I analyzed the employment history of ~100 VPs at SpaceX (2018-2025) and Blue Origin (2023-2025) to understand how their leadership pipelines differ.

The data suggests a divergence in engineering philosophy: SpaceX appears to optimize for high-volume manufacturing (looking to the auto industry), while Blue Origin values legacy aerospace pedigree.

The Data (n=101):

SpaceX (52 VPs analyzed): - Top source: Internal promotions (40%) - #2 source: Tesla (15%) - #3 source: Automotive (BMW, Ford, GM) (~10%) - Insight: SpaceX pulls VPs from the auto industry at ~2.5x the rate of Blue Origin.

Blue Origin (49 VPs analyzed): - Top source: Honeywell (20%) - #2 source: NASA (16%) - #3 source: Boeing/Lockheed Martin (12%) - Insight: Significant reliance on traditional aerospace and defense contractors.

Observations:

While the Tesla connection to SpaceX is expected due to Musk, the presence of executives from BMW and Ford (e.g., Richard Morris, ex-BMW, now VP of Production) suggests a deliberate strategy. It implies SpaceX treats Starship as a mass-production problem (automotive scaling) rather than a pure systems engineering problem.

In contrast, Blue Origin's hiring seems aligned with traditional reliable, low-volume, high-precision aerospace projects.

I'm curious if folks here with experience in these sectors see this cultural difference on the ground?