The Civil Engineer in Society: Merit v Profile 19

[tuto]

Dear fellow engineers,

We all know how important is the role of the civil engineer in society by providing and maintaining its infrastructure.

However I believe most of you share my concern that the profile of civil engineering as a profession is rather low (world wide).

What do you think it can be done to raise the civil engineer's profile in society?

 

[msharief]

Profile of Civil Engineers World Wide is very high.It is very high in USA,UK,Australia and all countries in the World.There should be no doubt about this. Mohammed A Sharief

 

[tuto]

Mohammed,
In the country I work (UK), I can assure you that there is plenty of doubt about it. The situation seems to have begun improving lately with the important workload forecast in civil engineering and with the efforts of the Institute of Civil Engineers to restore the place of civil engineer in society. Yet, it is a recognised fact within our profession, admitted quasi-officially by the ICE, that our profile is not particularly high. My Australian colleagues share the same oppinions about the situation in their.
By the way, as personal oppinions are largely influenced by the environment we are working in, I believe it would be interesting if we specify in which country we work.
Bogdan

 

[Qshake]

I agree, with your assesment tuto. I work in the US and I am also a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers. As part of a solution to raise the level of professionalism for Civil Engineers it has been suggested that we institute the masters degree as the first professional degree. Obviously there is also a definite need to expand the education for furture generations, so the first professional degree isn't all about professionalism. It does mark a significant step toward increasing our public's perception of our value in society.

As a structural engineer, it drives me crazy to hear someone say what a wonderful job the architect did designing a building or bridge.

 

[waterguy]

Like anything, I think part of the problem has to do with lack of knowledge about engineering in general. Also, the notion that Civil Engineers are not as hi-tech as the other disciplines may also be a factor, since buildings and roads have been around forever and aren't as fun or stimulating as the latest electronic gadgets or the newest cars.

You generally don't hear about civil engineering in the news unless something has gone wrong. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing since it reminds us that if we don't do our jobs right it could cause fatalities. However, some of it can be misleading and unfairly portray us as people who don't know what we are doing. I always think of those people living within the floodplain of some major river and whose homes are flooded every 2 to 5 years. To some of them the cause is simple: the engineers didn't build the levees high enough, or some such answer. Ask these same people if they would relocate outside of the floodplain or if they would be willing to pay more in taxes to build bigger and better flood control structures and they will probably say "no".

One of the other reasons why civil engineers don't garner as much "respect" as they should, in my opiniion, is due to the fact that we are often perceived as a necessary evil to those clients who need our services. If you look at other professionals such as lawyers, accountants, doctors, they all do work that is of direct benefit to their client. A lawyer can help you win a big lawsuit or keep you out of jail. An accountant will do some creative bookeeping to save you some money. And a doctor will save your life.

Although an Engineer will certainly add value to the work, and produce a design that is efficient and cost effective, the basic reason an engineer is required (from a clients perspective) is because some approval agency says that they need documents (drawings, reports etc...) that are prepared and/or stamped by an Engineer. If it wasn't for that requirement, some clients would just go ahead and do the design themselves, or employ a "friend" whose only experience in structures (as an example), is building a backyard deck.

I'm not sure if I answered your question or not ?

 

[tuto]

It doesn't matter so much if my question was answered or not. What matters more is what we learn from each other's responses. Anyway, my query was meant to initiate a discussion and share oppinions.
Waterguy, I think your analysis of the causes of our profile not being as high as it should be, is very comprehensive and I do agree with you.
Indira Ghandi was saying: "There are two kinds of people: those who do the job and those who take the credit. Try to be in the first group, there is less competition there". Engineers are in the first lot. However we could use a bit of credit for what we produce, so we could use some publicity.
Qshake, the same I think has already been established in UK (MEng as an admission requirement in the Instutition of Civil Eng -ICE). Ii does indeed lift the standards a little bit. What also ICE is promoting is approaching the schools to let the kids know what is civil engineering about. I understand that the perception in school has already changed and keeps changing. It's like pubilicity in a way.
Kids will hopefully have a better idea what a civil eng. does even if they won't become one, and maybe they would ask themselves which engineer designed that bridge and not only what architect.
It is also very important that the professional association be well established and shall we say powerful. Co-ordinated effort has more odds to succed.
Anyway, things evolve, and who knows, maybe the society will move towards a technocratic nature, after engineers will have proven their leadership abilities and with that our profile we'll jet up

 

[Deron]

I don’t know how most people find themselves in the engineering profession. It was something that I naturally progressed to. There are few professions that a person can favorably change or influence the environment in which we all live. More importantly to me, there are few professions that help balance the natural, wondrous world in which we live and the wants and needs of the people living in it.

Civil/Environmental Engineering is a noble profession; We earn a modest wage without drawing attention to the fruits of our labor. We have done a good job if the work goes unnoticed. If it rains and there is no flood damage, no one will notice what was done by an engineer to eliminate the flood damage. If a person is looking for recognition and can’t persist simply on the satisfaction of having made the world a better place, then I would suggest looking into another profession.

 

[pmkPE]

tuto:

I believe that part of the problem with the perception of engineers by society is that
1) too many job positions/descriptions are labeled "engineer" (with various prefixes) but the person filling the position is not an engineer by education or experience, (also many of the job activities are not related to engineering).
The word engineer is too casually used by municipalities, contractors, various government agencies and so on. If you do submit work to either federal or municipal or state agencies for review often times the reviews are conducted by personnel that are not licensed professionals. The criteria or issues that they use to dictate changes to the "consulting engineer" is often based on check lists for such items as preferred drafting requirements or cad layer names, to name a few, without having the understanding what to do for the actual engineering. (This is not to say that such reviewers don't often have valid and insightful comments). Because so many people have the "title" of engineer without the background experience and knowledge relating to the discipline that they represent, the comments that they make to others outside of the profession are taken as factual. They are paid less and in todays environment all "engineers" are equal in ability to do the work; therefore the deciding factor is which engineer is available to do the work for the least amount of money? (just like contractors bidding on a job - supposedly all are capable of doing the work so the cheapest must be acceptable.)
2) with the advent of the personnel computer and a variety of software packages available - all it takes is to plug and chug. Why pay an engineer when you can have a technician or a cad operator to make the software run?
3) (I'll stop after this.) Relating to the software available I can now design and produce plan and profiles for roadway and sewer and water distribution lines with far fewer people than I could 10-15 years ago. Supply and demand - our engineering societies with the prompting of the colleges and universities tell us that there are not enough engineers (engineering students). However, our productivity has increased dramatically in the last decade. I know from marketing our services to private industry and governmental agencies that there are many engineers/firms competing for a limited volume of work. Twenty five years ago it was considered unethical for engineers to"market" their services. Today it is essential. The addition of more engineers will result in lower pay which in turn requires lowering the standards to attract more people to begin a profession that doesn't pay as well as other careers.

In closing I would just like to say that I enjoy my work and that I find it very satisfying and believe it results in a valuabe contribution to my clients and the public at large. I am glad that the Good Lord gave me the opportunities that I have experienced as a civil engineer.

 

[snafuman]

Deron is right on the mark!
We civil engineers are like the offensive linemen in football. We are only noticed when we screw up, we make decent money but not the highest, and we are absolutely necessary.
So what's wrong with that? If you need recognition to survive, become an actor. We should be thankful that most of us don't.
Perhaps our "Can-Do" attitude is our greatest failing. We tend to do what is assigned to us instead of being part of the decision making. Building a great dam can be an engineering masterpiece, but still be a poor project politically, environmentally and economically.
As for advanced degrees, my personal experience is that engineers with them may be very good at one thing, but weak on everything outside their area. It would be a mistake to create a profession loaded with speciallists. We need general practioners in our profession, and lots of them. The best engineer I've ever known never even went to college.

 

[civil21]

I only want to comment on the advanced degree issue as most of the responses above cover my thoughts in general. Civil Engineering as a profession has long understood the importance of practical work experience in what makes a good engineer. To become licensed in most states of the US one has to complete at least four years of progressive experience (Looking back it seems I did not know very much after four years and had a license to practice engineering). Whether one comes out of college with a bachelors, masters, or PhD, I suspect most would agree it is the day to day where they really learn what it takes to be an engineer.

I am not opposed to additional learning, in fact the contrary is true, but never underestimate the school of life's experiences.

 

[Art]

To Tuto and Fellow Engineers:

Multi-disciplined teams address many of the issues facing organizations today. The Civil Engineer is just one of many professionals that may be part of those teams. We need to improve and increase our communication with other professionals. We need to clearly state our positions on issues so that they are understood and are given sufficient consideration.

Quebec University’s Sherbrooke campus has recently made dramatic changes in its Mechanical Engineering department. The university has discarded its old curriculum and has introduced completely new Engineering classes to better prepare its students for Engineering careers. The new curriculum was 10 years in the making. It was partially a response to industry’s dissatisfaction with Engineering graduates who had difficulty applying their knowledge and also had poor teamwork and communication skills.
Discussions about the curriculum began in 1990. In 1992, a faculty task force visited other Engineering schools in the U.S. and Europe. After many meetings and debates, they gutted the old curriculum and set about creating the new curriculum, which became a reality in 1996.

The new curriculum includes courses on teamwork, creativity, and design methodology. In the place of humanities courses, students take courses in ethics, management, and professionalism. They also take on special projects such as designing an amusement park attraction that uses virtual reality technology and designing rockets that could later be developed to launch satellites.

This information was obtained from the NSPE U.S. Engineering Press Review at

http://www.nspe.org

in the “Members Only” section. Your national membership number and your password are needed to enter this area of the web site.

Art Schrage PE
Professional Sanitary Engineer
Director, Oakland Chapter of Michigan Society of Professional Engineers
Troy, Michigan USA

 

[breaks]

Qshake's comments reflect my sentiments exactly. It drives me NUTS when people comment on how the Architect did a wonderful job designing a certain building or bridge! The concept may be the Architect's, but the reality is the Structural Engineer's.

One reason for the low profile of civil engineers is a lack of knowledge and understanding by the general public. I've given up describing myself as a Structural Engineer because this invariably leads to the question "what is THAT?". Instead, I say that I design bridges, buildings and other structures which leads to the comment "oh, so you're an Architect!". At least I get to choose my own poison. Doctors and Lawyers have more glamorous professions - they are glorified and villianized in countless movies and TV shows. Civil Engineers will know they've arrived when their careers are documented/showcased on a station other than the History Channel.

Not that I'm complaining. I'm proud of the work I've done. Plus, most of the time my hours are very flexible. Most Doctors and Lawyers can't say that! Plus, how many Civil Engineering jokes have you heard? Yeah, I've heard a few, too, but that's not my point. In this age of greed, contempt, loud complaints and finger pointing, I'd like to think I'm part of a profession to which society gives quiet respect.

Oh, I work in the US.

 

[suryanarayan]

Dear Tuto,

I'am an Indian, a civil engineer by profession. In our country, many a middle class houses are by large built by skilled masons. A maistry (Suprevisor) is usually entrusted with construction of houses on a contract basis. There is practically no civil designing of any part of a structure and they are done only on practical experience of the maistry. Many a time, it proves uneconomical and dangerous too. But people have a notion that there is no requirement for a civil engineer during the construction of the houses. The equation, here, is that a maistry possesses knowledge whatever an civil engineer knows. You may, by now, have got a feeling of the plight of most of the civil engineers. This has caused considerable downward trend in the civil engineering field. There are a few takers for the civil engineering branch seats in the engineering colleges.

The profile of civil engineers can be raised by world wide practice of the following :

* Use of low cost high quality building materials which results in reducing the final cost of building.

* Propogating the requirement of civil engineers in construction and also highlighting the dangers of hiring unqualified personnels.

* The civil engineers should update themselves with the recent developments in the field by exchanging the recent technologies worldwide.

* Working with true conscience and respect to the branch.

* Straightforwardness by not practicing unfair practices.

* Engineers should not be money minded.

Waiting for a good suggestion and advice from engineers worldwide.

 

[cvg]

I'm not sure if any of this will raise our profile, but we should all follow the code of ethics and rules of professional practice. check out this website:

http://www.nspe.org/ethics/eh1-code.asp

Chuck
cgopperton@stantec.com

http://www.stantec.com/

 

[dilwala]

please tell me i need veiws on this from all of you :

Does a Civil engineer needs the knowledge of art , culture, history of architecture , if yes comment on this ?

 

[Deron]

No, a civil engineer does not require a knowledge of art, culture, or history of architecture. Engineering is based on science, and requires the use of science to enhance the safety, health and welfare of the public. However, a civil engineer must know that art, culture, and architecture are important for our quality of life. Architects know about art, culture, and architectural history; Civil engineers should work closely with architects during design stages to ensure that the public's safety, health, welfare, and quality of life are enhanced.

 

Dilwala:

I have done a few researches on your doubt and I wish i can help you. As a matter of fact, in the process of designing and creating a structure, the person who knows about art, culture and history is the arquitect. It is not the engineer`s job to choose the design of the structure , but to bring to reality what the arquitect had designed. Thereby an engineer(structural) job is much`more complex and difficult than the arquitect job inthis process.

 

[breaks]

danmccarthy - why do you say the current trend in Structural Engineering is down? I wouldn't agree at all! The great thing about Structural Engineering is how useful it is - it's principles are used to design buildings, bridges, planes, tunnels, water treatment plants, by NASA ... you name it, we're there.

Cool Kid, I encourage you to study what interests YOU.

 

Preamble
Engineering is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, engineers are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honesty, impartiality, fairness and equity, and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

I. Fundamental Canons

Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall:

1. Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.

2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.

3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.

4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.

5. Avoid deceptive acts.

6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

II. Rules of Practice

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.

a. If engineers' judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate.

b. Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents that are in conformity with applicable standards.

c. Engineers shall not reveal facts, data or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or this Code.

d. Engineers shall not permit the use of their name or associate in business ventures with any person or firm that they believe are engaged in fraudulent or dishonest enterprise.

e. Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required.

2. Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their competence.

a. Engineers shall undertake assignments only when qualified by education or experience in the specific technical fields involved.

b. Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control.

c. Engineers may accept assignments and assume responsibility for coordination of an entire project and sign and seal the engineering documents for the entire project, provided that each technical segment is signed and sealed only by the qualified engineers who prepared the segment.

3. Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.

a. Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current.

b. Engineers may express publicly technical opinions that are founded upon knowledge of the facts and competence in the subject matter.

c. Engineers shall issue no statements, criticisms, or arguments on technical matters that are inspired or paid for by interested parties, unless they have prefaced their comments by explicitly identifying the interested parties on whose behalf they are speaking, and by revealing the existence of any interest the engineers may have in the matters.

4. Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.

a. Engineers shall disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest that could influence or appear to influence their judgment or the quality of their services.

b. Engineers shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all interested parties.

c. Engineers shall not solicit or accept financial or other valuable consideration, directly or indirectly, from outside agents in connection with the work for which they are responsible.

d. Engineers in public service as members, advisors, or employees of a governmental or quasi-governmental body or department shall not participate in decisions with respect to services solicited or provided by them or their organizations in private or public engineering practice.

e. Engineers shall not solicit or accept a contract from a governmental body on which a principal or officer of their organization serves as a member.

5. Engineers shall avoid deceptive acts.

a. Engineers shall not falsify their qualifications or permit misrepresentation of their or their associates' qualifications. They shall not misrepresent or exaggerate their responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers, employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments.

b. Engineers shall not offer, give, solicit or receive, either directly or indirectly, any contribution to influence the award of a contract by public authority, or which may be reasonably construed by the public as having the effect of intent to influencing the awarding of a contract. They shall not offer any gift or other valuable consideration in order to secure work. They shall not pay a commission, percentage, or brokerage fee in order to secure work, except to a bona fide employee or bona fide established commercial or marketing agencies retained by them.

III. Professional Obligations

1. Engineers shall be guided in all their relations by the highest standards of honesty and integrity.

a. Engineers shall acknowledge their errors and shall not distort or alter the facts.

b. Engineers shall advise their clients or employers when they believe a project will not be successful.

c. Engineers shall not accept outside employment to the detriment of their regular work or interest. Before accepting any outside engineering employment they will notify their employers.

d. Engineers shall not attempt to attract an engineer from another employer by false or misleading pretenses.

e. Engineers shall not promote their own interest at the expense of the dignity and integrity of the profession.

2. Engineers shall at all times strive to serve the public interest.

a. Engineers shall seek opportunities to participate in civic affairs; career guidance for youths; and work for the advancement of the safety, health and well-being of their community.

b. Engineers shall not complete, sign, or seal plans and/or specifications that are not in conformity with applicable engineering standards. If the client or employer insists on such unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the proper authorities and withdraw from further service on the project.

c. Engineers shall endeavor to extend public knowledge and appreciation of engineering and its achievements.

3. Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that deceives the public.

a. Engineers shall avoid the use of statements containing a material misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact.

b. Consistent with the foregoing, Engineers may advertise for recruitment of personnel.

c. Consistent with the foregoing, Engineers may prepare articles for the lay or technical press, but such articles shall not imply credit to the author for work performed by others.

4. Engineers shall not disclose, without consent, confidential information concerning the business affairs or technical processes of any present or former client or employer, or public body on which they serve.

a. Engineers shall not, without the consent of all interested parties, promote or arrange for new employment or practice in connection with a specific project for which the Engineer has gained particular and specialized knowledge.

b. Engineers shall not, without the consent of all interested parties, participate in or represent an adversary interest in connection with a specific project or proceeding in which the Engineer has gained particular specialized knowledge on behalf of a former client or employer.

5. Engineers shall not be influenced in their professional duties by conflicting interests.

a. Engineers shall not accept financial or other considerations, including free engineering designs, from material or equipment suppliers for specifying their product.

b. Engineers shall not accept commissions or allowances, directly or indirectly, from contractors or other parties dealing with clients or employers of the Engineer in connection with work for which the Engineer is responsible.

6. Engineers shall not attempt to obtain employment or advancement or professional engagements by untruthfully criticizing other engineers, or by other improper or questionable methods.

a. Engineers shall not request, propose, or accept a commission on a contingent basis under circumstances in which their judgment may be compromised.

b. Engineers in salaried positions shall accept part-time engineering work only to the extent consistent with policies of the employer and in accordance with ethical considerations.

c. Engineers shall not, without consent, use equipment, supplies, laboratory, or office facilities of an employer to carry on outside private practice.

7. Engineers shall not attempt to injure, maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly, the professional reputation, prospects, practice, or employment of other engineers. Engineers who believe others are guilty of unethical or illegal practice shall present such information to the proper authority for action.

a. Engineers in private practice shall not review the work of another engineer for the same client, except with the knowledge of such engineer, or unless the connection of such engineer with the work has been terminated.

b. Engineers in governmental, industrial, or educational employ are entitled to review and evaluate the work of other engineers when so required by their employment duties.

c. Engineers in sales or industrial employ are entitled to make engineering comparisons of represented products with products of other suppliers.

8. Engineers shall accept personal responsibility for their professional activities, provided, however, that Engineers may seek indemnification for services arising out of their practice for other than gross negligence, where the Engineer's interests cannot otherwise be protected.

a. Engineers shall conform with state registration laws in the practice of engineering.

b. Engineers shall not use association with a nonengineer, a corporation, or partnership as a "cloak" for unethical acts.

9. Engineers shall give credit for engineering work to those to whom credit is due, and will recognize the proprietary interests of others.

a. Engineers shall, whenever possible, name the person or persons who may be individually responsible for designs, inventions, writings, or other accomplishments.

b. Engineers using designs supplied by a client recognize that the designs remain the property of the client and may not be duplicated by the Engineer for others without express permission.

c. Engineers, before undertaking work for others in connection with which the Engineer may make improvements, plans, designs, inventions, or other records that may justify copyrights or patents, should enter into a positive agreement regarding ownership.

d. Engineers' designs, data, records, and notes referring exclusively to an employer's work are the employer's property. Employer should indemnify the Engineer for use of the information for any purpose other than the original purpose.

As Revised February 2001

"By order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, former Section 11(c) of the NSPE Code of Ethics prohibiting competitive bidding, and all policy statements, opinions, rulings or other guidelines interpreting its scope, have been rescinded as unlawfully interfering with the legal right of engineers, protected under the antitrust laws, to provide price information to prospective clients; accordingly, nothing contained in the NSPE Code of Ethics, policy statements, opinions, rulings or other guidelines prohibits the submission of price quotations or competitive bids for engineering services at any time or in any amount."

Statement by NSPE Executive Committee

In order to correct misunderstandings which have been indicated in some instances since the issuance of the Supreme Court decision and the entry of the Final Judgment, it is noted that in its decision of April 25, 1978, the Supreme Court of the United States declared: "The Sherman Act does not require competitive bidding."

It is further noted that as made clear in the Supreme Court decision:

1. Engineers and firms may individually refuse to bid for engineering services.

2. Clients are not required to seek bids for engineering services.

3. Federal, state, and local laws governing procedures to procure engineering services are not affected, and remain in full force and effect.

4. State societies and local chapters are free to actively and aggressively seek legislation for professional selection and negotiation procedures by public agencies.

5. State registration board rules of professional conduct, including rules prohibiting competitive bidding for engineering services, are not affected and remain in full force and effect. State registration boards with authority to adopt rules of professional conduct may adopt rules governing procedures to obtain engineering services.

6. As noted by the Supreme Court, "nothing in the judgment prevents NSPE and its members from attempting to influence governmental action . . ."

 

[superowen]

I got a Bachelor's degree this July and now working in a design institute. Now, I want to pursue a M.A., but I don't know which fields to engage in, such as steel, concrete? Would somebody give me some advices?