This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

U.K. ENGINEERING 2016 REPORT

Former Community Member over 8 years ago

I have noted in another discussion, several comments of my own, but there seems to be a lack of interest or it takes too long to read and digest the report.

Apart from Roy's original comments and direction to be able to read the report, it would be great to find out if IMechE, ICE and the IET have had any official comments on the report and if not, when can we expect any.?

Daniel

P.S. Just had to get away from CEng v IEng status discussion.

Parents

0 Mark Curtiz over 8 years ago

Thus Andy, by definition, as someone who is a generalist with specialist areas/skills, you could equally consider yourself a Neo-Generalist. Personally, I see this all in a very positive light, being one or the other or both - simply helping to recognise it all. And that is part of the context of the book - where one might struggle to define one's skillset, as either or speciliast or generalist, it seeks to recognise that you can be both, or one or othe other as the situation/environment requires. I feel this describes most Engineers and Technologists.

From the Book's preface “The neo-generalist is both specialist and generalist, often able to master multiple disciplines. We all carry within us the potential to specialise and generalise. Many of us are unwittingly eclectic, innately curious. There is a continuum between the extremes of specialism and generalism, a spectrum of possibilities. Where we stand on that continuum at a given point in time is governed by context.
Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, our society has remained in thrall to the notion of hyperspecialism. This places constraints on the ways in which we are educated, the work we do, the people we socialise with, how we are recruited, how our career progression is managed, how we label ourselves for the benefit of others’ understanding. To counter and challenge these social norms, the neo-generalist has to learn how to give expression to their more generalist tendencies, even as they practise various specialisms, guiding others as they do so.
Our workplaces, governments, intelligence agencies and other communities and institutions constantly complain of silos, but that is an inevitable consequence of our promotion of hyperspecialism. So too the myopia of expertise that prevents us from seeing properly what is right in front of us, or connecting it in meaningful ways with other information, other people.”

From the back cover: Have you encountered difficulties describing what you do to other people? Have you ever labelled yourself in order to be understood? Is there a difference in the way that a generalist and a specialist can stay relevant?

This battle between the need for generalists and/or specialists is played out elsewhere constantly: Throughout my decade in the NHS, running several small hospitals, I battled it constantly. In a small hospital, it might not be able to afford the luxury of having specialists where the demand (i.e. population, prevalence of condition, etc) does not fully justify it yet equally a patient rightly wants to be treated by an expert in their condition or treatment (and usually prefers it to be local). This is no different to a small high-technology firm that needs specialist engineers that can also double as a generalist. In an acute hospital, a further dilemma exists where you need to staff your 'general' emergency dept. (or A&E) with generalists capable of dealing with whatever comes through the door - yet the Royal Colleges (encouraged by Govt policy) produce specialists that are ill-equipped for generalist work. Overlay the earning potential as a personal factor that individual Docs make, and you have a real problem - as the NHS is finding out. (As a rule, Specialist Docs earn more than Generalist Docs, have more socialable hours, and are rarely on-call, AND Specialists also have greater earning potential from private work which is not really an option for an Emergency Physician. All things considered, few want to be an A&E doc).

I beleive the same arguments, the same dilemmas apply in engineering and technology.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Mark Curtiz over 8 years ago

Thus Andy, by definition, as someone who is a generalist with specialist areas/skills, you could equally consider yourself a Neo-Generalist. Personally, I see this all in a very positive light, being one or the other or both - simply helping to recognise it all. And that is part of the context of the book - where one might struggle to define one's skillset, as either or speciliast or generalist, it seeks to recognise that you can be both, or one or othe other as the situation/environment requires. I feel this describes most Engineers and Technologists.

From the Book's preface “The neo-generalist is both specialist and generalist, often able to master multiple disciplines. We all carry within us the potential to specialise and generalise. Many of us are unwittingly eclectic, innately curious. There is a continuum between the extremes of specialism and generalism, a spectrum of possibilities. Where we stand on that continuum at a given point in time is governed by context.
Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, our society has remained in thrall to the notion of hyperspecialism. This places constraints on the ways in which we are educated, the work we do, the people we socialise with, how we are recruited, how our career progression is managed, how we label ourselves for the benefit of others’ understanding. To counter and challenge these social norms, the neo-generalist has to learn how to give expression to their more generalist tendencies, even as they practise various specialisms, guiding others as they do so.
Our workplaces, governments, intelligence agencies and other communities and institutions constantly complain of silos, but that is an inevitable consequence of our promotion of hyperspecialism. So too the myopia of expertise that prevents us from seeing properly what is right in front of us, or connecting it in meaningful ways with other information, other people.”

From the back cover: Have you encountered difficulties describing what you do to other people? Have you ever labelled yourself in order to be understood? Is there a difference in the way that a generalist and a specialist can stay relevant?

This battle between the need for generalists and/or specialists is played out elsewhere constantly: Throughout my decade in the NHS, running several small hospitals, I battled it constantly. In a small hospital, it might not be able to afford the luxury of having specialists where the demand (i.e. population, prevalence of condition, etc) does not fully justify it yet equally a patient rightly wants to be treated by an expert in their condition or treatment (and usually prefers it to be local). This is no different to a small high-technology firm that needs specialist engineers that can also double as a generalist. In an acute hospital, a further dilemma exists where you need to staff your 'general' emergency dept. (or A&E) with generalists capable of dealing with whatever comes through the door - yet the Royal Colleges (encouraged by Govt policy) produce specialists that are ill-equipped for generalist work. Overlay the earning potential as a personal factor that individual Docs make, and you have a real problem - as the NHS is finding out. (As a rule, Specialist Docs earn more than Generalist Docs, have more socialable hours, and are rarely on-call, AND Specialists also have greater earning potential from private work which is not really an option for an Emergency Physician. All things considered, few want to be an A&E doc).

I beleive the same arguments, the same dilemmas apply in engineering and technology.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

U.K. ENGINEERING 2016 REPORT

Community Rules & Guidelines