This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
I don't see ANY managers who try to do anything like that listed. Quite the opposite, I have seen them disparage employees who asked for treatment like those described in the article. The bar needs to be set much, much lower for LLNL managers. Step 1 is don't be a weasel. Step 2 is start the very long road to rebuilding trust. Long indeed for LLNL.
Whatever happened to the employee surveys? Enough said.
July 12, 2014 at 6:16 AM
We are still waiting for Anastasio's followup upward appraisal on LANL management. Could someone ask him the status when he comes "rolling in" to the NSSB on one of his "boondoggle" assignments?
Many of these rules are more for business rather than scientific lab however the basic idea still applies. The sad part if that the management sees itself being like a corporation, however the fail miserably by the rules below.
Suggestion #1—Form Relationships Built on Trust.
It seems like the management deliberately tries to reduce interactions with non management and has no interest in trust or relationships. Management interactions go one one which is up.
Suggestion #2—Show Them Respect
Since our management only manages up and kicks down it creates the opposite of respect. Much of the lab managers feel scorn for the non managers and feel they are simply people who could not make it in management.
Suggestion #3—Nurture Creativity
Not an an NNSA lab.
Suggestion #4—Build Effective Teams
Lab management does not build teams and in some cases breaks up working teams that could be threat.
Suggestion #5—Make It Real One of the first things to stress with your management team is what’s called “Making It Real.” This means being genuine and believable in interacting with their people.
Emails are sent out by the management that are so empty inane, and insulting to the intellect that there is little doubt that managers are only going through the motion of managing.
A committee of managers will be formed, absolve themselves, tell themselves what a great job they are doing. Evidence provided will show all managers got huge raises and the workers did not. What more evidence do you need? The workers are the problem, otherwise their raises would be bigger. Input will be accepted by workers who will go on the record to document problems with a promise that there won't be retribution like before...no really, not this time.
I just want to take a few moments to personally thank you for helping me bring back my husband to me and his family. About three months ago, I discovered that my husband of 3 years was having an affair outside our relationship. When I found out about this affair, I approached him and he did not confessed that he and She was having an affair and that he loved her and wanted to end our marriage and be with her.I was so devastated that I had to be hospitalized for a nervous breakdown. When I got better, I decided to go online and look for someone very good to help me. for a surprised! Then one day, I saw your comment about the powerful saibaba temple and was impressed by what they said. and i contacted him for the solution of my problem, and my husband attitude began to change and share good feelings towards me and i am so much happy after he apologies for what he had done to me, he now love me and treat so much better than ever before. thanks to the great one. you can contact this great spell caster via his email templesaibaba@yahoo.com
"Management bad, management bad, management bad. Rinse and repeat.
July 12, 2014 at 9:34 PM"
In case you did not notice the vast majority of the problems at the labs are a direct result of poor management. The contract change has resulted in extra managers and provides no incentive for good management or leadership.
If you want to change the NNSA "approved" management culture at LLNS, understand and propose modifications to the NNSA set of performance metrics for LLNS. If it is not a material performance metric, LLNS doesn't care about it and will instead leverage performance voids to their advantage.
The insecurity on display by all sides is unfortunate. Here is the solution: get busy and work hard for a couple years, build up your skills and get a few wins, look for and apply to opportunities that offers more of what you're looking for, use resulting job offers as leverage to increase your position at your current workplace, or take the other offer and leave. If you can't get another offer, this is where you "rinse and repeat." Either way, you win, you grow, you avoid all this useless manager bashing (this is wasted energy).
A typical LLNS style leadership response and they wonder why morale is suffering.
July 13, 2014 at 11:21 AM
Under any normal circumstances, advice such as given by July 13, 2014 at 10:59 AM would be seen as a solid and reality-based method for getting ahead in any field of endeavor. Unfortunately, the victimhood culture at the national labs has reached the point where rational discussion and clear thinking, not to mention self-reliance, is no longer tolerated or even recognized as valid. I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity.
Management bad, management bad, management bad. Rinse and repeat.
A few years ago, my administrative manager in Computation scheduled a meeting with me in his office. I mentioned being busy at that time and offered alternate times to meet. He insisted on his time. Because of this meeting, I missed what turned out to be an important programmatic teleconference call.
The end result is that the Laboratory lost a million dollar project. Not a ton of money, but still a million dollars. This was part of a broader politicized effort involving multiple agencies. I was not on the teleconference to defend turf, and what would have been the Laboratory's role in the project went to a DoD contractor. When I told my sponsor in DC why I missed the call, he went off on a screaming rant, "You people at Livermore ..." He called back a few minutes later to apologize for his outburst. Good guy. He wanted to have funds sent to LLNL, but could not defend this without my participation on the teleconference.
An irony is that the organization funded to do the work has been using my software for the project, and has been informally consulting with me on a number of related technical issues. I'm told that this organization has been funded for followup work, so in all likelihood the Laboratory is out even more funds.
The all important meeting with my administrative manager turned out to be useless and could have been handled by email. But in his mind, as a Laboratory manager, he was more important than programmatic work or the prospect of programmatic work. Sadly, this is not the first time something like this has happened.
So yes, management is bad. Better said, management is incompetent and essentially worthless. And to be clear, when I say management, I do not mean those people directly funded by projects and programs. I mean people funded by overhead.
Seriously. What bulk value does Laboratory management add? Any? Negative ROI? Why do we pay them so much money just so they can make it more difficult to perform our work?
It's easy to be happy when you know you have a purpose.
Giving yourself real and achievable goals and making sure you can get there in a timely manner is key. Even if all you CAN DO is something as simple as being kind to a co-worker, DO IT.
Safety is NOT a goal, rather it is a necessity for making it to the goal appropriately. Ditto for the environment and health. Forget management, forget congress, forget the institution, it is up to you.
Re-purpose yourself. That is where the real happiness is. Be the change you seek. If you do that, your morale will improve.
Yup, me too. Out of here shortly. Wish it was tomorrow but will be a few more months, then everything is set, and I am gone. They will ask why but I know better, when leaving you focus on the positive. The labs problems are no longer mine, so no need to tell them the myriad issues at that point. Telling them only risks burning bridges and damaging me (the managers are very vindictive). I do have other reasons than my bosses abject, mind numbing incompetence. I will leave the lab behind and only be left with regrets that I had to stay as long as I did. I wish it was tomorrow so bad. But got to get things in order first, then gone.
"Under any normal circumstances, advice such as given by July 13, 2014 at 10:59 AM would be seen as a solid and reality-based method for getting ahead in any field of endeavor. Unfortunately, the victimhood culture at the national labs has reached the point where rational discussion and clear thinking, not to mention self-reliance, is no longer tolerated or even recognized as valid. I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity.
July 13, 2014 at 12:48 PM"
What you a really saying is that everyone who is good should leave. Great for the institution. Well a large number of good people left, a number of good people are just waiting to retire and the last part is that the rest of the good people who are fighting to save the place will reach a point where they will leave also. That is just great, what sound advice. Sure on the individual level it has some value but what you are saying is to just let the place die.
"I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity."
If you work at the lab and you are technical person, (which I highly doubt) than you would know that is is precisely the experienced people with expertise that that are the most pessimistic about the labs. LANL actually did do an upward appraisal survey and it came back with dismal results. Ask yourself a simple question, what are the odds that over 80% of the workforce are just self-pitying fools who can no longer exhibit rational thought or that you are the one that is self-deluded and not being rational about the situation at the labs. What are the odds that thousands and thousands of people across the entire complex are people that have "victim culture"? Compare this to the odds that you simply full of it, deluded, or bitter about something. This is just something for you to think about before post again. (I am sure you will shortly reply without having put in a moments thought to this point).
I have heard arguments like yours since the Nanos times and they really boil down to something along the lines of "all scientists and engineers are entitled lazy, arrogant, misfits, irrelevant and could never last in the real world, where the real world is working at Office Depot" I sense that this is really what you are driving at from and if that is the case you are indeed a very sad and irrational person.
In any case here is a chance to tell your story. Tell us how you made it in the "real world" and how you "know it all".
This is one of the most dumbest threads I've seen. All the problems stem from the lack of viable mission relevance to anyone let alone NNSA. You see, there is absolutely no incentive in this business to be correct or to have the best service or to deliver. Annual certification? You gotta laugh at the whole thing, it's all a farce. And what kind of environment do you create when your business is not truly competitive? You have dregs clawing their way up the ladder. The more vile a scumbag you are the more you will claw your way up. Does Tomas ring a bell? In this kind of environment, the smart and talented are threats. The mediocre are welcome and encouraged. Oh look, the morale has gone down the toilet.
So while it's nice to hear all these Pollyanna suggestions on how to fix the lab morale, they are all stupid because they don't address the root cause - that the labs are just wasteful welfare cases for white collar workers. LLNL, Sandia, LANL? The triad of mediocrity. And oh yeah by the way morale sucks. Noncompetetive environment, striving for mediocrity, and low morale seem to go hand in hand.
The above post sums it all nicely...all the weapons labs are pretty terrible. I personally think Sandia is the worst since it was always run by a for-profit management and was always scientifically behind LLNL and LAN. At least LLNL and LANL were once affiliated with UC, but now those days are gone, and both LLNL a LANL are pretty bad too.
I doubt you work at any of the labs. If so, you should leave immediately and find your salvation in private industry.
Clearly you have no clue about the great science still performed at the labs, despite management's and NNSA's attempt to curtail it.
Basic science (which I define as not directly connected to commercial interests) will always be driven by govt sponsored activities, either at labs or universities. There is enough competition in the research field to drive people along.
Your blurb about : And what kind of environment do you create when your business is not truly competitive? is off the mark. It is the typical privatize everything argument , which got us into this mess in the first place. The reason for this is the typical attitude of US politicians and people in general that for everything there has to exist a metric, with which we measure success . So then we create PBIs , and voila we loose sight of what is important
Clearly you have no clue about the great science still performed at the labs...
Typical lab attitude, stemming from an inability to distinguish great science from mediocre research oversold as great science, by managers who are equally unable to see the difference. Yes there are pockets, but they are rare.
Competitiveness has nothing to do with privatization in this context. We are talking about mechanisms for rewarding performance and shutting down failure. There is no downside to failure for the three labs. Privatizing didn't change this.
Work done by the labs that are under the umbrella of "management consulting" for government agencies is piss poor at the three labs, especially at Sandia. The sad thing is the generators of the trite rubbish have no clue how bad their work is because they have never seen good work, nor do they put in the hours required to read and condense case study to make valid arguments and inferences. Add to that the fact that there are rules how much agencies have to spend on ffrdcs versus going out to real consultants. This is a great example of how noncompetetiveness feeds mediocrity at Sandia and other labs.
In any case here is a chance to tell your story. Tell us how you made it in the "real world" and how you "know it all".
July 13, 2014 at 9:10 PM
Yeah, right. So you can intentionally and disingenuously misinterpret my statements and put words in my mouth. Nope, find your fun elsewhere. I am long gone from the labs. 30 year career ending in middle management (PhD in physics). Don't need to provide you with more excuses to denigrate honest, rational thoughts.
"...If you want to change the NNSA "approved" management culture at LLNS, understand and propose modifications to the NNSA set of performance metrics for LLNS..."
Try the above systematic approach as opposed to stumbling from event to event without ever addressing root causes.
If you don't like cars traveling at the posted speed limit in your neighborhood, we can vent about it and repeatedly discuss it with the neighbors, or we can make the case to have the speed limit formally reduced. It doesn't mean we will never again have speeders, it just means we now have a reestablished metric by which to address it. New NNSA performance metrics for LLNS is not a topic to address solo...
"Re-purpose yourself. That is where the real happiness is. Be the change you seek. If you do that, your morale will improve."
I don't disagree with this. People are responsible for their own happiness.
That's why I'm seeking change by leaving the Laboratory. While LLNL has a few areas of decency, overall it is not a very good place to work. There are better opportunities out there. Many of them. Just look around.
Does any other company have employees stand around and do nothing for two hours for an earthquake drill, like we had last week. I understand the purpose of the drill. It is important to know where to go and to hear general instructions. But two hours – standing around doing nothing? I spend about half my time each day responding to these types of forced requirements. The Lab is a joke.
The moron who equates competitiveness with privatization really needs to get a better grasp of reality. There are lots of private sector "privatized" entities that are in noncompetitive industries while there are many good examples of public sector organizations with very competitive drivers. I wasn't even talking about privatization. As we all know, privatization of the labs made things worse!
"Yeah, right. So you can intentionally and disingenuously misinterpret my statements and put words in my mouth. Nope, find your fun elsewhere. I am long gone from the labs. 30 year career ending in middle management (PhD in physics). Don't need to provide you with more excuses to denigrate honest, rational thoughts.
July 14, 2014 at 8:17 AM"
Ah, POS is that you again? In any case you are one sad and very very bitter person.
In any case you are one sad and very very bitter person.
July 14, 2014 at 7:16 PM
Ah, Mr. "angry and bitter" again. This time he added "sad" in hopes for more support. Only one person uses the term "bitter" on this blog, and his posts are so very predictable. How does satisfied with your career, proud to have served, happy about the outcome, and wishing the situation were better for current employees equate to "sad and bitter"?? I'm not even sure what "bitter" means. Have you every tasted anyone who was "bitter"?? Oh wait, politically incorrect question.
Dysfunctional LLNL My name is Kevin Moore and I recently left the Lab after 10.5 years. My new job has shown me just how dysfunctional LLNL is, and revealed the lab's greatest problem: it's inability to fire those who should be. Repeatedly, I watched failed scientists/engineers not be terminated, but"coaxed" into management. These folks, typically with no managementexperience beyond some two-day LLNL coarse, made horrible managers. Theymoved their way through middle management, arriving to a place where theywere seen as a person who guides science/engineering at the lab. We then had a failed science/engineering with poor management skills trying to build programs and direct the lab. The result is what we have today: a rudderless monolith with ghastly overhead.LLNL was a truly sad place to be, and the day I got out was one of the most happy periods I had in years. If I can suggest anything to our government, come into the weapons labs with a team of competent strategists and start slashing useless managers and failed scientist. Use metrics like peer-reviewed publications to gauge a persons quality, not spot awards or other worthless internal recognitions. Kevin Moore Manager, Materials & Corrosion Engineering Exponent Failure Analysis Associates 149 Commonwealth Drive Menlo Park, Ca 94025
For scientists, particularly physicists and engineers who are so anal about everything, I am surprised by your comments. The lab is not privatized. We have a private contractor running a government lab. We are not Batelle or whatever. We are not fully privatized. Might be better to parse this in the rants especially those of you who hate private entities with a passion. Many of you make comments about private companies that are plain ignorant. Many at the lab have NO private sector experience at all yet pontificate on what a disaster it is to work for a fully privatized company. I have been in academics, private tech companies, and this strange hybrid privately managed government entity. The truth? There are upsides and downsides to all. Some depend on personal preferences for a particular work environment. The thing that I most note about LLNL is the astonishing, huge management bloat. I couldn't even tell you what most of these people do. I have almost never heard "good thing X happened to the lab because of management actions". In high tech, if you were a manager that most people couldn't figure out what you do, you were laid off pretty quick. Also there was not heaping on layers of useless managers. They kept it pretty lean. Now private companies can certainly treat their employes bad, apparently Apple was like this I am told, but usually you were highly compensated. And this bit at LLNL where they do not pay compensation relative to performance is so moronically stupid, only a physicist could think it up. Yup, the lab is led by a physicist so it is on you guys. As far as the science coming from LLNL,well, the scientists are pretty mid-tier. Stanford is a comparable sized institution to LLNL but the amazing science and tech coming out of Stanford is astounding. Livermore's output is not in the same league as Stanford, and it is not even in the next league below. Count the number of scientific pubs: 2013 LLNL 166, Stanford 4825. Before privatization LLNL was this magnificent science lab? Well lets look at the numbers 2003: LLNL 134, Stanford 2611. Looks like science is doing better under the new managment than the glorious UC days. But LLNL as a scientific institution, when compared to a similar sized institution shows who the "crown jewel" is, it is not LLNL. Pre LLNS and post LLNS LLNL scientists are pretty mediocre by these measures. And lets not even count the number of Nobel prizes. For those of you who pine for the UC days, I assume you think that was a flourishing time at the lab yet your production was pathetic. After LLNS, your production is still pathetic. Now I realize that the pathetic record can be for reasons other than bad scientists. The management bloat at LLNL means many usless managers and many few scientists. Bad management never advances science either. The siphoning of funds to pay for useless management hurts scientific output. Some programs cannot be published openly. But still the amount of science coming from LLNL suggests much more than bad managment, also there is mediocrity within the scientific ranks. Ouch! That must sting a little.
The lab is not really a science institution, and papers are only one way to measure performance. That doesn't mean you aren't correct, but it does mean there is a problem for lab employees who think they are getting paid to "do science".
"2013 LLNL 166, Stanford 4825. Before privatization LLNL was this magnificent science lab? Well lets look at the numbers 2003: LLNL 134, Stanford 2611."
I have also been looking at some numbers for the labs and compared them some of the top 10 universities. I tried to compensate for things like not counting papers from Fermi lab and so on. For LANL I found a slight increase over the years, however for the other institutes I found a much larger increase in total publications across the board for the other institutes.
One argument I heard is that the science at the labs has not suffered but such a trend shows that the labs are falling significantly behind other institions so that labs are indeed losing there competence. The other point is why is there such such increase in production in the other institutes? One possibility is that things like laptops and advances in computer technology making it much easier to write papers. Another is that universities are actually growing and putting more money in science. I have noticed that at many universities that even through the number of faculty have not doubled the number of postdocs and research associates have. Anyone else have any ideas?
With slight change, so true in the 60's, so true here now....We the willing, led by the unqualified, have been doing the unbelievable for so long, with so little, that we now attempt the impossible with little or next to nothing.....
The fact remains that LLNL, Sandia and LANL have no mechanism for self-correction I.e., removal of trash and promotion based on performance, no matter what reasonable metric of performance you choose (publications, delivery to customer, etc.).
Just look at how LLNL announces promotions for NIF related programs like Laser EoS and Strength. These are very technical programs where you would expect to bring in experts to lead technical work. Instead, they promote some schmuck with almost no publications to his name, hasn't done any real work in YEARS. And justification for promotion? Oh such and such was helpful to me, so I'm promoting them. Or worse, they went to a good school for their phd (two decades ago). Most people with some amount of self-respect would turn it down, because it's just an embarrassment to be promoted under such circumstances. But no, in true Livermoron form, they perpetuate this race to the bottom.
The lab produces so few publications because you have people in leadership positions who you might expect to be "experts in their fields" but are in fact, not. Take for instance, Laser EoS of Deuterium. They are supposed to be able to make accurate measurements of SNM (unpublishable) by demonstrating the ability to take similar measurements in other materials (Tantalium, Deuterium, Diamond, etc.). But the lab ignores this latter part. The scientists are annointed as experts without any proof of competency, and allows to waste millions of dollars in taxpayer money to screw around with error bars and create more uncertainty.
It's one thing if you're in some engineering organization that doesn't focus on research and publications. It's quite another when you are, but your manager has no PhD, let alone, no substantial record of accomplishments and publications. Gotta suck for early career Sandians who are stuck underneath the thumbs of the mediocre.
In 1990 Los Alamos is in the top ten cities in the world for physics knowledge production (cities not institutions, so cities with multiple institutes have a huge advantage) and Livermore is in the top 20. By 95 only Los Alamos was still hanging on.
"And lets not even count the number of Nobel prizes."
C'mon, LLNL essentially "has" one Nobel prize. There were three large group prizes (I think two of these were peace prizes) for work that happened to include LLNL staff, and only one real prize, to Robert Laughlin who was apparently at the lab when he did the research that led to the prize. LBL has 13, all real prizes.
Interesting tangent, but how do Nobel prizes and publication activity directly relate to across the spectrum low employee morale at LLNS?
July 17, 2014 at 10:15 AM
I cannot speak for Nobel prizes, but here is my anecdotal story regarding publications.
I was to be a co-author on a paper that was eventually published in Science. I was the only LLNL author. My contribution was not directly related an active Laboratory project, although it was tangentially related to a former LDRD project. I was a diligent employee at the time so I asked to have my name removed from the paper when I could not get an account number to pay the $60 for the Review and Release process. No one objected to the science or the paper. I gave multiple Laboratory talks - including one to a DRC - about the research. The Lab didn't hesitate to take credit for work it didn't fund. I would have paid for the Review and Release out of my own pocket but there was no way to do so. I probably spent 2-3 days running around trying to deal with this issue, being passed from one management group to another.
So I lost out - and the Lab lost out - having a publication in Science. Not the end of the world, for sure, but one would think a scientific institution would pursue publications in noted journals. Nope. No LLNL citation due to its own bureaucratic stupidity.
It was probably this event above the many others that convinced me what type of place the Lab represents. Now I just play along with it. And I am good at gaming the system. I am very well compensated for doing almost nothing. I don't know how much he's paid, but I'm like Wally in Dilbert. Why bother to try in this type of environment. Just waiting for retirement.
Publications are a good reflection of the productivity of the lab. Good productivity comes from an engaged, motivated work force. 6000+ people at the lab and LLNL can only put out 150+ publications? Something is broken.
Saw this on a news site: "LIVERMORE, Calif., July 17 (UPI) -- Scientists wanted to better understand what conditions are like deep inside giant, carbon-rich planets. To find out, they blasted a diamond with the world's biggest laser.
"The goal of the shots is to try and create planetary core conditions on Earth," explained Ray Smith, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "And by that I mean very high pressure and relatively low temperature."....
This better at least push LLNL above 200 publications this year...
Complete hype. They've been using the "planetary cores on Earth" line for years. It's interesting work, but not worth yet another "try and create planetary core conditions on Earth" news article.
Anonymous said... It's one thing if you're in some engineering organization that doesn't focus on research and publications. It's quite another when you are, but your manager has no PhD, let alone, no substantial record of accomplishments and publications. Gotta suck for early career Sandians who are stuck underneath the thumbs of the mediocre.
July 15, 2014 at 12:48 PM
Three Vice Presidents of technical divisions at Sandia National Laboratories do not have a Ph.D.: Hruby, Walker, Vahle.
Adam Rowen a manager at Sandia Livermore does not have a Ph.D. either.
The previous 3 individuals are the first ever Vice Presidents without a Ph.D. in Science or Engineering to lead technical divisions at Sandia. A quick search on the internet shows that Adam Rowen went to a school in New Mexico.
"The goal of the shots is to try and create planetary core conditions on Earth," explained Ray Smith, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "And by that I mean very high pressure and relatively low temperature."....
July 17, 2014 at 10:01 PM
Oh my God we have another NIF goal. It won't be long before we can't meet this goal and the the next one will be "we (NIF) are try to create the conditions of pressures in the human bladder".
July 18, 2014 at 12:28 AM - Hey, idiot. Will you at least try to modify your post once in a while? You keep posting the EXACT SAME posting about non-PhD's at Sandia. We get it. You'd prefer PhD's. Now find something else to poast about.
Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members.
It's worse than lack of empathy. They somehow contributed to the conditions leading up to the suicide, and they are worried that doing ANYTHING will be a partial admission of liability. These lab managers are much worse than just lacking empathy.
Looking for answers about the awful state of your management? Trying watching this documentary below to get some deeper insight. The movie "Fishead" explains a lot and it also gives some solutions to the problem:
"...Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members..."
"...It's worse than lack of empathy. They somehow contributed to the conditions leading up to the suicide, and they are worried that doing ANYTHING will be a partial admission of liability. These lab managers are much worse than just lacking empathy..."
Are the above two comments in reference to the NIF engineering employee suicide in the Fall of 2012? In what way did management "contribute" to this tragedy? "They somehow contributed" is a serious claim blog or no blog. Just saying.
It's one thing to keep poking about the lack of PhDs or record of accomplishments among managers that lead technical organizations. (which has been pointed out alot). It's quite another thing to use that as an indicator of the decay in the organization, the prevalence of group think, workplace bullying, intolerance to outside ideas, an insular culture of self-annointed-superiority, mediocrity in terms of the quality and quantity of work produced/completed compared to peers, performance based on any factor other than merit, etc. etc...
"...When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that"..."
I am not challenging your HR quote or your general impression of managements response, but it is likely the LLNS legal team provided specific guidance to the departed persons management chain if it was a suicide. If it was a suicide, was there an external investigation?
Yeah, there's always a lot of lab legal involved. But pretending people never existed is not a way of handling the situation. Imagine if people treated the deaths of their relatives like that - "dispose of the body. Let's never talk about him again." Even coworkers can experience grief and a feeling of loss.
Of course, the lab is run like banana republic junta so it's no surprise they can get people to shut up and move on. Oh, and let's not forget that we're defending the country by maintaining old Cold War museum pieces. We have a higher purpose. We can't be bothered with minor human things like acknowledging a person's death.
"...I'm sure management is thinking they had some role in the tragedy and have clammed up..."
If an employee makes a mistake with consequence, it becomes a printed "lessons learned" in the attempt to prevent a repeat of the event. If what happened to this employee could have been prevented by a different management "approach", the information shutdown is completely unacceptable and self-serving.
I am no fan of management but blaming them for a suicide is really going too far and I would suggest ending that conversation. There can be many reasons people take their own lives, all tragic. I don't think there is a place for management to be involved in suicide unless it happened at the lab. Otherwise it is appropriate for them to respect the privacy of the family. And I urge anyone thinking of suicide because of a bad job or any other reason to seek help. Nothing is so bad that taking your life is the best option.
"...I urge anyone thinking of suicide because of a bad job or any other reason to seek help. Nothing is so bad that taking your life is the best option.."
It is very within the realm of the plausible that the seemingly heartless apathy was actually a manager thinking to himself about how he may have contributed unfairly or otherwise to an employee's stress. It doesn't mean the manager is actually to blame. But you can see how things like abuse, workplace bullying, etc. will often go unchecked until someone dies. Give it some time and those a users will go right back to their bad behavior. This is what you would expect from a morally bankrupt organization like the weapons labs.
"...It is very within the realm of the plausible that the seemingly heartless apathy was actually a manager thinking to himself about how he may have contributed unfairly or otherwise to an employee's stress. It doesn't mean the manager is actually to blame. But you can see how things like abuse, workplace bullying, etc. will often go unchecked until someone dies. Give it some time and those a users will go right back to their bad behavior..."
Yes the distinction between blame and contribution is important and is a point 7-20-14 8:38pm may have missed. His point about one seeking help with suicidal thoughts is spot on though.
"Bad behavior" as you put it in any form can not be sustained or become chronic without endorsement from the larger organization. If the larger organization contributes to the behavior, or if they claim they were unaware, either answer is cause for concern. Again, it doesn't mean they were directly to blame.
The topic here is "low morale". We should offer solutions with our comments to the extent we can and endorse the life preserving advice of 7-20-14 8:38pm.
From LLNL management's pov... it's all the employee's faults. As you should know by now, management at LLNL can do no wrong. Same clearly applies for Sandia and LANL.
Management is not likely to make suggestions because the current system benefits them nicely, why change? 25% of the lab is laid off and only 2 managers went. Managers don't do their job and nobody is fired. Take credit for the work done by the people under you without having to work much yourself. If something does go wrong, blame said people below you because you are responsible for nothing bad, you are the the quintesential perfect manager, as is every other manager at LLNL. And for all this you are compensated at an outrageously high salary. Employee morale is irrelevant to the cushy setup managers have. Your unhappiness with management has NO impact whatsoever on rewards heaped on management and the cast in steel job security they enjoy. In short you happiness as an employee does not benefit management one bit. So why make suggestions when the setup is literally the ideal job. As managers come on here and say: you don't like it LEAVE. Your work and all the discoveries or benefit to the government you create makes NO difference to them and their job, the high salary is coming regardless and they have a job for life.
That's absolutely right. National labs are where managers can fail their way up. Are you incompetent? You should figure your way up the ladder. Ingratiate yourself with the mediocrity above you. The future looks great for you. There is nothing to gain by "performing" as a manager. You only lose because other managers will tear you down for making them look bad. It's a great place to work if you are both ambitious and mediocre.
As managers come on here and say: you don't like it LEAVE.
July 24, 2014 at 10:47 PM
Actually, Bret Knapp's current quote is "if you don't like it, there's the door". By the way, how that ole booger doing? Craig Leasure bought new furniture for him when he returns to LANL.
7-24-14 10:47pm, you have summarized the ingredients of sustained low morale at LLNS well. There will be few in management wiling to suggest change without compromising their own careers.
As long as LLNS management are effectively the "ghostwriters" of their own NNSA report cards why change?
If employees want real change at LLNS, collectively shine some light on the ghostwriters, and make constructive suggestions on the NNSA performance metrics that relate to employee morale, mission effectiveness, and the long term viability of this place.
"...Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members..."
Has the work environment improved in your area since this happened? If not, one can anonymously contact the LLNS Health Services Department for additional group grief counseling and the NNSA ECP Office for some helpful advice to improve the situation.
That's an accurate discussion, in fact, a care home should be government regulated, its workers screened and licensed to see that they are following rules.
"...Root causes are two. A unbalanced power relationship between employees and employer and a lack of transparency in human resources issues..."
When a company's values and workplace ethics evaporate, the only thing left to pursue are their OWN interests.
This can only become a chronic and expanding problem when the monitor(s) of said company enable the behavior.
Low employee morale is a symptom of an inadequate company and company monitor relationship.
In this scenario, the company leadership view themselves as "winners". Employees are thought of as tools with liabilities to be kept "in check" at all cost through carefully coordinated non-transparent actions.
"Company leadership view themselves as "winners". Employees are thought of as tools with liabilities to be kept "in check" at all cost through carefully coordinated non-transparent actions."
Captures our current situation perfectly. Well said.
Quite simply, morale is low because the lab is full of pessimists.
Optimists make things happen, and when they can't, move on.
How much has the lab really changed in 10 years. Not much. Granted a lab decay is ongoing, but the workforce quality is falling faster than the residual fallout can come from DC... that is the real problem.
From the other Blogs, the only logical answer is Diversity!
"....Quite simply, morale is low because the lab is full of pessimists. ..."
I disagree. LLNS is a failed experiment that has elected to disenfranchise its workers on a number of fronts. Low employee morale is logical outcome, not a previously existing or random occurrence. Without binding external guidance with consequence, expect more of the same this time next year, and the year after that.
LLNL has a piss-poor product to sell (i.e., NIF). On top of that, it's weapons program survives purely on the basis of systems taken away from LANL. The ole cow has got to go. It has no good legs to stand on, and is sick and sucking away this nation's resources. It will do everyone a favor to just shut it down, along with Sandia, and put more resources into LANL.
Yup, let's wrap more resources around the boat-anchor that is dragging us all toward the bottom.
Those systems were taken away from LANL because LANL is failing in every possible way, and even the C-students in DC can see that. So they continually reduce the LANL scope, hoping to get it small enough that LANL will finally get it right, or the scope will be so small that nobody cares any more.
But, having failed at safe-waste-drum-packaging, and crapping up the NATIONAL dump, I'm not sure there's much left. Sayonara LANL.
To correct low employee morale at LLNS in a verifiable and meaningful way would create huge liabilities for LLNS management.
Short of a secular version of a "come-to-Jesus” moment (external pressure), nothing will change here to improve low employee morale.
If you are seriously considering employment at LLNS, speak to a broad mix of LLNS employees first, don't just rely on what the LLNS recruiter tells you or what you read in the color brochures. If you plan on leaving in 3-5 years anyway, don't worry too much about low employee morale or its root causes.
I want to give thanks to the great Prophet harry who help me in getting back my Husband i saw a testimony post by miss Kate from Spain about how the great Prophet harry had helped her, i decide to email him and to my greatest surprise my Husband came back to me after three days of contacting him.i simply want to say thanks for what he had done for me and am so happy may he live long. if you have any problem just email him :prophetharryprayerhome@yahoo.com and you will not regret contacting him..
"...When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy..."
Looks like there might be another leg to this story under "status" /post 8-10-14 /parts 2 of 4 and 3 of 4.
103 comments:
I don't see ANY managers who try to do anything like that listed. Quite the opposite, I have seen them disparage employees who asked for treatment like those described in the article. The bar needs to be set much, much lower for LLNL managers. Step 1 is don't be a weasel. Step 2 is start the very long road to rebuilding trust. Long indeed for LLNL.
Whatever happened to the employee surveys? Enough said.
Whatever happened to the employee surveys? Enough said.
Whatever happened to the employee surveys? Enough said.
July 12, 2014 at 6:16 AM
We are still waiting for Anastasio's followup upward appraisal on LANL management. Could someone ask him the status when he comes "rolling in" to the NSSB on one of his "boondoggle" assignments?
"... Step 2 is start the very long road to rebuilding trust.."
One can't wear "trust" like a hat as needed for speech talking points and the like. It must always be part of ones attire. A long road indeed.
Many of these rules are more for
business rather than scientific lab however the basic idea still applies. The sad part if that the management sees itself being like a corporation, however the fail miserably by the rules below.
Suggestion #1—Form Relationships Built on Trust.
It seems like the management deliberately tries to reduce interactions with non management
and has no interest in trust or relationships. Management interactions go one one which is up.
Suggestion #2—Show Them Respect
Since our management only manages up and kicks down it creates the opposite of respect. Much of the lab managers feel scorn for the non managers and feel they are simply people who could not make it in management.
Suggestion #3—Nurture Creativity
Not an an NNSA lab.
Suggestion #4—Build Effective Teams
Lab management does not build teams and in some cases breaks up working teams that could be threat.
Suggestion #5—Make It Real
One of the first things to stress with your management team is what’s called “Making It Real.” This means being genuine and believable in interacting with their people.
Emails are sent out by the management that are so empty inane, and insulting to the intellect that there is little doubt that managers are only going through the motion of managing.
Sadly, employee relations & appreciation is not a PBI.
A committee will be formed to solve the problem.
A committee of managers will be formed, absolve themselves, tell themselves what a great job they are doing. Evidence provided will show all managers got huge raises and the workers did not. What more evidence do you need? The workers are the problem, otherwise their raises would be bigger. Input will be accepted by workers who will go on the record to document problems with a promise that there won't be retribution like before...no really, not this time.
Managers don't care about any of this stuff. They let HR take care of any worker problems. They meet with staff relations psychologists weekly.
Management bad, management bad, management bad. Rinse and repeat.
I just want to take a few moments to personally thank you for helping me bring back my husband to me and his family. About three months ago, I discovered that my husband of 3 years was having an affair outside our relationship. When I found out about this affair, I approached him and he did not confessed that he and She was having an affair and that he loved her and wanted to end our marriage and be with her.I was so devastated that I had to be hospitalized for a nervous breakdown. When I got better, I decided to go online and look for someone very good to help me. for a surprised! Then one day, I saw your comment about the powerful saibaba temple and was impressed by what they said. and i contacted him for the solution of my problem, and my husband attitude began to change and share good feelings towards me and i am so much happy after he apologies for what he had done to me, he now love me and treat so much better than ever before. thanks to the great one. you can contact this great spell caster via his email templesaibaba@yahoo.com
"Management bad, management bad, management bad. Rinse and repeat.
July 12, 2014 at 9:34 PM"
In case you did not notice the vast majority of the problems at the labs are a direct result of poor management. The contract change has resulted in extra managers and provides no incentive for good management or leadership.
If you want to change the NNSA "approved" management
culture at LLNS, understand and propose modifications to the NNSA set of performance metrics for LLNS. If it is not a material performance metric, LLNS doesn't care about it and will instead leverage performance voids to their advantage.
The insecurity on display by all sides is unfortunate. Here is the solution: get busy and work hard for a couple years, build up your skills and get a few wins, look for and apply to opportunities that offers more of what you're looking for, use resulting job offers as leverage to increase your position at your current workplace, or take the other offer and leave. If you can't get another offer, this is where you "rinse and repeat." Either way, you win, you grow, you avoid all this useless manager bashing (this is wasted energy).
The real problem is you.
"...The real problem is you. .."
A typical LLNS style leadership response and they wonder why morale is suffering.
I don't understand what all you lab whiners are complaining about. The metric for "slips & trips" is at an all time low. Winning!
A typical LLNS style leadership response and they wonder why morale is suffering.
July 13, 2014 at 11:21 AM
Under any normal circumstances, advice such as given by July 13, 2014 at 10:59 AM would be seen as a solid and reality-based method for getting ahead in any field of endeavor. Unfortunately, the victimhood culture at the national labs has reached the point where rational discussion and clear thinking, not to mention self-reliance, is no longer tolerated or even recognized as valid. I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity.
Management bad, management bad, management bad. Rinse and repeat.
A few years ago, my administrative manager in Computation scheduled a meeting with me in his office. I mentioned being busy at that time and offered alternate times to meet. He insisted on his time. Because of this meeting, I missed what turned out to be an important programmatic teleconference call.
The end result is that the Laboratory lost a million dollar project. Not a ton of money, but still a million dollars. This was part of a broader politicized effort involving multiple agencies. I was not on the teleconference to defend turf, and what would have been the Laboratory's role in the project went to a DoD contractor. When I told my sponsor in DC why I missed the call, he went off on a screaming rant, "You people at Livermore ..." He called back a few minutes later to apologize for his outburst. Good guy. He wanted to have funds sent to LLNL, but could not defend this without my participation on the teleconference.
An irony is that the organization funded to do the work has been using my software for the project, and has been informally consulting with me on a number of related technical issues. I'm told that this organization has been funded for followup work, so in all likelihood the Laboratory is out even more funds.
The all important meeting with my administrative manager turned out to be useless and could have been handled by email. But in his mind, as a Laboratory manager, he was more important than programmatic work or the prospect of programmatic work. Sadly, this is not the first time something like this has happened.
So yes, management is bad. Better said, management is incompetent and essentially worthless. And to be clear, when I say management, I do not mean those people directly funded by projects and programs. I mean people funded by overhead.
Seriously. What bulk value does Laboratory management add? Any? Negative ROI? Why do we pay them so much money just so they can make it more difficult to perform our work?
Fortunately, I will not work here much longer.
Fortunately, I will not work here much longer.
July 13, 2014 at 1:24 PM
Good. Now I can hire some Facility Engineers to replace you. Signed, Bret Knapp
It's easy to be happy when you know you have a purpose.
Giving yourself real and achievable goals and making sure you can get there in a timely manner is key. Even if all you CAN DO is something as simple as being kind to a co-worker, DO IT.
Safety is NOT a goal, rather it is a necessity for making it to the goal appropriately. Ditto for the environment and health. Forget management, forget congress, forget the institution, it is up to you.
Re-purpose yourself. That is where the real happiness is. Be the change you seek. If you do that, your morale will improve.
Yup, me too. Out of here shortly. Wish it was tomorrow but will be a few more months, then everything is set, and I am gone. They will ask why but I know better, when leaving you focus on the positive. The labs problems are no longer mine, so no need to tell them the myriad issues at that point. Telling them only risks burning bridges and damaging me (the managers are very vindictive). I do have other reasons than my bosses abject, mind numbing incompetence. I will leave the lab behind and only be left with regrets that I had to stay as long as I did. I wish it was tomorrow so bad. But got to get things in order first, then gone.
"Under any normal circumstances, advice such as given by July 13, 2014 at 10:59 AM would be seen as a solid and reality-based method for getting ahead in any field of endeavor. Unfortunately, the victimhood culture at the national labs has reached the point where rational discussion and clear thinking, not to mention self-reliance, is no longer tolerated or even recognized as valid. I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity.
July 13, 2014 at 12:48 PM"
What you a really saying is that everyone who is good should leave. Great for the institution. Well a large number of good people left, a number of good people are just waiting to retire and the last part is that the rest of the good people who are fighting to save the place will reach a point where they will leave also. That is just great, what sound advice. Sure on the individual level it has some value but what you are saying is to just let the place die.
"I have to hope that no employees who actually have experience and expertise, and therefore options, have fallen into this cesspool of self-pity."
If you work at the lab and you are technical person, (which I highly doubt) than you would know that is is precisely the experienced people with expertise that that are the most pessimistic about the labs. LANL actually did do an upward appraisal survey and it came back with dismal results. Ask yourself a simple question, what are the odds that over 80% of the workforce are just self-pitying fools who can no longer exhibit rational thought or that you are the one that is self-deluded and not being rational about the situation at the labs.
What are the odds that thousands and thousands of people across the entire complex are people that have "victim culture"? Compare this to the odds that you simply full of it, deluded, or bitter about something. This is just something for you to think about before post again. (I am sure you will shortly reply without having put in a moments thought to this point).
I have heard arguments like yours since the Nanos times and they really boil down to something along the lines of "all scientists and engineers are entitled lazy, arrogant, misfits, irrelevant and could never last in the real world, where the real world is working at Office Depot" I sense that this is really what you are driving at from and if that is the case you are indeed a very sad and irrational person.
In any case here is a chance to tell your story. Tell us how you made it in the "real world" and how you "know it all".
Thank you, angry and bitter B-program bomber.
This is one of the most dumbest threads I've seen. All the problems stem from the lack of viable mission relevance to anyone let alone NNSA. You see, there is absolutely no incentive in this business to be correct or to have the best service or to deliver. Annual certification? You gotta laugh at the whole thing, it's all a farce. And what kind of environment do you create when your business is not truly competitive? You have dregs clawing their way up the ladder. The more vile a scumbag you are the more you will claw your way up. Does Tomas ring a bell? In this kind of environment, the smart and talented are threats. The mediocre are welcome and encouraged. Oh look, the morale has gone down the toilet.
So while it's nice to hear all these Pollyanna suggestions on how to fix the lab morale, they are all stupid because they don't address the root cause - that the labs are just wasteful welfare cases for white collar workers. LLNL, Sandia, LANL? The triad of mediocrity. And oh yeah by the way morale sucks. Noncompetetive environment, striving for mediocrity, and low morale seem to go hand in hand.
The above post sums it all nicely...all the weapons labs are pretty terrible. I personally think Sandia is the worst since it was always run by a for-profit management and was always scientifically behind LLNL and LAN. At least LLNL and LANL were once affiliated with UC, but now those days are gone, and both LLNL a LANL are pretty bad too.
July 14, 2014 at 12:01 AM
I doubt you work at any of the labs. If so, you should leave immediately and find your salvation in private industry.
Clearly you have no clue about the great science still performed at the labs, despite management's and NNSA's attempt to curtail it.
Basic science (which I define as not directly connected to commercial interests) will always be driven by govt sponsored activities, either at labs or universities. There is enough competition in the research field to drive people along.
Your blurb about : And what kind of environment do you create when your business is not truly competitive?
is off the mark. It is the typical privatize everything argument , which got us into this mess in the first place. The reason for this is the typical attitude of US politicians and people in general that for everything there has to exist a metric, with which we measure success .
So then we create PBIs , and voila we loose sight of what is important
July 14, 2014 at 12:01 AM
Clearly you have no clue about the great science still performed at the labs...
Typical lab attitude, stemming from an inability to distinguish great science from mediocre research oversold as great science, by managers who are equally unable to see the difference. Yes there are pockets, but they are rare.
Academia is far more competitive than the labs, generating far more high quality science. The lab can't even do big science experiments properly.
Competitiveness has nothing to do with privatization in this context. We are talking about mechanisms for rewarding performance and shutting down failure. There is no downside to failure for the three labs. Privatizing didn't change this.
Work done by the labs that are under the umbrella of "management consulting" for government agencies is piss poor at the three labs, especially at Sandia. The sad thing is the generators of the trite rubbish have no clue how bad their work is because they have never seen good work, nor do they put in the hours required to read and condense case study to make valid arguments and inferences. Add to that the fact that there are rules how much agencies have to spend on ffrdcs versus going out to real consultants. This is a great example of how noncompetetiveness feeds mediocrity at Sandia and other labs.
In any case here is a chance to tell your story. Tell us how you made it in the "real world" and how you "know it all".
July 13, 2014 at 9:10 PM
Yeah, right. So you can intentionally and disingenuously misinterpret my statements and put words in my mouth. Nope, find your fun elsewhere. I am long gone from the labs. 30 year career ending in middle management (PhD in physics). Don't need to provide you with more excuses to denigrate honest, rational thoughts.
"...If you want to change the NNSA "approved" management culture at LLNS, understand and propose modifications to the NNSA set of performance metrics for LLNS..."
Try the above systematic approach as opposed to stumbling from event to event without ever addressing root causes.
If you don't like cars traveling at the posted speed limit in your neighborhood, we can vent about it and repeatedly discuss it with the neighbors, or we can make the case to have the speed limit formally reduced. It doesn't mean we will never again have speeders, it just means we now have a reestablished
metric by which to address it. New NNSA performance metrics for LLNS is not a topic to address solo...
But how can morale be so low while we rescued Jessy's marriage? (July 13, 2014 at 7:59 AM) We should all take great pride in that accomplishment.
You're quite welcome, Jessy!
"Re-purpose yourself. That is where the real happiness is. Be the change you seek. If you do that, your morale will improve."
I don't disagree with this. People are responsible for their own happiness.
That's why I'm seeking change by leaving the Laboratory. While LLNL has a few areas of decency, overall it is not a very good place to work. There are better opportunities out there. Many of them. Just look around.
Does any other company have employees stand around and do nothing for two hours for an earthquake drill, like we had last week. I understand the purpose of the drill. It is important to know where to go and to hear general instructions. But two hours – standing around doing nothing? I spend about half my time each day responding to these types of forced requirements. The Lab is a joke.
The moron who equates competitiveness with privatization really needs to get a better grasp of reality. There are lots of private sector "privatized" entities that are in noncompetitive industries while there are many good examples of public sector organizations with very competitive drivers. I wasn't even talking about privatization. As we all know, privatization of the labs made things worse!
"Yeah, right. So you can intentionally and disingenuously misinterpret my statements and put words in my mouth. Nope, find your fun elsewhere. I am long gone from the labs. 30 year career ending in middle management (PhD in physics). Don't need to provide you with more excuses to denigrate honest, rational thoughts.
July 14, 2014 at 8:17 AM"
Ah, POS is that you again? In any case you are one sad and very very bitter person.
In any case you are one sad and very very bitter person.
July 14, 2014 at 7:16 PM
Ah, Mr. "angry and bitter" again. This time he added "sad" in hopes for more support. Only one person uses the term "bitter" on this blog, and his posts are so very predictable. How does satisfied with your career, proud to have served, happy about the outcome, and wishing the situation were better for current employees equate to "sad and bitter"?? I'm not even sure what "bitter" means. Have you every tasted anyone who was "bitter"?? Oh wait, politically incorrect question.
Kevin Moore's post in this blog on August 21, 2013, is particularly relevant for this subject:
http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/2013/08/dysfunctional-llnl.html
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Dysfunctional LLNL
My name is Kevin Moore and I recently left the Lab after 10.5 years. My new job has shown me just how dysfunctional LLNL is, and revealed the lab's greatest problem: it's inability to fire those who should be.
Repeatedly, I watched failed scientists/engineers not be terminated, but"coaxed" into management. These folks, typically with no managementexperience beyond some two-day LLNL coarse, made horrible managers. Theymoved their way through middle management, arriving to a place where theywere seen as a person who guides science/engineering at the lab. We then had a failed science/engineering with poor management skills trying to
build programs and direct the lab. The result is what we have today: a rudderless monolith with ghastly overhead.LLNL was a truly sad place to be, and the day I got out was one of the most happy periods I had in years.
If I can suggest anything to our government, come into the weapons labs with a team of competent strategists and start slashing useless managers and failed scientist. Use metrics like peer-reviewed publications to gauge a persons quality, not spot awards or other worthless internal recognitions.
Kevin Moore
Manager, Materials & Corrosion Engineering
Exponent Failure Analysis Associates
149 Commonwealth Drive
Menlo Park, Ca 94025
7:34 pm, you missed it totally. There are at least three, including you.
For scientists, particularly physicists and engineers who are so anal about everything, I am surprised by your comments. The lab is not privatized. We have a private contractor running a government lab. We are not Batelle or whatever. We are not fully privatized. Might be better to parse this in the rants especially those of you who hate private entities with a passion. Many of you make comments about private companies that are plain ignorant. Many at the lab have NO private sector experience at all yet pontificate on what a disaster it is to work for a fully privatized company. I have been in academics, private tech companies, and this strange hybrid privately managed government entity. The truth? There are upsides and downsides to all. Some depend on personal preferences for a particular work environment. The thing that I most note about LLNL is the astonishing, huge management bloat. I couldn't even tell you what most of these people do. I have almost never heard "good thing X happened to the lab because of management actions". In high tech, if you were a manager that most people couldn't figure out what you do, you were laid off pretty quick. Also there was not heaping on layers of useless managers. They kept it pretty lean. Now private companies can certainly treat their employes bad, apparently Apple was like this I am told, but usually you were highly compensated. And this bit at LLNL where they do not pay compensation relative to performance is so moronically stupid, only a physicist could think it up. Yup, the lab is led by a physicist so it is on you guys. As far as the science coming from LLNL,well, the scientists are pretty mid-tier. Stanford is a comparable sized institution to LLNL but the amazing science and tech coming out of Stanford is astounding. Livermore's output is not in the same league as Stanford, and it is not even in the next league below. Count the number of scientific pubs: 2013 LLNL 166, Stanford 4825. Before privatization LLNL was this magnificent science lab? Well lets look at the numbers 2003: LLNL 134, Stanford 2611. Looks like science is doing better under the new managment than the glorious UC days. But LLNL as a scientific institution, when compared to a similar sized institution shows who the "crown jewel" is, it is not LLNL. Pre LLNS and post LLNS LLNL scientists are pretty mediocre by these measures. And lets not even count the number of Nobel prizes. For those of you who pine for the UC days, I assume you think that was a flourishing time at the lab yet your production was pathetic. After LLNS, your production is still pathetic. Now I realize that the pathetic record can be for reasons other than bad scientists. The management bloat at LLNL means many usless managers and many few scientists. Bad management never advances science either. The siphoning of funds to pay for useless management hurts scientific output. Some programs cannot be published openly. But still the amount of science coming from LLNL suggests much more than bad managment, also there is mediocrity within the scientific ranks. Ouch! That must sting a little.
The lab is not really a science institution, and papers are only one way to measure performance. That doesn't mean you aren't correct, but it does mean there is a problem for lab employees who think they are getting paid to "do science".
"2013 LLNL 166, Stanford 4825. Before privatization LLNL was this magnificent science lab? Well lets look at the numbers 2003: LLNL 134, Stanford 2611."
I have also been looking at some numbers for the labs and compared them some of the top 10 universities. I tried to compensate for things like not counting papers from Fermi lab and so on. For LANL I found a slight increase over the years, however for the other institutes I found a much larger increase in total publications across the board for the other institutes.
One argument I heard is that the science at the labs has not suffered but such a trend shows that the labs are falling significantly behind other institions so that labs are indeed losing there competence. The other point is why is there such such increase in production in the other institutes? One possibility is that things like laptops and advances in computer technology making it much easier to write papers. Another is that universities are actually growing and putting more money in science. I have noticed that at many universities that even through the number of faculty have not doubled the number of postdocs and research associates have. Anyone else have any ideas?
With slight change, so true in the 60's, so true here now....We the willing, led by the unqualified, have been doing the unbelievable for so long, with so little, that we now attempt the impossible with little or next to nothing.....
The fact remains that LLNL, Sandia and LANL have no mechanism for self-correction I.e., removal of trash and promotion based on performance, no matter what reasonable metric of performance you choose (publications, delivery to customer, etc.).
Just look at how LLNL announces promotions for NIF related programs like Laser EoS and Strength. These are very technical programs where you would expect to bring in experts to lead technical work. Instead, they promote some schmuck with almost no publications to his name, hasn't done any real work in YEARS. And justification for promotion? Oh such and such was helpful to me, so I'm promoting them. Or worse, they went to a good school for their phd (two decades ago). Most people with some amount of self-respect would turn it down, because it's just an embarrassment to be promoted under such circumstances. But no, in true Livermoron form, they perpetuate this race to the bottom.
The lab produces so few publications because you have people in leadership positions who you might expect to be "experts in their fields" but are in fact, not. Take for instance, Laser EoS of Deuterium. They are supposed to be able to make accurate measurements of SNM (unpublishable) by demonstrating the ability to take similar measurements in other materials (Tantalium, Deuterium, Diamond, etc.). But the lab ignores this latter part. The scientists are annointed as experts without any proof of competency, and allows to waste millions of dollars in taxpayer money to screw around with error bars and create more uncertainty.
It's one thing if you're in some engineering organization that doesn't focus on research and publications. It's quite another when you are, but your manager has no PhD, let alone, no substantial record of accomplishments and publications. Gotta suck for early career Sandians who are stuck underneath the thumbs of the mediocre.
July 14 11:41 PM needs a response:
"Pre LLNS and post LLNS LLNL scientists are pretty mediocre by these measures."
http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130410/srep01640/fig_tab/srep01640_F5.html
In 1990 Los Alamos is in the top ten cities in the world for physics knowledge production (cities not institutions, so cities with multiple institutes have a huge advantage) and Livermore is in the top 20. By 95 only Los Alamos was still hanging on.
"And lets not even count the number of Nobel prizes."
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.1395
How many places have zero?
Of the 3 weapons labs, Sandia is the only one that never generated a Nobel Prize.
C'mon, LLNL essentially "has" one Nobel prize. There were three large group prizes (I think two of these were peace prizes) for work that happened to include LLNL staff, and only one real prize, to Robert Laughlin who was apparently at the lab when he did the research that led to the prize. LBL has 13, all real prizes.
Interesting tangent, but how do Nobel prizes and publication activity directly relate to across the spectrum low employee morale at LLNS?
Low prestige, low morale, low prestige.
Low prestige, inability to recruit the best and most creative minds to lead their respective fields, low morale, low prestige
Or one of any other plausible sequences.
Vicious circle, really.
Interesting tangent, but how do Nobel prizes and publication activity directly relate to across the spectrum low employee morale at LLNS?
July 17, 2014 at 10:15 AM
I cannot speak for Nobel prizes, but here is my anecdotal story regarding publications.
I was to be a co-author on a paper that was eventually published in Science. I was the only LLNL author. My contribution was not directly related an active Laboratory project, although it was tangentially related to a former LDRD project. I was a diligent employee at the time so I asked to have my name removed from the paper when I could not get an account number to pay the $60 for the Review and Release process. No one objected to the science or the paper. I gave multiple Laboratory talks - including one to a DRC - about the research. The Lab didn't hesitate to take credit for work it didn't fund. I would have paid for the Review and Release out of my own pocket but there was no way to do so. I probably spent 2-3 days running around trying to deal with this issue, being passed from one management group to another.
So I lost out - and the Lab lost out - having a publication in Science. Not the end of the world, for sure, but one would think a scientific institution would pursue publications in noted journals. Nope. No LLNL citation due to its own bureaucratic stupidity.
It was probably this event above the many others that convinced me what type of place the Lab represents. Now I just play along with it. And I am good at gaming the system. I am very well compensated for doing almost nothing. I don't know how much he's paid, but I'm like Wally in Dilbert. Why bother to try in this type of environment. Just waiting for retirement.
Publications are a good reflection of the productivity of the lab. Good productivity comes from an engaged, motivated work force. 6000+ people at the lab and LLNL can only put out 150+ publications? Something is broken.
Saw this on a news site:
"LIVERMORE, Calif., July 17 (UPI) -- Scientists wanted to better understand what conditions are like deep inside giant, carbon-rich planets. To find out, they blasted a diamond with the world's biggest laser.
"The goal of the shots is to try and create planetary core conditions on Earth," explained Ray Smith, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "And by that I mean very high pressure and relatively low temperature."....
This better at least push LLNL above 200 publications this year...
Complete hype. They've been using the "planetary cores on Earth" line for years. It's interesting work, but not worth yet another "try and create planetary core conditions on Earth" news article.
Anonymous said...
It's one thing if you're in some engineering organization that doesn't focus on research and publications. It's quite another when you are, but your manager has no PhD, let alone, no substantial record of accomplishments and publications. Gotta suck for early career Sandians who are stuck underneath the thumbs of the mediocre.
July 15, 2014 at 12:48 PM
Three Vice Presidents of technical divisions at Sandia National Laboratories do not have a Ph.D.: Hruby, Walker, Vahle.
Adam Rowen a manager at Sandia Livermore does not have a Ph.D. either.
The previous 3 individuals are the first ever Vice Presidents without a Ph.D. in Science or Engineering to lead technical divisions at Sandia. A quick search on the internet shows that Adam Rowen went to a school in New Mexico.
"The goal of the shots is to try and create planetary core conditions on Earth," explained Ray Smith, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. "And by that I mean very high pressure and relatively low temperature."....
July 17, 2014 at 10:01 PM
Oh my God we have another NIF goal. It won't be long before we can't meet this goal and the the next one will be "we (NIF) are try to create the conditions of pressures in the human bladder".
July 18, 2014 at 12:28 AM - Hey, idiot. Will you at least try to modify your post once in a while? You keep posting the EXACT SAME posting about non-PhD's at Sandia. We get it. You'd prefer PhD's. Now find something else to poast about.
Oops. maybe "poast" = post + roast?
Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members.
It's worse than lack of empathy. They somehow contributed to the conditions leading up to the suicide, and they are worried that doing ANYTHING will be a partial admission of liability. These lab managers are much worse than just lacking empathy.
Looking for answers about the awful state of your management? Trying watching this documentary below to get some deeper insight. The movie "Fishead" explains a lot and it also gives some solutions to the problem:
www.fisheadmovie.com
Educate yourself.
"...Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members..."
"...It's worse than lack of empathy. They somehow contributed to the conditions leading up to the suicide, and they are worried that doing ANYTHING will be a partial admission of liability. These lab managers are much worse than just lacking empathy..."
Are the above two comments in reference to the NIF engineering employee suicide in the Fall of 2012? In what way did management "contribute" to this tragedy? "They somehow contributed" is a serious claim blog or no blog. Just saying.
It's one thing to keep poking about the lack of PhDs or record of accomplishments among managers that lead technical organizations. (which has been pointed out alot). It's quite another thing to use that as an indicator of the decay in the organization, the prevalence of group think, workplace bullying, intolerance to outside ideas, an insular culture of self-annointed-superiority, mediocrity in terms of the quality and quantity of work produced/completed compared to peers, performance based on any factor other than merit, etc. etc...
"...When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that"..."
I am not challenging your HR quote or your general impression of managements response, but it is likely the LLNS legal team provided specific guidance to the departed persons management chain if it was a suicide.
If it was a suicide, was there an external investigation?
Yeah, there's always a lot of lab legal involved. But pretending people never existed is not a way of handling the situation. Imagine if people treated the deaths of their relatives like that - "dispose of the body. Let's never talk about him again." Even coworkers can experience grief and a feeling of loss.
Of course, the lab is run like banana republic junta so it's no surprise they can get people to shut up and move on. Oh, and let's not forget that we're defending the country by maintaining old Cold War museum pieces. We have a higher purpose. We can't be bothered with minor human things like acknowledging a person's death.
"...Yeah, there's always a lot of lab legal involved. But pretending people never existed is not a way of handling the situation..."
On the coworker side, I doubt it was a lack of concern for the departed preventing open discussion.
I'm sure management is thinking they had some role in the tragedy and have clammed up.
To openly broach this topic at LLNS would be equivalent to stomping on a fire ant mound and waiting around for a response. I'm serious.
Scooby deleted this loss of life as a new topic. Did he get a call from LLNS Staff Relations?
"...I'm sure management is thinking they had some role in the tragedy and have clammed up..."
If an employee makes a mistake with consequence, it becomes a printed "lessons learned" in the attempt to prevent a repeat of the event. If what happened to this employee could have been prevented by a different management "approach", the information shutdown is completely unacceptable and self-serving.
abuse and workplace bullying is a problem at all three weapons labs. It's absolutely no surprise that management just clammed up.
I am no fan of management but blaming them for a suicide is really going too far and I would suggest ending that conversation. There can be many reasons people take their own lives, all tragic. I don't think there is a place for management to be involved in suicide unless it happened at the lab. Otherwise it is appropriate for them to respect the privacy of the family. And I urge anyone thinking of suicide because of a bad job or any other reason to seek help. Nothing is so bad that taking your life is the best option.
"...I urge anyone thinking of suicide because of a bad job or any other reason to seek help. Nothing is so bad that taking your life is the best option.."
Excellent points!
It is very within the realm of the plausible that the seemingly heartless apathy was actually a manager thinking to himself about how he may have contributed unfairly or otherwise to an employee's stress. It doesn't mean the manager is actually to blame. But you can see how things like abuse, workplace bullying, etc. will often go unchecked until someone dies. Give it some time and those a users will go right back to their bad behavior. This is what you would expect from a morally bankrupt organization like the weapons labs.
"...It is very within the realm of the plausible that the seemingly heartless apathy was actually a manager thinking to himself about how he may have contributed unfairly or otherwise to an employee's stress. It doesn't mean the manager is actually to blame. But you can see how things like abuse, workplace bullying, etc. will often go unchecked until someone dies. Give it some time and those a users will go right back to their bad behavior..."
Yes the distinction between blame and contribution is important and is a point 7-20-14 8:38pm may have missed. His point about one seeking help with suicidal thoughts is spot on though.
"Bad behavior" as you put it in any form can not be sustained or become chronic without endorsement from the larger organization. If the larger organization contributes to the behavior, or if they claim they were unaware, either answer is cause for concern. Again, it doesn't mean they were directly to blame.
The topic here is "low morale". We should offer solutions with our comments to the extent we can and endorse the life preserving advice of 7-20-14 8:38pm.
How about a few suggestions from seasoned managers to address "low morale" at LLNS that don't include "leave LLNS" as a first response.
From LLNL management's pov... it's all the employee's faults. As you should know by now, management at LLNL can do no wrong. Same clearly applies for Sandia and LANL.
"...How about a few suggestions from seasoned managers to address "low morale" at LLNS that don't include "leave LLNS" as a first response..."
And the management responses are pouring in!
Management is not likely to make suggestions because the current system benefits them nicely, why change? 25% of the lab is laid off and only 2 managers went. Managers don't do their job and nobody is fired. Take credit for the work done by the people under you without having to work much yourself. If something does go wrong, blame said people below you because you are responsible for nothing bad, you are the the quintesential perfect manager, as is every other manager at LLNL. And for all this you are compensated at an outrageously high salary. Employee morale is irrelevant to the cushy setup managers have. Your unhappiness with management has NO impact whatsoever on rewards heaped on management and the cast in steel job security they enjoy. In short you happiness as an employee does not benefit management one bit. So why make suggestions when the setup is literally the ideal job. As managers come on here and say: you don't like it LEAVE. Your work and all the discoveries or benefit to the government you create makes NO difference to them and their job, the high salary is coming regardless and they have a job for life.
That's absolutely right. National labs are where managers can fail their way up. Are you incompetent? You should figure your way up the ladder. Ingratiate yourself with the mediocrity above you. The future looks great for you. There is nothing to gain by "performing" as a manager. You only lose because other managers will tear you down for making them look bad. It's a great place to work if you are both ambitious and mediocre.
As managers come on here and say: you don't like it LEAVE.
July 24, 2014 at 10:47 PM
Actually, Bret Knapp's current quote is "if you don't like it, there's the door". By the way, how that ole booger doing? Craig Leasure bought new furniture for him when he returns to LANL.
7-24-14 10:47pm, you have summarized the ingredients of sustained low morale at LLNS well. There will be few in management wiling to suggest change without compromising their own careers.
As long as LLNS management are effectively the "ghostwriters" of their own NNSA report cards why change?
If employees want real change at LLNS, collectively shine some light on the ghostwriters, and make constructive suggestions on the NNSA performance metrics that relate to employee morale, mission effectiveness, and the long term viability of this place.
"...Look at the kind of management we have to get an answer as to why morale is so low. I had a coworker commit suicide and the division leader would do nothing for his family or even acknowledge what had happened. When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy. They despise the workers and only listen to fellow managers or the so called distinguished members..."
Has the work environment improved in your area since this happened? If not, one can anonymously contact the LLNS Health Services Department for additional group grief counseling and the NNSA ECP Office for some helpful advice to improve the situation.
Root causes are two. A unbalanced power relationship between employees and employer and a lack of transparency in human resources issues.
Keep banging your head against the wall you will eventually become numb or unconscious and it will all disappear.
POS
That's an accurate discussion, in fact, a care home should be government regulated, its workers screened and licensed to see that they are following rules.
"...Root causes are two. A unbalanced power relationship between employees and employer and a lack of transparency in human resources issues..."
When a company's values and workplace ethics evaporate, the only thing left to pursue are their OWN interests.
This can only become a chronic and expanding problem when the monitor(s) of said company enable the behavior.
Low employee morale is a symptom of an inadequate company and company monitor relationship.
In this scenario, the company leadership view themselves as "winners". Employees are thought of as tools with liabilities to be kept "in check" at all cost through carefully coordinated non-transparent actions.
"Company leadership view themselves as "winners". Employees are thought of as tools with liabilities to be kept "in check" at all cost through carefully coordinated non-transparent actions."
Captures our current situation perfectly. Well said.
Quite simply, morale is low because the lab is full of pessimists.
Optimists make things happen, and when they can't, move on.
How much has the lab really changed in 10 years. Not much. Granted a lab decay is ongoing, but the workforce quality is falling faster than the residual fallout can come from DC... that is the real problem.
From the other Blogs, the only logical answer is Diversity!
"....Quite simply, morale is low because the lab is full of pessimists. ..."
I disagree. LLNS is a failed experiment that has elected to disenfranchise its workers on a number of fronts. Low employee morale is logical outcome, not a previously existing or random occurrence. Without binding external guidance with consequence, expect more of the same this time next year, and the year after that.
LLNL has a piss-poor product to sell (i.e., NIF). On top of that, it's weapons program survives purely on the basis of systems taken away from LANL. The ole cow has got to go. It has no good legs to stand on, and is sick and sucking away this nation's resources. It will do everyone a favor to just shut it down, along with Sandia, and put more resources into LANL.
Yup, let's wrap more resources around the boat-anchor that is dragging us all toward the bottom.
Those systems were taken away from LANL because LANL is failing in every possible way, and even the C-students in DC can see that. So they continually reduce the LANL scope, hoping to get it small enough that LANL will finally get it right, or the scope will be so small that nobody cares any more.
But, having failed at safe-waste-drum-packaging, and crapping up the NATIONAL dump, I'm not sure there's much left. Sayonara LANL.
All in all, that makes me pretty optimistic!
LLNL, Sandia and LANL are the three-stooges of the national labs. We need to assign Shemp to someone.
Shemp is Bechtel... replacing something not quite as good as the original.
To correct low employee morale at LLNS in a verifiable and meaningful way would create huge liabilities for LLNS management.
Short of a secular version of a "come-to-Jesus” moment (external pressure), nothing will change here to improve low employee morale.
If you are seriously considering employment at LLNS, speak to a broad mix of LLNS employees first, don't just rely on what the LLNS recruiter tells you or what you read in the color brochures. If you plan on leaving in 3-5 years anyway, don't worry too much about low employee morale or its root causes.
I want to give thanks to the great Prophet harry who help me in getting back my Husband i saw a testimony post by miss Kate from Spain about how the great Prophet harry had helped her, i decide to email him and to my greatest surprise my Husband came back to me after three days of contacting him.i simply want to say thanks for what he had done for me and am so happy may he live long. if you have any problem just email him :prophetharryprayerhome@yahoo.com and you will not regret contacting him..
you're welcome, Olive
People like Olive give me low morale.
"...When the group leader of the employee who had died asked the the division leader why they were doing nothing for the family his response was "Let HR take care of that". These people have absolutely no empathy..."
Looks like there might be another leg to this story under "status" /post 8-10-14 /parts 2 of 4 and 3 of 4.
Well detailed article. However there are various ways to measure employees morale. If the morale is high, it will increase productivity of the organization.
Post a Comment