What's the direction of the LLNL?
I've been at LLNL, senior scientist/manager, for 1 year now. And while the lab is great from the outside and many aspects within, the direction and pursuit of new ideas is lacking. I can't tell if its from culture or sub par staff compared to LBNL.
As this blog is about LLNL, I would suspect this would be the #1 topic. But it doesn't appear to be.
I've been at LLNL, senior scientist/manager, for 1 year now. And while the lab is great from the outside and many aspects within, the direction and pursuit of new ideas is lacking. I can't tell if its from culture or sub par staff compared to LBNL.
As this blog is about LLNL, I would suspect this would be the #1 topic. But it doesn't appear to be.
Comments
There is a chronic and growing political rift between the science and engineering staff (the employees that define and sustain research and development here) and those looking to please LLNS management.
Open and free flowing ideas from the UC/LLNL days are no more. We are all "at will" employees now in a threatening and retaliatory work environment with a "for profit" master. No joke. The continued interest in this blog is in part an outcome of this fact. Welcome aboard, I wish we were on something comparable to "Angie's List" before you made your move.
I remember coming to the lab in the 80's and the collegiate atmosphere, everyone pitching in and helping each other, engineering building widgets from scratch and the friendly mentorship, as knowledge passed from the wise to the neophyte. What a difference now. It's all about compliance and being risk averse. Engineering is a laughing stock which is 15 years behind industry, only now they tout "additive manufacturing" like it is something new. The scientists can't get any funding and relegate themselves to political infighting and backbiting each other. Work well with others? Not happening at LLNL. As for me, I am in a particular position in a particular program with a particular set of skills that allow me to not have to work for "big lab" projects which is fine by me. If I keep my sponsors happy, I continue to have work. This won't last forever and I am preparing for my exit in about 5 -7 years. I am not particularly happy watching the slow decay of the lab, like the death spiral of some flaming obese moth...I miss the old work ethic and the demeanor back then...sad
However many of these same criticisms could be leveled at LBL too, so you should be used to most of this already.
When you bring in LLC managers without a scientific or engineering background or appreciation for it, they are the model and pathway to success, not scientific or engineering accomplishments. Accomplishments are things LLC managers harvest from their "at will" employee workforce. This success model now permeates LLNS.
I'd echo your thoughts and add that the LLC brought in from large DOE/NNSA production and environmental cleanup sites managers who only had experience and success in those highly structured cultures with their clearly defined mission outcomes/goals. Places like the nuclear facilities at SRS, Hanford, Pantex, Y-12, INL. Places built on following NNSA approved procedures to the letter.
Sort of like taking a by the book production line manager from an assemble plant, and putting them in charge of an R&D department full of freethinking scientists focused in innovating the next big thing. Won't be fun from somebody.
And since I'm out of here in a year or so I'll just say it. The gender biased promotions and gender biased replacements is just disgusting. I'll re-iterate what another blog said.... it's beyond the good old boys network of the past. This "good old girls" network now incubating means just barely being competent is good enough, as long as that person is the "team player". Team player now means not a threat to expose the gravy train culture.
It's only a matter of time before someone writes a book with examples....
The sad thing is, everybody thinks they are a valuable employee.
There is a sense by the higher ups that if you just stay a scientists after so many years than you loser who could not make it into management and should be treated as such. They way they see it is that the only worthy goal of anyone at at the lab is to become a manager and make big money. The science does not matter, the mission does not matter, the pride at doing something worthy doe not matter. They only thing that matters is the money and the lack of accountability.
Some of the most telling things I see is when someone who has not visited in the lab for the past 10 years comes back says how much things have decayed and how far the lab has fallen.
The same gravy train exists for some "under" utilized minorities at LLNS no matter what disgusting activities they indulge themselves in on official programmatic Lab business. A non-minority manager for the same conduct, would be fired or at least removed from management, not promoted to senior management.
Enabling this behavior to maintain targeted sector "diversity points" places the entire diversity effort in an undeserving bad light. It is a shameful distortion and manipulation of good faith diversity efforts.
While, the overly enthusiastic promotions are out of hand, I enjoy watching 60 year old scientists/managers giving special opportunities to the young female staff. And of course the higher females do the same... "good old girls network".
And what's more, neither side knows that could never admit what they doing or getting is so egregious and transparent.
I wish someone would write a book. I've an example from a colleague at a real institution who commented on a female scientist standing in front of a conference poster and 1st author, who couldn't answer simple questions that scratched below the surface of what was on the poster. Even more funny, was this scientist has been touted in newsline and other LLNL outlets.
Everyone's a superstar at LLNL!
The NW supported, including basic research, part of the labs doesn't reward risk taking or good science. It's all about project management, bringing in declining funding, who you know and safety compliance. The managers have an entitlement, DMV attitude about their jobs.
This is why I switched to doing computer science R&D for WFO customers. None of the safety bullshit and fewer incompetent managers, since we are WFO funded, not on the NNSA gravy train. The irony is that now I'm doing real science because I spend my time discovering new things, instead of just writing grant proposals, filling out paperwork and kissing managers worthless fat asses.
Face it, basic research is dead in America. Go to Wall street or silicon valley if you want to have a future.
Unfortunately, I'm used to barely working 8 hours a day at a National Lab, so would get clobbered there.
December 11, 2014 at 8:37 PM
And since I'm already out, I'll second it. There are some very sub-par female scientists who are held up as stars and showered with honors even though everyone knows they don't know anything. I cannot see how that does anyone any good, particularly other female scientists who do know what they are doing.
Therefore change will only come to LLNL by external pressure applied to LLNS or by redefined metrics for the successor. I agree.
The greatest example is in Engineering where the past female AD had a B.S from San Jose State and came from operations, and the current male has a PhD from MIT, has sponsor ties, and has brought in money for his own research. This alone shows the completely different career tracks based on gender available at LLNL.
Take away is that being female helps so much as to have equalized their opportunities at LLNL.
Lab leadership should be held accountable to explain what would is an obvious inconsistency with "lab direction". Otherwise gender based career paths is the only conclusion.
I'm excited to hear any other explanations, because as we all know the examples of gender based career paths are quite numerous.
I can't believe I'm actually reading what everybody is too scared to say about the over protected class at the lab. Agreed. We all see the examples how the hurdles are so much lower for women for the equivalent achievement.
While on the topic of ____ based (or baseless) promotions, don't forget "good old boy" hires and promotions, LLNS transplants into deluxe positions,
or the rapid advancement of employees with well publicized and frequently deployed diversity functions.
or the rapid advancement of employees with well publicized and frequently deployed diversity functions.
December 13, 2014 at 9:24 AM
The difference being the "good old boy" an open topic where as the ______ based promotions are protected from criticism.
And by the way, a DOE reportable incident has already occurred, where this management placed worker has also eceived awards... all the while hands on folks wouldn't work with this person not just because a lack of skills, but also skill.
A valid point.
"...And by the way, a DOE reportable incident has already occurred, where this management placed worker has also eceived awards... all the while hands on folks wouldn't work with this person not just because a lack of skills, but also skill..."
Can you provide more detail without mentioning names? What was the DOE reportable finding?
Take away is that being female helps so much as to have equalized their opportunities at LLNL.
December 13, 2014 at 8:31 AM
You will be told by management that it's coincidence, and to report to HR for re-programing.
But lab leadership, how can two quite different resumes be qualified for the same leadership rolse? I look forward to the low level explanation/argument that I will then crush.
December 14, 2014 at 8:12 PM"
This is an example of the arrogant
attitude expressed over and over again by the scientists and engineers. You do realize that you look like sanctimonious jerk?
This is precisely the reason that Congress was upset with the labs and demanded contract change.
We all know that someone can have a plethora of degrees from fancy names schools yet still not be able to even be able to walk and chew gum at the same time much less even thing about managing something. The last time I checked management and leadership skills are not something ones goes to school for. I would add that the more education a scientist or engineer has the less qualified they are to lead, just look at Steve Chu. Technical types may be good at solving well defined problems when they are given such problems but the commonly mistake their ability to solve well defined problems as the ability to lead. The latter requires real creativity and gut instinct. Decsions have to made in fast. For example read the excellent book called "Blink: The power of thinking with thinking" by Malcolm Gladwell. The more eduction have you have the more you "think" rather than acting in a blink. When you need a real leadership you should never look at a resume. Every good company knows this and goes by personal interactions with candidates and how you feel about them. Looking at a resume means you are "thinking" and you always end up over thinking. If you think you can crush my argument then just look at who are the greatest minds of our time in terms of leading technological and science innovation. Examples include Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, and Steve Jobs, these people did not even graduate from college. Your reply is crushed before you can even make it.
Malcolm Gladwell.... that is just soft. I look forward to the response.
oh and by the way, you never addressed December 14, 2014 at 8:12 PM comment, but went off on a rant.
I think Bill Gates dropped out of San Jose State.
Wait, and didn't Zuckerberg drop out of Cal State Stanislaus?
and Jobs, didn't he drop out of De Anza College.
As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it. Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
One factor is that what the institution wants from Engineering changes with who is Director and who has their ear. Having someone operationally focused met the needs of certain powers at a certain time. Whether that is astounding is a matter of perspective.
Oh, I'll say it, if Monya were a man, should wouldn't even have gotten close to being AD.
December 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM -These are the types of comments that come from within a field or industry that has no more value.
Since we say we're innovation, let's take a look at Silicon Valley again. White men from MIT, Harvard and Stanford built it, and Asian males (East and South) are disproportionately represented and continue the entrepreneurial tradition. Who would ever put their own hard earned money in or value institutions that emphasize
"As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists" as legitimate workforce planning.
" Wow, somebody has an inferiority complex looking for any populist rhetoric to back up their feelings."
False, just calling like it is, and you can call it populist rhetoric but everyone else calls it common sense.
" Malcolm Gladwell.... that is just soft. I look forward to the response."
Gladwell has more money that you can ever dream, so STFU.
" oh and by the way, you never addressed December 14, 2014 at 8:12 PM comment, but went off on a rant."
You are not very bright are you? My point was that resumes are utterly useless. You have to talk to the person and go with your gut feeling if they have it or not. Never trust a resume and most of all never trust credentials. Your gut knows, and it gets it right far more often than thinking, every sports champion knows this and life is nothing more than a game. Play it don't think it.
December 15, 2014 at 10:42 AM
December 15, 2014 at 11:49 AM
You just come across sounding envious and bitter. Just because some played the game well and won does not give you the right to call bad on them. What would you do if you where in their shoes? I bet you would take the money and then some. You are just bitter that you did not get in on the game. I hate to say it but maybe you where just not fast enough or smart enough to see which way the wind was blowing. In any case you just look pathetic when you begrudge the success of others. Look at this way, the next time it could be you that makes the big score.
"... every sports champion knows this a..."
Don't get distracted by the bling, as tempting as it may be.
Glenn Beck is richer than Gladwell, so the world should listen to him first in your world?
Sport Champions are only such through working harder, commitment and discipline first.. as per your Gladwell's "Outliers".
" Now go ahead and rationalize your bigotry away..."
It's not racist to quote a fact. You seem to not like the fact, so you use race card. Must have been coddled too long at the lab and can't differentiate an agreement nod from a pandering nod.
Take off your race glasses, and try being open minded first. But being pandered to by the lab, you've gotten quite comfortable with name calling. So sad.
December 15, 2014 at 9:32 PM
You think this way because you've been coddled by the lab through p.c. fear, and calculated outrage.