U.K. ENGINEERING 2016 REPORT

Petty internecine squabbles about the relative value or status of different Engineers, Technicians or Technologists will add no value to anyone except those caught in an introspective bubble of very little interest to society, including employers. This isn’t unique to the UK and I quoted in an earlier forum a US debate for example, where only those who had carried out “multiple semesters of calculus based study” were considered by some to be “Professional Engineers”.  

 

The snobbery,  prejudice and apparent irrational pettiness, widely acknowledged to exist within the profession (and some other professions) has led to widespread apathy towards professional recognition amongst practitioners of engineering.  As we have seen in these forums there are also a significant number of people who have sought to engage, only to feel that they have suffered injustice or disrespect. The bitterness and sometimes angry recrimination generated as a result, especially towards other professionals is particularly unfortunate.

 

I see no point in looking backwards now, but the disrespectful treatment of senior “loyal” IEng volunteers by Engineering Council during the last revision UK-SPEC and especially its Registration Regulations, was a “last-straw” for me.

 

I respect the arguments of those who wish to restrict the practice of “engineers” through some form of statutory or licensing system. I was at one time even somewhat sympathetic, until I experienced this at much closer quarters. There are some circumstances where this is important, but not that many and often at the level of public interface such work in the home. I was initially taken aback by a comment made to me by a senior NHS manager a few years ago; “you don’t think we would trust Engineering Council to confirm people’s technical competence do you?”, but the point was fair.

 

I think that there is potentially great value to be gained by benchmark standards of performance being set and by practitioners subjecting themselves to “peer review”, including periodic re-validation. However all that value and more can be lost through political manipulation and systematic disadvantage created mainly for sociological reasons. For example, I have observed many an engineer trained via an apprenticeship, performing to an equal or higher standard than an equivalent person from a full-time undergraduate background, especially in early career. However the established system has pigeon holed them as being of “inferior status” relative to an age group peer who performed well academically in their teens, for reasons either of aptitude or systematic educational advantage.  

 

As I see it, the practice of engineering is an extremely “broad church” and different roles require different emphasis in the application of knowledge and skills. We need to set some sort of minimum standard for professional recognition and this is currently the threshold of Technician, which seems reasonable to me. Beyond this point people will continue to progress based on a mixture of talent and opportunity in many different ways. The role of a professional community should be to nurture and respect that development ,within appropriate boundaries, if necessary sanctioning those who step outside accepted standards.

 

In the UK “Chartered” Professional designation can be awarded by approved bodies to those who have demonstrated graduate level understanding and reached the standard of a responsible “trusted” professional.  Typically this might represent a combination of 8-10 years of learning and professional practice.  Prof Uff’s tentative suggestion of REng offers something which might be achieved as part of being ultimately becoming “Chartered”, or as part of an equally valuable career pathway such as a “more practical” Technician.  In my opinion Chartered recognition should only available to those REng who had demonstrated over a reasonable time period, significantly enhanced performance at “graduate level” or beyond, including affording fair value to work-based learning.                  

         

For the avoidance of any misunderstanding, I am keen to support academic research and learning provision in engineering and technology. However our system has for too long been allowed to presume that teenage academic prowess, is somehow superior to current workplace performance. There are exemplars of work-based learning assessment by universities of experienced practitioners and many who would benefit from a masters level academic experience in mid-career, as would the institution hosting them. Practical refresher and update training has also always been part of many craft and technician careers.

 

We need a sensible evolution and carefully considered transition period which needs strategic level leadership. Change of this nature can never be without pain for those wedded to the established order, but what I am arguing for is not a radical revolution, it is a sensible evolution aimed at providing a compelling proposition to today’s teenager who may be seeking professional registration and recognition in a few years.  

 

Petty internecine squabbles about the relative value or status of different Engineers, Technicians or Technologists will add no value to anyone except those caught in an introspective bubble of very little interest to society, including employers. This isn’t unique to the UK and I quoted in an earlier forum a US debate for example, where only those who had carried out “multiple semesters of calculus based study” were considered by some to be “Professional Engineers”.  

 

The snobbery,  prejudice and apparent irrational pettiness, widely acknowledged to exist within the profession (and some other professions) has led to widespread apathy towards professional recognition amongst practitioners of engineering.  As we have seen in these forums there are also a significant number of people who have sought to engage, only to feel that they have suffered injustice or disrespect. The bitterness and sometimes angry recrimination generated as a result, especially towards other professionals is particularly unfortunate.

 

I see no point in looking backwards now, but the disrespectful treatment of senior “loyal” IEng volunteers by Engineering Council during the last revision UK-SPEC and especially its Registration Regulations, was a “last-straw” for me.

 

I respect the arguments of those who wish to restrict the practice of “engineers” through some form of statutory or licensing system. I was at one time even somewhat sympathetic, until I experienced this at much closer quarters. There are some circumstances where this is important, but not that many and often at the level of public interface such work in the home. I was initially taken aback by a comment made to me by a senior NHS manager a few years ago; “you don’t think we would trust Engineering Council to confirm people’s technical competence do you?”, but the point was fair.

 

I think that there is potentially great value to be gained by benchmark standards of performance being set and by practitioners subjecting themselves to “peer review”, including periodic re-validation. However all that value and more can be lost through political manipulation and systematic disadvantage created mainly for sociological reasons. For example, I have observed many an engineer trained via an apprenticeship, performing to an equal or higher standard than an equivalent person from a full-time undergraduate background, especially in early career. However the established system has pigeon holed them as being of “inferior status” relative to an age group peer who performed well academically in their teens, for reasons either of aptitude or systematic educational advantage.  

 

As I see it, the practice of engineering is an extremely “broad church” and different roles require different emphasis in the application of knowledge and skills. We need to set some sort of minimum standard for professional recognition and this is currently the threshold of Technician, which seems reasonable to me. Beyond this point people will continue to progress based on a mixture of talent and opportunity in many different ways. The role of a professional community should be to nurture and respect that development ,within appropriate boundaries, if necessary sanctioning those who step outside accepted standards.

 

In the UK “Chartered” Professional designation can be awarded by approved bodies to those who have demonstrated graduate level understanding and reached the standard of a responsible “trusted” professional.  Typically this might represent a combination of 8-10 years of learning and professional practice.  Prof Uff’s tentative suggestion of REng offers something which might be achieved as part of being ultimately becoming “Chartered”, or as part of an equally valuable career pathway such as a “more practical” Technician.  In my opinion Chartered recognition should only available to those REng who had demonstrated over a reasonable time period, significantly enhanced performance at “graduate level” or beyond, including affording fair value to work-based learning.                  

         

For the avoidance of any misunderstanding, I am keen to support academic research and learning provision in engineering and technology. However our system has for too long been allowed to presume that teenage academic prowess, is somehow superior to current workplace performance. There are exemplars of work-based learning assessment by universities of experienced practitioners and many who would benefit from a masters level academic experience in mid-career, as would the institution hosting them. Practical refresher and update training has also always been part of many craft and technician careers.

 

We need a sensible evolution and carefully considered transition period which needs strategic level leadership. Change of this nature can never be without pain for those wedded to the established order, but what I am arguing for is not a radical revolution, it is a sensible evolution aimed at providing a compelling proposition to today’s teenager who may be seeking professional registration and recognition in a few years.