From the preface & promo copy, it looks like this will make interesting reading.

A couple of comments about NASA's management culture and "Faster, Better, Cheaper":

20th century history buffs may recall that the motto of Chairman Mao's "Great Leap Forward" translates more-or-less as "more, better, faster, cheaper". That disaster for China paved the way for the, even worse, "Cultural Revolution". Was it as bad for NASA? Perhaps in some ways. The problem with the commercial development model is that you have to be willing to accept and manage risk. I've heard a NASA project manager admit that his greatest fear in life was facing a "failure review board". Many other NASA managers act like that's their motivation, including senior program managers who behave as if facing a Congressional hearing on a mission loss trumps everything else--including wasting great sums on useless design reviews and ossified processes.

"Management by view-graph" contributed to the loss of Challenger, giving senior managers the illusion of technical oversight. Tufte explained how "management by PowerPoint" partly explains the loss of Columbia. Until NASA's *management culture* changes, things will not improve. Mediocre minds, promoted to their level of incompetence, tend to fall back of 'process' make up for incompetence, lack of technical understanding, and failure to properly delegate, trust, and hold experts accountable for their analysis.

I can attest from recent personal experience: Management by PowperPoint is alive and well at NASA. I'm sorry but a brief "status update" is not sufficient basis for technical evaluation. To pretend otherwise is silly & dangerous. Competent & confident managers would know this and act like it!

- Discouraged but hopeful(?)