It’s a myth that NASA and SpaceX are sworn enemies. It’s the natural assumption, since NASA spent 40 years monopolizing the space exploration industry in America. Yes, the underlying feeling towards each other may be…less than love, but NASA and SpaceX actually work as a team more often than not.
Their biggest difference isn’t who pays the checks or whether or not they have top secret government clearance. The most drastic reason for all the made-up narratives of rivalry is the organizations’ polar opposite philosophies—on failure.
You may have read Gene Kran’s book Failure Is Not an Option and pinned this notion against Elon Musk’s Silicon Valley conceptualization of failure–that it is good and necessary. The faces of each organization have taken stands that seem to contradict each other. So, how can two competitors with every reason to loathe each other work together?
NASA and SpaceX’s collaboration should be an inspiration to all companies who strive to be at the top of their industry. Here are three takeaways from studying this cohesion among competitors.
1. Acknowledge your weaknesses
Each organization has its downfalls–things that hold them back from being the best in their industry.
NASA
NASA is a government-run organization and anyone who has ever worked for the government or paid attention to our legislative process knows change moves slowly when it has to break through red tape. It may have great minds working behind the scenes but NASA hasn’t been seen as a leading innovator for years.
Run by the motto “failure is not an option,” NASA takes its time to ensure everything goes to plan. It has seen things go horribly wrong with the Challenger and Apollo 13 space craft. The organization can’t risk its reputation, funding, and most importantly, lives. On top of a philosophy that emphasizes perfection, the organization has many layers of bureaucracy to move through for decisions to be made and implemented. So, it moves slow.
SpaceX
SpaceX is a startup. Yes, it has been around for years now, but that doesn’t change how it makes money. The company is based on investors and funding, with a small portion of its revenue coming from practical applications of technologies.
The private company spends most of its money, time and man-power on inventing new technologies, like a space shuttle for commercial travel so anyone can pay to go on a space tour to Mars. So far, it isn’t making money off of an idea that is still being built. The startup needs funding and income.
Both organizations lack in certain areas, and yet succeed past limitations because each acknowledges its weaknesses and takes action to overcome them.
2. Find someone to compliment your strengths
When you hold NASA’s growth up against SpaceX’s growth there’s an obvious winner. NASA saw how fast SpaceX could move to actualize ideas and used this speed to their advantage. To bypass the government’s red tape NASA began outsourcing to SpaceX, and SpaceX quickly realized this was a great way to fund its long-term projects.
NASA began buying SpaceX’s fly-back boosters because the time and money required to build its own fly-back booster technology would have been too much. NASA also uses SpaceX’s commercial transporter, The Falcon Heavy, instead of creating its own.
This symbiotic relationship provides each organization with the elements each is lacking.
3. Stand by your philosophy, while embracing differing ideologies
NASA and SpaceX differ most drastically on how each views failure. While Gene Kran made “failure is not an option” the unofficial motto of NASA, Elon Musk, SpaceX’s founder, believes that idea is a death wish.
Musk comes from the Silicon Valley mindset of failing is crucial in achieving success. Without experimentation and putting yourself in a position to possibly fail, there is no growth or innovation. SpaceX was built on this idea. Musk told FastCompany, “There’s a silly notion that failure’s not an option at NASA. Failure is an option here. If things are not failing, you are not innovating enough.”
These two companies work together, even support each other, and yet neither have abandoned principal philosophies. Whether you believe your competitor to be morally right or wrong, it’s possible to find the good in each other’s beliefs and harness them in ways that don’t corrupt your values.
If two inherently opposing organizations can find common ground to collaborate on, there’s no reason your company can’t find a way to harness your competitors’ assets for your own benefit.
