Eight Common Challenges to Scaling Innovation

Implementing an innovative approach within the federal government takes relentlessness, stamina, and strategy. It can be incredibly lonely. You are often your own best champion. It can feel impossible-- like being the underdog trying to win a sporting match. But after all the frustrations and setbacks, when you win that first match it is also overwhelmingly satisfying.

But for the change agents in government, winning the first match is not enough. To make innovative approaches more routine, winning one match is just the beginning. The scaling challenge begins when you try to win over and over—and when you try to get more people to join your team.

I have spent my entire career working on increasing the use of innovative approaches to advance federal agency missions at various levels. This has included designing and implementing dozens of specific projects as well as working to build communities and capacity within agencies and across the federal government. I’ve had the opportunity to work on a wide variety of approaches at various levels over the last 10 years, including:

  • Program/project level: Online dialogues (both externally to the public and internally to employees), participatory technology assessments/ citizen deliberations, grand challenges, prizes and challenges, and user-centered design
  • Interagency and intra-agency community building level: Design thinking (as one of the original organizers of Design Thinking DC), prizes and challenges, and the maker movement (as the co-chair of the interagency working group on making)
  • Government-wide capacity building level: Prizes and challenges, and citizen science and crowdsourcing

The Obama Administration coined many of these approaches as part of an “innovation toolkit” in their last Strategy for American Innovation (pages 109-110). I have struggled first hand with the challenges in scaling these approaches. Conventional wisdom when experimenting with new approaches is to “start small” with a series of pilots to build an evidence base before scaling. That has largely been the experience of the federal employees and contractors that have been championing these approaches at their agencies. As described by a former boss of mine, each new project feels like it requires “hand-to-hand combat” to pull off. Making an analogy to the technology adoption lifecycle, innovators and early adopters are more likely to fight these fights. But to increase the adoption of these approaches to the early majority and late majority, the required level of effort to understand and execute the approach must be significantly reduced.

Early pilots are not ALL that is required to support the scaling of innovative approaches. Despite hundreds of great examples of impact of these approaches across government, many still struggle with scale. This is further complicated because some approaches are better supported and more mature than others. For example, I would argue that approaches like open data and prizes, which got an earlier start in federal government adoption this century, are much closer to reaching a scaling tipping point than other, relatively newer approaches, such as participatory technology assessment. Furthermore, these approaches have some common “ingredients” that have been critical to getting those approaches to that point. The challenges to scale are not unique. Thus, when charging forward to scale a relatively newer approach, champions would benefit from learning from the experience of innovative approaches that have come before them.

Challenges to Scale:

There are eight common critical elements to scaling innovative approaches across the federal government that are not unique.

  1. Legal and policy frameworks: Even without an explicit legal authority, policy guidance on existing available authorities can have a great impact on initial scaling efforts.
  2. Shared infrastructure and common platforms: It is not cost-effective for each agency to have to recreate similar capabilities to support each innovative approach; shared services for some functions can reduce barriers to entry and increase efficiency.
  3. Emergence and sustainability of communities of practice: People are the most important part in developing and sharing the knowledge for innovative approaches—and their individual energy can be channeled for higher impact when intentionally connected with shared purpose.
  4. Knowledge capture and sharing: Toolkits increase the impact of interactions between experts and new learners by making basic knowledge more easily discoverable.
  5. Budget: Finding ways to build flexibility into program annual budget requests to allow for the funding of innovative approaches is critical to unlocking more resources to support these approaches that are owned by the programs themselves.
  6. Agency processes: Spending time modernizing the “un-sexy” protocols owned by procurement, human resources, and other Agency mission support functions might be the single most important door to unlock to scale new approaches.
  7. Reporting requirements: Creating centralized mechanisms (whether required or voluntary) for reporting and being disciplined in collecting quality reports that describe results on a project level builds the evidence base for scaling. 
  8. External assessments and impact studies: Federal agencies should also support independent assessments of their use of innovative approaches in order to capture non-biased impact analysis and improve practice, based on evidence.

Here’s a little bit more context about why these are all important elements to scaling innovation:

  1. Legal and policy frameworks: Without a clear legal basis for conducting a particular type of approach, the road to implementation can be murky. Explicit legal authority is not necessarily required for an approach to be used, but it can be extremely helpful for scaling. For example, prizes have been in use by the federal government since the early 2000s. Early innovators figured out how to implement prizes and challenges under existing authorities. In March 2010, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) summarized those existing legal authorities in a policy memo that helped empower other innovators who were trying to find a legal path to implementation. Building upon this law and policy, in December 2010, Congress passed the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act, providing all Federal agencies broad and explicit authority to conduct prize competitions. Since the passage of the COMPETES prize authority, the use of prize competitions has skyrocketed in the federal government due to the much clearer legal path for implementation.
  2. Shared infrastructure and common platforms: Programs provided by the General Services Administration (GSA) have been critical in scaling many innovative efforts to date. These programs provide a focal point for federal efforts on an approach-by-approach basis. Data.gov, launched in 2009, now lists over 170,000 open datasets. Upwards of 100 agencies have used Challenge.gov—a no-cost platform—since its debut in September 2010, launching more than 740 challenges with prizes totaling over $250 million. These programs are more than just websites for listing datasets and challenges. They provide shared services and infrastructure at no cost to agencies. These no cost shared services allow innovators at agencies to bootstrap their early pilots without having to completely re-invent the wheel each time at every agency. Programs like data.gov and challenge.gov employ small teams of full time federal employees that provide critical government-wide policy support, training, community of practice management, metrics, and public outreach for the entire federal community.  
  3. Emergence and sustainability of communities of practice: A critical part to enabling the use of new approaches is to support the people that are using them. Being an innovator within government can be lonely and connecting like-minded people to each other is critical not only to sustaining their energy but also to attracting new converts. A great example is the Federal Community of Practice for Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing (CCS). The CCS community was founded in 2012. Five people came to the first meeting; the group has since expanded to almost 300 members. This grassroots group of like-minded people championing a new approach to public participation in science and technology had remarkable impact in four short years. Working with the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Wilson Center, this effort culminated in the launch of citizenscience.gov, a new central hub for citizen science and crowdsourcing initiatives in the public sector in 2016. The momentum created in these four years also contributed to Congress authorizing the explicit use of citizen science and crowdsourcing approaches (PL 114-329) in 2017. It is also important to recognize that there might be robust communities of practice outside the federal government for certain approaches. For example, the Citizen Science Association and its members are a critical source of knowledge and support for the federal citizen science and crowdsourcing community. Intentionally connecting internal and external communities--recognizing the federal government does not need to reinvent the wheel--can create mutually beneficial outcomes for all communities.
  4. Knowledge capture and sharing: For many years as I was encouraging people to use prizes, I noted that there was no “prizes for dummies” book, which meant that learning largely happened when one person experienced with running a prize personally mentored another that was not. This approach to knowledge sharing is inherently limiting. Expert time is precious and limited. Recognizing that knowledge sharing to date had been largely dependent on expert time and community of practice meetings, the Second National Action Plan for Open Government committed the US to developing an Open Innovation Toolkit to document the best practices, case studies, and step by step instructions for conducting open innovation approaches. The first half of this toolkit, for citizen science and crowdsourcing, was launched in September 2015. The second half, for prizes and challenges was launched in October 2016. Both of these toolkits were developed by federal employees experienced with these approaches for federal employees that are not—yet. Toolkits are not only a collection of resources and practices; they are tools for the people working on these approaches (communities of practice and shared service providers like GSA) to help new learners “help themselves” in the introductory content so they only need to engage experts on more nuanced and complex issues.
  5. Budget: Formulation of new project ideas can be hindered immediately by a critical question of budget and resources. Who pays for innovative approaches? The program who will benefit from the innovation (and thus they may need to work the project into their budget request two years prior)? Or a central innovation group with a special budget for those types of projects? Will programs ever budget to pay for these activities themselves if they see an external pot of funds from a central innovation group as the source for these resources? Since funds are not often appropriated specifically for these purposes, finding the resources to support innovative approaches are a recurring problem to scale.
  6. Agency processes: A huge barrier to scaling innovative approaches are the standard protocols and processes for program management in federal agencies. Many innovative approaches require program and project managers to think fundamentally differently about what their problem is, who could possibly solve it, and what success looks like. It requires a much heavier focus on problem definition and user research. It sometimes requires different “make-buy-partner” decisions and creatively structured contracting, granting or prize mechanisms. This is not standard protocol and since it’s not standard protocol this way of thinking is not an easy path. In order to scale their innovative approach, the US Digital Service, a team that uses technology and design to deliver better services to Americans within a number of Federal agencies, have confronted institutional process barriers head on. The way many Information Technology (IT) contracts are written make agile software development and user-centered design nearly impossible. USDS has attempted to confront this institutional barrier by addressing procurement misconceptions across the government through the development of the TechFAR and acquisition training.
  7. Reporting requirements: Earlier I stated that the use of prizes has skyrocketed since the passage of the COMPETES authority. But how do we know the use of prize competitions have skyrocketed? Because the law also required an annual report to OSTP to document the use of these approaches. Thanks to this requirement, we now have rich narratives and a qualitative dataset for hundreds of prizes (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015) that not only explores the impact of each individual prize, but also allows the study of prize practice more generally to improve use. Without a reporting requirement, capturing these stories can be like pulling teeth since the stories don’t write themselves.
  8. External assessments and impact studies: A healthy interest from researchers in exploring the methods and impacts of innovative approaches is critical to improving practice and understanding how to best use these approaches within the government context. Independent assessments are best conducted once there is a rich dataset to analyze and when the recommendations from those assessments are used to improve future practice. Some innovative approaches, like citizen science, already have a healthy interest from the academic community in studying questions related to the “science of citizen science”. Other approaches may have rich datasets, such as prize competitions, but have not yet developed wide-spread academic interest. Academic interest in prizes started with a relatively small set of leaders (like Karim Lakhani at Harvard) and has grown in recent years, but could still be expanded substantially.

Adding to the Toolkit:

The innovation toolkit will without question grow. Fifteen years ago, many could not have imagined crowdsourcing and design-thinking being applied to government services or deployed widely within the federal government. There will be new practices that emerge outside of government that we can’t imagine today that we will have a responsibility to experiment with, and scale, as appropriate. Thus, efforts to understand how to scale new approaches within the federal context will continue to be applicable—just to a whole new set of approaches.

For example, participatory technology assessment and the practice of participatory citizen policymaking is a relatively new innovation approach in the United States. I also personally find it to be an exciting approach with many possible applications within the federal government. Citizen deliberations complement other sources of more traditional input to government decision making by increasing the citizen voice in socio-scientific policymaking. The government is used to asking for industry, academic, and association input through mechanisms like requests for information (RFIs) and the rule making process. Individual citizens, who may have a stake in the decision, are not regularly trolling the federal register and thus often do not have a voice in issues that could impact them. Citizen deliberations provide a method to enable individual citizens to be informed and then provide their input, which increases the quality of their participation well beyond tools like surveys and online polls, which often to do not objectively inform a participant about an issue prior to seeking their input. Citizen input gained through deliberations complement the input gained from other sources and can highlight values and complexity that might not have been otherwise considered.

Citizen deliberations bring different perspectives and values to the table in science and technical decision making, opening the solution space for system level problem solving approaches. This is a counter-culture and innovative approach for government and thus it should expect to encounter many of the same barriers described in this piece. The early adopters of citizen deliberation approaches—as well as any new emerging innovative approach—would be wise to consider systematically working to address the eight common challenges to scale described above. Our ability to innovate within the government will continue to depend on it.

Note: Last month I was invited to participate in a panel at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) 2017 Annual Meeting entitled “Adding the Citizen Voice: Participatory Socio-Scientific Policymaking”. After my remarks, several members of the panel and the audience asked me to share my remarks—which focused on my observations about the common challenges to scaling new approaches to innovation within the Federal government. This piece is an adapted version of my remarks.

Also, despite my experience first hand with many of these challenges, the identification of many these common challenges should be attributed to my former boss, Tom Kalil, the former deputy director for technology and innovation at the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Reflecting on the "end" of the Obama OSTP

Last night The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy held its farewell party for all current staff and Obama Administration OSTP Alumni. It was extremely bitter sweet. 

On one hand I feel SO proud and grateful to have worked for the most science and technology literate President and the most ambitious Science Advisor in my lifetime thus far; I feel so lucky to have worked closely with the concentration of high caliber colleagues and friends at OSTP working to empower a network of innovators within and outside government, to deliver sound science and technology policy on a staggering number of topics, and build coalitions to accelerate and sustain policy implementation. This A-team group of alumni won't stop working for good even if they're no longer in the White House.

However I can't shake the feeling that this very well could be the MOST science and technology forward Administration, and thus most strongly supported OSTP, we will EVER HAVE in my lifetime which leads me to wish I had used my time there to do even more (note: I really hope I'm wrong and we see a "geek in chief" in the White House again). Don't get me wrong, I am so, so proud of what our community was able to accomplish for Open Innovation over the last 8 years including the 2 years I held the open innovation role at the White House. In fact, also last night, the President signed the first crowdsourcing and citizen science authority into law (in the COMPETES reauthorization) which is HUGE for creating further momentum for OI in the government. OI has a sound legal basis all around (for prizes and citizen science) which is critical to continuing to scale these approaches within government. But for each and every one of us there are moments to harness in one's life where you have the opportunity and the RESPONSIBILITY to do the most you possibly can and in reflection I know I had some gas left in my tank when I left OSTP. So at this moment while feeling so proud I also wish I could have done more.

OSTP led a remarkable amount of science and technology work over the last 8 years. And we were able to do this in large part to the level of support from the top it received as well as its sheer size. More people = more hours to get more work done. To put it in perspective, this OSTP was the largest OSTP by more than a factor of 2--EVER. And that's not because staff were working less hard, but because we worked SO HARD to do SO MUCH for science and technology at a truly amazing scale. This week, the White House released a memo detailing its high level accomplishments and recommendations for the next administration: https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/cabinet/exit-memos/office-science-and-technology-policy. If you really want to be awed, you should read the OSTP impact report released in mid 2016, that describes the top 100 OSTP accomplishments, including prize and citizen science work: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/06/21/impact-report-100-examples-president-obamas-leadership-science). I hope we have another empowered OSTP again in my lifetime that can get this sheer amount of work done for science and technology. Our country and the world need it.

With these mixed emotions I am grateful to keep serving the public's S&T interests at NASA with a rockstar team, am so thankful for the lifelong friends I made at OSTP, and I hope someday to get another chance to flex the S&T policy muscles I honed in my time at the Obama OSTP in an even higher impact way, where I use every bit of gas in the tank.

Incentivizing Innovation: A New Toolkit for Federal Agencies

Incentivizing Innovation: A New Toolkit for Federal Agencies

Today, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the General Services Administration (GSA) are launching a new Challenges and Prizes Toolkit to help Federal agencies increase the use and sophistication of incentive prizes even further.

Collaboration Gives Federal Government Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing a New Home on the Web

Collaboration Gives Federal Government Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing a New Home on the Web

Yesterday, in conjunction with the 6th White House Science Fair, the White House announced that the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has partnered with the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (WWICS), a Trust instrumentality of the U.S. Government, to launch CitizenScience.gov as the new hub for citizen science and crowdsourcing initiatives in the public sector.

Announcing the “Fellows in Innovation:” A Coalition Contributing Fresh Ideas on National Priorities

Announcing the “Fellows in Innovation:” A Coalition Contributing Fresh Ideas on National Priorities

One of the Federal government’s great assets is the talented cadre of individuals who join its ranks each year as part of a variety of fellowship programs. Participants in these programs bring enthusiasm, new ideas, and fresh perspectives to Federal departments and agencies every day. Last year, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) convened a workshop of 100 participants in fellowship programs that place individuals in the Federal government to discuss how to apply creative 21st century tools to their fellowship projects, and how to use these tools to inspire and ignite innovation in government.

Applying the Innovation Toolkit to Bring Cancer Nanotechnology Inventions to Market

To support the United States as a nation of innovators, the Administration has introduced many tools to the Federal government’s innovation toolkit. As described in the Strategy for American Innovation, these tools are aimed at uncovering the best ideas, wherever they may lie, and creating opportunities for those ideas to find their way to the marketplace. It is rare to find a program that opens that toolbox as wide as the Nanotechnology Startup Challenge for Cancer (NSC2) — an open-innovation competition designed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the non-profit Center for Advancing Innovation (CAI) to bring promising cancer nanotechnology inventions to market.

Building Momentum for Open Innovation

Building Momentum for Open Innovation

The White House, the Federal Community of Practice on Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing (CCS), and the General Services Administration (GSA)’s Challenge.gov program have been working diligently over the last two years to deliver on previous commitments. This work was highlighted in a series of events this fall designed to build momentum both within and outside the Federal government for more ambitious, cross-sector applications of open innovation approaches.

The People and Teams that Power High-Impact Incentive Prizes

The Administration is helping organize two events this week to celebrate the success of Challenge.gov, recognize the importance of public-sector prizes, and catalyze the next-generation of ambitious prizes. On Wednesday, October 7, the White House, the Case Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, and Georgetown University will host an event titled “All Hands on Deck: Solving Complex Problems through Prizes and Challenges” that will provide Federal, state, and local government leaders and private-sector supporters with information and tools on how to effectively use incentive prizes to improve outcomes in addressing complex social, policy, and technological challenges in national priority areas. On Thursday, October 8, the General Services Administration will host a community of more than 300 prize practitioners to celebrate the great accomplishments of public-sector prizes at a five-year anniversary event for Challenge.gov.

This October, the White House Celebrates Over $150 Million in Prize Competitions Since 2010

This October, the White House Celebrates Over $150 Million in Prize Competitions Since 2010

To celebrate the accomplishments of prize competitions and to inspire the next generation of ambitious, cross-sector prizes, the White House, the General Services Administration (GSA), nonprofits, and academic institutions will host back-to-back events in Washington, DC, one on October 7 and the other on October 8, in Washington DC.  These two events will highlight the impact of open innovation in the Federal government and across sectors, as well as celebrate the successes of Challenge.gov

Open Science and Innovation: Of the People, By the People, For the People

Open Science and Innovation: Of the People, By the People, For the People

Only a small fraction of Americans are formally trained as “scientists.” But that doesn’t mean that only a small fraction of Americans can participate in scientific discovery and innovation.  Citizen science and crowdsourcing are approaches that educate, engage, and empower the public to apply their curiosity and talents to a wide range of real-world problems. To raise awareness of these tools and encourage more Americans to take advantage of them, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Domestic Policy Council will host “Open Science and Innovation: Of the People, By the People, For the People,” a live-webcast forum, on Wednesday, September 30th.

Public Sector Prizes and Challenges Show Increased Sophistication, Ambition and Use: A Fiscal Year 2014 Progress Report

Public Sector Prizes and Challenges Show Increased Sophistication, Ambition and Use: A Fiscal Year 2014 Progress Report

Today, OSTP released its fourth annual comprehensive report detailing the use of prize competitions and challenges by Federal agencies to spur innovation, engage citizen solvers, address tough problems, and advance their core missions. This report details the remarkable results from 97 prize competitions and challenges offered by 30 agencies under a variety of authorities in FY 2014 as required by Section 105 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (COMPETES) added Section 24 (Prize Competitions) to the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (Stevenson-Wydler).

Growing the Network of Innovators in Government

Growing the Network of Innovators in Government

Participants in a variety of Federal fellowship programs bring enthusiasm, new ideas, and fresh perspectives to Federal departments and agencies every day. Last week, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) convened a workshop to teach 100 current participants in Federal fellowship programs how to apply creative 21st-century tools to their fellowship projects, and to use these tools to inspire and ignite innovation in government.

21st-Century Public Servants: Using Prizes and Challenges to Spur Innovation

21st-Century Public Servants: Using Prizes and Challenges to Spur Innovation

Last month, the Challenge.gov program at the General Services Administration (GSA), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)’s Innovation Lab, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and a core team of Federal leaders in the prize-practitioner community began collaborating with the Federal Community of Practice for Challenges and Prizes to develop the other half of the open innovation toolkit, the prizes and challenges toolkit. In developing this toolkit, OSTP and GSA are thinking not only about the information and process resources that would be helpful to empower 21st-century public servants using these tools, but also how we help connect these people to one another to add another meaningful layer to the learning environment.

Citizen Science is Everywhere, including the White House

Citizen Science is Everywhere, including the White House

The 5th White House Science Fair, the gave the Obama Administration and a broader community of companies, non-profits, and others an opportunity to announce new steps to increase the ability of students and members of the public to participate in the scientific process through citizen science.  One of these commitments came from the White House itself, showing that anyone, anywhere can participate in citizen science!

Citizen Science Contributes to Advances in Scientific Understanding

Citizen Science Contributes to Advances in Scientific Understanding

Every day, citizens like you help career scientists advance scientific discovery and understanding of the world around us. Two recent success stories demonstrate the enormous value of citizen science contributions. 

Designing a Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing Toolkit for the Federal Government

Designing a Citizen Science and Crowdsourcing Toolkit for the Federal Government

On November 21, 2014, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) kicked off development of the Toolkit with a human-centered design workshop. Human-centered design is a multi-stage process that requires product designers to engage with different stakeholders in creating, iteratively testing, and refining their product designs. The workshop was planned and executed in partnership with the Office of Personnel Management’s human-centered design practice known as “The Lab” and the Federal Community of Practice on Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science (FCPCCS), a growing network of more than 100 employees from more than 20 Federal agencies.

How should we coach the next generation of scientists, engineers and technologists?

This week an undergrad from the University of Florida (my alma mater) reached out to me for some advice on getting into MIT for grad school and working for NASA. In writing the response it got me thinking about how we should be coaching the next generation of scientists, engineers and technologists to be preparing for their careers. I’ve copied and pasted the advice I gave to the young student below, based on my personal experience and path. Photo Credit: Vanderbilt

I’m curious what others think though. How would you give a freshman in college advice for prepping for a career at NASA or in any other science and technology job? Do you agree with me? Disagree? What other tactical pieces of advice did I miss? Is this advice universal or are there pieces of advice that should differ depending on geography, background, gender or other considerations?

Freshman Physics Student at UF: "What are some crucial steps to take now if I want to get into a school like MIT or get a job at NASA?"

My Response: “For MIT, keep your grades up and get a sense of what you want to study in grad school. A compelling research proposal is KEY to getting into a grad program at MIT. The dirty little secret though is that you can change your direction once you get in. You just have to write a good one to get in. Use your time in undergrad to explore many different topics and classes. Get to know your professors so you have good recommendations. Don't just rely on grades--actually develop relationships with professors you have classes with or do research with. If you get along with one well, ask them to be your mentor. You are really smart for starting to think about these things as a freshman. You have plenty of time to figure out what intrigues you and develop relationships. Your recommendations, grades, and research statement are critical to getting into MIT based on my experience. Furthermore, once you think you know what topics you want to pursue for grad school, start researching the professors at MIT and their research groups that are involved in those topic areas. Reach out to some of the students in their labs to understand their work better. During your junior year make a trip up to MIT and schedule appointments with the faculty who's work you like and who you might want to do research under in graduate school. Have them know you before you even apply.

On top of grades, recommendations, and research topic, stay well rounded. Take some politics classes or a foreign language class. Stay well rounded outside the classroom. I joined a sorority to keep me social and was involved in student government. I hung out with more than just scientists and engineers. Also, travel if you can. Do a study abroad program and see a different part of the world and experience different cultures. I was never abel to do a study abroad but I did backpack Europe on the cheap for a few months right after graduation. One of the most shaping experiences of my life. Travel, friends outside of your academic area, and making sure to schedule in social activities is key to developing your emotional intelligence and ability to work with many types of people. That will be a critical skill for your future career. It's important to have PEOPLE skills and not just smarts.

And while all this stuff is swimming in your head remember that college is about having fun as much as it is for prepping for your career. Sometimes careers are a combination of hard work, luck and seizing opportunities when they come. Despite your most well laid out plans, the path might look different than you thought. Resiliency, adaptability and curiosity are really critical skills nowadays. College should prepare you to be adaptable, curious, good with people, and intelligent (emotionally and mentally). So don't put too much pressure on yourself. Do your best to study topics you find interesting and learn how to learn. Too often we just study for the test and don't really learn. Learn how to learn. You'll do it for the rest of your career. That's a skill employers and graduate programs will look for.

Also for space specific stuff, you should try to get involved in the NASA Social activities (follow them on twitter) and also if you're not already find the people the participate locally in things like Yuri's Night. Those fellow space nerds are a great network to have and great people to help you get connected to what’s going on in space). Apply to a summer internship or co-op program at one of the centers. Email NASA engineers and researchers at centers and see if they’d be willing to grab coffee with you and talk about their work. And never be afraid to reach out to people doing a job you think you might want to do (like you did with me). Building your network through those types of informational interviews is really smart.

To me, the key really is learning how to learn and growing your network. Experts in particular know what they don’t know and know when to ask someone a question. You shouldn’t strive to be perfectly qualified from the beginning. You can’t possibly be. You should strive to develop the tools you’ll need to be able to grow and effectively implement projects throughout your career. The intangibles are just as important as the tangibles (grades, test scores, etc) but they will be infinitely more critical as a foundation for the rest of your career. And you only live once, so you should make sure to enjoy the ride :)

Good luck, and Go Gators!”