The google expert 15

[MatthewDB]

I'm curious how you people who would deal with the google expert. I have a peer who is an engineering manager, and he often will google something and then believe what he comes across.

Shocking, I know, but often what you find on the internet can be wrong. And when you get to a technical topic, it can often be wrong. Multiple times he's challenged me in a group setting (a dick move too, I don't do that to him or anyone else, but that's another symptom). Many times he's quite wrong, but he'll persist with the "see here, read this" type of attitude.

 

[lacajun]

The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters

To me, this sums it up nicely. This is a rampant problem across the spectrum of life. We can get a lot of information from the internet and other sources; however, I would never stack up what I learn from those sources against the knowledge of an expert that's been studying whatever subject for 30 or more years.

I met an EE Saturday morning that does circuit design for a local instrument manufacturer. He's been doing this for about 40 years. After listening to him, I need to get some new books to align with more recent knowledge.

Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC
NSPE-CO, Central Chapter
Dinner program:

http://nspe-co.org/events.php

 

[CWB1]

Asking for the information on a design & clarification on technical points is not a dick move, and I have no issue with that. Announcing in the group that my fundamentals are wrong on a regular basis is another matter.

So where should he share his concerns then? We do similar regularly, engineers who cant adequately support their design/analysis in the current meeting review minor details with a supervisor or senior engineer afterward. Usually after having their work questioned a few times folks are more prepared to support their work in meetings, its part of the reason I usually have my presentation as well as necessary models/sims ready in the background.

 

[MatthewDB]

So where should he share his concerns then? We do similar regularly, engineers who cant adequately support their design/analysis in the current meeting review minor details with a supervisor or senior engineer afterward. Usually after having their work questioned a few times folks are more prepared to support their work in meetings, its part of the reason I usually have my presentation as well as necessary models/sims ready in the background.

There is a presumption in your post, that I'm not ready to share everything backing up my work. That's not the case. I keep everything on a shared folder that anyone in the division is free to review. I make it know how it is organized. During a meeting I'm totally fine with pulling it up.

The issue is that when the counter point to my decisions are "I googled this article, it must be right" it is hard to have a substantive discussion. Particularly with someone who doesn't want to admit that if they want to weigh in on the argument, they better be more informed on the topic than they are.

 

[IRstuff]

re: The Death of Expertise

To some degree, that's TLDR territory. Ultimately, does it matter if no one who needs to read it reads it? Once someone convinces themselves they're experts, who's now qualified to argue against them? And, is this really new? The Moon Landing doubters have at it for decades; it's just now spreading to the masses.

The bigger issue isn't the wealth of knowledge, per se; it's the fact that someone who's invested in a partial factoid that's incorrect will defend the error with irrationality, as they have nowhere to go if they are proven wrong, nor can they comprehend why they're wrong in the first place.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[MatthewDB]

I have a theory that is stated this way "What goes around comes around". It may not develop right away, but in time it does. Sometimes tragically. Stay patient.

You're right! I need to not dwell on any of it, because it will come around again. I'm a driven person so patience is hard but this is certainly one of those cases.

The bigger issue isn't the wealth of knowledge, per se; it's the fact that someone who's invested in a partial factoid that's incorrect will defend the error with irrationality, as they have nowhere to go if they are proven wrong, nor can they comprehend why they're wrong in the first place.

Something I've caught onto over the years is figuring out what kind of student / engineer a co-worker is with regards to the way they learn and they way they understand.

There are those that lean via an appeal to authority. Their professor in college is an authority. Their mentors and other engineers they consider a good engineer are an authority. They take the advice, "rules of thumb", procedures, etc... to heart and duplicate those throughout a career. They can be decent, reliable engineers.

Then there are those who seek and understand the fundamentals at a deep level. They understand what's behind the rules of thumb, the procedures, where that advice came from.

When you're doing "turn the crank" engineering, either is OK. When you tread into new territories, or are doing something outside the box, working with one versus the other is a huge difference. When you do something new, those that use the authority of previous professors or mentors don't have much to fall back on. It leaves them unable to critique, expand on the idea, and really contribute. When you get into a disagreement with the first group and you're not deemed an "authority" it becomes nearly impossible to have a factual discussion over engineering work.

 

[jari001]

Assuming the article itself is a worthwhile source, I do that all the time and ask if its contents are relevant to the problem at hand. If I understand the article completely and it has relevant info that hasn't already been incorporated in a solution (which usually is not the case), then I will bring it up in a review meeting. But if that article talks about topics that are beyond my depth (which is how I am interpreting the OP's description of the manager's scope of expertise), I don't use that ONE article as the only foundation to start questioning things I don't have a working understanding of. That behaviour really does not befit someone that is supposed to an engineer - it's just a bad way of problem solving IMO.

If I think an article I don't have a full understanding of could be valuable, I will suggest to the more knowledgeable person offline if they would review the source, and try to convey why I think it might be worth their time, and tell me if they found it useful - but that's about as far as I'd be willing to go. If I were a manager, maybe I'd ask for an email of their thoughts to ensure they read it to make myself feel better - but even that seems a bit too pushy for my tastes.

 

[casseopeia]

In my company we have several areas of practice, structural engineering for new construction, (mostly highrise), seismic retrofit, facade engineering, forensic investigation, property loss consulting, sustainability, and renewel. The last one is where I fit in. I do the waterproofing and building envelope commissioning jobs. Renewel is where the architects who deal with real nuts and bolts issues are. We are the ones that fix the leaks and design the buildings to meet current codes after they burn down. I actually have to solve the problems, deal with bilding officials and end users, make drawings, write specifications, and take the heat if anything goes wrong.

I've got a "googlemeister' from the facade group who fancies himself to be a budding waterproofing expert. He is constantly sending emails asking for help or some magical reference he can look at to design the waterproofing/flashing/roofing. He and his poor little minions send screenshots of websites to ask if the product is OK to use without giving even the most basic of information. My boss and I make fun of him, but I cringe every time I see his name on an email. I consider him to be dangerous. I'm just waiting for the day he sends a link to FlexSeal for use on his large, corporate project in Anaheim. I already spent considerable time trying to convince him that he can't put glass shards and paint all over a new TPO roof membrane to 'make it pretty.'

MatthewDB, I guess my only suggestion is to grit your teeth and hope that your Mr.Google will eventually hoist himself by his own petard. I'm waiting for that day with my own googlemonster.

If you are offended by the things I say, imagine the stuff I hold back.

 

[Sparweb]

cassieopeia,
I googled "TPO roof membrane" to find out what you meant. Now, after seeing the GAF homepage, I know exactly what it is. I'll tell all my coworkers about it. They will be impressed.

STF

 

[casseopeia]

SparWeb,

Glad to help.

If you are offended by the things I say, imagine the stuff I hold back.

 

[IRstuff]

My brother had a TPO roof put on my father's house because we were tired of redoing the tar and gravel roof, particular since the gravel would get washed down into a drain that would then get clogged that would then overflow and flood the bathroom etc. We've had no drain overflows since then.

Why glass shards? Aside from being dangerous to walk on, they're dangerous to the TPO membrane.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[casseopeia]

IRstuff,

Glass shards because they come in various colors and are all sparkly. I'm actually talking about various colored gravel and glass you can purchase at landscape suppliers. You can't put it on your TPO roof without protection. I'm not a fan of TPO. They have been fooling around with the formulation because of several high-profile failures, always coming out with, "OK, now we fixed it." PVC has a much better track record.

If you are offended by the things I say, imagine the stuff I hold back.