Women in Aerospace Europe Munich Regional Network hosted a LinkedIn Live discussion on 24 January 2025, examining how leaders in the space sector move ideas from personal conviction to accepted decisions. The panel brought together perspectives from New Space ventures and established institutional programs, offering insight into how influence operates under different constraints of speed, risk, and responsibility.
The speakers represented three distinct panellists. Allison Bajet, Co-Founder & CEO of Spark Microgravity, leads a New Space company developing an orbital pharmaceutical laboratory at the intersection of scientific innovation and cross-market creation. Sebastian Klaus, Co-Founder & CEO of ATMOS Space Cargo, heads a startup building reusable space logistics systems where technical ambition must withstand financial reality. Charlotte heads the Department of Science, Exploration & Space Safety Missions at OHB System. Her focus is to perform pre-development and feasibility studies, technical studies with well-established customers such as the European Space Agency. Her path in successful procurement of bids includes complex navigation and in-orbit servicing initiatives shaped by long timelines, multiple stakeholders, and safety-critical requirements. Together, their experiences illustrated how resistance to new ideas takes different forms depending on organisational structure and decision-making culture.
Speaker Spotlights & Key Takeaways
WIA-Europe Munich started the panel by putting the spotlight on all three panellists and prompting each of them to share a moment where they strongly had to advocate for an idea. The main theme of this spotlight was to portray what kind of resistance they faced and what ultimately helped move the idea forward or get accepted.Ā Allison spoke about the unique challenges of building a new concept in a field where the value of the idea is not immediately obvious. She described how resistance can appear in layers ā starting with technical questions about whether microgravity is truly necessary, moving into market scepticism, and eventually evolving into credibility barriers. She also highlighted the bias that can exist in investment circles, where the āexpectedā face of leadership may not reflect the reality of who is building the future. Despite these obstacles, Allison emphasised that the most important strategy has been discipline in belief. She stressed the importance of sticking to evidence, building credibility, and finding a community of people who share the same mindset and passion. Over time, the conversations have shifted from āwhy are you doing this?ā to āhow will you do it?ā ā a sign that the idea has moved from concept to serious consideration. For her, the key to building something new is to remain steadfast in vision while continuously proving it through structured progress.
Sebastianās story was a reminder of what it takes to turn a far-out dream into a real company. He shared how the journey began with a small budget of ā¬100,000, working with students, and slowly building a team and a credible foundation. He talked about the challenge of finding the right co-founder and convincing key partners, and he was candid about the reality of raising venture capital. The initial business case did not work as planned, and the team had to adapt quickly to changing timelines and market realities. Sebastian described how learning to identify breaking points early, especially in a reusable rocket environment, was crucial to avoiding catastrophic losses. Keeping the company afloat required extreme discipline ā saving every euro and relying on the strength of the team. His most important message was that success comes from trust: trust in the team, trust in each otherās abilities, and trust in the vision you are building together.
Charlotte offered a perspective from within a well-established space industry, where the environment and decision-making processes are fundamentally different. She described the early phases of large programs ā preādevelopment studies, technical evaluations, and lengthy institutional timelines ā and highlighted how working within a large system integrator (LSI) adds its own complexity. Unlike most start-ups, an LSI does not operate under a single, unified vision. Rather than pitching to external investors, you must first convince internal stakeholders ā programme directors, senior management, and other decision-makers ā to commit time, resources, and funding to your idea. Charlotte shared her experience with in-orbit servicing, assembly and manufacturing programmes (ISAM), where collaboration across different ESA directorates is required, and where competing deadlines must be managed while keeping the main goal in focus. The same is true within OHB ā different directorates need to combine forces to develop new missions and systems. She also highlighted in particular new challenges and opportunities in dual-use development, with both civil and military applications. The key challenge is finding the right contacts and technical resources, and convincing internal stakeholders to invest. She described how internal investment decisions often involve high-level meetings with CEO, CFO, business developers, and programme directors. Preparation is essential: knowing your audience, doing your homework, and presenting a clear case that includes your own investment alongside external funding.
Conviction Under Uncertainty (New Space Focus)
The conversation first focused on the reality of New Space: fast timelines, imperfect data, and constant pressure to move forward. In this setting, leaders rarely enjoy the luxury of full certainty. The question was not whether uncertainty could be avoided, but how conviction can survive inside it. How do leaders take action when answers are incomplete, without appearing reckless or losing sight of their mission?
Sebastian addressed the question by drawing a parallel to decision-making in military contexts, where limited data is the norm rather than the exception. He emphasized that in such situations, standing still is rarely neutral. āAny decision is better than no decision,ā he explained, noting that a lack of movement often becomes the biggest risk. Conviction, for him, comes from applying a structured decision-making process: gathering the available facts, defining possible courses of action, and deliberately trading them off against one another by weighing pros, cons, and strategic impact. Planning remains essential, but it must be paired with adaptability ā you plan as well as you can, and then adjust as reality evolves. He also highlighted the importance of ruthless prioritization in a startup environment, referring to the urgent-versus-important matrix as a practical tool to stay focused on what truly moves the business forward and to consciously drop what does not.
Allison followed by offering a complementary perspective rooted in disciplined focus. She described how conviction requires being deeply stubborn about direction while remaining flexible about the route taken to reach the goal. Refusing to be deterred from the mission does not mean ignoring uncertainty, but rather structuring how it is addressed. She explained how a rigorous R&D process helps turn ambiguity into clarity, emphasizing that speed is not about rushing decisions, but about focus. By using flowchart-based thinking, relying on heritage hardware, and framing the future plans through past technical achievements, uncertainty becomes more manageable. For Allison, conviction under uncertainty means protecting the mission while continuously adapting execution.
Credibility & Influence (New Space Focus)
In fast-moving New Space environments, credibility does not come with history or hierarchy. It must be built in real time, often under close scrutiny from investors, partners, and regulators. The discussion, therefore, shifted to how trust is established when companies are still proving their technical and commercial foundations. The central issue was how leaders ensure their ideas are taken seriously in the absence of long track records or mature proof of concept.
Allison responded by emphasizing the importance of structure and discipline in demonstrating seriousness and capability. She explained that early-stage credibility comes from defining clear milestones with objective criteria and sticking to them under pressure. In an environment where schedules are tight and uncertainty is high, she noted that the goal is not perfection but consistent progress through disciplined execution. This approach, she said, builds trust because it shows that the team is organized, focused, and capable of delivering even before the idea is fully proven.
Sebastian offered a complementary perspective, highlighting the value of honesty and expertise in building credibility. He explained that credibility is not about pretending to know everything, but about being transparent about what you know and what you do not. He spoke about working in dual-use contexts where the time between proposal and contract can be as short as one year, meaning credibility must be earned quickly. In areas where he lacks direct experience, he relies on his past successes and deep technical knowledge to establish trust. For him, credibility is grounded in integrity and the confidence that comes from demonstrated capability over time.
Final Reflections
To close the session, we asked each speaker what mindset or strategy they wished they had learned earlier in their careers when it comes to getting ideas heard and accepted. Their answers were honest, personal, and deeply reflective of the realities of leadership in space.
Charlotte spoke first, and her answer highlighted a skill that is often underestimated: negotiation. She explained that influencing decisions is rarely the result of a single persuasive conversation. Instead, it is a continuous process that requires constant attention and adaptation. āItās not one meeting,ā she said. āItās a process.ā She emphasized the importance of understanding negotiation techniques, including the ability to navigate both direct and indirect dynamics within large organizations. For her, shifting her mindset around negotiation was transformative because it allowed her to move from simply presenting ideas to actively shaping the decision-making environment around them.
Allisonās reflection was more about the inner drive that sustains leaders through uncertainty and resistance. She described how early in her journey she learned the power of visualizing the future with clarity and intensity. She used the image of āfires on your tailā to explain how pressure can either burn you or fuel you ā and that the difference is whether you hold onto a vivid vision of success. Her advice was to double down on that vision and let it guide decisions, especially when the path forward is unclear. In her words, having a clear, compelling picture of the future is what keeps conviction alive.
Sebastian brought the conversation back to the core of long-term leadership: passion. He reflected on his early career and shared that he wished he had learned sooner the importance of choosing a path you truly love. He explained that love for the work is what carries you through difficult periods, even when rational decisions suggest a different direction. He added that reality often does not follow the linear plans we create, and that the path may change while the goal remains the same. His message was that conviction is not only a strategy, but a sustained commitment to something you deeply believe in.
Together, these final reflections reminded us that influence is not simply a skill; it is a mindset that grows over time. Negotiation, vision, and passion may look different in New Space and Traditional Space, but they all shape the way ideas become accepted and decisions move forward. The most valuable takeaway from the session was that leadership is not only about being heard, but about building the inner and outer conditions that allow ideas to take root and grow.
