
Gwynne Shotwell Is Steadying Force at SpaceX - jkuria
https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musks-right-hand-woman-is-steadying-force-at-spacex-1538233204
======
mncharity
How to usefully say this briefly? The article has some interesting context.
The byline is Andy Pasztor, who is known for anti-SpaceX low-quality
journalism. This article was relatively tame for him. There's been a long-term
press campaign against SpaceX. Apparently coming from old-aerospace. Its
narratives have been... unconstrained by reality. And seemingly overlap with
parts of the article. Long-term, the press campaign seems to be ramping up.
Modulo intense tactical campaigns like Northrop's around loss of Zuma, which
lasted only a few days. The many-$B "Senate"LaunchSystem appears in increasing
trouble, both internally, and threatened by SpaceX's BFR. So odds are we'll
enjoy a lot more of these.

> In August, reporters asked Ms. Shotwell how confident she was about the
> latest timetable. Such difficult predictions “can make a liar out of the
> best of us,” she said, adding: “I hope I am not proven to be a liar.”

This last paragraph... ick. Not worrying about the mischaracterization of
delay, that's just Pasztor. But the association of Shotwell and "liar"...
Shotwell is known for her honesty. Boeing leadership... very not so much. I do
hope this isn't a new meme - that would be remarkably slimy.

Meta: There's the idea that knowing some topic, and seeing the press
repeatedly get it wrong, causes one to doubt their reporting of everything
else. Watching press coverage of SpaceX has introduced me to an unhappy
variant. Knowing some political background for a topic, and finding it
essential to even "read" press articles, leaves me wondering if I've been
unknowingly failing to adequately "read" press coverage of everything else. :/

~~~
whatshisface
> _There 's the idea that knowing some topic, and seeing the press repeatedly
> get it wrong, causes one to doubt their reporting of everything else._

Typically, this is presented as the opposite, where most people seem to
mysteriously forget how poorly the media treats their own area of expertise
when they turn around to trust it in other areas[0].

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-
Mann_amnesia_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect)

~~~
exolymph
It goes both ways. Some people have a Gell-Mann revelation, some suffer from
the amnesia.

------
projectileboy
This is almost always the case with consistently successful companies - the
CEOs get the coverage and the glory, but scratch the surface and you'll find a
stellar COO who makes the whole thing actually work.

~~~
liftbigweights
It isn't just the COO. An organization is successful because of a lot of great
people. The CEO or COO are inconsequential.

It's the organization that succeeds, not the CEO or COO or any individual.

It's like a few years ago when steve jobs died, some people were claiming
Apple was doomed. The "great man or woman" theory has been debunked enough
that we know it is nonsense.

But as you noted, a successful company needs a stellar COO. So why is this
news?

~~~
cdepatie
When you say "The CEO or COO are inconsequential." and "But as you noted, a
successful company needs a stellar COO." in the same paragraph, the obvious
contradiction really weakens your argument.

~~~
liftbigweights
> When you say "The CEO or COO are inconsequential."

That was in reference to a particular CEO ro COO. It doesn't matter if Steve
Jobs or Tim Cook is running Apple as long as they are competent and the
organization is solid. As I said, I was referring to the "great man or woman"
theory. Of course a successful organization requires "stellar" employees at
every level.

> "But as you noted, a successful company needs a stellar COO." in the same
> paragraph, the obvious contradiction really weakens your argument.

That remark was in reference to the "news" cycle. If every successful company
has a stellar COO ( just like they have stellar janitors, mid level managers,
etc ), why is it news? Could it be just because she is a woman? That was what
I was implying.

The only reason this is a story is because the media had to push out another
woman story.

As he noted, every successful company has a stellar COO. Wonder why they
aren't getting articles in large newspapers?

~~~
BurningFrog
> _It doesn 't matter if Steve Jobs or Tim Cook is running Apple as long as
> they are competent and the organization is solid._

But, at least at a smaller/newer company, the CEO/COO has _created_ the
organization. It's not some thing that exists independently of the CEO/COO.

------
ecesena
Highly recommended TED talk:
[https://www.ted.com/talks/gwynne_shotwell_spacex_s_plan_to_f...](https://www.ted.com/talks/gwynne_shotwell_spacex_s_plan_to_fly_you_across_the_globe_in_30_minutes)

------
umeshunni
Perhaps Elon needs such a COO at Tesla, too.

~~~
mikeash
This seems to be a pretty common sentiment in the Tesla/SpaceX fan community.

~~~
ceejayoz
It may be difficult to find someone Musk trusts as much as Shotwell, given her
lengthy, loyal tenure alongside him.

~~~
_ph_
It might already have happened - Jerome just became president of Tesla
automotive. Sounds to me that this means one of the long-time Tesla VPs moved
into a position to take over a lot of the direct management duties from Elon
and also be a steadying force.

------
cashsterling
I didn't read the article because of the paywall.

Gwynne Shotwell is much, much more than a steadying force at SpaceX. She is
brilliant and an amazing leader and has been pivotal in the success of
SpaceX... as in: if you replaced her with someone else, I doubt SpaceX would
be where they are today.

It is sad that her amazing accomplishments are often glossed over and/or
overshadowed. I hope she is properly recognized in time. I think she is
adversely affected by bias in the press (gender, etc.)

I don't work at SpaceX (used to work for JPL)... so this is just an outsider's
opinion. I'm also male, FWIW.

------
neonate
[http://archive.is/F7KnL](http://archive.is/F7KnL)

------
fredfoobar
Alternate title: Lady does a job.

------
synaesthesisx
Tesla needs a COO that can keep Musk in check

------
captn3m0
Her name (why is it not in the headline WSJ!) is Gwynne Shotwell

~~~
dboreham
Now we know where the inspiration for Pepper Potts came from.

~~~
rwallace
I understand where you're coming from with the parallel, but for the sake of
understanding what's going on here, it's worth bearing in mind that they are
not really equivalent.

Potts (at least as far as I can tell from the movies; I haven't read the
comics; please let me know if they take a different approach) is personal
assistant to the cranky genius; her job is to go with him and help him do his
next great project.

Shotwell is operations; her job is to take over the company the cranky genius
built, keep it running smoothly and profitably, and let him go off and do his
next great project.

Different jobs, both important. (It's a pity Musk doesn't seem to have a
Pepper Potts, who might have talked him into giving up his Twitter account.)

~~~
scarejunba
> ... her job is to take over the company the cranky genius built, keep it
> running smoothly and profitably, and let him go off and do his next great
> project.

I think this is precisely what Pepper Potts ends up doing in the movies. Tony
Stark stops running the company. Not to condone the comparison or anything,
just clarifying what happens in the movies.

------
misotaur
Paywall.Paste it somewhere maybe?

~~~
nabaraj
[https://outline.com/RAr4c6](https://outline.com/RAr4c6)

