BOLDNESS and IMPORTANCE needs to be conveyed.

My #1 beef is that it's literally three cliches strung together and that makes it invisible.

It says "we're not doing anything in particular but we had to fill out this form and there was a slot for mission statement and we didn't want to bother getting a mission statement waiver from central bureaucracy."

There was concerted effort here to be most bland, hence the cliches; it doesn't feel risky to say if you're the one writing it because it feels familiar and doesn't jump out at you. If it was voted on, it was disliked by the fewest people, like an American Idol winner, and will enjoy the same success.

I could nitpick it further but the key point is the hollowness mentioned by bill and aerowerks. What is there mission anyway? It is to do whatever congress says to do; they're a public agency. Their mission is to be America's agent in space.

Today that involves exploring, astronomy, space-based science, earth observation, helping the fledgling manned spaceflight industry, aerospace R&D and plain old make-work (not that I'm judging.)

And I don't see a common thread there other than mastering the sky.

Which does sorta fit what the statement says...

But someone more artful needs to take a swing at it.

It has no clearly defined, national, inspired goal that would attract anyone or any resources.

"Advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust space exploration program."

I like CM's pitch. It's accurate and that kind of understatement is always more effective than telegraphed pathos. It also gives a clear "serious business" impression.

A Vision Statement needs to be clearly defined so that anyone knows exactly what NASA's mission is. This applies to workers, children, space cadets.. what have you.

I don't believe NASA's mission statement should use the word "robust". It's an overused word that means to me virtually nothing, regardless of what the actual definition.

Economic interests? Come up with something better than that!

Once again, clear language. Exact mission and goals. No namby pamby crap.

It is boring, a nambi pambi mish mash that could apply to anything...it has no flow, no power and is unfortunately reflective of the current state of non- leadership under the Administrator - "NASA non-speak". I wish it weren't so.

Something more reflective of their current plans as mandated by some in Congress would be (said smiling):

"Big rockets, big bucks, we dug a hole and now we're stuck."

"Supporting the post Soviet economy with your funds."

"Exploring tomorrow by exporting America's space jobs today."

"Keeping yesterday's space program alive for today at the cost of tomorrow."

A vision statement as quoted from Administrator Bolden:
"...."

Visionary stuff that I wish would apply:

"Blazing a trail to tomorrow, so that others may follow..."

"Exploration, expansion and enabling the economic development of the frontier."

"Building a stairway to the stars, one small step at a time."

"Supporting and expanding life on Earth by opening space."

With luck perhaps the agency can actually begin to achieve its own aspirations. And along the way perhaps hire a good wordsmith, and a leader who embodies the Dream.

I like cm's "Advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust space exploration program."
Also Star Trek's mission statement is dramatic and inspiring.
NASA's motto ranks with the Navy's "Accelerate your life" and "A global force for good" as perhaps the worse mission statements ever written in 10,000 years of recorded history. This is painful for me to write as I am both retired Navy and a NASA fan.

Pathetic. Of course it was written by a committee that probably took weeks to arrive at it. And it doesn't even promise results. Just to attempt at getting results. It's not "reach new heights" whatever those heights are but "reach for new heights". They're afraid of promising success.

Maybe they are just tired, sour pessimists and should move on to greener pastures.

"Reach new heights" means do new things.

"Reveal the unknown" means learn new things.

"Benefit all humankind" is self explanatory.

Sounds good to me. But then I'm not mad.

I agree with the comments above: it is a generic generality that doesn't even "sing". NASA should fork over the money for the ultimate vision statement- it starts like this: "Space, the Final Frontier..."

CM's should appear on every letterhead, every e-mail signature, etc. Keith: I think you posted a condensed version earlier that was nicely worded too.

"To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind."

What's truly sad is that most of the statement is word clutter that any competent editor would excise & rephrase on their first editing pass, and the rest is generic blandness applicable to ANY govt agency (or hundreds of other organizations).

To reach for >> To expand

new heights and >> boundaries,

reveal the unknown >> pursue knowledge,

so that what >> and thus
we do and learn will

benefit all humankind >> benefit humanity

cm's stab at a better one is pretty good but it neglects aeronautics...perhaps another indicator that it's long past time to split the agency?

In my opinion, NASA has had a clear, actionable mission statement since it's charter in 1958:

"To advance and communicate scientific knowledge and understanding of the Earth, the solar system, and the universe and use the environment of space for research. To explore, use, and enable the development of space for human enterprise. To research, develop, verify, and transfer advanced aeronautics, space, and related technologies."

Is that really so bad that people feel a constant need to redo it? I guess if I was pressed to condense this mission statement, an extremely lossy version might be:

Using the environment of space for research. Enabling the development of space for human activities. Incubating aeronautics and space technologies. For the benefit of the Nation.

Enough said. Why not? The people at NASA obviously cannot come close to Gene Roddenberry's vision.

It's too long!

The first part isn't bad:
"To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown."

"Taking the arrows to give you the land."

"It's not ourselves we conquer, but the sky."

"It's not congress we conquer... So let's get to work on that solid rocket doodad."

I had to read it more than once before I could wrap my head around it. At first I thought there was a typo, and until I figured out how to parse "so that what we do" I wasn't sure it was actually a sentence.

A verbose bit that doesn't seem to say much is probably not what people wanted to hear at this point in the post constellation recession.

I want some moral boosting direction. Something with "Oomph!" that gets attention. Something that suggests we're going onward and upward.

Instead we get this thing that sounds like something my boss would attach to the bottom of his emails...

No sir. I don't like it!

I share views both for and against as expressed in this thread. Having been through an exercise like this, two definitions of use:

A vision describes the world we strive for; a mission is the organization's specific role in achieving the vision.

One organization rarely achieves the vision on its own, but plays a role (its mission) in getting somewhere profoundly better than current circumstances. In being expansive, a vision risks sounding generic and/or by being beyond any organization's grasp, unrealistic on its own. In contrast to the vision, an organization's mission should specify its unique capabilities and role.

I sense that some commenters are evaluating the vision as a mission statement; in that light it is almost bound to come up wanting. Our discussion might be richer if it framed NASA's vision and mission in tandem.

NASA needs to shed the barnacles of past failure, catch-up with the technology of the present, and regain the agility of the Apollo era.

Only then can it look to the future.
---------------------------------------------
Why ain't the space station a wheel like it was supposed to be?

And why do we insist on making expensive rockets? The rocket launch is by far the shortest part of the mission. Is there a reason we can't do that part with big dumb rockets that use cheap ARM processor avionics?

Don't blame the "people" at NASA for this piece of hgh ...hgh "Literature". This is a product of NASA's political wing, the same people that brought change, last years and this years budget. Imagine how the working troops feel having to deal with this piece of .... "Literature" every day.

Can NASA move it’s blooming arse beyond slogans?

How about NASA the Opera while we’re waiting?

“My Fair NASA”

Words! Words! Words! We’re so sick of words!
We get words all day through;
First from NASA, now from you!
Is that all you blighters can do?

Oh, poor bloggers!
Nine p.m. Ten p.m.
On through midnight ev'ry night.
One a.m. Two a.m. Three...!
Hear our plea Professor Bolden!
While we can sit and pitch a fit
we'll never quit Professor Bolden!
Asteroid or L-1, Commercial vs NASA
Pounding, pounding in our brains
Moon not Mars, Mars not Moon,
Don't say manned, say machine...

The Vision of NASA stays mainly in distain!
I think we’ve got it! I think we’ve got it!
The Vision of NASA stays mainly in distain!
By George, we’ve got it! By George, we’ve got it!
Now, once again what is the plan?
Don’t complain! Search your brains!
So where's today’s dodgy claim?
In distain! In distain!
We will complain!

We’ve gotta be there in 2040
Spruced up and lookin' in our prime.
NASA partners come support us;
Show how you've loved us.
But get us to the asteroid on time!

If we’re still planning, roll up the floor.
If we’re viewgraphing, whewt us out the door!
For we’re gettin' launched in the mornin'
Ding dong! the bells are gonna chime.
Kick up an rumpus but don't lose the compass;
And get us to the asteroid, get us to the Moon,
For Gawd's sake, get us to Mars on time!

NASA doesn't have a tuppence in its pocket.
The poorest bloke you'll ever hope to meet.
NASA doesn't have a tuppence in its pocket-but
With a little bit of luck, With a little bit of luck,
NASA will be movin' to great feats.
With a little bit...with a little bit...
With a little bit of luck, NASA’s movin' up.
With a little bit...with a little bit...
With a little bit of bloomin luck!

Make us no undying vow. Show us now!
Sing us no song! Read us no rhyme!
Don't waste our time, show us!
Don't talk of June, don't talk of fall!
Don't talk at all! Show us!

Never do we ever want to hear another word.
There isn't one we haven't heard.
Here we are together in what ought to be a dream;
Say one more word and we'll scream!
Please don't "expl'ine," Show us! Show us!
Don't wait until wrinkles and lines
Pop out all over our brows,
Show us now! But…….

We’ve grown accustomed to this fight
It almost makes the day begin
We've grown accustomed to the tune NASA whistles night and noon
Her smiles, her frowns, her ups, her downs…is second nature to us now.

So much better said in far fewer words, "The truth is out there."

I figured out the riddle, it originally had more words within it and was shortened based on space allowed by the Obama Administration:

To reach for new "budget" heights and reveal the unknown "issues about JWST and so many other missions that are overrunning their budgets" so that what we do and learn "from our wasting of Federal funds" will benefit all humankind "through our NASA jobs program".

At least it would represent the latest vision of this Administration written this way...

To explore and use the heavens for America's benefit.

Actually, knowing NASA, I don't think this was written by anyone with NASA affiliation. I bet it was written by some PR consulting firm that spent 5 minutes on it picking random buzzwords out of a hat and stringing them together and charging several million dollars to NASA for the 'effort'. That way everyone that had anything to do with it has 'plausible deniability'.

Sounds more like Holdren's vision for NASA, not NASA's vision for NASA:-)

Marcel F. Williams

We need more missions and less 'visions'.

i like the new vision statement.
but if all of you think that it is an awkward
mouthful of useless and patronizing,and shallow words
Please,, if you will.
allow me to suggest this statement!!
we are getting the band back together and
we are on a mission from God
to save the world form a global catastrophic event!
one that very well could cause extinction
at the very least earth changes that are beyond
your'e wildest nightmares.
we need world peace and everyone must help.
and you better pray to God we get this one right.
with your'e support of peace and money and knowledge,and understanding,we ask that you pray for us that we might allow earth and man to exist
beyond 2030.
thank you very much
N.A.S.A
product of the U.S.A.

The simple truth is that it does not matter what NASA's vision statement is, people are not going to like it.

look,
if you guys want to be funny
lets be funny together.
N.A.S.A.
has helped mankind way beyond J.F.K's
wildest dreams.
hell back then we were still thinking Buck Rodgers
she has evolved to unreachable heights by all
but the latest of our'e dreams and imaginations
spreading through humanity like a wave of blessings
seeking truth and finding it. then sharing it
with us all.
opening hearts and minds like no other time before
ever.
and now her focus must be to save our'e ass
from a hole in the ground.
funny how that works right.?
what do you think the value is of that?
or maybe you cannot tell a priceless jewel
when you see one. which is,
Her benefit to the world.

It is dull, stupid, ...just plain "rah rah rah" garbage.

CM almost has it right:
"Advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust aeronautics and space exploration program."

Andy,, i think not,
it's more like
it would take a book
a very big book.to x-plane
what they do, hell if you don't like my idea
use Roddenberry's, get the rights,
and boldly go where no man has gone before,
people love N.A.S.A. anyway,no matter how you say it.
Go N.A.S.A,,Go N.A.S.A.
full throttle, lets roll, and God's speed john Glen.
The Eagle has landed.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 we have lift off!!!!

Ed
as you know it will be hard
almost impossible to beat star trek.
check this one out.
Mans Final Hope For A Future
To Dream and Make it Happen.
with just a few changes to the missions themselves
N.A.S.A. could set up a shield and bump rocks to the sun. bring about world peace, give mankind
another chance to try and get things right.
as you also know .0000001 Au off and Apophis
could pop us. or make a gravity wave, shift
our plates,, i think if the world understood
just how close we are to a strike
they might bend a knee to God
and yield to peace
think about it.