With special guest Andrew “Drew” Carton from the Wharton School of Business
Given algorithmic management and concerns over the degradation and deskilling of work, we felt it was worthwhile to look at a case study where the meaningfulness of work was enhanced through leaders actions. A frequently referred case was the solidarity felt among members of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the decade-long runup to the successful Apollo XI mission to the moon. This is exemplified by the apocryphal story of a NASA janitor approached by then-President John F. Kennedy who asked what he was doing. The janitor supposedly responded with, “I’m not mopping the floors, I’m putting a man on the moon!” A simple internet search will produce numerous memes capitalizing on this sentiment that the words and actions of leaders can magically inspire employees to connect their work with the organization’s highest purposes. (Side note: Did it really happen? Although there are sources claiming to know the name of the janitor, none originate near the date of the supposed 1962 incident, hence it is considered apocryphal).
As today’s article and its author (our very special guest) Drew Carton show, while the story of the janitor may not be true, it represents a time and place where everyone in the organization indeed felt something special about their work. Through an extensive review of thousands of archival documents, Carton was not only able to supply ample evidence of such unity of purpose and effort, he successfully laid out a framework that explains how the actions of President Kennedy and NASA leaders accomplished this. The award-winning 2018 article, “’I’m not mopping the floors: I’m putting a man on the moon’: How NASA leaders enhanced the meaningful of work by changing the meaning of work,” showed not only how difficult this was in practice, it also raises questions about how challenging it may be to replicate this success, contrary to the promises made in some popular business literature.
Carton’s framework is built on four sensegiving actions by President Kennedy that served as a blueprint for outlining the relationships between NASA’s goals and the daily work performed by individuals. This was followed by a series of five stages of the workers connecting their work to NASA’s ultimate purpose. Of note is that at times, the stages produced disconnection from NASA’s purpose that subsequent stages had to reverse. The paper provides details accounts of each sensegiving action and act of connection-building with dozens of examples drawn directly from primary sources. The implications are significant. It was not nearly so simple as the leader putting forth a vision that inspired everyone – President Kennedy had to simplify that vision around a single “ultimate aspiration” (of advancing science), develop a “concrete objective” (landing on the moon), communicate a limited but logical set of milestones (expressed through the sequential Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs), and finally construct the linkages between the milestones and everyone’s work. But the concreteness of the objective was easily understood because, as many within NASA would say, one could merely step outside the building at night and see the moon in the sky, beckoning them. To what extent contemporary leaders can leverage such inviting concrete symbols to their attempts at transforming their organizations now remains an open question.
It is worth noting also that the paper was also cited as a landmark example of archival research, a qualitative inquiry into large amounts of historical documents to conduct inductive analysis. While this form of research may be uncommon, the increased availability of archival records on the internet may make it more feasible as a qualitative approach for today’s researchers interested in examining past events.
You may also download the audio files here: Part 1 | Part 2 | Supplement
Read with us:
Carton, A. M. (2018). “I’m not mopping the floors, I’m putting a man on the moon”: How NASA leaders enhanced the meaningfulness of work by changing the meaning of work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 323-369.
To know more:
So far, none. Suggestions welcome!
Related episodes from the Talking About Organizations Podcast:
103: Bringing Work Back In – Barley & Kunda
40: TAOP Symposium on Algorithmic Management and the Gig Economy