Engineering dept staffed with unqualified "engrs" 15

[plasgears]

A word for the big three, especially since I have a stake in the matter; I generally buy American brands:

In the spirit of ISO 9000, seek to learn the level of expertise in first and lower tier suppliers. In section 4 of ISO 9000 there is a requirement that engineers should be well qualified to perform the function. You should find it alarming that the engineering department is managed by a non-engr. Further, it should trouble you that team leaders and other "engineers" are not graduate engineers.

 

[willi3b]

I'd really like to jump into this one - it could get lengthy but here is my 2 cents: fat chance that anything will change, as a matter of fact the degree is going to the foreign countries. I don't know what kind of qualifications they have, but a degree in the US will cost alot more for sure and the jobs are going overseas where it's cheap. THAT will influence design more than anything, maybe that's why cars are looking so strange lately. Anyway, i'm one of the 30 year plus guys, started on the board, using Catia now for plastics. I still prefer to work with the degreed project manager, preferably an engineer not a manager. We exchange ideas and compromise for a good design. I have a business degree myself, tried my own business, that sucks. I'm very happy now on the tube flying through the 3d world, get paid plenty, and have more fun than ever. At the end of the day, i think i won in life. We are a tier two to the big 3 and the benefits trickle down. ALSO, i ran into alot of degreed engineers that were not born to be engineers or designers, but thought the money was good, or got pushed into it, same as doctors, some are worse than plumbers. SO: surround yourself with road scholars, i do like experience, degree or no, the winner is the one with the best idea - oh by the way ( btw for you young ones ) it's all an idea!!! You gotta have one first, preferably a good one, and most have been thought of before, so don't re-invent the wheel, go with a proven one, it's all based on i - that stands for information - it's out there, find it, you could be president, if you want, but make sure you like your job. That's all - except this: if you don't like it, get the hell out of my life, you are slowing me down, i don't want to share in your missery, go do something you like or know how to do, or just go away - NO WHINING!!!

 

[LabRatt]

Ok, like everyone else, I just had to get in on this one. Although, unlike many, I choose not to divulge my level of degree. The point of this thread, which we have deviated from, was the connection between ISO standards and degreed personnel. I would agree with the comments made, that ISO does not concern itself with the degree level of company employees. I would also agree that in the event of a crisis such as a lawsuit, a persons degree should match with his/her position. For example, a peice of equipment fails in a steel mill, killing six employees. After investigation, it is discovered that the failure was caused by a poorly sized feedpipe. The design is traced back to the originator, who, it is discovered, is not a degreed engineer. No fluid pressure calcs, no structure calcs, no materials calcs of any kind. Now, put this scenario in front of a jury. What would you do, if you were on that jury?
On the other hand....there is experience and raw know-how. We all have stories about the freshly degreed engineer (or even the old one) who walks blindly on, bumbling through one task after the other, while we laugh up our sleeves at each new failure. Natural, intuitive knowledge does not happen in classrooms, nor is it found in books. So is this person a good engineer? Perhaps.
Bottom line is, the effective manager will know his/her people and their weaknesses, and place them accordingly. Take the mechanically inept engineer off of the plant floor, and put in the "dirt-on-the-hands" tech who knows the job. Oversee everything. At the end of the day, it is the manager who is responsible for the performance of the company. Personnel leadership and management can be more important than degrees.
I have been involved in both environments. Those staffed with degreed personnel, and those that were a mix of both. The most interesting part is, Nine times out of ten, you could not tell who was who.
As a closing, I will insert one of my favorite quotes.
"Success happens in seclusion, failure in full veiw".

 

[CanEngJohn]

Actually I was reading this for the umpteenth time and I realised no one here keyed in on a significant issue which really shifts the focus and debate. (I am particularly ticked at myself for not seeing it since I am a QS9000 auditor and spent 6+ years in Quality dealing with ISO issues).

Only the ISO 9001 level deals with the qualifications of Engineers. Specifically section 4 of the ISO standard only applies to companies that perform a design function on the finished product. ISO 9002, 9003 and 9004 do not have this clause.

With that said I do not know too many Design Engineering Departments which are not managed by an Engineer. This section of ISO does not deal with the qualifications of people working on the floor in a Manufacturing Facility. It specifically deals with the individuals who are design responsible. So I think we need to start again with the focus on where it should be.
How Qualified is your Design Group?

 

[willi3b]

FINALLY, some more opinions! I don't think there is an answer, especially when the company finds itself thinking that they can get this guy over here really cheap, maybe because he is green, or he needs to work to keep his green card, or he has a doctors ... what was that university again? That said, i think the individuals that are short on know how, experience or educated ability, know that they are! Seems the more they know, the harder they try to convince you that they are really good. SO, there are all kinds out there, including me. I'm just hoping that MANAGEMENT is smart enough to know who is and who is not! I don't even blame the poor sap that made his way past human resources - i do blame management - ALWAYS - no exceptions.

 

[plasgears]

There is a creeping tendency to place non-engineers in positions previously reserved for engineers. I saw this in several major companies.

A long time ago the plant engineering secretary in a large company was trained in drafting to "qualify" as asst plant engineer. She was writing contracts for electrical, HVAC, concrete, etc. work.

At a GM plant recently I discovered a clerical type working in plant engineering writing contracts for plant engineering work. The graduate engineers were long gone from the plant engineering dept.

I would like to know where this tendency is flowing from. In my last company it was flowing from QC types. The whole engineering department was infested with QC types who spoke QS9000 but no engineering. The engineers were sparse and mostly student interns. They were mostly CAD qualified but not versed in the design engineering discipline.

 

[CanEngJohn]

It is called outsourcing. Most companies do not like having an expensive Technical Professional doing mostly paperwork.

The contracts can be created by anyone. The engineering work is being done by Engineers at the HVAC contractor (for example). There are clauses in the contract specifically places design responsibility on the contractor. The result is that the plant does not need to have Plant engineers in house because they rely on the contractors to provide the Engineering.

Most of the basics in process control (which is the dominant form of Engineering at the plant level) can be done by people without an Engineering degree. The good ones usually become Engineering-like from their experience while not necessarily being true engineers from the start. Get enough of that and liscense yourself and I will call you an Engineer.

Mind you this still does not fall under the ISO clause 4.4. Personally I belive that what you are seeing is the pushing of Engineers to do more true Engineering. An Engineer intern at the plant level doesn't need design capablilities because the design is usually controlled elsewhere (especially true in automotive). If he decides to change a design he can't do it without going through head office which has all the design guys. He is primarily there to gain real world experience on how things go together or are made.

The tendancy is monetary driven though. Engineers are expensive compared to the bulk of the workforce in a plant. Why should you pay for an Engineer to do work which is technically below his qualifications? Typically any plant between 200 and 500 people only needs about 2-5 true Engineers and a bunch of Techs. Typically only 10% of the actrivities that occur at the plant level without the input from a corporate head office require an Engineering background.

 

[willi3b]

By the way, have you all seen the reports on the national news these last couple of weeks about white collar jobs going overseas? the design as well as the engineering ...

 

[patdaly]

Willi3b,
Yes, and magically, none appear to be CEO positions. I would think corporations could save far more money, I believe they call it "enhancing the shareholder's position", if they outsourced top management...........

 

[willi3b]

Wola, shisch bang boom, and Bingo! Of course, we can't say things like that, just unethical. I have long been a proponent of free enterprise, to the extent of unlimited ceilings, thinking the Board, the stockholders or the owners would be smart enough to limit these concerns, but that was wishfull thinking, now it seems that it's totally out of control, not even the owners know what is being voted in, the Board is part of the scheme, it's party time for everyone at the top. Maybe it's time to rethink it all.

 

[c2s]

Actually, I was thinking that it's only a mater of time before the "Corp management" goes oversees. It does make logical sense if you have shifted manufacturing, support (tech & sales) and design there already. You could then liquidate your large US capital holdings. This in turn would produce more available revenue for expansion (overseas) and aquisition of other corporations ... and it'd make the balance sheets look gggrrreeeaaat.
Kevin (mostly tongue-in-cheek)

 

[plasgears]

Watch for lawyers examining the qualifications of engineering management and engineers in companies involved in loss of life suits. Its not just a license issue like in civil engineering. It's a question of whether management has allowed boneheads to prevail in pivotal engineering positions.

 

[dskarupa]

My current and previous employer accepts experience for a degree. I am the only engineer on my staff with an engineering degree. One of my co workers does not have his degree yet but is close to finishing an Engineering Degree. He as been close to getting an engineering degree but then changed what kind of engineer he want to be before he received the degree. He has all around knowledge which is a good asset to the company. Just because a person does not have a degree does not mean he is not qualified. A professor once told me, you will learn more at your job then you ever will in school. That is why they have Co-Op at most colleges now.

 

[TheTick]

Still, for every "You can't learn that in school" I receive from a school-of-hard-knock educated engineer, I have equal amounts of vacant stares while explaining fundamental concepts like spring rates, free body diagrams, and simple dynamics to these same folks, usually in the context of explaning to them why their stuff won't work.

If the ladies don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

 

[Ratty]

Surely, in a situation where loss of life resulted from a bad or "bonehead" engineering decision, the fact that the engineers involved hold or do not hold degrees is irrelevant?

Regardless of whether you hold a degree or not, your ability to be a good or bad engineer is unaffected and a bad decision that you make is still a bad decision.

What ISO is for is providing a set of tools to document decision making, controlling drawing issue and process instructions, and ensure that all relevant departments are involved in those processes as necessary. Even a degree qualified engineer can miss a point, and ISO tools help in calling for other department heads and managers to ask the questions that may well catch it.

The provision of ISO doesn't prevent bad decisions from being made, just as a degree doesn't. ISO may be accepted as being best practice, and in such a court case, failure to adhere to those guidelines may be more important than whether the engineer holds a degree or not.

That said, I'd agree that management of engineering departments is something best done by a degree qualified engineer. The department manager is normally a bit distanced from the detail in a project, but represents the department in relation to a number of projects. He therefore needs a broad, but solid understanding of all principles applied at design level in order to appreciate the issues faced by his engineers. He also needs to perhaps see the wood despite the trees when it comes to gateway reviews.

 

[daubery]

IMHO Engineering Managers need to be skilled Engineers (1st), & skillful Managers (2nd)...

I believe that it is a falicy to think that non-technical Managers can 'manage' Engineers towards excellent solutions - without the intuition needed to guide/coach engineers towards the optimum solutions...

Managers actually need to be 'Leaders' - they need to be ahead of the game...

Regards,

Des Aubery...
(adTherm Technology -

http://www.adtherm.com

- des@adtherm.com )


Best regards,

Des Aubery...
(adTherm Technology -

http://www.adtherm.com

- info@adtherm.com)

 

[GregLocock]

I disagree entirely.

My manager is there as an interface to the rest of the company to get me resources that I need, and to set general priorities. For this I do not need an analytical engineer, I need a generalist/politician with a great deal of common sense.

It is 8 years since I have had a manager who was a technical resource, and could understand the details of any problems I had without hours of explanation, and fourteen years since I have had a manager who could consistently teach me anything, technically, about my job.



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[daubery]

Hi 'Greg',

In my experiences as a Technology Executive & Executive Consultant in the Automotive Component Industry, I have seen both kinds of manager... The technically competent leader generally wins hands-down - especially with rapid hitech development...

The non-tech manager is a typical byproduct of US Management Theory & will work in some cases... but is generally not optimum... in most cases, a dismal failure...

But, there are always exceptions...



Best regards,

Des Aubery...
(adTherm Technology -

http://www.adtherm.com

- info@adtherm.com)

 

[finman]

Des, at last the voice of reason!

I've worked for both Engineer and Non Eng managers and I can honestly say that the engineers win hands down! Far better at determining the possibilities of a concept before work begins in ernest and better idea of what their workforce is up against especially in developmental environments.

 

[mloew]

Greg,

Right on the money. A manager's job is to enable and facilitate progress within an organization.

Besides, what about the lousy engineers that get promoted into management?


Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew
"Luck is the residue of design."
Branch Rickey

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

 

[TheTick]

I'm with daubery on this one. Someone who is in charge of "facilitating" should have a decent understanding of what those needs are.

One of the few things I miss about the navy is the qualification structure for rank and position. One needed to demonstrate both technical comptetence in his rating (work specialty) and also understanding of the leadership and management responsibilities of his position ("basic military requirements&quot. This also applied to officers. One can not attain command of a sub without also meeting requirements for technical understanding of that ship's operation.