Among the ever-expanding portfolio of brands that Elon Musk oversees, one has stood out lately. It’s not the constant high-wire act that is Tesla, or his hot-mess plaything X. It’s the company that’s been making news not for controversy, but for achievement: SpaceX.

SpaceX’s current halo moment is particularly notable as Silicon Valley types argue the relative merits of operating a company in “founder mode” or “manager mode.” Broadly speaking, this debate centers on the the difference between founder-run and manager-run companies. The assertion being that when founders maintain tight control of a company, their vision permeates a business, with superior results.

The founder-versus-manager framing has been in the air since a recent Y Combinator event, where Airbnb’s Brian Chesky made the case for “founder mode,” a hands-on approach that he believes can head off problems that many startups face.

In “manager mode,” operations responsibility is divided between the founder and a dedicated top manager, and is dispersed through a designed hierarchy. This is a standard step in the growth of most companies seeking to scale, but critics say it waters down vision, slows decision-making, and can cause a company to lose its way.

Musk in founder mode

Musk is an extreme example of a top manager who is practically synonymous with the companies he runs (regardless of whether he actually founded them). A self-described “nano manager,” he also tends to be the primary public spokesperson for his brands. It often seems his companies depend on his individual ability to pull all-nighters, and personally harangue his employees into doing the same.

This plays out differently in Musks’ various companies. The former Twitter, rebranded as X by Musk, has become less known for product innovation than for being an extension of Musk’s ideas about politics and free speech. He has been extremely hands-on since buying the company, and remains so.

SpaceX, on the other hand, seems comparatively staid despite the sweep of its ambitions. It has developed a more traditional management structure that’s less tethered to Musk’s whims.

Consider the two most recent examples of splashy and completely Musk-free SpaceX news. The first came at the expense of an old-school rival. Owing to safety concerns, NASA decided Boeing’s Starliner capsule would not carry two astronauts home from the International Space Station, where they were initially scheduled to stay a few days. Instead, they would wait for a SpaceX craft to visit the station early next year to ferry the stranded astronauts safely back to Earth: a black eye for the beleaguered Boeing, and a reputation boost for SpaceX.

Even as it assumed the air of trustworthiness that comes with a de facto endorsement from NASA, SpaceX was at the center of a much edgier-sounding adventure. Earlier this week, the commercial-sector Polaris Dawn mission, led by billionaire Jared Isaacson, sent a SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule into orbit farther from Earth than any manned space flight in over 50 years. The journey, scheduled to last five days, included a spacewalk (partly to test SpaceX-designed space suits) and a variety of other experiments. The crew of four included two SpaceX employees, who have now traveled deeper into space than any prior female astronaut.

Cool stuff—and all unencumbered by shenanigans or theatrics from the brand called Musk. What is the secret sauce lately making SpaceX the star of Musk’s brand portfolio? The answer may be manager mode.

Musk in manager mode

SpaceX president and chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell, who oversees the company’s daily operations, is widely seen as the most empowered of Musk’s C-suite collaborators. An engineer by training, she started in a business development role in 2002 and was promoted to president in 2008. She has been credited with building out a management structure and reassuring business partners and clients concerned about Musk’s divided attention.

Even as SpaceX is shaped by (founder) Musk’s vision and ambition, Shotwell has been the “steady hand behind the company’s earthly success,” as a Los Angeles Times profile earlier this summer put it. “She’s a rarity at a Musk company—an executive, the second-in-command, no less, who has lasted for more than two decades. More than that, she has Musk’s ear and his trust.”

This is not to say SpaceX hasn’t had its problems. Between 2006 and 2008, three of its original Falcon 1 rockets failed. And while its aggressive approach has so far paid off—a funding round this year valued the company at $210 billion—it has continued to have occasional failures, including the high-profile 2016 explosion of a Falcon 9 rocket carrying a satellite to be used by Facebook to facilitate Internet access in Africa. And earlier this year, The Wall Street Journal reported on a number of boundary-blurring relationships Musk had with various female SpaceX employees. Any company in such a risky business is always a mistake away from reputational peril.

But for now, SpaceX is enjoying a stellar brand moment. And one reason seems to be steady management that clients and partners judge as reliable. As for the relative lack of crossover with its founder’s mercurial personal brand—that may be helping, too.