Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 22 subscribers
  • Views 165 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in

Are we preparing engineers well enough for the age of AI?

Gaurav Mishra

Over the last few months, while attending the Executive Programme in Business Management at ISB, I have had more exposure to AI and generative AI. It has made me think seriously about how engineering work may change over the next few years.

AI can certainly help us review information, prepare documents, compare requirements and explore possible solutions faster. But engineering is not only about producing an answer. It also involves understanding the actual process conditions, questioning assumptions, assessing risk and taking responsibility for the final decision.

This becomes even more important in safety-critical areas, where a technically convincing answer may still be wrong or incomplete.

So, I have been reflecting on a broader question:

How should engineers prepare for the growing use of AI without losing the technical judgement, practical understanding and professional accountability that define engineering?

I would be interested to hear how other engineers are approaching this in their own fields.

Parents

  • This is an important question, especially for engineers working in power generation, industrial automation and other safety-critical environments.

    AI can accelerate document reviews, fault analysis, requirements comparison, coding and troubleshooting, but it cannot fully understand the physical process, equipment condition, operating history or consequences of a wrong decision. A technically polished answer is not necessarily a safe or correct engineering solution.

    I believe engineers should be prepared in three areas: strong engineering fundamentals, practical exposure to real systems, and the ability to critically validate AI-generated outputs. Training should include not only how to use AI, but also how to identify incorrect assumptions, incomplete data, cybersecurity risks and unsafe recommendations.

    Professional accountability must remain with the engineer. AI should support engineering judgement, not replace it. The engineers who will add the greatest value are those who can combine digital tools with field experience, systems thinking and the confidence to challenge an answer that does not match the real process.

  • in reply to Brian Masona

    Thank you, Brian. I agree with the three areas you mentioned. With clients expecting faster service, AI can help engineers complete routine work more quickly. However, engineers still need practical experience and the confidence to question an answer that does not match the actual process.

Reply
  • in reply to Brian Masona

    Thank you, Brian. I agree with the three areas you mentioned. With clients expecting faster service, AI can help engineers complete routine work more quickly. However, engineers still need practical experience and the confidence to question an answer that does not match the actual process.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines