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!

 

[KENAT]

Twoballcane, don't tell me, I'm looking anyway.

Don't get me wrong, some of our self is cutting edge/on the limits of known physics so there you may not have a choice. But making sure the parts fit together for instance seems fairly fundamental.

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

 

[zdas04]

I like the guys that define "easy" as "someone else has to do it" and skip engineering altogether because it is a "simple problem". And then they call some consultant to fix the mess and get mad because we can't solve the problem without doing the calculations that were skipped.

David

 

[Twoballcane]

If I can give you another star zdas04 I would. This is my bread and butter in my company where mangers start to think in this maner to save money, but at the end spend more and then have their fanny out for all to see.

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

 

[MechNorth]

When it comes to the "bottom line", senior engineers are damned expensive and we don't put out as much volume as our junior counterparts. Part of the reason is that we've recognized that haste makes waste; $100 spent in engineering can save $10k in scrap, rework, delays and administrative overhead down the road. But that is proactive thinking that doesn't help TODAY's bottom line.

As a result, a significant chunk of many (most?) companies' knowledge base is culled as soon as the company doesn't meet its "projected" profit (even if a profit is still made).

The end result is that seasoned engineers aren't around to take younglings under our wings as it were.

Another consideration is that today's grads (not all, but a really good percentage) don't respect the knowledge of veteran engineers as it's "not what's in my textbook". If it isn't published in the last 5 years, and it doesn't include high-res cad models, it's just too old to be of any value.

I'm just over 40, and I had the advantage of working for a small mold shop for a while before moving to a large company. What I learned from the patience of senior designers and master mold makers was invaluable compared to what I learned of design from school.

Some engineering regulatory bodies are starting to reconsider the value of formal mentors because of the downward trend, so we just may see an increased focus on developing post-academic education.

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services

http://www.profileservices.ca

TecEase, Inc.

http://www.tec-ease.com

 

[zdas04]

Oh but were that true. The direction of NCEES is to require post-bachaloriate acedimic qualifications. The revised model law that has been recenlty approved is going to require an MS before you can get a PE after (I think, not sure about the date) 2015. I don't see anything in it to encourage mentoring.

David

 

[IRstuff]

OK, David, that's pretty bad; I'm going to have to call you on that:

post-bachaloriate acedimic

post-baccalaureate academic

SPELL CHECK!!!!

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[zdas04]

I usually do. My phone rang as I finished typing. Attention span of a goldfish. Apologies to all.

David

 

[IRstuff]

No problems. Your postings are usually pretty clean, so this was a rarity, and I couldn't resist ;-)

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[rowingengineer]

The NCEES sounds like it has lost contact with the real world. Most Grads in my opinion are very good fundamentally these days, know how to analysis anything to the S**t house. Unfortunately when it comes to the details, well they just don’t know and this is the problem. Regrettably there is only two ways to learn 1.good mentoring, 2. experience. Even though I am not affected by the NCEES idea’s I almost feel like writing a letter telling them how it is on the street.

When in doubt, just take the next small step.

 

[zdas04]

A lot of people have written them. A lot of people have written to their state boards. No progress that I can see.

The problem as I see it is that the people on the NCESS committee are a mix of academics who only know the public trough and people that companies feel they can do without for long enough to participate in NCEES committees. Not terribly representative of industry. Further, the committee is dominated by civil/structural types (just like the ranks of PE's) and MS degrees are more common in those fields than ME, EE, IE, etc. so they don't see what the fuss is all about.

David

 

[MechNorth]

Ah, so that's where the Canadian engineering associations got that notion from. It's the opposite faction to those supporting the mentorship model.

Some senior engineers (up here) with impressive lists of accomplishments (though mostly without Master's or Doctorate's it seems) are now advocating Engineering as a Master's-level degree rather than just requiring a Bachelor's degree. They seem to feel that grads aren't socially rounded enough to appropriately function. It's also motivated in an attempt to raise our stature comparable to medical doctors and lawyers. The fact is that we turn out too many engineering graduates (compared to those other professional-level programs) to be in a position where our services are publicly perceived to be as important as others.

We seem to have the same Civil-minded base up here too. That's where I see the bulk of the membership and the bulk of the professional development offerings too.

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services

http://www.profileservices.ca

TecEase, Inc.

http://www.tec-ease.com