Where are all of the master tradesman? 18

[curiousmechanical]

Hello Everyone,

Background:

I have been working as a mechanical design engineer at a small (<100 employees) OEM for a little over four years now. During this time, I have observed a disappointing trend and would like to hear other engineers’ thoughts on the matter.

Description:

While in college, I imagined a working life analogous to that of any apprentice. I pictured a world filled with experienced tradesman - engineers who have mastered their skills after many years of experience. I was truly looking forward to working alongside such people and I was eager to learn all that I could.

Upon entering the workforce, I eventually learned that few engineers have actually mastered their trades. In fact, more shockingly, many seem to lack even the most basic fundamental knowledge and skills. I find this very disappointing. In addition, I have also noticed a trend of sloppy and poor workmanship.

Intermediate Questions:

Why have so few engineers mastered their trades? Why don’t people care about quality? Why don’t people seem to take pride in what they do?

Theories:

I have noticed that quality is a falsely claimed priority. Companies like to say that they “take pride in producing a quality product,” but I have trouble believing them. Not when engineers are told “I don’t care [that the design is incomplete or of poor quality] just release the drawings.” Deadlines and managers pressure engineers to get work done as fast as possible. Quantity seems to be valued in the real world, not quality. Aside from self-respect, there is no incentive (or time) for an engineer to master his or her trade.

Closing Questions:

Is this lack of master tradesman common in engineering? Are there any environments where the quality workmanship of a master tradesman is valued over the high volume/sub par output of the average engineer?

Thank you for reading my rant! I look forward to reading your feedback!

 

[oldfieldguy]

zdas--

I was one of those. "Senior field engineer" was the title they had to hang on me in order to put me in the pay range I demanded when they hired me.

Was a neat and impressive title to the uninformed, but rather embarrassing when I had to deal with some REAL and very impressive engineers in the industry.

old field guy

 

[FeX32]

I didn't know you could do that. I mean where I come from if you put Engineer on you business card and you are not a real engineer it's a big deal. You can be sued 50 grand.
(but this is off topic)


Fe

 

[zdas04]

He was a nice guy and seemed to know a lot about pulling wire, but he glazed over when I asked how hard he could pull on it before it broke or how many conversations could take place concurrently. Good worker, not an engineer.

FeX32,
Each jurisdiction is different, but most have weasel words in the regs to allow things like the phone company's "Field Engineer" and the Microsoft "Applications Engineer" (spelled "programmer everywhere else). But you're right it is another topic.

David

 

[IRstuff]

Not to further dilute the discussion, but most states have "industrial exemptions" for actual engineers who are not required to be licensed.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[zdas04]

All of the states I've looked at (maybe 20 states) have the industrial exemption, but all of these have language that says that those guys can't have the word "engineer" on their business cards or letterhead because it constitutes "holding yourself out to the public as an Engineer". It isn't right, but it is the law in those states.

In the 90's, one state got horsey about this and threatened to fine companies if their logo was on a business card with the word "Engineer" that wasn't a P.E. It was really unclear if they had jurisdiction over the companies (since the companies didn't have the word "Engineer" in the registered name) and I think it fizzled after a few nasty letters.

David

 

[IRstuff]

California's PE law only specifically addresses civil, electrical, and mechanical engineers, and "engineer" only in the context of "licensed," "professional," "register," or "consulting."



TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[oldfieldguy]

The company that hired me was nationwide in its scope, with corporate headquarters in California. One would suppose that they were cognizant of laws that would have precluded the use of the title on non-degreed persons.

As for me, I didn't care what they called me, as long as the money was right. They couldn't fit "very well qualified and experienced high voltage power systems technologist" on the card.

I have spent a significant portion of my career tiptoeing around, saying "I'm not an electrical engineer, but THIS is wrong..." and smiling...

old field guy

 

[ScottyUK]

OFG,

Do you remember the Budweiser advert with the frogs from about 15 years ago? "I'm no electrician..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3mXaATLeRM

About 1m 45s into the video.


----------------------------------

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!

 

[rowingengineer]

Currently in Queensland they are cracking down on who can advertise as engineers, and also cracking down on non-registered engineers giving engineering advice. This is having a big effect on the university research teams.

I know of a few companies that had to reprint business cards because of it.

slta,
Be careful what you wish for!





When in doubt, just take the next small step.

 

[Twoballcane]

Hmmm...I have to agree with what IRstuff post way back this morning "The market is now about agility and adaptation to current conditions. This invariably results in engineers that are never at the end of the learning curve.", but let me expand on this thought.

In today's economy, there are two kinds of engineers that I see general and specialized. The general engineer will learn and do just enough to get the project done and out the door. These types of engineers have a “broad” knowledge of ideas and methods and most likely keep their jobs in a down economy or find another job quicker because of there vast repertoire. However, their salary would be on the lower end.

The flip side (and maybe you can consider them the “master tradesmen”) are the specialized engineer. They are specialized in one or few things. They have a “depth” of knowledge. These are the people you call in when the general engineer is stuck and need more specialized engineering knowledge to fix the problem. However, these engineers will be the first to go in a down economy and will take longer to find a job because their repertoire is limited. But, the plus side is that they will enjoy the hire pay scale compared to the general engineer.

Now, in today’s economy, it is smarter for an individual to be the general engineer. Is this bad? I don’t think so. It is the survival of the fittest. If one company goes down, a general engineer will have a wider skill set to transfer over to another industry or company. The master tradesmen (specialized engineer) would not.

To find specialized engineers, I tend to think that they would be in the larger companies than the small ones. If you are engineer in a small company, I guess you tend to wear many hats (which makes you a general engineer) and not have the luxury of having access to specialized engineers. However, in larger companies with many programs running in tandem, a specialized engineer can jump from one program to another as needed.

So to answer the OP, you would find more “master tradesmen” in larger engineering companies. I myself is considered a specialized engineer and I work with other specialized engineers who help me advance my knowledge of engineering, however, in a very narrow field.



Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[hokie66]

Some of the discussion above relates to preserving the term "engineer" for professionals. I don't get too excited about it, but if we want to do that, we should not refer to engineers as master "tradesmen". To me a tradesman is a carpenter, plumber, electrician, boilermaker.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradesman

 

[graybeach]

Those of us who prepare drawings, specifications and other contract documents can think of ourselves as tradesmen when we craft these items whether one is a general engineer or a specialist. Often the quality of drawings and specifications is sorely lacking, based on my experience reviewing such documents prepared by our own in-house engineers as well as outside consultants. Recent viewpoints written by steel detailers in Modern Steel Construction magazine echo this experience.

This is about communicating designs to others in a clear, unambiguous manner, but it is also about having a quality design. It involves taking the time think things through up front, which actually saves time in the long run. It often comes down to simply remembering to put you pants on before you put your shoes on. The more you work at it, the more you will remember to do this, and eventually you will become a "master tradesman."

Stick your guns, Curiousmechanical.

 

[rowingengineer]

I would never put "master tradesman" on my business card......

When in doubt, just take the next small step.

 

[patprimmer]

Master tradesman and engineer are not mutually exclusive.

There are many non professionally qualified but good engineers out there, however I think you need to be more than just an assembler of parts according to strict instructions to be considered an engineer. To be an engineer you need to be able to understand how things work and be able to use that knowledge to create or build things that work without depending unduly on luck or ridiculous over design.

If my previous comments lead anyone to believe that one must have an engineering degree and be certified by a professional association to be an engineer, that most certainly was not my intent.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[knight185]

I work for a power company where many of the older guys are retiring. I was told that during the old days you had enough expertise in the engineering group that a they could design, build, and operate a power plant. Now just about all design work is outsourced. I am a mechanical engineer and do general process engineering and troubleshooting. If a pump fails, find out why. If has to be repaired, I run the project of repairing it. Many of the older guys are retiring and few people really understand how a power plant operates.

A lot of my job is spent troubleshooting problems and assisting with repairs, but it does not seem like there is a very hard drive from upper management to really get to the root of a problem. Most of the time these investigations require detailed monitoring and inspections and management doesn't really want to invest much time and money into it, especially if that means derating the unit.

And training is a joke. There isn't any solid detailed training program. You basically learn on the job. Most of the time we get by okay. The company just doesn't want to spend the money on training. As long as the units are running and making money, management is okay. They aren't doing much of anything about all of the tribal knowledge that will be lost with all of the upcoming retirements.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Top management today mostly comes out of business schools.

Which is not in and of itself a bad thing, but business schools don't cover agrarian subjects, including such basic concepts as not eating your seed corn.

The same Professional Managers (I use that as a pejorative in this context) are everywhere in the USA, so you can't escape them by changing companies or industries.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[KENAT]

curiousmechanical, are you my alter ego?

I swear I had similar thoughts/conversations with one of my friends from Uni a few years after entering industry. I was in a defence company he worked for the government in defence. We both bemoaned the promotion of inexperienced folks to project management, including ourselves.

Look around you, when you do find someone experienced learn from them what you can. I was fortunate to work alongside some very experienced folks my first few years, but there was little formal training or mentorship. However, every now and then one of them would take me under his wing and show me something. I owe a lot to Tony, Tony, Ray, Rob and Roger and probably a couple of others I forget to mention. You can still learn something from people that suck - what not to do!

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484

 

[knight185]

Most of the plant managers used to be engineers are a familiar with how the power plants work but their job is to make sure the plant not only reliable, but profitable. That means spending as little money as possible while maintaining reliability. Most of the time poor technical decisions are made in order to satisfy the company earnings requirements.

 

[curiousmechanical]

Hello Everyone,

Once again, thank you all for your continued feedback and comments!

hokie66:

You are correct. I probably should have used the term “master engineer,” instead of “master tradesman.” I think I was stuck in the mindset of the apprentice/master craftsman comparison.

Twoballcane:

Thank you very much for your breakdown of the two common types of engineers! It was very enlightening. Based on your descriptions, I am definitively working in the “general engineering” environment. I often here the figure of speech: “jack of all trades, master of none.” This may be the root of my problem.

I enjoy getting deeply involved in a problem or subject and fully understanding it. I hate just “plugging and chugging” without having any confidence in what I am doing or the results that I get (that goes for FEA and manual analysis). However, that seems to be what most people do at my company because there is so much pressure to just get the job out of the building. Everything seems to be done haphazardly. People are forced to work fast, not smart.

In school, I enjoyed the more in-depth subjects and heavy level math used to solve difficult problems. I often wonder if I should pursue a more specialized career. I suppose that I am somewhat reluctant to do so for the reasons that you have outlined (and others); the fear of picking the wrong (one that I may lose interest in) specialty or becoming obsolete as technology and trends change. I guess this is a hard, but necessary decision that every engineer has to make in their career. Either, that or I guess I could pursue a career in academia. While not knowing any better, this sounds like an attractive alternative!

Thanks again!

 

[IRstuff]

Don't be beguiled by the promise of greener pastures, or utopia, or whatever. Anything human, is always human, which means that there is always something going on. Academia is rife with issues about publish/perish, tenure, office politics, etc. Do not think that there are no issues with quality of education, as there are many, as you have alluded to yourself. Moreover, it's the same; learn on the job. They don't train you to be a professor, or to teach; that's why there are so many sucky profs.

Life is not about finding the utopia, it's about making your own utopia out of whatever life deals you. As spoken by the master actor himself, "Captain Kirk, have you ever read Milton?" Kirk responds, "Yes. I understand. ... The statement Lucifer made when he fell into the pit: "It is better to rule in hell than serve in heaven.""

TTFN

FAQ731-376