@davidu That’s a lot and enough, especially when your children are young. You’ll have a much higher probability of having a healthy relationship with your spouse and children later in life. Thanks for sharing.
We were just discussing this last week as a leadership team. Curious what everyone thinks about the skills required to perform the role well in mature industry such as transportation and logistics?
Great post on FDEs. Everyone should read it if you’re interested in this job category. This is a job that is going to be around as long as AI keeps changing rapidly, which it inevitably will.
People often wonder why isn’t this like just deploying other forms of technology in the past, like cloud.
Because something like cloud adoption affected a fairly concentrated set of users (developers and IT), and generally didn’t require a fundamental change to the workflows of employees to get the benefits of the new service being delivered on the cloud. At best you went to one training session and you were done.
With agents, the work to implement them is not only highly technical, but they directly impact the underlying workflows that people participate in. This means there’s a ton of technical work and change management that comes with it.
Further, the pace of change of cloud wasn’t nearly as quick, so there was a lot more time for best practices to propagate. Now, every model change means either something new can be done that wasn’t possible before, or some piece of scaffolding is now redundant or holding you back.
This is why it’s commonly easier for a vendor or partner that’s seen the implementation hundreds or thousands of times help do the work, even with internal support from the customer.
So, this job isn’t going away any time soon, and will be a great path for a lot of technical talent, especially early career.
@bhalligan Grace & Truth. We can be graceful when sharing news that may be hard to hear. Being honest, yet graceful, increases the odds that others will actually listen as well. If they listen, maybe they’ll act and course correct.
While it seems there’s an exception to every rule, I tend to agree with him. I never imagined a day where I would build programs. Now I do. We, as leaders, have to become more technically sound. It too seems that those who are more purely technical will need to become more flexible and learn how their businesses really operate and be engaged with leading people.
@gsivulka The point about process resonates with me. When we consider our process and people first, we see bigger gains. It’s not as easy and buying the shiny object.
It seems like it’s much easier in the modern, developed world for me to begin to elevate material items or power, status, etc., into an inordinate position in my life. I think I’m made to worship, but just not those things. They are good, even great at times, but when I elevate them into the primary, they fall flat and leave me unfulfilled. It definitely takes some intentionality when living in a wealthy city, which has a critical mass of people who look great, are intelligent and wealthy, to avoid comparing exclusively to others on those attributes, elevating them, and then pursuing them primarily.
NASA does not have a top-line problem. We receive roughly $25 billion in annual appropriations, including more than a $10 billion plus-up from President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill. If that is not enough to run a lunar exploration program and do all the other things across science and discovery, then what is the right number?
We don’t need to blame budgets or continuity of decision-making as the common excuse, as if a billion dollars is somehow not a billion dollars and troubled programs should perpetually stay troubled programs. NASA, like the federal government, cannot spend our way out of every problem, nor can we perpetuate bad decisions.
That means not getting spread thin across too many imposed endeavors or jumping straight to the “dream state,” which is how everything becomes over budget and behind schedule.
Instead, we concentrate on the needle-moving objectives, the reason NASA exists in the first place. We execute with urgency, in an iterative and safe way, and empower the workforce and our partners to get the job done.
That is how we changed the world on July 20, 1969, and it is how we will do it again. Expect more from NASA and start believing again.
We humans don’t like change, and we really don’t like abrupt change; it disagrees with our biology. Yet, our world is changing quickly, and it’s uncomfortable for many. Tech leaders, along with all business leaders and legislators need a coherent message as it relates to AI. It’s important to get others in the boat with us when we have to lead big changes. We need buy in. To do that, we have to meet others where they are and consider their perspectives. Legislators and business leaders need to be cognizant of that in a proactive sense and serve up deals where pro-rata benefit inures to communities. If we don’t get everyone in the boat with us, we leave openings for others to create their own narrative.