The internet started as a Department of Defense-funded military project in 1969. Today, it’s in the pockets of 100% of smartphone owners and accessed by 68% of the world’s population. Space travel started as a postwar race between the governments of America and the Soviet Union to put people on the Moon in the 1950s-’60s. Today, celebrities and wealthy citizens can purchase tickets to go on space flights.
When it comes to technology that powers high-stakes industries, why not shortcut the arc of innovation and start with space-grade software from takeoff?
I’m speaking as both a mission operations engineer and a founder when I say that the business world and our everyday lives increasingly rely on software platforms to bring order to complexity. As engineers, our job is to figure out the best ways to apply technology and tools to fix complex problems. We’re focused on critical issues playing out in the digital and physical worlds.
It doesn’t get more physical than aerospace, and it doesn’t get more high-stakes than SpaceX. I know. I spent over 10 years as a member of SpaceX’s mission operations team in charge of pioneering innovation in the aerospace industry.
In the early days, we got a directive to push for mission success, then keep pushing towards the next mission, and the next. And building aircraft, satellites, rockets, and other hardware needs software to support getting from idea to launchpad. The problem? The very software that makes missions possible can make an operations engineer’s tasks harder.
As one of the first members of the Dragon spacecraft’s operations team, I saw SpaceX’s leadership grow within the commercial space industry firsthand. The obstacles we had to meet in the control room never got easier, from our first mission in 2010 to the delivery of the first commercial astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) in 2020.
Despite the scale of the problems we solved, we still were challenged by fragmented processes and disconnected workflows — some of which included the very same tools you might find in an everyday office, like multiple PDFs, disparate spreadsheets, and physical checklists. We were able to patch some of these siloed processes and workflows over time, but the difficulty lay at the core: our systems weren’t altogether connected, meaning our solutions would always be limited stopgaps if the larger, structural issue went unaddressed.
This wasn’t a SpaceX-only problem, either. It was an industry-wide, dangerous divide between what the software provides and what the team actually needs.
We can close that gap today. We need more tools made for space by talented software engineers and fewer mechanical engineers building mission-critical software tools. That way, mechanical engineers have the ability to turn their attention to the tasks in front of them: ensuring the world’s most time-critical and high-stakes activities, like managing nuclear energy or launching an aircraft filled with humans into space, can run safely.
I’ve seen firsthand how much professionals in industries like space, aviation, mining, and defense depend on software to keep projects running smoothly. Whether we’re designing a vehicle destined for a faraway planet or coordinating thousands of airline patterns, each step is tracked, tested, and managed through software. And for tasks like these, the margin for error isn’t just thin—it’s nonexistent.
All companies from Fortune 500s to stealth startups remain confined to a life of patching together workflows using spreadsheets, shared folders, and fragmented tools. But in mission-critical industries, “good enough” just isn’t good enough. And in 2025, that’s just about every industry.
If we don’t prioritize streamlined, top-tier software, we risk repeating incidents like a radar screen blackout at Newark Airport this past May. The issue was attributed to a brief telecommunications outage, but its impact stretched beyond the 90 seconds the radar screens went dark. The FAA halted incoming air traffic with a ground stop, compounding delays created by staffing shortages resulting from a separate outage the previous month.
And, at the time of the outage, an air traffic controller could be heard communicating to a nearby flight: “Scopes just went black again.” Key word: again. We can’t keep putting operators in this position, over and over, by giving them no option other than antiquated, disconnected software. The public’s trust—and safety—relies on us doing better.
That starts by building software with the highest engineering standards and principles that guide how the world’s most prolific innovators, rocket scientists, and engineers design, then extend them to other industries with critical, complex operations like aviation, manufacturing, or defense.
The truth is, the systems we engineer and bring to market are only as strong as the software that supports them. Whether you’re launching rockets, modernizing medical operations, or testing cutting-edge defense programs, missions across industries operate at a level where failure carries enormous cost—sometimes financial, sometimes human. If the software that powers these projects isn’t ironclad, intuitive, and resilient, then it’s a weak point in the entire system—and an exploitation opportunity for nefarious actors and, increasingly, automated attackers.
As engineers or business leaders operating in high-stakes industries, we must accept that operations software should be as bulletproof as the systems it supports. It must provide full traceability and visibility. It should adapt to complex workflows, not the other way around.
Today’s software needs to prevent problems from happening, not proliferate them or self-destruct. In practical terms, that means building platforms with a keen eye toward version control, real-time collaboration, auditable histories, and data security.
Getting there, however, requires considering more than by-the-numbers requirements. During my time at SpaceX, we had the opportunity to build custom, in-house operational tools. On paper, our initial concepts were excellent. But, in practice, we needed to prioritize the end-user. And incorporating usability testing with non-technical subjects revealed momentary human behaviors, like eye and scan patterns, that would buy operators critical split seconds when making mission-critical decisions.
So, by “space-grade,” I don’t mean overly complex or only for aerospace. I’m talking about elegant software: blending operational rigor with human-centered design to create unified platforms and tools capable of supporting complex, consequential operations in any industry.
Teams in defense, energy, nuclear fusion, and advanced manufacturing thrive with the same capabilities we once reserved only for spacecraft. Why not apply that to accounting, customer service, or legal industries?
Success, in any mission, starts with a solid foundation. And today, that foundation is software. The right platform doesn’t just make your team more efficient or your company stand out from competitors—it makes your operation safer, more accountable, and more prepared for the unexpected.
Let’s raise the bar for tools, platforms, and software powering our world and the exploration of our galaxy. Both stand to thrive if we can achieve space-grade innovation across engineering contexts.
Holding software to the standard you’d hold spacecraft engineering in terms of durability, security, and practicality not only levels up each mission, but can create new industry standards of excellence for a more resilient tomorrow.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.