Specialists vs. Generalists 12

[PSE]

How do you see the engineering profession evolving? Will there be a greater profusion (or need) of engineers specializing in a discipline/sub-discipline or will there be a greater need of the "Jack of all trades, master of none"? Science (in my point of view for this thread), seems to be evolving toward focused specialization, will engineering follow?

 

[BobPE]

I think that one of the problem with our new tools is that they are increasingly being used by people outside of our profession. They plug numbers in and get answers out and feel that they have no need for us expensive tempermental demanding engineers. I can't even beging to describe the increase in projects that involve fixing a faulty design, as I type this I have one on my screen were several computer tools were used by a Geologist to design a large scale verticle turbine pump application. It is a complete disaster that I as an engineer understood immediately. The geologist used our tools and he was excellent in identifying the information he needed from the running of the programs, he developed a system curve and specified a pump. I am on the project now because the pump corroded? It's actually cavitation damage from an improper pump selection.

Now, with this said, engineers are hurt by this. The engineering went bad, but I was practiced by a non engineer using our engineering tools. These tools are no substitute for an engineer. I think its our job to as engineers to all be Generalists in order to police our practice from those who are not qualified to practice it even though they may have our tools to do so. After becoming Generalists, specalizing in areas that we enjoy becomes the passion of our careers.

This is a lot of rambling, but I thought I would share it with you all...

BobPE

 

[owg]

BobPE - What you say rings true with me. I was a generalist for 20 years working for the man, then a specialist for 20 years working for myself.

 

[brad]

BobPE,
Total agreement with regards to engineering tools being used by non-engineers. Not only are they giving the proverbial guns to children with this, generally they are encouraging these children to play with the guns.

I had a person ask me how (using a CAD package with FEA functionality) how to calculate the stiffness for a given part (with given b.c.'s and given point unit loads). He couldn't find the "stiffness" button in the program (and wasn't knowledgeable enough to know the definition of stiffness).

By the way, I told him to call tech support for the particular product. I'd let them deal with their own monster.
Brad

 

[mloew]

Brad,

Don't feel so bad, I once had an engineer ask me how big were the units for the unit load! Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew

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

 

[brad]

Did you give him the correct answer:
"Unity"

Brad

 

[NickelMet]

Good thread. Interesting stories and opinions.

I must say that after 12 years I would have to consider myself a generalist with a melting/casting emphasis (but by no means a specialist).

However, the problem I see at this time is the lack of MENTOR-type engineers to school the younger generation. There are specialists that are retiring every day that leave their knowledge to no one. I think you can blame part of this on today's companies and their policies on turnover and mentoring. I just left a company that 1) found itself hurting from a lack of knowledge due to retirements; 2) disregarded the engineer's need for networking, peer development, and continuous education; and, 3) considered engineers "grunts" instead of professionals.

Another part of the blame resides on the engineer themselves by changing positions so readily. (Hey, I include myself in that one.) The last I heard, the average engineer graduating since 1985 would move jobs at least 7 times in his/her career. How does that promote stability and specialization?

And lastly, the other part of the blame resides in the profession itself for not emphasizing this problem more. I think we all realize there are needs for experts/specialists. But how do we get to be the next generation of experts if the profession itself doesn't promote it? When all the professional societies put out statistics on job title, pay, etc., what are we really saying we are concerned with?

Additionally, there is so much opportunity out there if you're willing to go for it. Plus, there is an attitude in this time that most everyone wants to "march up the ladder". Both of these together don't promote specialization at all...just generalization.

Personally, 25 years from now, I don't believe you'll see the number of specialists you see today. Generalists will be plentiful. And, though I hate to admit it, key knowledge will be lost, maybe forever.

Thanks for reading my 2-cents worth.

 

[sc]

Now that the thread is talking about the learning part, I would like to know which skills are more valuable for the graduate.

Do we teach them to be practical from day dot or do we give them all of the theory and let them learn the practical component in the field?

I am currently involved in helping a Uni restart its civil degree course and this seems to be the main question being asked. My feeling is that with the number of computer aids for design that are available today we should be teaching students to use them and to recognise when the results are up the creek. This can come from practical experience or theory.

So should we be creating a student that is street wise but basically behind in terms of deep theoretical knowledge or should we be creating a theoretical person who will need a lot of assistance to become street wise.

Regards

sc

 

[ProEpro]

SC
Your question deserves it's own thread and I'll give it one
thread730-46733

ProEpro

http://www.whitelightdesign.com

 

[uppili11]

The most relevant issue today for engineers is to have absolute knowledge on all issues that has its bearing on day to day businesss scenario.I have a CAD designer but who does not know tool design,I have a methods engineer who can not understand the basic product developemnt process .Like that there are several specialized set of people who does job whenever there is a need or being idle .Not all specialization is required at all point of time but a generalist is the most needed person who habdle/manage any situation or rather the time has come wherein an engineer has to perfectly function like a technical manager managing several facets of engineering.


This is how all industries are moving now and one of the important elements of LEAN is cross functional training wherein every function must be able to peform other functions as well in the sense the designer will move to manufacturing,a quality guy will move to product design etc.This essentially reduced the burden on the industries to have absolute flexibility with out adding many resources and being idle most of the time.

 

[StressGuy]

That sounds like a watered down, bean counter oriented recipe for disaster. Edward L. Klein
Pipe Stress Engineer
Houston, Texas

All opinions expressed here are my own and not my company's.

 

[BobPE]

LOL stressguy, bean counters run the industry exmpt world!!!
BobPE

 

[brad]

Uppilli11--
That is the standard "bookspeak"; however this runs completely counter to the concept of economies of scale. I will acknowledge that this is a popular trend as of late, but I have dealt with the byproducts of this "jack-of-all-trades, master of none" mentality, and it ain't pretty.

Sadly too often they are barely a jack of any trade. Therein lies the problem.
Brad

 

[uppili11]

Have compared this in medicine wherein it is very difficult to find a general medical practicioner who can recommend or can be consulted for some common ailments.everybody is a speialist but majority of the people for their day to day problems need only generalist not a nail specialist or throat specialist.

Today fortunately there are many engineers than doctors so you can find a mix of every person

 

[RDK]

This thread which focuses of the difference between generalists and specialists, it has not done a very good job of defining these terms.

I work in construction management. Therefore in the construction pond I’m a generalist in the sense that I work across the civil, mechanical and electrical disciplines to achieve an integrated complete final product. In the overall ocean of engineering I consider myself a construction specialist.

If I was a structural designer would I be a specialist because that is one small field or a generalist because I design in wood, steel and concrete? If I only worked in steel design would I be a generalist because I design compression, tension and bending members or would I have to specialize in only designing bending members?

At some level everyone in the profession has to be by necessity both a specialist who can concentrate on the specific item at hand as well as a generalist who can see the bigger picture and integrate his work into that larger cooperative effort that is engineering. That is what being a professional is all about.

Also remember that if you are say a steel design specialist and the price of steel jumps, there will be no more steel design and like the over specialized branches of the evolutionary tree you will be wonderfully adapted to do a job that no longer exists.
Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[PSE]

RDK

The vagueness of defining specialist or generalist is intentional. It allows for the greatest variation of discourse within the thread. My personal opinion (for what it is worth) is the same as yours. Someone should attain excellence within a particular field or discipline while at the same time, developing or retaining a sensitivity to other fields. Rarely is a product the result of only one engineering discipline. Overspecialization, as you illustrate with your steel design specialist, can lead to career extinction. Choose wisely.

Regards

 

[EngineerDave]

Perception can play a huge role in whether someone is a generalist or a specialist in an organization.

I worked recently in a company in which the materials engineers all focused on one area ( a group of materials or processes) of the product design. With that view, most of the managers considered us "specialists". I felt that was simply not the case for me personally, since I had a good understanding of the work the other engineers were doing, regardless of the fact that I was working on distinct projects from them.

However whether you are more aptly defined by "specialist" or "generalist" problem depends more on your own commitment to continued learning in new fields. I find it far more interesting to learn about several new fields, than merely focus on one. I believe it is possible for anyone to learn new things and continue learning new things in areas they are considered an expert in. After all, life is quite dynamic and things change so rapidly we all need to continue learning new things.

So being a generalist as many has stated does not mean that you can't also have specialty or expert status in some other specific areas.