This comment was brought from the post "Any suggestions for upper management"
It calls a spade, a spade!
First, management needs to understand how past WFO projects outside the weapons area have started -- a scientist or group of scientists had an idea and convinced their division leader to support it. They then developed it and found sponsors. A main motivator was that they would be rewarded by their division leader with higher pay, responsibility, and prestige in their division.
The current situation is completely counter to the the process that has worked in the past.
We now have middle managers whose primary responsibility is to bring new money in the door. This means that any efforts or initiative to do so by "lower-level" scientists/engineers are not rewarded. Indeed, the credit is usually stolen by the middle managers and they will take away control of any funding. The scientist's division no longer sees any of the money -- so they can care less. Scientists who rely on these middle managers for ranking get low grades (or else they would have to admit who actually brought in the money). The problem is now exasperated by the fact that the middle managers now often sit in different organizations than the scientist. As alluded before, this means that the division has less incentive for the scientist to bring in new money.
The increasing trend towards pure "matrixization" at the Lab that has occurred over the years is leading to less and less financial control in the hands of line-level divisions. They no longer have the flexibility to deal with their local needs (employee development, bringing new funding) because they rely or compete with organizations that they support for "overhead" funds. These latter organizations, by the way, have their own people as their highest priority.
An unintended, but serious consequence, is that scientists who bring in projects in subject areas, whose funding stays inside his organization, will get rewarded more highly than those who bring-in money in subject areas where funding control is under the support organization.
It only makes sense that WFO opportunities require subject matter expertise at the division level where management directly works with scientists. This has worked before. Now the Lab has created a broken system that disincentivizes workers and prevents divisions from bringing-in new work.
A personal experience -- the division, in which I belong, used to be a world leader in its scientific area until it was arbitrarily declared to be a matrix organization and it's own programs were given to another organization. Now the division is literally disappearing and leadership is lost. Employees in this division are scrouging around for work here and their. A colleague brought in several millions of dollars in a new subject area but his efforts were ignored and complete project management was taken away. His annual ranking was mediocre. Another colleague has a new idea and works to find several gov't sponsors. When word gets around, he is promptly contacted by a middle manager in another organization who is eager to "manage" his project.
If the above fundamental problems are not fixed, obviously, the Lab won't last very long.
It calls a spade, a spade!
First, management needs to understand how past WFO projects outside the weapons area have started -- a scientist or group of scientists had an idea and convinced their division leader to support it. They then developed it and found sponsors. A main motivator was that they would be rewarded by their division leader with higher pay, responsibility, and prestige in their division.
The current situation is completely counter to the the process that has worked in the past.
We now have middle managers whose primary responsibility is to bring new money in the door. This means that any efforts or initiative to do so by "lower-level" scientists/engineers are not rewarded. Indeed, the credit is usually stolen by the middle managers and they will take away control of any funding. The scientist's division no longer sees any of the money -- so they can care less. Scientists who rely on these middle managers for ranking get low grades (or else they would have to admit who actually brought in the money). The problem is now exasperated by the fact that the middle managers now often sit in different organizations than the scientist. As alluded before, this means that the division has less incentive for the scientist to bring in new money.
The increasing trend towards pure "matrixization" at the Lab that has occurred over the years is leading to less and less financial control in the hands of line-level divisions. They no longer have the flexibility to deal with their local needs (employee development, bringing new funding) because they rely or compete with organizations that they support for "overhead" funds. These latter organizations, by the way, have their own people as their highest priority.
An unintended, but serious consequence, is that scientists who bring in projects in subject areas, whose funding stays inside his organization, will get rewarded more highly than those who bring-in money in subject areas where funding control is under the support organization.
It only makes sense that WFO opportunities require subject matter expertise at the division level where management directly works with scientists. This has worked before. Now the Lab has created a broken system that disincentivizes workers and prevents divisions from bringing-in new work.
A personal experience -- the division, in which I belong, used to be a world leader in its scientific area until it was arbitrarily declared to be a matrix organization and it's own programs were given to another organization. Now the division is literally disappearing and leadership is lost. Employees in this division are scrouging around for work here and their. A colleague brought in several millions of dollars in a new subject area but his efforts were ignored and complete project management was taken away. His annual ranking was mediocre. Another colleague has a new idea and works to find several gov't sponsors. When word gets around, he is promptly contacted by a middle manager in another organization who is eager to "manage" his project.
If the above fundamental problems are not fixed, obviously, the Lab won't last very long.
Comments
Also, In chemistry they will provide PMC funding to middle managers to compete against the PIs for funding. How does this help grow things?
Most of middle management just needs to go. I only know a very few individuals that are capable of providing the role of bringing sponsored projects and scientist together!
The hardest thing to do when I leave will be to do it gracefully and not tell all these parasites what I really think of them. At least I know that several WFO sponsors will follow me to my new job rather than stick with paying the lab's overheads - I figure that's enough of a middle finger to subdue myself!
Why not tell them?
Worried about burning the bridge?
I have never seen someone leave the Lab that has given the real reason for leaving. They always give the politically correct reason during th exit interview.
Can someone explain that?
Can someone explain that?"
It's because no employee who has been here for any length of time really believes that upper management will really listen. Instead they will be labeled a troublemaker.Everyone here knows of instances of whistle blowers who were blacklisted when it came to support. Why burn bridges when you don't have to.
Incompetent project leaders, bullying the developers, cheating the workers out of overtime pay, nepotism. It's all there.
Anyone complains and they get reminded, "This is not a democracy!"
Incompetent project leaders, bullying the developers, cheating the workers out of overtime pay, nepotism. It's all there.
Anyone complains and they get reminded, "This is not a democracy!"
Ditto for CMELS...the leadership and mentoring capabilities are a lacking.
It's over for the NNSA labs. You would have to be crazy to think of serving out a career here as a scientist.
Nevertheless, have good cheer because no matter how badly the science rots away, you can be sure that the "for-profit" LLCs will be loud cheerleaders for any of the little pieces of science that get left behind. They'll juice it to the max so they can receive their big bonus. Likewise, you can expect that NNSA will be too frightened to acknowledge that they've ended up killing off most of the scientific talent at their labs.
Expect to see the science graded on a huge curve with lots of "Rah, Rah, Rah.. we're still the best!" from both NNSA and the new LLCs.
we know you already said no , so now the NRLB is taking you to fedral court to do so; also the law firm that is representing the other laid off employees is going to sue the dog piss out of you. SL,FR,HW,RR and the rest of the rechtel boys a nasty frieght train is bearing down on you and it is called the law if i were you id get my affairs in order jails are cold and lonly.
This Ship of Science is going down fast.