So I just read the whole "co-worker not claiming all hours worked" thread that included an interesting discussion of engineering fees, or the lack thereof. I would like to get a thread going that is focused solely on this topic.
I have seen the commoditization of engineering services accelerate over the past few years. I work in the construction industry and I can think of several reasons for this occurance.
One of the big drivers is the advent of "design-build". Rather than retaining a professional services firm to design a product that meets their requirements, many owners have resorted to hiring a contractor that can give them "something" as cheap and fast as possible. Government project managers have been driven to this contract type by the unreasonable schedules manadated by Congress for certain programs. The private sector is driven solely by first cost. I think that 10-20 years from now, both entities will realize that their money would have been better spent on a high quality product instead of something cheap and fast. Essentially, design-build has reduced the demand for superior design services, thus destroying the suppliers who are capable of delivering a high service level.
A second reason for the devaluing of our services is the eagerness of the majority of firms to capitulate to the demands of the "cheaper and faster" market place. If professional service providers were less willing to push the quality level down to "just barely good enough to meet code", then the demand side of the market would have to adjust to the limited supply of "cheap" engineering. If we do not value our services, then no one will.
There is also a noticeable decline in the technical ability and confidence in the emerging generation of lead engineers. I feel that this has been brought on by a job market that rewards frequent employment changes and punishes loyalty with mediocre salary adjustments. If firms would fairly reward their top performers these individuals would be less compelled to seek greener pastures. The only real way for engineers to learn is to see projects through from craddle to grave. Given the duration of most projects, this is not possible unless a position is held for 5 or more years.
Lastly, we as individual engineers are far too meek when it comes to what we will tolerate for our working conditions. If we refused to work for "sweat shop" firms, then these firms could not exist. It is ultimately up to us to demand fair pay, reasonable schedules, and a work life balance. Given that we are highly skilled, integral to the modern world, and historically in short supply, we are in a unique position to command respect. We should encourage a sort of arrogance in the junior engineers that we mentor and expect it from our collegues. We should always talk in jargon that is impossible for outsiders to understand and we should reveal as few of our methods as possible. These are the things that doctors and lawyers do, why should we be any different?
I want to write more, but I must go to bed. I have a 12 hour day in a salaried position waiting for me tomorrow...oh the irony.
I have seen the commoditization of engineering services accelerate over the past few years. I work in the construction industry and I can think of several reasons for this occurance.
One of the big drivers is the advent of "design-build". Rather than retaining a professional services firm to design a product that meets their requirements, many owners have resorted to hiring a contractor that can give them "something" as cheap and fast as possible. Government project managers have been driven to this contract type by the unreasonable schedules manadated by Congress for certain programs. The private sector is driven solely by first cost. I think that 10-20 years from now, both entities will realize that their money would have been better spent on a high quality product instead of something cheap and fast. Essentially, design-build has reduced the demand for superior design services, thus destroying the suppliers who are capable of delivering a high service level.
A second reason for the devaluing of our services is the eagerness of the majority of firms to capitulate to the demands of the "cheaper and faster" market place. If professional service providers were less willing to push the quality level down to "just barely good enough to meet code", then the demand side of the market would have to adjust to the limited supply of "cheap" engineering. If we do not value our services, then no one will.
There is also a noticeable decline in the technical ability and confidence in the emerging generation of lead engineers. I feel that this has been brought on by a job market that rewards frequent employment changes and punishes loyalty with mediocre salary adjustments. If firms would fairly reward their top performers these individuals would be less compelled to seek greener pastures. The only real way for engineers to learn is to see projects through from craddle to grave. Given the duration of most projects, this is not possible unless a position is held for 5 or more years.
Lastly, we as individual engineers are far too meek when it comes to what we will tolerate for our working conditions. If we refused to work for "sweat shop" firms, then these firms could not exist. It is ultimately up to us to demand fair pay, reasonable schedules, and a work life balance. Given that we are highly skilled, integral to the modern world, and historically in short supply, we are in a unique position to command respect. We should encourage a sort of arrogance in the junior engineers that we mentor and expect it from our collegues. We should always talk in jargon that is impossible for outsiders to understand and we should reveal as few of our methods as possible. These are the things that doctors and lawyers do, why should we be any different?
I want to write more, but I must go to bed. I have a 12 hour day in a salaried position waiting for me tomorrow...oh the irony.
![[2thumbsup]](/data/assets/smilies/2thumbsup.gif "[2thumbsup] [2thumbsup]")
