Houston researchers build life-saving decision making mathematical model with big potential

houston voices

Researchers created a mathematical model that helps transplant centers make decisions about when to move forward with a matching donor and when to wait. This work can potentially help decision making in other industries. Photo via Getty Images

To wait, or not to wait? That is the question — or at least it might be, if you need a kidney transplant.

Nearly 89,000 Americans with chronic kidney disease are on a waitlist for a new organ, and an estimated 13 people die each day while awaiting a transplant. But there are real costs to matching patients with the first donor that becomes available, just as there are equally real costs to having them wait in hopes of finding a better one.

Recently, Rice Business professor Süleyman Kerimov and colleagues at Stanford University and Northwestern University developed a mathematical model that helps clarify when it's best to match patients to donors as quickly as possible and when it's best to wait.

Their findings, which appear in two papers published in Management Science and Operations Research, respectively, could help optimize all manner of matching markets in which participants seek to connect with potential partners based on mutual compatibility — a sprawling category that encompasses everything from e-commerce platforms to labor markets that match employees with employers.

Kerimov and his colleagues focused on programs that match live kidney donors with people who need transplants. Live donors typically volunteer to give one of their kidneys to a loved one. But biological differences between a donor and their intended recipient can render the pair incompatible.

Kidney exchange programs solve this problem by swapping donors amongst different patient-donor pairs, choreographing a kind of kidney-transplant square dance aimed at finding a compatible partner for every willing donor.

In countries such as Canada and the Netherlands, kidney-matching programs perform a batch of matches every few months (called periodic policies). American programs, meanwhile, tend to perform daily matches (called greedy policies). Both models seek to produce the greatest number of high-quality transplants possible, but they each have advantages and disadvantages.

Less frequent matches in a periodic policy allow more patient-donor pairs to accumulate in the kidney exchange network, creating potential for better matches over time. But this approach risks making some patients sicker as they wait for a better match that might never appear.

Arranging feasible matches as soon as they become available in a greedy policy avoids that predicament. But it means passing up the opportunity to make a potentially better match that could represent the possibility of a longer, healthier life.

Balancing these trade-offs is tricky. There is no way of predicting precisely when a patient-donor pair with a particular set of characteristics will show up at the kidney-exchange network. And in the world of organ transplants, there are no do-overs.

Kerimov and his colleagues have constructed a mathematical model that represents a simplified version of a kidney exchange network.

Within the model, the researchers could dictate which patient-donor pairs could be matched with one another. They can also assign different values to individual matches based on the number of life years they provide. And they can establish the probability that various kinds of patient-donor pairs with particular characteristics might arrive at the network and queue up for a transplant at any given time.

Having set those parameters, the researchers applied different matching policies and compared the results. As it turns out, the answer to whether one should wait or not is: It depends.

To determine which policies generated the best outcomes — i.e., performing matches either daily or periodically — the researchers calculated the difference between the total value in life years that could possibly be generated within the network and the amount generated by a specific policy at a particular point in time. The goal was to keep that number, evocatively dubbed "all-time regret," as small as possible over both the short and long term.

In their first paper, Kerimov and his team explored a complex network in which donor kidneys could be swapped amongst three or more patient-donor pairs. When such multiway matches were possible, the cost of applying a daily-match policy turned out to be onerous. Using all available matches as quickly as possible eliminated the chance of later performing potentially higher-value matches.

Instead, the researchers found they could minimize regret by applying a periodic policy that required waiting for a certain number of patient-donor pairs to arrive before attempting to match them. The model even allowed the team to calculate precisely how long to wait between matchmaking sessions to get the best possible results.

In their second paper, however, the team looked at a simpler network in which kidneys could only be swapped between two donor-patient pairs. Here, their findings contradicted the first: Applying a daily-match policy minimized regret; a periodic matching process yielded no benefit whatsoever.

To their surprise, the researchers discovered they could design a foolproof algorithm for making two-way matches in simple networks. The algorithm employed a ranked list of possible match types; and the researchers found that no matter how many patient-donor pairs of various kinds randomly arrived at the network, the best choice was always simply to perform the highest-ranked match on the list.

In future research, Kerimov hopes to refine the model by feeding it data on real patient-donor pairs that have participated in actual kidney exchange programs. This would allow him to create a more realistic network, more accurately calculate the likelihood that particular kinds of patient-donor pairs will show up, and assign values to matches based not only on life years but also on rarity and difficulty. (Certain blood types and antibody profiles, for example, are rarer or more difficult to match than others.)

But Kerimov already suspects that in a real-world situation, the wisest course of action will be to alternate between periodic and greedy policies as circumstances dictate. In a simple region within a kidney exchange network that only allows for two-way matches, pursuing a greedy policy that involves taking the first match that appears on a fixed menu of options would be the best choice. In a more complex region that allows three-way matches, however, pursuing a periodic matching policy that involves waiting to make rarer and more difficult matches would ultimately offer more patients more years of healthy life.

The benefits of choosing flexibly between greedy and periodic policies should hold for any kind of matching market that can be represented by a network with simpler and more complex regions, such as a logistics system that matches online orders to delivery trucks or a carpooling system that matches passengers with drivers across different parts of a city.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Süleyman Kerimov, an assistant professor of management – operations management in the Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

From Your Site Articles
This Halloween, consider your office costume contest or luncheon social a productive part of the day. Socialization in the office has been linked to greater creativity, according to a Rice University researcher. Getty Images

Rice University research finds that office socializing can be a pathway to innovation and creativity

Houston voices

Innovation is a team sport. We know that creative workplaces represent a series of social networks, each brimming with useful ideas and expertise. And there is clearly a link between innovation within a firm and the colleagues and friends with whom employees hobnob off duty.

But how exactly does that alchemy happen? What's the relationship between creativity and the hive of direct and indirect contacts in an employee's cell phone?

A recent study by Jing Zhou of the business school, Giles Hirst of Australian National University, Daan Van Knippenberg of Erasmus University, Eric Quintane of the University of Los Andes and Cherrie Zhu of Monash University sheds new light on this. Mapping the social networks that underlie a creative workplace, the researchers showed that employee creativity rises when social networks are more diverse.

The researchers started with the premise that direct links in a network are offshoots of larger networks. The more diverse these indirect networks are, the researchers found, the more likely that innovative concepts will appear in a company's intellectual landscape.

The most efficient resources for gathering novel perspectives are networks made up of two-step "non-redundant ties"—that is, people you may not interact with directly, but with whom your direct ties do interact. These contacts are effectively the raw material employees use to come up with new ideas and ways of working. But why are these indirect networks so important? They diversify the thinking of the group, Zhou and her colleagues argue. Because these networks include individuals who are not necessarily linked, they lower the chances of groupthink or stale ideas.

To test their hypothesis, the researchers looked at the social networks of a large, state-owned pharmacy corporation in the People's Republic of China. Examining 11 divisions, each with roughly 25 sales representatives, the team studied creativity among the sales representatives. Evenly divided between men and women, the representatives were, on average, 35 years of age with approximately 10 years' of experience. Some had developed networks so large that they reached beyond the corporation's geographic territory.

The representatives' creativity manifested itself in a range of forms: new ways to promote products, strategies to cross-sell products, ideas for connecting with hard-to-access sales targets and plans for boosting client sales. The ideas included making products more visible in retail outlets and personalizing product launches to push customers to specific distributors. Because this kind of inventiveness is critical to gaining an edge, it's one of the most important tools in pharmaceutical marketing.

The researchers devised a matrix that matched sales metrics and managers' creativity rankings to the types of social networks the representatives had. The map showed clearly that a two-step, indirect network with few redundancies correlated to individual creativity. When networks were further removed than this, employee creativity was unchanged.

The implication: Firms should attend closely to the kind of social networks their workers cultivate. Not only that, it's possible to teach employees how to design networks for maximum efficiency. Persuading employees to make that effort might be another matter. Luckily, possible incentives abound, from bonuses to the satisfactions of a varied network to the simple pleasure of a more ample expense account. Executives just need to get creative in making their case.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Jing Zhou is the Mary Gibbs Jones Professor of Management and Psychology in Organizational Behavior at the Jones Graduate School of Business of Rice University.

In a recent study, a Rice Business professor found that board members actually need incentives — both short- and long-term — to act in stakeholders' best interests. Getty Images

Rice University research finds executive board members are driven by incentives

Houston voices

If you're a stockholder, you may envision your investment helmed by a benevolent, all-knowing board of directors, sitting around a long finely-grained wooden table, drinking coffee, their heads buried in PowerPoint charts as they labor to plot the best course for the company. Too often, however, you can't take for granted that a company's board will steer it wisely.

Companies choose directors because they offer rich and varied experience in the business world. Many who serve on boards, moreover, are CEOs of other corporations, or have headed big companies in the past. As of October 2018, for example, six of the 11 directors on Walmart's board and eight of 13 on AT&T's board hold CEO or CFO positions in other firms. So it's easy to assume that board members will act in the best interests of stockholders.

But in a recent study, Rice Business professor Shiva Sivaramakrishnan found that board members actually need incentives — both short- and long-term — to act in stakeholders' best interests.

Corporations usually compensate board members with stock options, grants, equity stakes, meeting fees, and cash retainers. How important is such compensation, and what sort of incentives do board members need to perform in the very best interests of a company? Sivaramakrishnan joined co-author George Drymiotes to trace how compensation impacts various aspects of board performance.

Recent literature in corporate governance has already stressed the need to give boards of directors explicit incentives in order to safeguard shareholder welfare. Some observers have even proposed requiring outside board members to hold substantial equity interests. The National Association of Corporate Directors, for example, recommended that boards pay their directors solely with cash or stock, with equity representing a substantial portion of the total, up to 100 percent.

To the extent that directors hold stock in a company, their actions are likely influenced by a variety of long-and short-term incentives. And while the literature has focused mainly on the useful long-term impact of equity awards, the consequences of short-term incentives haven't been as clear. Moreover, according to surveys, most directors view advising as their primary role. But this role also has received little attention.

To scrutinize these issues, the scholars used a simple model, which assumes the board of directors perform three roles: contracting, monitoring and consulting. The board contracts with management to provide productive input that improves a firm's performance. By monitoring management, the board improves the quality of the information conveyed to managers. By serving in a consulting role, the board makes managers more productive, which, in turn, means higher expected firm output.

This model allowed the scholars to better understand the relationship between the board of directors and the company's managers, as well as with shareholders. The former was particularly important to take into account, because conflict between a board and managers is typically unobservable and can be costly.

The results were surprising. Without short-term incentives, the researchers found, boards did not effectively fulfill their multiple roles. Long-term inducements could make a difference, they found, but only in some aspects of board performance.

While board members were better advisors when given long-term motivations, short-term incentives were better motivators for performing well in their other corporate governance roles, according to the research, which tied specific aspects of board compensation to particular board functions.

Restricted equity awards provided the necessary long-term incentives to improve the efficacy of the board's advisory role, the scholars found, but only the short-term incentives, awarding an unrestricted share or a bonus based on short-term performance, motivated conscientious monitoring.

The scholars also examined managerial misconduct. Board monitoring, they concluded, lowered the cost of preventing such wrongdoing — but only if the board had strong short-term incentives in place.

Even at the highest rungs of the corporate ladder, in other words, short-term self-interest is the greatest motivator. Maybe it's not surprising. In the corporate world, acting for one's own benefit is a given — so stockholders need to look more closely at those at the very top. Like everyone else, board directors need occasional brass rings within easy reach to do their best.

------

This story originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Shiva Sivaramakrishnan is the Henry Gardiner Symonds Professor in Accounting at the Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Keeping on track with trends is crucial to growing and developing a relationship with your customers, these Rice University researchers found. Getty Images

Rice researcher delves into the importance of trendspotting in consumer behavior

Houston voices

Every business wants to read consumers' minds: what they love, what they hate. Even more, businesses crave to know about mass trends before they're visible to the naked eye.

In the past, analysts searching for trends needed to pore over a vast range of sources for marketplace indicators. The internet and social media have changed that: marketers now have access to an avalanche of real-time indicators, laden with details about the wishes hidden within customers' hearts and minds. With services such as Trendistic (which tracks individual Twitter terms), Google Insights for Search and BlogPulse, modern marketers are even privy to the real-time conversations surrounding consumers' desires.

Now, imagine being able to analyze all this data across large panels of time – then distilling it so well that you could identify marketing trends quickly, accurately and quantitatively.

Rice Business professor Wagner A. Kamakura and Rex Y. Du of the University of Houston set out to create a model that makes this possible. Because both quantitative and qualitative trendspotting are exploratory endeavors, Kamakura notes, both types of research can yield results that are broad but also inaccurate. To remedy this, Kamakura and Du devised a new model for quickly and accurately refining market data into trend patterns.

Kamakura and Du's model entails taking five simple steps to analyze gathered data using a quantitative method. By following this process of refining the data tens or hundreds of times, then isolating the information into specific seasonal and non-seasonal trends or dynamic trends, researchers can generate steady trend patterns across time panels.

Here's the process:

  • First, gather individual indicators by assembling data from different sources, with the understanding that the information is interconnected. It's crucial to select the data methodically, rather than making random choices, in order to avoid subjectively preselecting irrelevant indicators and blocking out relevant ones. Done sloppily, this first step can generate misleading information.
  • Distill the data into a few common factors. The raw data might include inaccuracies, which must be filtered out to lower the risk of overreacting or noting erroneous indicators.
  • Interpret and identify common trends by understanding the causes of spikes or dips in consumer behavior. It's key to separate non-cyclical and cyclical changes, because exterior events such as holidays or weather can alter behavior.
  • Compare your analysis with previously identified trends and other variables to establish their validity and generate insights. Looking at past performance through the filter of new insights can offer managers important guidance.
  • Project the trend lines you've identified using historical tracking data and their modeling framework. These trend lines can then be extrapolated into near-future projections, allowing managers to better position themselves and be proactive trying to reverse unfavorable trends and leverage positive ones.

It's important to bear in mind that the indicators used for quantitative trendspotting are prone to random and systematic errors, Kamakura writes. The model he devised, however, can filter these errors because it keeps them from appearing across different series of time panels. The result: better ability to identify genuine movements and general trends, free from the influence of seasonal events and from random error.

It goes without saying that the information and persuasiveness offered by the internet are inevitably attended by noise. For marketers, this means that without filtering, some trends show spikes for temporary items – mere viral jolts that can skew market research.

Kamakura and Du's model helps sidestep this problem by blending available historical data analysis, large time panels and movements while avoiding errors common to more traditional methods. For managers longing to glimpse the next big thing, this analytical model can reveal emerging consumer movements with clarity – just as they're becoming the future.

(For the mathematically inclined, and those comfortable with Excel macros and Add-Ins, who want to try trendspotting on their own tracking data, Kamakura's Analytical Tools for Excel (KATE) can be downloaded for free at http://wak2.web.rice.edu/bio/Kamakura_Analytic_Tools.html.)

------

This article originally appeared on Rice Business Wisdom.

Wagner A. Kamakura is Jesse H. Jones Professor of Marketing at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

As more and more offices have remote workers, managers need to know how to measure virtual employee success. Getty Images

Rice University research calls for more ways to measure virtual employee success

Houston Voices

Managers are always hunting for ways to measure performance. They need to know what's succeeding and what's not so they can make adjustments and improve a work team's output. This has led to countless research that looks at ways to measure and boost employee performance. Indeed, one recent study showed there were more than 130 models and frameworks for measuring team performance in the workplace.

But how we do business has been changing in the last two decades. Communication technology and information sharing increasingly has decentralized the workforce. More and more people are working remotely. Consider telecommuters, online messenger services such as Slack and customer service call centers routing their calls across the world. What forces determine how these virtual teams function?

In a recent study, Rice Business professor Utpal Dholakia and colleagues René Algesheimer of the University of Zurich and Călin Gurău of GSCM-Montpellier Business School looked closely at what motivates remote teams and how to measure what they do. They began with a standard input-mediator-output-input model (IMOI) to measure team characteristics such as size, tenure, communication, strategic consensus and intentions. Then they dove further, including expected team performance, actual team performance and past team performance into the equations. Finally, they analyzed the influence of motivational (desire to perform) and rational (shared goals) dimensions.

To conduct the research, Dholakia, Algesheimer and Gurău analyzed professional computer gaming teams, reasoning that such teams work together in highly competitive environments. The gamers' lack of organizational context, meanwhile, eliminated any bias that could be linked to traditional institutional structures such as culture and goals. There was a downside, however: the gaming teams didn't fully replicate the situation of virtual teams in business organizations.

Still, by choosing the European Electronic Sports League (ESL) the researchers were able to pick from more than half a million teams that play in excess of 4 million matches a year. In the end, 606 teams participated in the study by answering a questionnaire in the course of a year. The teams all had stable structures and specific objectives, strategies and training, just like virtual work teams. Data was also collected from the ESL database and included in the model.

The findings: most studies do not consider expected and actual team performance in their calculations. This is important because research shows a strong link between expectation and performance. Including both sets of results can help managers choose the right steps to enhance team strategy and effectiveness. (The study did not analyze issues such as trust, training, conflict resolution or leadership, areas Dholakia recommends for further research).

The framework devised by Dholakia and his colleagues gives researchers a more precise way to analyze remote or international teamwork. It also could help guide managers in examining a team's cultural diversity, and how that might affect output. In a time when the workplace is growing ever less tangible, Dholakia's model is a sturdy tool to measure what's happening out there.

------

This article originally appeared on Rice Business Wisdom.

Utpal Dholakia is the George R. Brown Professor of Marketing at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

According to research done by a Rice University professor, businessmen and women are more likely to help out colleagues who attended the same university. Pexels

Rice University research finds that investors and executives are more likely to help out those from their alma mater

Houston Voices

Friends help each other out, right? Imagine young men or women racing down a New England playing field, effortlessly passing a lacrosse ball on their way to the goal. Now imagine some of those old friends as CEOs of large firms, and others as managers of mutual funds. Do they still have each other's backs?

That was the question Rice Business Professor Alexander W. Butler explored in a recent paper. What he found makes perfect sense given human nature, and raises serious questions about the dynamics of the financial market.

Yes, Butler and his coauthor, Umit G. Gurun of the University of Texas at Dallas, found, CEOs of publicly traded corporations and mutual fund managers from the same schools do appear to help each other out. It may be conscious or unconscious: they do what friends do the world over. But the effect on the market can be profound.

To trace the role of social connections in the world of corporate and finance, Butler and Gurun studied how mutual fund managers vote when shareholders proposed limiting executive pay. They cross-referenced these data with information about the educational background of the firms' executives and of the mutual fund managers who took part in the votes.

When voting fund managers and an executive went to the same schools, Butler found, those halcyon days at A&M or Wharton clearly corresponded to fewer votes to limit executive pay.

Now, this may reflect all kinds of things. Shared school ties could mean fund managers have more relevant information about a firm's CEO and his or her value. The shared culture and vocabulary of a school environment might ease information flow between a CEO and managers. But there is also another possibility: Perhaps the value a mutual fund manager places on a CEO's firm has nothing to do with the company's actual value. The manager may simply support him because he's a school friend.

CEOs weren't the only ones to benefit from old-school ties. Well-connected investors prospered too. When a fund manager shared a school background with a given CEO, Butler found, the fund outperformed funds whose managers weren't part of the network. For investors as well as CEOs, in other words, school ties with decision makers at mutual funds raised the chances of a winning outcome.

So a shared school or social background leads to well-paid CEOs, successful fund managers and happy investors. What's not to celebrate?

Plenty, it turns out.

The better trading outcomes of well-connected mutual fund managers have implications far beyond one happy set of shareholders. The Securities and Exchange Commission protects a level playing field because it's in the public interest for the U.S. financial markets to be liquid.

Consumers buy and sell stocks more easily when they are confident that a product's price is reasonably close to its actual value. When one party seems to know more about a stock – perhaps through friendship with the CEO – other investors may lose confidence that they can assess the value of stocks as accurately. When too many consumers distrust the market, liquidity drops. Fewer people buy and sell.

Think how much it easier it is to buy a used car with public resources such as Carfax, or pre-owned car certifications. In the past, a buyer had to wonder what a car seller knew but wasn't saying – or else try to buy a car from someone she already knew and trusted.

Almost everyone has a friend. Almost everyone has experienced the memories, common lingo, and wordless sense of goodwill that come from sharing a common history. Butler and Gurun's study of corporate and financial markets, however, shows how these natural instincts can disadvantage players outside the alumni circle. Shareholders may have less power to limit CEO pay. And consumers may end up less confident about the value of stocks, shaking trust in the financial markets overall. Surely, that's not what friends are for.

------

This article originally appeared on Rice Business Wisdom.

Alexander W. Butler is a professor of finance at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston tech platform raises series C round backed by Mastercard

money moves

Hello Alice, a fintech platform that supports 1.5 million small businesses across the country, has announced its series C round.

The amount raised was not disclosed, but Hello Alice reported that the fresh funding has brought the company's valuation to $130 million. Alexandria, Virginia-based QED Investors led the round, and investors included Mastercard, Backstage Capital, Guy Fieri, Golden Seeds, Harbert Growth Partners Fund, How Women Invest I, LP, Lovell Limited Partnership, Tyler “Ninja” and Jessica Blevins, and Tamera Mowry and Adam Housley, per a news release from the company.

“We are thrilled to hit the milestone of 1.5 million small businesses utilizing Hello Alice to elevate the American dream. There are more entrepreneurs launching this year than in the history of our country, and we will continue to ensure they get the capital needed to grow,” Elizabeth Gore and Carolyn Rodz, co-founders of Hello Alice, say in a news release. “In closing our Series C, we welcome Mastercard to our family of investors and continue to be grateful to QED, How Women Invest, and our advocates such as Guy Fieri.”

The funding will go toward expanding capital offerings and AI-driven tools for its small business membership.

“Our team focuses on finding and investing in companies that are obsessed with reducing friction and providing superior financial services solutions to their customers,” QED Investors Co-Founder Frank Rotman says in the release. “Hello Alice has proven time and time again that they are on the leading edge of providing equitable access to capital and banking services to the small business ecosystem."

Hello Alice, which closed its series B in 2021 at $21 million, has collaborated with Mastercard prior to the series C, offering small business owners the Hello Alice Small Business Mastercard in 2022 and a free financial wellness tool, Business Health Score, last year. Mastercard also teamed up with other partners for the the Equitable Access Fund in 2023.

“With Hello Alice, we’re investing to provide support to small business owners as they look to access capital, helping to address one of the most cited business challenges they face,” Ginger Siegel, Mastercard's North America Small Business Lead, adds. “By working together to simplify access to the products and services they need when building and growing their business, we’re helping make a meaningful impact on the individuals who run their businesses, the customers they serve, and our communities and economy at large.”

While Hello Alice's founders' mission is to help small businesses, their own company was threatened by a lawsuit from America First Legal. The organization, founded by former Trump Administration adviser Stephen Miller and features a handful of other former White House officials on its board, is suing Hello Alice and its partner, Progressive Insurance. The lawsuit alleges that their program to award10 $25,000 grants to Black-owned small businesses constitutes racial discrimination. Gore calls the lawsuit frivolous in an interview on the Houston Innovators Podcast. The legal battle is ongoing.

Inspired by the lawsuit, Hello Alice launched the Elevate the American Dream, a grant program that's highlighting small businesses living out their American dreams. The first 14 grants have already been distributed, and Hello Alice plans to award more grants over the next several weeks, putting their grant funding at over $40 million.


NASA awards $30M to Houston space tech company to develop lunar rover

moon rider

Houston-based space technology company Intuitive Machines has landed a $30 million NASA contract for the initial phase of developing a rover for U.S. astronauts to traverse the moon’s surface.

Intuitive Machines is one of three companies chosen by NASA to perform preliminary work on building a lunar terrain vehicle that would enable astronauts to travel on the moon’s surface so they can conduct scientific research and prepare for human missions to Mars.

The two other companies are Golden, Colorado-based Lunar Outpost and Hawthorne, California-based Astrolab.

NASA plans to initially use the vehicle for its Artemis V lunar mission, which aims to put two astronauts on the moon. It would be the first time since the Apollo 17 mission in 1972 that astronauts would step foot on the lunar surface.

The Artemis V mission, tentatively set for 2029, will be the fifth mission under NASA’s Artemis program.

“This vehicle will greatly increase our astronauts’ ability to explore and conduct science on the lunar surface while also serving as a science platform between crewed missions,” says Vanessa Wyche, director of NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

Intuitive Machines says the $30 million NASA contract represents its entrance into human spaceflight operations for the space agency’s $4.6 billion moon rover project. The vehicle — which Intuitive Machines has dubbed the Moon Reusable Autonomous Crewed Exploration Rover (RACER) — will be based on the company’s lunar lander.

“Our global team is on a path to provide essential lunar infrastructure services to NASA in a project that would allow [us] to retain ownership of the vehicle for commercial utilization during periods of non-NASA activity over approximately 10 years of lunar surface activity,” says exploration,” says Steve Altemus, CEO of Intuitive Machines.

Intuitive Machines’ partners on the RACER project include AVL, Boeing, Michelin, and Northrop Grumman.

Intuitive Machines plans to bid on the second phase of the rover project after finishing its first-phase feasibility study. The second phase will involve developing, delivering, and operating the rover.

In February, Intuitive Machines became the first private company to land a spacecraft on the moon with no crewmembers aboard. NASA was the key customer for that mission.

Houston expert: How to avoid 'ghost hiring' while attracting top talent

guest column

One of the latest HR terms grabbing attention today is “ghost hiring.” This is a practice where businesses post positions online, even interviewing candidates, with no intention to fill them. In fact, the role may already have been filled or it may not exist.

Usually, an applicant applies for the job, yet never hears back. However, they may be contacted by the recruiter, only to learn the offer is revoked or a recruiter ghosts them after a first-round interview.

Applicants who are scouring job sites for the ideal position can become discouraged by ghost hiring. Employers do not usually have any ill intentions of posting ghost jobs and talking with candidates. Employers may have innocently forgotten to take down the listing after filling the position.

Some employers may leave positions up to expand their talent pool. While others who are open to hiring new employees, even if they do not match the role, may practice ghost hiring when they want a pool of applicants to quickly pull from when the need arises. Finally, some employers post job roles to make it look like the company is experiencing growth.

When employers participate in ghost hiring practices, job candidates can become frustrated, hurting the employer brand and, thus, future recruiting efforts. Even with the tight labor market and employee turnover, it is best not to have an evergreen posting if there is no intention to hire respondents.

There are several ways employers can engage candidates and, likewise, build a talent pool without misleading job seekers.

Network

A recruiter at their core is a professional networker. This is a skill that many have honed through the years, and it continues to evolve through social media channels. While many recruiters lean on social media, you should not discount meeting people face-to-face. There is power in promoting your organization at professional meetings, alumni groups and civic organizations. Through these avenues, many potential candidates will elect for you to keep them in mind for future opportunities.

Employee Referrals

When recruiters want to deepen their talent pool, they cannot discount the employee referral. Simply letting employees know and clearly stating the exploratory nature of the conversation can lead to stellar results. Employees understand the organization, its culture and expectations, so they are more likely to refer the company to someone who would be a good fit and reflect highly on them.

Alternative Candidates

In recent years, organizations and recruiters are more dialed into skills-first recruiting practices. Creating job postings that emphasize the skill sets needed rather than the years of experience, specific college degree or previous job titles, can yield a crop of candidates who may be more agile and innovative than others. Fostering relationships with people who fit unique skills needed within the organization can help you develop a deeper bench of candidates.

Contingent Workforce

Part-time workers, freelancers, and independent contractors are a great way to build connections and the talent pool. These workers and their skills are known entities, plus they know the organization, which makes them valuable candidates for open roles. If their expertise is needed on a regular basis, it is easier to have open conversations about a potential expansion of their duties or offer full-time work.

Internal Talent

Human resources and recruiters need to work with managers and leadership to intimately know what kind of talent lies within their own organization. Current employees may have the strengths, skills, and capabilities to fill new positions or roles. Through conversations with employees and their managers, you can identify who can flex different skills, but even more importantly, the ambition to grow within the company.

In every instance, it is crucial for recruiters and hiring managers to be transparent in their intentions. Communicating within your network that you are always looking for great talent to fill future roles sets the tone. When communicating with candidates, whether there is a pressing job opportunity or not, be clear from the onset regarding your intentions for hire. With a transparent approach to hiring and candidate development, you will keep the employer brand intact and maintain recruiting power.

------

Jaune Little is a director of recruiting services with Insperity.

View All Listings