Jared Isaacman: What went wrong at NASA
- jeanne7629
- Jul 4
- 2 min read
Updated: Jul 12
I really enjoyed this episode, partly because the guest was so articulate and driven, but also because it offered a fresh perspective I hadn’t really considered before.
Until now, I wasn’t very familiar with NASA or the broader dynamics of the space race - I'm still no expert! but this conversation shed light on a lot I didn’t understand. One point I found less convincing was the rationale for returning to the moon; mainly that we should go back because we once said we would, or because China might get there first. It raised a bigger question for me about how hard it is for governments to walk back commitments, even when the original context has shifted.
Another section I particularly enjoyed were the arguments around efficiency not being anti-science. I found that quite thought-provoking. The idea that overfunding can lead to bloated systems, and that cutting costs might actually accelerate progress rather than hinder it, challenged some of my assumptions. I'd be curious to hear how others feel about that... Did it shift your perspective like it did mine?
Given my work with government agencies, I was really cheering on when Isaacman said this:
“You need so many more doers, and there's a lot of them there. They're really smart, but you got to push down ownership to the absolute lowest level. You got this crushing bureaucracy that impedes progress.”
I see this ALL THE TIME: smart, capable people stuck in systems that make it almost impossible to act. Hearing someone say it so directly was refreshing. If we don’t start shifting ownership and decision-making to the people actually doing the work, I don’t see how we can move forward.
Last thing I promise!This line made me smile: “It's like you're trying to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.” I'd never heard that expression before, and it perfectly captures the futility of over-managing a sinking system.
Would love to hear if this episode sparked anything for others? Any shifts in perspective, surprises, or pushbacks?
Comments