National Academies Press: OpenBook

Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science (2022)

Chapter: 2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community

« Previous: 1 Introduction
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×

2

Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community

CHARACTERISTICS OF A HEALTHY AND VITAL RESEARCH COMMUNITY

Scientific research is a human endeavor that integrates knowledge, skills, creativity, and social interchange. The science enterprise of the 21st century is a collaborative environment, through which the total value is greater than the sum of the individual contributions, which empowers the science research community to address increasingly complex problems. This community extends across much of society—government, academia, institutes, private industry, international partners, and non-traditional partners ranging from financiers to skilled tradespeople. Through this constellation of participants, human capital can be focused toward addressing the critical questions of today and the future. An efficient system, guided by clear standards, processes and evaluation criteria can ensure a robust future, and enable the reliability and ethical basis of the research activities and products. To this end, the committee has identified six tenets to capture the needs of a healthy and vital scientific research community:

  • Clarity of science for efficient research and public support. Clear scientific questions guiding research solicitations to facilitate communication of the mission, alignment of funded research, and societal value to a wide range of stakeholders.
  • A representative workforce. Primary researchers and partners who represent society in general in the United States, including the elements of gender, ethnicity, race, place of origin, physical capability, pathways, and experiences,1 the data on whom are both collected and shared.
  • Sustaining a diverse science enterprise through outreach, acceptance and development. Acceptance, engagement, and promotion of individuals with diverse experience pathways and levels, from top-line researchers to support professionals. Beyond the metrics and necessary analyses of the workforce, sustainment processes, with their own metrics, must be cultivated, measured and shared. Tapping familiar sources of talent or establishing artificial criteria for inclusion can lead to intellectual echo chambers and adversely impact creativity and innovation (Brainard 2021). Inclusion of robust career development plans that reflect the opportunities associated with the profession as well as individual capabilities is key. Willingness to accept novel concepts and approaches as a healthy part of competition that values potential at least equally with existing track-records.
  • Establishing supportive funding. Funding agencies that actively support human potential, creativity, the science enterprise, novelty, and a diverse selection of capabilities in their funded programs, which is promulgated into the choice of, and guidance to review panels. While “adequate funding” may be debatable, “supportive funding,” or the distribution of funding from available resources, adequate or not, to best advance the objectives is essential.

___________________

1 This builds on the research of improved outcomes from genuinely diverse work teams. See Rock and Grant (2016).

Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
  • Resilience to emerging challenges. Both the institutional and individual capacities to anticipate emerging challenges not only in the science, but to the human, technological, infrastructure and political environments in which it then must readily adapt.
  • Community standards of conduct. Community standards of conduct and equity processes that are uniformly accepted and sufficiently respected to be successfully self-policed, with a review process to externally address situations deficient in ethics, equity processes, and recognition of the value of diverse opinions within the science enterprise.

At its most basic level, NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) is healthy and vital if it is producing world-class space, Earth, and biological and physical sciences missions making innovative scientific discoveries. NASA’s recent history of space and Earth sciences missions and discoveries is impressive, and there is much to admire and respect about the agency’s accomplishments. SMD is broadly recognized as performing extremely well in each of its main discipline areas. The committee recognizes that working in space is always going to be hard, especially when straining to execute a cutting-edge science program. This is not simple. As the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), an observatory with an unprecedented capability—a 6.5 m diameter primary mirror, composed of 18 precision segments, a massive 22 m × 12 m sunshield, instruments that operate with precision in visible, near infrared and mid-infrared wavelengths—the result of collaboration with hundreds of U.S. partners and 14 countries, delivers stunning images this summer, an even stronger statement can be made. The committee also recognizes the complexities of these accomplishments. Launch and instrument failures, schedule delays and cost overruns will continue to occur. The goal will always be to minimize these, while maximizing discovery. The bright future of continued success in space science will require a balance among these key criteria—a highly proficient, innovative, resilient and supported workforce that pushes forward, remembering that with few exceptions, there are no second chances in space.

Clarity of Science for Efficient Research and Public Support

A clear vision of the prioritized scientific questions being asked of and by the research community is vital for the efficient use of resources, appropriate alignment of the myriad of teams and missions being supported, and to allow taxpayers to see the clear benefits of their investments. Science advances through new questions, often building on previous findings, which in turn leads to increasingly complex challenges. The complexity of the science conducted today requires the use of large collaborative teams of talent. With complexity comes the added challenge of ensuring all participating entities have a clear understanding of the goals, to better align efforts and make sure the partners within a given collaborative, as well as across the entire science enterprise, are addressing the appropriate issues.

With a clear strategic goal for the research community, conveying the purpose and value to the taxpaying public which ultimately funds the science is simpler, even for complex challenges. For the public, the research process provides value through multiple channels, including addressing the intellectual curiosity of the questions at hand, the new understandings that can contribute to a thriving society, the by-product technological advances which are transferred into the general economy, and the fundamental benefits of building a robust science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce through expanded opportunities. Success with managing a clear strategic goal for the science requires processes that identify, define, and frame the next challenges for the science. The current decadal survey process does much to address this issue. The actual implementation, especially keeping a sharply defined research portfolio, is the responsibility of the funding agencies, which will need to control scope creep or bias as specific solicitations are issued. Likewise, though the fundamental discovery process of science often yields messy and novel findings and pathways, the entirety of the research community needs to understand

Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×

how each step, finding, and advancement contributes to addressing the strategic goals. Because of the continuing spirals of discovery, the foundations of priorities change over time. A regular cadence of multidisciplinary reviews remains imperative. Equal attention to the enablers of science, the technology, instruments, facilities, data analytics and modeling is important.

A Representative Workforce

People are the center of the scientific enterprise. Critical to its health is a workforce built on diversity of the greatest dimensions. The science workforce should be representative of its community—the community that funds its science and benefits from it. Metrics must adequately address the elements of demography. Diversity comes in many forms, and intellectual diversity is central to innovation developing novel approaches to address new challenges. Tapping individuals and organizations whose background aligns with well-accepted pedigrees is a safe strategy to produce consistent results along well-defined approaches. However, this policy is blind to new approaches and innovations (Brainard 2021). NASA’s research community should reflect the diversity of the population that it inspires and serves inclusive of R1 and non R1 universities,2 Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), Minority Institutions (MIs) including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AAPISIs), Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Institutions, Native American Serving Non-Tribal Institutions, and Predominantly Black Institutions. Not all competent individuals in the science enterprise have had access to a well-supported educational and professional development pathway. Many have received their degrees from under-resourced universities or worked in smaller organizations. A cornerstone of supporting a diverse work group is to recognize talent that is not just qualified, but “qualifiable” for the effort at hand.3 This difference has been recognized since at least 1979 as an impediment to diversity in the workforce.4

Social sciences research demonstrates that diversity within a working team yields superior results, including more efficient work solutions and greater innovation (Rock and Grant 2016) over the long term (Jehn and Bezrukova 2004; Lungeanu and Contractor 2015; McLeod et al. 1996). While diverse teams may over perform in the long run, careful consideration of developing an organizational culture of acceptance and leveraging diversity will require engagement and training over some period to achieve desired results and avoid backlash. Specific strategies addressing group diversity can increase desired outcomes, such as domain diversity measurably increasing innovation (Ancona and Caldwell 1992). But in the short-term, diversification of teams or organizations without training can produce conflict, requiring that development of culturally competent scientists and engineers must be part of a successful process. Skills that drive a team of differing perspectives to reach cognitive consensus require development (Choi and Rainey 2009; Mohammed and Ringseis 2001; Pelled et al. 1999; Rico et al. 2007). This means that engagement, data collection and analysis over a long period is necessary to build the robust educational pathways and cultures necessary for acceptance and training.

Success in any science mission requires the talents of a wide range of professionals. Success for the principal investigators (PIs) and their scientific colleagues is dependent on an ecosystem of talents. Engineers are critical to the successful design and implementation of equipment. Programmers, data scientists, system administrators, and a range of information technology (IT) professionals ensure the success of the digital component of missions. Skilled trades such as machinists and electricians are key to implementing specific custom details, and finance, administrative, and other support personnel are key to keeping the whole development and deployment process moving. Any strategy focused on a vibrant research community must treat the range of colleagues as peers in the process, because without this constellation of skills, few missions would succeed. Likewise, this ecosystem can

___________________

2 Now officially termed as very high research activity universities and high research activity universities, these are doctoral-granting institutions with at least $5 million per year in research funding. The difference between the two is that very high research activity institutions (R1) also have a high per-capita, relative to faculty, level of research funding. R1: doctoral universities—very high research activity; R2: doctoral universities—high research activity; Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education and American Council on Education, “Basic Classification Description: Doctoral Universities,” https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/classification_descriptions/basic.php.

3 U.S. Congress, 1979, Hearing Before the Joint Economic Committee, 96th Cong., 1st sess., October 19, p. 28.

4 U.S. Congress, 1979, The Cost of Racial Discrimination: Hearing Before the Joint Economic Committee, 96th Cong., October 19.

Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×

stretch across the civil service, academia, the private sector, international partners and all organizational partners need to be working toward a vibrant research community based on a common value system. The scientific community consists of many levels of scientist and researcher, from theorist through observer and data analysts. All are important and require adequate support.

The expected benefits from research that accrue to broader society help account for the decisions nations make to invest in research. The nature and scope of the benefits can depend, however, on the characteristics of the research enterprise, including the size and continuity of the investments made as well as the make-up of the research workforce. Systematic data on the enterprise is necessary to ensure that societal benefits flow from research demands. Key data include its structure, activities, responsiveness to change, current status, and trends. Beyond collection, transparency is required (Moravcsik 2019). Shared data, data collection processes, and intended data use not only reveal status, but support voluntary data contribution by members of the community. Regular, temporal metrics to describe the many facets of the workforce provide a perspective of progress and opportunities.

Sustaining a Diverse Science Enterprise Through Outreach, Acceptance, and Development

The research community, an entire ecosystem of skills, professions, organizations, and experiential pathways, must recognize, respect, and nurture its component parts. Beyond staffing and measuring, sustainment processes require spotlight attention. To genuinely thrive, all components of the scientific enterprise—from NASA offices to grant-receiving institutions, contractors, and other stakeholders—need to establish a common respect and value for this broadest framing of diversity. Inclusion relies on each individual feeling a sense of belonging and believing that their contributions are valued.5 This tenet acknowledges the processes of sustainment—nurturing, promoting, retaining, and cultivating.

The urgent need to engage the “missing millions” of potential scientists to realize the future of scientific breakthroughs and world-changing discovery is captured in the National Science Board 2030 Vision, which states: “To stay at the forefront of the practice of science and engineering, the United States must be at the leading edge of research modalities and tools that are likely to change the practice of research or to shift paradigms.”

Over the next decade, the United States will have to adapt to technological advances by creating structures and implementing coordination strategies that take full advantage of the opportunities they present (NSF 2022). Of course, in addition to the challenge of identifying potential beyond well-demonstrated records of success, this process will require the development of an appetite for risk in the light of potential new innovative science, a richer community of collaborators, and a greater ability to represent the science to the public that provides the research funds.

New members must see their ideas and participation are valued and equally recognized to continue to contribute and grow within the community. A healthy community finds ways to objectively review and potentially accept the new ideas generated by new eyes. The non-traditional backgrounds of researchers from underrepresented groups contributes to new relationships, observations, and perspectives that may have been missed. The concept of a “diversity bonus,” or “innovation dividend,” attained when ”meritocratic” thinking is challenged, has been quantified (Page 2017). A research community that can find a way to embrace novel ideas opens itself to new opportunities.

Ongoing support of professional development through proven tools like mentoring, employee engagement, and advocacy programs, are critical for retention and growth. Career development in areas that build leadership and program-management skills like PI-training programs allow for all potential leaders, particularly in underrepresented groups, to build capacity and competitiveness. Maintaining a competent and capable workforce when programs are evolving requires continual training. Data should inform when investment in high-performing employees is appropriate. Programs that enable and encourage individuals to develop a personal vision and see themselves as part of an exciting future builds career resilience. Successful tools like career mapping and pathways to leadership, whether as a PI or as a program manager, are important. If done well, these tools also support

___________________

5 For more about inclusion and diversity in the scientific workforce, see Puritty et al. (2017).

Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×

strong and successful space, Earth and biological and physical sciences professionals as they move between roles, whether at NASA, in academia, or industry.

NASA’s high research profile, with discoveries that reveal secrets of the universe, or explain weather phenomena or drought or bring us solutions to human problems from space, is a natural magnet for new entrants to space science and to STEM overall. This is an important role in retaining stakeholders and cultivating new members. General metrics are associated with activity and participation.

Establishing Supportive Funding

As the catalyst for space science, from basic research through mission development and data analysis, SMD maintains the multiple responsibilities of a leadership role in an ongoing process that cultivates and embraces new scientists and supports their involvement and growth. This responsibility includes stating the desired vision for space science, clear expectations for engagement, and identifying its supporting infrastructure. Support can also extend to engaging regulatory, political, and external stakeholders in developing the necessary climate. In this larger strategic role, tools for enabling consistent focus, include

  • Stable funding to enable long cycle change.
  • Measurement criteria as gates tied to funding opportunities that indicate intended and actual progress toward goals, where regular review of progress highlights success or opportunities for change.
  • Clear policies that are reviewed and reinforced regularly with every member using case studies and relatable storytelling.
  • Non-advocate reviews to independently assess progress. The decadal processes, including senior reviews, mid-cycle decadal reviews and engagement of independent review committees like the NASA Advisory Council (NAC), have been instrumental in tracking progress and change.

Resilience to Emerging Challenges

Most NASA science missions take a decade or even decades from start to the return and analysis of data. With such a long cycle, external challenges, such as difficulties in advancing technologies, whether uncooperative, disruptive innovative technologies, failures of equipment, unexpected human factors such as loss of talent or personality clashes, or even political challenges, wherein the societal support or priorities for the research may change, are persistent factors facing a research community. The health and vitality of that community will be defined by its resilience to these challenges and its ability to demonstrate agility and purpose in redirecting and continuing to move forward.

A workforce of diverse skills, backgrounds, experiences, and viewpoints is most responsive such that the collective knowledge can be applied to develop solutions. However, there are core traits for resilient teams, which can also be recognized for even whole communities. Ferrazzi et al. (2021) identify four key characteristics of resilient teams, which need to be considered in how the SMD research community views its internal culture:

  • Candor. Not only within working groups, but across the research community, all parties should be able to participate in a truthful and direct manner as to help identify and solve emerging and extant problems.
  • Resourcefulness. The community should be able to align to support recovery for setbacks in the process of addressing the strategic goals of the enterprise and not be diverted away from the bigger vision.
  • Compassion and empathy. The research community at large should be able to care about the success of the greater scientific endeavor and the success of colleagues and even potential competitors. In a merit-based, competitive system such as a research community, developing a sense of common mission is a critical need for the individuals, but must be set by the funding and managing organizations. Inherently a given funding solicitation or mission is a zero-sum environment for the competing proposals. However, the decision processes need to be transparent and constructive, while building the underlying spectrum of
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×

    talent needed for success, such that talent does not leave the system, but rather builds on lessons to enhance their competitiveness to make a future contribution in the research community.

  • Humility. The broader research community, which is inherently competitive, should have readily available mechanisms to be able to ask for help, support, or new collaborations to ensure success. Asking for help should be encouraged and expected.

Community Standards of Conduct

Public science, such as that conducted by SMD, is reliant on the implicit support of the general public. The science community within these programs must earn the public’s trust and maintain confidence in the work of every member of the enterprise that they are working with, assured of constructive and honest intent. The most effective communities are those that can establish acceptable norms and effectively self-police the actions of their constituents. Failure to successfully self-police can lead to the imposition of external review and enforcement mechanisms which potentially will create critical impediments to innovation and efficiency, thus negatively impacting the science.

A corrosive work environment can impact researcher productivity, morale, and allocation of management functions in the workplace. The importance of safety and a place where anyone can feel comfortable to perform without fear of feeling uncomfortable, unwelcome or challenged, should not be underestimated. Care of these critical resources, the community, also includes addressing aspects of misconduct to reject the negative and constraining effects of harassment and discrimination.

OVERVIEW: SCIENCE AND RESEARCH PRIORITIES, PEOPLE, AND PROGRAMMATICS

Using the framework of the six tenets described above to capture the ideal state of a healthy and vital research community, each area was assessed for the means to perform quantitative and qualitative assessments, identifying processes within NASA SMD and in the community at large to illustrate promising practices. The next three chapters further explore theory, existing practices and recommendations, metrics, and challenges in each of these. The tenets are captured in the subsequent chapters as shown in Table 2-1.

Chapters 6 and 7 each assess the tenets or attributes of a healthy community as a whole, as part of the discussion on data collection and highlighted promising practices, respectively, with information of how the tenets are approached explained therein.

TABLE 2-1 Alignment of Tenets to Chapters

Chapter Tenet
3. Foundations for the Health of NASA SMD’s Research Community: Assuring Strong, Clear Science Priorities
  • Clarity of Science for Efficient Research and Public Support
4. Foundations for the Health of NASA SMD’s Research Community: Ensuring a Healthy People Enterprise
  • A Representative Workforce
  • Sustaining a Diverse Science Enterprise Through Outreach, Acceptance, and Development
5. Foundations for the Health of NASA SMD’s Research Community: Addressing Programmatic Issues
  • Establishing Supportive Funding
  • Resilience to Emerging Challenges
  • Community Standards of Conduct
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"2 Identifying the Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26575.
×
Page 17
Next: 3 Assuring Strong, Clear Science Priorities »
Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $24.00 Buy Ebook | $19.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The U.S. space science community includes thousands of scientists across multiple disciplines that influence and are influenced by the many engineers, technicians, and support personnel that are part of the space research enterprise. Over one-third of NASA's budget is devoted to space science, and the agency currently operates over 50 space missions in the fields of astrophysics, Earth science, solar and space physics, planetary science, and the biological and physical sciences. The strength of NASA science lies with its people, both those who work directly for the agency and the thousands of researchers and professionals who are funded by NASA grants and contracts.

At the request of NASA, this report examines the foundation for healthy and vital research communities. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science identifies the characteristics of a healthy and vital research community, defines implementable measures for assessing the health and vitality of a research community, describes the types of data that NASA should be collecting to enable future assessments of the health and vitality of the scientific work force, and recommends best practices to improve the health and vitality of NASA’s research communities.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!