FFRDCs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

You know there's more than two kinds of websites online? It's not a choice between really bad versus really nice like a contractor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

If FFRDCs put in some effort to “sell themselves,” they wouldn’t be RIF'ing their employees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:any word on more mitre rifs?

Not yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

If FFRDCs put in some effort to “sell themselves,” they wouldn’t be RIF'ing their employees.

Yep. Pretty much unarguable that a stronger public face would not only have allowed them to hit their congressionally-mandated funding cap even earlier in the year in the Before Times, but would have steered the current administration away from their war on oversight, expertise, and random words and phrases deemed to give electoral benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sorry to hear.

Me too. I think RAND's current CEO is in way over his head. He has never managed a large organization before. I think the largest place he ever led was CSET... that place employs around 50 people and is the size of a single program in one of RAND's many FFRDCs.

100% spot on.

[Anonymous]

No new RIFs today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

CNA has a gov contract shop called IPR.

Losing some contracts and allowed grant work/agreements.

Thus, staff and managers being laid off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

CNA has a gov contract shop called IPR.

Losing some contracts and allowed grant work/agreements.

Thus, staff and managers being laid off.

How many ppl?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

Good. FFRDCs should be putting on a public face like the most boring of government agencies, not selling themselves like a contractor.

CNA has a gov contract shop called IPR.

Losing some contracts and allowed grant work/agreements.

Thus, staff and managers being laid off.

How many ppl?

Sorry to hear that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

IDA is a tiny company and a not-for-profit. It has tightly controlled spend.

The website looks like a lot of research organizations and small universities.

Nobody cares anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

IDA is a tiny company and a not-for-profit. It has tightly controlled spend.

The website looks like a lot of research organizations and small universities.

Nobody cares anyway.

Why is everyone beating up on IDA? In my experience, their employees are typically earnest and mission driven. It’s a nonprofit and (like most FFRDCs) their growth is capped. It sounds like they had a large round of layoffs. You might as well start trashing your local library or fire department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://ida.org/ida-ffrdcs/systems-and-analyses-center

This website looks like it’s from 1999.

IDA is a tiny company and a not-for-profit. It has tightly controlled spend.

The website looks like a lot of research organizations and small universities.

Nobody cares anyway.

mediocre mentality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sorry to hear.

Me too. I think RAND's current CEO is in way over his head. He has never managed a large organization before. I think the largest place he ever led was CSET... that place employs around 50 people and is the size of a single program in one of RAND's many FFRDCs.

He probably didn't think the world would fall apart when he took the job.

I'm guessing IDA will have to do the same, with the DOT&E drawdown.

Isn't it the CEO's job to actually lead during crisis?

He’s not leading, just building the personal brand for himself and his cronies from the Biden admin.

The future is AI. Get with the program or don’t be surprised if things actually change. Good grief.

Effective Altruism is a cult.

pretty much

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ziz-silicon-valley-rationalist-deaths-1235278765/

[Anonymous]

Has the RIF madness subsided now?

[Anonymous]

I heard that MITRE would end the year a third of its size at the beginning of the year. I don't think those layoffs have happened yet.