Would you ban this post?

Last time, I spoke about how we can sometimes limit our ability to reflect upon our engineering ability and how it might be affected by our background. This limitation is a result of, what I considered to be, saviourism. The text below is the post I mentioned, and promised I would share. Take a read and decide for yourself if it should be banned.?

BTW if you have read The Global Engineer - https://amzn.to/3VMcu08, then you will not learn anything new, but it might be a handy reminder.

THE GLOBAL ENGINEER - AND THE SKILLS THAT LET YOU CAN WORK ANYWHERE AND FOR ANYONE

This blog is a summary of research conducted into how your background - cultural, economic, national, and organizational - can affect the way you think and behave as an engineer. It will then talk about how you can use this knowledge to develop universal skills that will allow you to be the perfect engineer for any role anywhere in the world. Even if you do not plan on changing roles, this information will help you improve your engineering capabilities.?

But first, to create context, what is currently known about engineering expertise needs to be covered.?

The expert engineer

Much of the research into engineering expertise comes from research into design engineers. This is because they often have more definable tasks. But, they use the same skills as other engineers, and the findings are applicable to all. It’s just that design engineers make better “lab rats”.?

So what has this research found??

There are three things the expert engineers do:

• Systemic thinking - they don’t stay focused solely on the problem right in front of them. And they don’t make the problem more and more specific. Instead, they consider all the peripheral issues - for both potential future problems and opportunities to solve the problem they are working on.
• Framing - they don’t always accept the problem as presented. They look at it from different perspectives - like looking at it through a different frame. They then find the one that provides the path to the best solution. In short, they take real world problems and then turn them into engineering problems.
• First principles - everything is optimized based on the best applicable scientific knowledge available. There is no guesswork or doing simply what was done before. They make sure that every specification in any solution is justified with some scientific principle.

?How does background affect this expertise??

Examples are best to demonstrate this.?

And let’s consider systemic thinking first.??

Research into how people from a western or eastern background look at paintings found that westerners looked more at the centre of a painting and those from an eastern background noted more details in the periphery. The reason for this was argued to be that in eastern cultures it is not simply what happens that is important, but it is also the context of when and where it happens. It is not simply what was said, but who said it, to whom, while whom else was present (and not present) and what was happening elsewhere. While in the west, it is more about the facts, which, we like to think, are absolute and independent of other things.?

This would mean that people from eastern cultures would likely exhibit greater systemic thinking. They always need to be aware of other factors.?

However, other research specifically into engineering found the opposite.??

This was because of another influence - organizational.??

Organizations in these countries would often divide work and then allocate one engineer to each subtask. Once an engineer finished their subtask, they would pass the work to another engineer to complete the next subtask. The reason for this was attributed to the developing understanding of concurrent engineering in these organizations. Dividing the labour seemed like a sensible way to improve efficiency so that each engineer could specialize and become more skilled - note that it has been found that such division does not actually offer increased efficiency.?

When such engineers worked for other companies - ones that engaged in concurrent engineering - it was challenging for them at first, but the systemic thinking ability did develop. Thus, when given a chance to be expressed, the cultural advantage could be seen, but it was also the case that it could be stifled by managerial and organizational decisions.?

This example shows not only how culture and organizational background affects engineering capabilities (and expertise) but also how they can counter each other.?

Now Let’s consider framing.?

Framing is where you take a challenge as presented and then turn it into the engineering challenge you will take on. Note that even if the challenge is initially presented as an engineering challenge, then you might still need to reframe it.?

It’s a bit like working out what the real problem is.?

A classic example of framing was reported on by Nigel Cross when he analyzed expert engineer Gordon Murray. You can find the paper here - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01607156. Gordon Murray was presented with what appeared to be an aerodynamic problem. But after he thought about it, he turned it into a suspension design problem. Aerodynamics was still the main issue, but it was the suspension that could bring about what was desired. This was a ground effect issue that required the vehicle to be lower to the ground while at speed.?

Research into engineers working in mixed nationality teams found the following.?

If you have been in an education system that encourages rote learning, then you would not have been encouraged to reject the problem put, and then take on one that suits you better. And you are less likely to frame an engineering challenge differently from how it is presented.?

If you have been in an education system that encourages creativity or one that gives you a chance to emulate others who have been successful (ideally by framing), then you will be better able to do this instinctively.?

This shows how the attitude toward your education, by those who run the education system, could affect your framing, and thus engineering, ability. This is often a result of government policy. So it is an example of how the nation you are from might affect your engineering skills.?

Finally, let’s take a look at first principles.?

First principles thinking is aligned with how you view knowledge and success. Some cultures attribute success to simply working hard and diligently. And also link success to a reward for good intentions. Other cultures view knowledge more as wisdom - something that resides in the minds of those with experience or who have gone before (the ancestors). If you can tap into this sacred knowledge, then you will succeed.?

However, the success of your engineering efforts will be a result of your intended solution aligning with the laws of nature: first principles.??

Therefore, if you come from a culture that values objective scientific methods to attain knowledge, and the sharing and utilization of that knowledge, then you come from a culture that is more likely to use first principles.??

An example was found when researching engineering practice in mixed teams in China.?

A Canadian electrical engineer was given a task by a Chinese manager. The Canadian engineer knew this was an impossible task based on the first principles. The Canadian engineer refused to take on the task. In response, the Chinese manager gave the task to a Chinese engineer. As expected, the Chinese engineer failed. Not due to a lack of skill - the first principles would simply not allow success. The Canadian engineer was then expecting the manager to come back to him and acknowledge that they were right. However, the manager said “At least they [the Chinese engineer] tried!” Even after the outcome, the Chinese manager thought that effort and diligence and respect of authority were more important than first principles. It was never established if the Chinese engineer knew failure was going to be the outcome and just did as their boss said.?

This example shows that your culture could affect your willingness to trust the outcome of using first principles and the associated calculations.??

How does this affect engineering career success??

If your engineering skills are affected by your background (cultural, national, organizational and more), then you are unlikely to have the skills that make you an expert engineer.

And that means you need to work on developing those skills.?

How can these core and universal engineering skills be developed??

The fact that you know about them is the first and major step.??From here on, you need to now remain aware of:

1. Your tendency to think about peripheral issues and source related information.
2. Viewing your engineering tasks from different perspectives to see if there is a better way to solve them.
3. How often you use first principles to guide your decisions. From the general strategy to the specific attribute of a part (length, resistance, elasticity etc.).

?If you keep focusing on these three things and your propensity for them, then you will automatically become better. You should also encourage these in your students if you are an engineering educator; or in your staff if you are an engineering manager.??

A final note..

There are other factors that can affect your engineering skill. The above will help with the majority, but always be open to learning about other factors that can influence the way you think.