America's High-Tech Quandary 10

[BitTwiddler]

"In technical and academic circles, the word is usually spoken in a whisper: a million. China is headed toward a million engineers a year, the experts say. The number is so big, so far from our own experience, that reasonable people hesitate to say it too loudly for fear they'll be accused of exaggeration. But the truth is, China's closing in on the figure now and may have already reached a million.

Then they add the kicker: Yes, China's heading toward a million . . . and India isn't far behind. Usually, they say it with a shrug, a plaintive look, as if to add, what can we do?

Indeed, what can we do? With China's educational system cranking out engineers like toy soldiers, with India simultaneously graduating some 350,000 engineers a year, and with the U.S. at just a small fraction of that — 75,000 is the best guess — questions about America's future competitiveness are inevitable.

Increasingly, those questions are being asked by some of this country's most knowledgeable leaders: University deans; chief executives; military officials. They're worried, they say, because the United States is a country of lawyers and business executives, not engineers. So where will our competitiveness come from? How will we out-innovate countries that are graduating five, ten, maybe 15 times as many engineers as we are?"

http://www.designnews.com/article/CA6286283.html

Does anybody have any suggestions on how American engineers can compete with several million Chinese engineers and win?

 

[GregLocock]

"Win" in what sense?

While not knocking the Chinese education system, I woud have thought the average American engineer had a better technical education, better working conditions, more training, and better tools, than >>99% of the Chinese engineers. So, what's your excuse for NOT performing?





Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[BitTwiddler]

I will define "win" as:

"making a product in the United States which produces more sales revenue in the global market than a similar product made in China."

Arms sales do not count because they are conducted primarily for reasons of politics, not commerce.

For example:

Cisco competes directly with Huawei and sells more products, so the US wins (at least for now - Huawei is growing fast).

For auto parts makers, it appears to be close to a tie, with China pulling ahead soon (please feel free to correct me if I am wrong).

American textiles are not competitive with Chinese textiles, so China wins.

 

[JAE]

Any engineer coming out of school is an engineer in the raw and still needs good, solid, experience. My first question would be - how is China going to employ all these engineers and just how many are going to get good experience practicing engineering. I suppose many will work for companies providing products for other countries like the USA..but that many? I wonder if the China gov't got a little carried away with their central planning.

 

[ziggi]

BitTwiddler,
Just need to correct you on something, the arms industry while more politacally motivated than others is still a big money business, and it's a business that the US thrives in.
The economics of the arms industry are different from more common industries. VERY dangerous weaponry is sold at a HUGE profit while others like, common handguns barely break even. The value of the equipment doesn't depreciate much and since innovation is relatively slow in the industry and the rarity of a piece of equipment rises (due to battlefield losses), it's not uncommon from equipment to actually appreciate considerably.
Basically, the US is still the top dog in the international arms industry, the domestic isn't doing all that well though.

As for textiles, China is the leader in constant production jobs, but when it comes to one off orders, the shorter lead times in Latin america and Eastern Europe mean that they're catching up quickly.


Contrary to popular belief, China is not the supreme being of the world, it has its bonuses, but there are better options out there for certain tasks, especially JIT tasks.
As for 1 million fresh engineers....from my experience with the Chinese, no one dares to innovate, Communism has killed creativity in all but a few people. That's if they actually get a job, and that's if it is actually in design. I have a feeling that alot of it will be in documentation control ie. poring over pages upon pages of boring specs.

 

[RDK]

The US was for many years a leader in production and innovation. The aftermath of WW2 left the US with the only major economy with intact infrastructure.

Now the US has surrendered this lead to become a nation of business men and is in essence living off the wealth acquired in the glory years. The result of paying too much attention to short term economic gain at the expense of long term profitability is starting to show, the accumulated debts both public and private and the large negative balance of trade will erode tie wealth of the US to the point where it cannot recover economically.

Quite frankly the US needs to lower its standard of living to accommodate its current means, get out of debt and start taking the long term view of things.

However with the culture of instant gratification and short term thinking I do not see this happening for a long time, perhaps not until it is too late to do anything about it if it’s not too late now.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[jmw]

Market share depends on economics.
Few people can aford the time or money to identify the best product at the best price.

What most people settle for is a product that does the job exected as near as possible without costing the earth. The fatc that there may be a better product or a cheaper product isn't a negative, thos cost of identifying it may be more than the benefit of doing so.

In that circumstance, and in most areas of industry, price can be king.

With that many new engineers and a top to bottom comitment to developing an engineering dominance (a lack of which commitment is notable in countries such as the US and the Uk where the "service industry" appears more attractive to politicians) they will surely suceed, as things stand, whatever the product quality.

Just go into your local hardware store and see how many products there are that are ridiculously low priced, made in China and inferior in many respects but one, they are the right product at the right price.

But where quality is an issue you can bet the top quality engineers will be involved.

Making "me-too" products involves transferable skills.
That leaves us with the more problematic question of what skills and what kind of working environment etc are required for innovation.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> However with the culture of instant gratification and short term thinking I do not see this happening for a long time, ...
I think in many ways, that's a side effect of our political process. The President of the USA has a maximum of either years to establish a legacy, and faces a re-election process after four. That doesn't leave much room for a long-term agenda. It's not much different for Congressional offices, nor for state and local positions either.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[VisiGoth]

Agree with ziggi on the business part of military industrial block in the USA< but I do not know about elsewhere.

However, I disagree on the Communism killed creativity. In general that is true. But it is based on the quashing of anything that will complete the supreme power of the state. It is possible that any religion competes with the concept that the state is the do all and the end all. But since the state needs innovation to advance technically, and engineering innovation does not compete (IMO) with the state, then engineering innovation can flourish. I have witnessed this in the electronics business. There is motivation, high moral, and dedication to a good product in the engineering and in the marketing. Also, witness the Russian missile program. They developed the Volga River project entirely without German rocket scientists. It was a highly innovative solution and successful and completely Russian.

On the other hand I saw no sense of earning your stripes in China. The some young men were very arrogant and just assumed that if they were educated by the state and were given a job to do that they somehow had the background and experience to do it. This part was very sad, but might be part of having a large growth rate in new engineers and any culture would have symptoms of that problem.

I do not think China is missing innovation in engineering. They are not complacent (as happens as a result of long term socialism in general) and they do strive to do good. There is an odd blindness or inability to see any wrongdoing on social issues by China. It does not seem to be fear, but they are truly blind. They think that if the results of competitive superiority are a result of the policies, then somehow it is justified. There is such a great lack in individual morals. Not immoral, but just amoral. Maybe as religious freedom grows there could be a solid foundation of morality as a side benefit.

 

[CajunCenturion]

A communisitic economic environment is not conducive to innovation and creativity, because you're dependant upon the power of the state. If the state is not willing to offer the rewards commensurate with innovation and creativity, then neither will happen. Yes, Russia developed its own missile program, but even then, the only innovation that received reward was that which benefited the state's missile program.

Innovation and creativity foster far better in a free market economy because it's the market the provides the rewards.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Heckler]

So where will our competitiveness come from? How will we out-innovate countries that are graduating five, ten, maybe 15 times as many engineers as we are?"

The business executives are the ones to blame for the outsourcing issue.....they are the ones that try to increase their stock prices all for the good of the stack holders but extremely shortsighted when technical knowledge is lost through layoff, downsizing and other worthless mergers. we should be outsourcing business executives not engineers.

So, what's your excuse for NOT performing?

Their is no excuse every engineer has a technical responsibility to stay current in his/hers field.

I think it's our responsibility as engineers in industry to mentor young people and expose them to the field of engineering. I happen to work for a company that creates INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS for SCIENCE LEARNING.....so the engineers inside our company are encouraged (paid) to take the time to lecture inside the class room regarding our science specialty.

 

[moltenmetal]

The theft of intellectual property is rampant in China. Innovators will cease to innovate, even in a free market, if their investment in research and development is basically ripped off before they get a chance to profit from it. If you're amoral and your state has no respect for the rule of law, it's far easier to steal what you need to know than to develop it from scratch.

China's tyrannical oligarchy will either deal with the state-tolerated theft of intellectual property, or China will merely rise to become a manufacturing ghetto for cut-rate versions of last-decade's products. That still makes China a serious threat to manufacturers in the so-called 1st world, but less so than if they'd get their act together and respect the rule of law.

China could train 2 million engineers a year and nothing about that would change. The mere presence of engineers in the marketplace does zero to stimulate innovation- lots of other conditions are needed as well.

 

[PSE]

All the lawyers in the US will just litigate China and India to death.

 

[VisiGoth]

I was involved in early talks to get the concept of patents, how they can actually help a company and a country, and the mind set that is needed, in China. I thought there was a serious plan to support intellectual property once China began to be a major producer of IP and not predominantly a beneficiary of other peoples IP. I got the impression that there was a great deal of pride in heading toward that goal. It was embarrassing and uncomfortable (but not difficult) to dissuade people returning from China to bring their illegal disks of stolen SW of all sorts into the plant. The young people doing this were using the laws of their state as a moral guide, a thought that I found sickening. They truly believed that there was nothing morally wrong with stealing, if the state did not make a big deal about it. These were people who would follow you out into the cold to hand you some spare change you had dropped. They were very nice and personable people in all other regards.

As a reference point, it was at one time common to find great books from other countries reprinted in India without agreeable recompense. Those days are long gone. India somehow found a way to have low cost technical books available without extremely high western prices and all done legally. I think that benefits everyone.

 

[GregLocock]

So, can you (generaly, not VisiGoth) explain why the USSR was able to educate creative and effective engineers whereas Chine does not seem to, to the same extent? Blaming communism or socialism seems a little too pat.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[jmw]

I'm not sure of the evidence that Chinese engineering doesn't have some good engineers ( I just don't know) though i have experience of working with Russian engineers and found them to be excellent (ame caveat as my ealier post; don't know how representative they were).

However, is there a risk in assuming that communism has stifled innovation?

Notice that when the Russian collapse came they seemed to lurch from the worst excesses of "communism" (soviet socialism) to the worst excesses of capitalism... I am still not sure how someone like Abramovitch managed to "own" Sibneft etc. I remember when I saw his picture on the wall in one of the siberian refineries, wondring why they had some unshaven popstars portrait on display. "That's our owner" they explained.

In China there is a much more structured approach to capitalism, a sign that they want, for the state, the advantages of capitalism or trade but are going to take great care not to let their culture be driven by it in directions they don't want to go.

Chinese engineers I have met, (very few) seem to be doing very well out of the new conditions and seemed open and ready to embrace everything that made them wealthy and by comparison even with wetsern engineers seemed well off, by local standards exceptionally so. This suggests to me that there will be every incentive for onnovative thinkers and entrepeneurs and no-one should not be complacent.

But whatever the endeavour, it thrives when it has government support and ambition behind it, and dies a slow death without. That I think will prove the real difference, the number of engineers being educated isn't a probable cause but a symptom.


JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[arunmrao]

Chinese /Indian engineers graduating in large numbers is good for the country. However, only about 1% of these are really good. Rest are just absorbed in the main stream life. Most of the engineers aspire to join the government services for very obvious reasons. Also due to socialistic pattern of society, the service is assured until death/retirement. No penalties and also the temptation for filthy lucre arising from government contracts.

US need not be too worried as you have a very congenial atmosphere to work and the bet facilities. Only you need to motivate the young to perform and perhaps an incentive scheme introduced to dissuade engineers from becoming beans counters.I find it a waste of talent and time for engineers to become beans counters/management gurus.This US trend is being aped in india too.

Perhaps the mantra for being labelled successful or Achiever is an Engineering dgree with a MBA in Financial Analysis. What a dichotomy?

 

[moltenmetal]

PSE: if we could only export your lawyers to China and India,we'd all be better off! It's a pity for all those shipping containers to be returning empty!

Seriously, all the lawyers in the world are worthless in a nation wherein a contract with a foreign company is viewed as merely the basis for future negotiation, and the intellectual property portion of what you're providing is viewed as having a zero value and open to theft. Unless they've got assets here to sieze, there's no point in even thinking about the courts.

 

[davefitz]

I am not sure what the concern is . 30 yrs ago you needed 500 engineers sitting in a rented auditorium ,working elbow to elbow along several very long tables ,in order design a large power plant. Today the same work can be done with a few dozen trained engineers at a few computers.

The fact that we have a lot fewer engineers than 30 yrs ago is partly due to the dumbing down of our educational system, partly due to the availability of other distractions that are more interesting than reading a textbook, and partly because the productivity imporvements caused by computers has eliminated the need for a massive engineering workforce.

If the concern has to do with innovation or growth of key industries, the availability of engineers is not the only determinant. The availability of funds to be applied to risky investments, the countries' legal system and stabiliyt, and access to other resources besides manpower play major roles. The fact that all essential scientific and engineering discourse is undertaken in english is a key advantage we have- if it changed to mandarin, we would be in big doodoo.

 

[ziggi]

Visigoth,
While I agree that the Russians developed missle tech in exceptional time, they did it b/c the government mandated it, much like the US mandate to get a man on the moon pushed the aerospace industry to new limits.

My experience with Russian engineers and other technical people has been that they are extremely knowledgable, I think alot of that has to do with the very high level of mathematical education in Eastern Europe up until a few years ago. East European kids learn calculus a full two years bfore north american kids do. Actually North America is way behind the world when it comes to mathematical education, I digress. My experience with the Taiwanese and Hong Kongers has been that they are exceptional at mathematics and physics, however they were terrible with puzzle solving....I'm not a career counseller so I don't know what that means.



On the topic of mentors, I'm a young engineer and I know when I started I desperately wanted an older Engineer as a mentor, just so that I knew what the hell I was doing. Instead I got a management type as a mentor....he was willing to give me his time....and am thus moving towards the business and management side, I think that an Engineer mentor may have swayed me to stay in Engineering though.



Anyway my main point is that the present situation with China and the US is similar to Sparta and Athens after the Peloponnesian war. Sparta won, due to its sheer strength, however Athenian culture and wealth was so overpowering that it corrupted the stolid Spartan society and led to its downfall 30 years later.