Where is the IET going?

Roy Bowdler:
 If the IET doesn’t listen to it members then it has an even bigger problem, than not being able to explain its value proposition to some of them. 

Given the lack of replies from the IET to my questions raised then they sure do!   I'm not alone in my feelings that the IET have abandoned their members.

 

My general point is, that it is impossible to offer equal value to every member everywhere with every specialist interest.  Probably the largest group of members with a single shared characteristic is our Chartered Engineers and for many of them this is value enough.

Chartered status is the only reason I can think of why you'd want to be a member, and only because I believe it's a condition by the Engineering Council.

For those with access to London, Savoy Place is a superb asset that members are rightly very proud of.

And there is one of the problems.   IET just closed the Glasgow venue citing refurbishment costs of £ 200k whereas Savoy Place apparently just received a £ 30+ million makeover!   It's too London centric.

 In fact almost everybody probably grumbles that they are paying for someone else?.

As I said in an above post I don't mind having some of my membership fee to support equality initiatives or STEM teaching, although how it's done I do disagree with, but to say that I'm not happy to pay in to the club isn't right.   I want to see some return to me for my membership.   It might sound to you selfish but it is my right to ask what do I get from membership?

  I assume but wasn’t involved, that the Teacher Building decision was taken because it couldn’t pay its way.

The Teacher Building wasn't fully utilised as an outreach centre for engineers providing support services as a mini-Savoy Pl.   It really never fulfilled its potential, or served members as it should have.

I agree about the principle of equal treatment on gender or other grounds and UK law requires this, unless you are a “private club” https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/panmure-is-latest-scottish-golf-club-to-admit-women-members-1-4736067   

I also agree that we shouldn’t supress debate or condemn different critical perspectives.

To stick with your golfing analogy.   You've got driving, chipping and putting.   Your driving is fine, your chipping is excellent, but your putting is abysmal.   So you decide that you're going to improve your putting.   You spend every effort on your putting, short putts, long putts, putts on a slope picking the right force and direction.   You spend months working just on your putting and at the end of the season no putt is beyond you.


Now your driving is short, chipping misses it target and when you do reach the green your putting nails it.   And you wonder why your handicap has gone up not down?


Which is why I'm being as careful as I can be not to say that the IET should stop trying to encourage woman in to engineering, or to have a prize for Young Women Engineer of the Year, but shouldn't do this at the exclusion of all others.   There has to be balance.   And balance is only gained through equality and ensuring that there are prizes for both genders.   Focus should be on engineering regardless of gender or other demographics, and then if you need to break down a little bit to recognise areas that are under-represented do so carefully as not to re-introduce inequality!   And the many traps therein.

As I am frequently reminded by my wife, I don’t understand women?.

What you do in your bedroom is your business.

Roy Bowdler:
 If the IET doesn’t listen to it members then it has an even bigger problem, than not being able to explain its value proposition to some of them. 

Given the lack of replies from the IET to my questions raised then they sure do!   I'm not alone in my feelings that the IET have abandoned their members.

 

My general point is, that it is impossible to offer equal value to every member everywhere with every specialist interest.  Probably the largest group of members with a single shared characteristic is our Chartered Engineers and for many of them this is value enough.

Chartered status is the only reason I can think of why you'd want to be a member, and only because I believe it's a condition by the Engineering Council.

For those with access to London, Savoy Place is a superb asset that members are rightly very proud of.

And there is one of the problems.   IET just closed the Glasgow venue citing refurbishment costs of £ 200k whereas Savoy Place apparently just received a £ 30+ million makeover!   It's too London centric.

 In fact almost everybody probably grumbles that they are paying for someone else?.

As I said in an above post I don't mind having some of my membership fee to support equality initiatives or STEM teaching, although how it's done I do disagree with, but to say that I'm not happy to pay in to the club isn't right.   I want to see some return to me for my membership.   It might sound to you selfish but it is my right to ask what do I get from membership?

  I assume but wasn’t involved, that the Teacher Building decision was taken because it couldn’t pay its way.

The Teacher Building wasn't fully utilised as an outreach centre for engineers providing support services as a mini-Savoy Pl.   It really never fulfilled its potential, or served members as it should have.

I agree about the principle of equal treatment on gender or other grounds and UK law requires this, unless you are a “private club” https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/panmure-is-latest-scottish-golf-club-to-admit-women-members-1-4736067   

I also agree that we shouldn’t supress debate or condemn different critical perspectives.

To stick with your golfing analogy.   You've got driving, chipping and putting.   Your driving is fine, your chipping is excellent, but your putting is abysmal.   So you decide that you're going to improve your putting.   You spend every effort on your putting, short putts, long putts, putts on a slope picking the right force and direction.   You spend months working just on your putting and at the end of the season no putt is beyond you.


Now your driving is short, chipping misses it target and when you do reach the green your putting nails it.   And you wonder why your handicap has gone up not down?


Which is why I'm being as careful as I can be not to say that the IET should stop trying to encourage woman in to engineering, or to have a prize for Young Women Engineer of the Year, but shouldn't do this at the exclusion of all others.   There has to be balance.   And balance is only gained through equality and ensuring that there are prizes for both genders.   Focus should be on engineering regardless of gender or other demographics, and then if you need to break down a little bit to recognise areas that are under-represented do so carefully as not to re-introduce inequality!   And the many traps therein.

As I am frequently reminded by my wife, I don’t understand women?.

What you do in your bedroom is your business.