Design News for Mechanical and Design Engineers

In your editorial on Aug. 20th, 01, you stated that your company hosted a dinner at which CEOs of several major engineering companies talked about the scarcity of engineering talent. My suggestion is to look at this problem and think beyond the box.

1. Instead of crying to each other at a dinner, and saying we have a problem, could they have instead spoken to various high schools and colleges in their companies geographical area and maybe inspire more kids to enter the engineering field by showing them how interesting our field is?
2. Look beyond the four-year degree and take a chance. Create internships for students interested in engineering or not. Not all of the engineering field workers are degreed engineers. I entered this field not as a 21-year-old engineering college graduate, but as a 33 year-old who had an injury and had an inability to do my previous job. Thanks to a program that taught CAD to the disabled, I was guaranteed an internship. After reading a 1989 article in Popular Mechanics about StereoLithography at Baxter Healthcare, I chose and interviewed for that internship and ended up working at Baxter's Advanced Engineering Design Center for six years.
3. Look within your own company at some of your technical or other assembly staff. There are a lot of people who know how to take apart a car, rewire electrical things in the house, or build decks or additions, who basically have the intelligence to learn to be engineers, but may not have had the time or money to do it.
4. All workers want more. We call it a corporate ladder. I am always looking at climbing it. It is my job to make the best products for my company, and to be the best designer for my boss and my group. This is a reflection on my manager and he, too, will be able to climb that ladder. A good company will look for people who want to grow and learn, from the assembly line to the engineer to the manager and even to the CEO.
5. Educators and parents must be honest and tell their kids that they have to enjoy what they do, whether they make $10 an hour or $100. And be realistic, you may be a great basketball player, but there are only about 300 or so pro players. So the odds are not that good.
6. Sometimes glamour comes in the color green. My five-figure salary in this field does not look as glamorous as the six-figure or more fields as lawyers and actors, but I have been having fun learning something new everyday, and in the medical field I feel that I can make a difference in someone's life. Nobody said life (or salaries) was fair.
7. A V.P. once told me that I should not just state what the problems were, but that I should offer solutions to those problems. This is a valuable lesson that I have tried to incorporate into my daily routine as a product designer.

In the last part, you bring up inventor Dean Kamen and the FIRST Robotics competition. From personal experience, it is very hard to organize and sponsor a team of students and mentors, as money and personal time from the mentors are sometimes difficult to come by. But the fun, energy, and creative inspiration that comes with creating that robot out of various parts and under certain restrictions is what this field is all about and I am glad that my company did the competition for two years. And I do believe that one of the teams from Indiana who have won the competition in the past, is a small firm and are not all engineering degreed.

Ronald Klein
Sr. CAD Designer
Sage Products, Inc.

I just read your editorial on role models for engineers and a thought came to mind. One role model for young adventurous engineers is McGyver. You may recall that TV program where McGyver thought his way out of a multitude of challenging problems. Granted he was technically a physicist (my formal education as well) but a good engineering one at that.

How about the astronauts and many of the test pilots? Most were also engineers. Almost all graduates from the military academies are engineers.

What we don't want in image is the old, overweight, scientist with a slide rule seen in the 1950s monster movies.

Perhaps a new TV program with a 30-40 year old engineer working in robotics, who likes to fly a homebuilt airplane, takes his (her) kids to the movies, has an interesting project at work, and helps the local neighborhood build a new walking bridge across the creek that's on the far side of the ball field would work.

Then you can add all kinds of reality - a real soap opera. Project takes too much time, boss is real pain, kids need help with homework, daughter wants to learn to drive. But the family keeps together and they find time for fun and the work project is a success.

Mike Zias, P.E.
Acme Electric Corp.
Cuba, NY

I am writing this in response to your column in Design News. I'd like to answer your questions at the end of the article.

What attracted me to engineering?

For me, it was pretty much a no-brainer. My mom still tells the story of me constructing a trap to catch crayfish when I was six years old. I always wanted to understand how everything worked. I was always taking things apart. I hot-rodded the lawnmower so I could drive it faster in order to complete my chores more quickly. With a pair of vice-grips, duct tape, and coat-hanger wire, I was able to coax 154,000 miles out of my first car, a '76 Ford Pinto (with the quality of cars these days, that isn't so much a feat anymore). My Dad retired from Borg-Warner after 30+ years as a designer for transmissions. It turns out that I have a knack for drafting, even though I rarely discussed my Dad's work with him. I have many relatives in the engineering field, mostly in the auto industry. After graduating high school, my Dad let me live with him and go to college, at a university down the street that had an engineering curriculum. He was living in Rochester, Michigan, at the time, and the school was Oakland University. It was an easy choice for me to accept his offer. As a result, I received a BSME. Later, I received a Masters in Control Systems Engineering from Wayne State University.

How does my experience translate to the next generation of potential engineers?

As I work with co-op students, I always try to give them things to do that involve working with tools and hardware. I also try to give them jobs that involve some design work of some kind. I think that working with your hands is an important aspect of engineering. For example, when I see a bolt torque specification that is, say, 10 lbf-ft, I have a good idea of the actual amount of force that is because I've torqued bolts to 10 lbf-ft before. I like to give students this "feel" for the numbers in the engineering world that are around them. After all, engineering decisions are not always made solely on data. Good engineering judgment relies heavily on having a "feel" for the numbers that are involved. Sometimes decisions can be made without the use of a computer or calculator. In any case, I think a "hands-on" approach to learning is essential, and I try to provide this opportunity to students whenever possible. The FIRST Robotics program, the LEGO program, and SAE's A World in Motion are great programs for potential engineers.

I hope that you find some interest in my thoughts.

Craig Condon
Senior Engineer
BOSCH

You propose interesting issues.

I have been an engineer for about 25 years, and it was difficult to remember what interested me in engineering. Back in the '60s, when I was in high school, if you were interested in engineering, you were labeled as a "nerd". This, I think, scared many people away from this vocation. It made no difference that I played football, baseball, ran track. If you were good at math and science, and had a good GPA, you were a "nerd".

Have things really changed since then? Is engineering still a "nerdy" endeavor? I am not sure that this is entirely true, but I get the impression that it still is. The people that I hire now are five-year college graduates in either computer engineering or software engineering, and they are still somewhat "nerdy". Sure, they don't walk around with pocket protectors and horn-rimmed glasses with white tape in the middle, but they are not the "cool" types that the marketing department hires.

As an example of the engineer’s plight, I won the Iowa Engineering Society's "Governor's New Product Award" in 1983 for the company that I was working for at the time. For me, it was the greatest honor I could dream of winning. For once in my life, someone "gave a damn" about what I did for a living. I was on cloud nine for a while until I couldn't find even a mention of it in the local paper. But, there were numerous notices and accolades for sales people and other business types who merely got promoted. Burst my bubble really quick!

Another anecdote from my past -- I was contacted, offhandedly, by one of our salesmen that one of our customers needed something special. I contacted the customer, worked out a system for them, wrote the specifications, designed the product, priced the product, and went to many meetings with the customer to take care of the myriad of details that there always are. I did everything except write up the sales contract.

For this whole project, the salesman made well over a hundred grand. I got a free lunch out of it. To this day, I have never received even a "Thank you" from that salesman. This is the lot of engineers. We do our work because we love it, but just once in a while, we would like to be appreciated.

I, and many other engineers, look at sales departments like this -- They do their job, they get rewards, trips, exorbitant salaries. They don't even have to be that good at their job. Engineers do their job for the internal satisfaction of saying to themselves, "Cool, I made that and it even works!"

I think that, in general, engineers don't get the respect they deserve. Sure, we do, within our own little circles, but not by the public at large. The best example of this is the shuttle disaster. No one ever heard about the engineers who made the shuttle fly--but, they became front-page news when something went wrong! That is the lot of engineers. When things work great, some marketing person or management person takes the credit for a wonderful product. When things don't work right, the first person to blame is the engineer. It makes no difference that they cut the development budget, moved up the timetable, eliminated testing, ignored the engineers' recommendations--all under the auspices of "getting the product to market in a timely fashion" or "budgetary concerns".

Somehow, we need to raise the public's perception of the engineer from the "nerds in the back room" to "lofty inventors who dream the future." If we can do that, then we will have a wealth of young people seeking out engineering as a career.

The only consolation that we engineers get in life is that many of us as we get older find that, as Bill Gates might remark, "The BMOC quarterback of the football team that gave me constant grief in high school and called me a ‘nerd’ is working for me now!"

Roger E. Bocox
Product Engineering Manager,
Ryko Mfg. Co.

I’m sure you’ll get an earful on the subject, but here’s my two-cents worth. Maybe you might pick up on a reason or two for the lack of engineering students.

I ended up as an engineer because I wanted to be an astronaut and a test pilot when I grew up. And after flying jets in the military for a number of years, I almost got there. But when my military career hit a dead-end, I had a good degree to fall back on. My second love in life is designing and building things.

I’ve been an engineer now for over 20 years. I’ve worked for some of the biggest and best, and I worked for some of the mom and pops. I have over a dozen patents in design and manufacturing. I have parts I’ve designed (or figured out a way to build) on cars, subs, aircraft and spacecraft. I have parts on weapons of mass destruction and I have parts on factories of mass production. I have cost some companies thousands of dollars, but saved (or made) most of them millions. I have a resume that reads like the Who’s Who in Engineering. I have been the head of engineering with some companies and have had my own. With all of that being said, I think I can speak for a lot of us out there.

In today’s world, where the above-average, skilled, blue-collar worker gets paid the same or more annually than an engineer with the same number of years experience, it is difficult to persuade high school students that it’s a worthwhile endeavor. And it may be intellectually challenging, but by no means equates to the income potential or job stability that a good mind can make in most big cities doing other things. And if you live out in the country it gets worse. My neighbor is a steel worker (union) and on a slow year makes almost what I do in wages and benefits ($65K). On a good year (which is defined by how much he wants to work), he can double my annual. His vacation package is easily twice as mine and his retirement benefits make mine look almost non-existent. And I have to put my salary into my retirement, he doesn’t. Most union workers can boast the same and they don’t have to take their job home with them.

Whenever a big company started with salary cuts, most started with the engineers. Many companies that are run [ultimately] by accountants and MBAs could not equate the value of years of experience an engineer is worth, and honestly thought that they could be replaced just as easily when the times are good [again] with a fresh grad (at half the cost).

Every time that I have been ‘victimized’ by downsizing I (and my cohorts) have gotten kicked out that very same day with two weeks severance; even after three to four years of perfect attendance. Conversely, most of the hourly folks that I worked with got four to eight weeks notice and four to six months of severance pay. To make matters worse, it takes (on the average) four to six months for an engineer to find a job, and many times he has to move to find work in the same engineering field. It’s tough to convince many companies that your engineering talents don’t all lie in the same category. For most other workers, it’s just the opposite.

I love my job and couldn’t imagine doing anything else to earn a living. When times were bad for aerospace engineers I was unemployed for over a year, lived out of apartments (away from my family), and even sold cars just to keep bread on the table. But I have always come back. When times are good, I have never had a problem finding a job, it’s just a matter of where and for how much. I am just now back to nearly the same salary I made 10 years ago. In between I was at less than half.

Few and far between are the engineers that can say they have hung their hats at any one company for over 10 years. It’s tough to get a good retirement going. Many times you have to leave just for a pay raise. I have never been offered more than 3 to 4% in good times and in bad. Some companies paid me up to $1,500 for a patent, but most just took it or offered me a buck (literally). But most made millions with them.

I think that because we are prostitutes for what we do (sometime I have a hard time believing that I actually get paid to do what I do), most companies realized that over the years and knew that if you wouldn’t do it for the pay offered, some other engineer would.

After reading the first paragraph of your editorial I got the impression that times are changing, and the true value of a good engineer is being finally realized. But my son doesn’t want to be an engineer. He resented moving every time.

We have engineering co-ops from the nearby colleges working for us, and the students love what they do. But they also have seen first hand (like my son) what the career of an engineer can be like, so some of them went on for their MBAs and never went back to the drawing board. If they want to be intellectually stimulated, they have only to turn on the computer or their Nintendo. What we use to have to imagine when we were young is now available in virtual reality.

Name withheld

I enjoyed your editorial from the 8.20.01 Design News. I agree with your comments that if TV made an interesting program about engineering (say, along the lines of "West Wing" but instead used engineering as the backdrop), it could have a very significant impact on young people. Look at all the law- or police-oriented shows, yet I know of very few policemen or lawyers who are happy in their jobs. Yet, most engineers feel that their jobs are rewarding.

I entered engineering for the following reasons:

1. Born in 1948, I grew up fascinated with the technology exploding right after WWII -- airplanes, jets and rockets, cars. I saw engineering and science as a positive influence on the society I lived in.
2. My father worked for NASA all of his career, so I was exposed to the space and aeronautics business.
3. My father encouraged me and my brothers and sisters to be involved in engineering or science from an early age. He took me to Saturday morning science classes and entered me in science fairs and also encouraged me prior to entering college.
4. Beyond my family, Sputnik and the reaction of American schools to Sputnik had a major impact on my seeing science or engineering as a valuable way to spend a future career.

How does this translate to the next generation?

I think not very well. None of my children have been interested in becoming engineers or scientists, and I know of no other engineers whose children want to become engineers. (I'm sure there are some -- I just don't know any.)

For myself, I think that my children saw my career as an engineer (31 years, so far) as unappealing, though I feel that it has been very good for both me and my family. A lengthy personal injury lawsuit in which my company was involved certainly affected my children's attitude. My father has commented to me many times that engineering today is a much more contentious, much more difficult field today compared to the decade or two after WWII.

Glenn R. Dorsch

In response to your editorial, I can say that two factors had the most significant impact on my decision to become an engineer: 1) my high school science teacher, a wonderful lady; and 2) the fact that three of my older brothers had already graduated from the University of Illinois with degrees in engineering and science. I am the youngest of eight children, attended a small central Illinois high school (Nokomis) with a graduating class of 44 (in1952), and I was one of only two graduates in my class to go directly to college. So, it was highly unusual for any of us to go to college, let alone pursue a technical degree.

The reason my brothers' influence was so strong

was that during grammar and high school, I had the opportunity to visit the workplace of each of them at least once (oldest brother with a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry was working at the DuPont Engineering Experiment Station, Wilmington, DE) and the next two brothers (B.S. and/or M.S. in Ceramic Engineering were both working at the Corning Glass Works). What I learned of their work had a profound influence on my career choice. I earned a B.S. ('56), M.S. ('57), and Ph.D. ('60) in Ceramic Engineering from the University of Illinois and worked in industry for 38 years (32 for Texas Instruments Inc., 2 private consultant, and 4 years for DSC Communications Corp. [now Alcatel]). I can say I have had a very enjoyable and rewarding career (now retired for the last five years.)

I have stayed involved with educational matters such as: Alumni Board member at Materials Science and Engineering Department for six years, advising on matters of curriculum and student development., as well as tutoring and speaking at local schools (high school and elementary, including my granddaughter' school).

I hope these personal notes are of some help.

Elwin L. Johnson

I just read your editorial in the August 20th edition of Design News and I thought I'd go ahead and drop you a line regarding what attracted me to engineering. But first, let me give you my background. I graduated from The Ohio State University with a B.S in Aeronautical Engineering in June 1989, then received a MS in Aeronautical Engineering (again from OSU) in March 1993. While in graduate school, I was also interning at Battelle Memorial Institute and was then hired at Battelle (doing mostly defense-related engineering) upon graduation. I worked for Battelle for four years and then took a job at Honda R&D Americas, Inc. doing mostly computational fluid dynamics modeling (both internal and external), where I currently am employed.

Having said that, I will first rephrase your question into "why I became an engineer", which is different than "what attracted me to engineering". I can sum up the answer into exactly one word: my Dad (OK, it's two words, but just plain "Dad" doesn't sound right and "exactly one word" has more impact). Anyway, my dad flew F-100s in the U.S. Air Force (until 1970), earned a B.S in Mechanical Engineering, and worked at the General Electric Jet Engine Division in Cincinnati, Ohio, as an engineer throughout my childhood. My dad was (and still is) a consummate tinkerer. Although now retired, he has a part-time job repairing sewing machines. My mom works at the same store selling sewing machines and teaching sewing classes. They both fostered my (and my two younger brothers') imagination and creativity. My parents never pushed us into anything - I could've even been a lawyer (ick) and they would've been happy - as long as it was what I wanted to do. While both my parents encouraged my childhood interests and pursuits, whether academic or athletic, it was my dad's knowledge/love of science, math, and engineering that was somehow imprinted on my personality. I absolutely love science and math and how they apply to everything. As my wife (who also is an engineer) occasionally laments, "You are such a geek ..." My reply is always, "Yes, I am!" You see, I am and always have been extremely curious and want to know how and why things work.

Finally, to answer your question: "what attracted me to engineering", I can't really think of anything specific because it implies other options/choices that I never had to make - or needed to make. I am one of those rare cases that always knew what I wanted to do. I remember (quite clearly, in fact) in the 7th grade that I knew I wanted to be an aeronautical engineer when I grew up. As I became a working adult – and gained the awareness that goes with it -- I have realized that engineering, whether research-, applied-, or developmental-related, has always been a part of my life and, quite frankly, I really wouldn't have had it any other way.

Thomas N. Ramsay
Honda R&D Americas, Inc.

Picture this! It's 1955, radio is only a couple of decades old, refrigerators have replaced the old ice boxes, televisions are becoming a household item, jet engines are replacing piston engines in military aircraft but not in commercial aviation yet, the space race is on. Transistors were developed by Bell Laboratories only a decade prior, and are not even in common use yet; technology is just starting to emerge, and the need for people who understand and can develop all of this technology is burgeoning. I was ten years old and the choice was clear, I was going to be an Engineer when I grew up. Engineers were highly respected, almost mystical in nature, and commanded huge salaries. This is what attracted ME to engineering!

Now, technology is old hat! Almost everyone has one or more of the following: TVs, stereos, cell phones, microwaves, computers, calculators, etc. Technology is now only a tool to more lucrative endeavors with higher earning potentials, such as marketing and sales, and people who work with technology are now nerds and social misfits. No longer does an engineer command a huge salary. No longer is an engineer perceived as a dignified, well respected professional.

The choice of a career is based mostly upon three elements, monetary compensation, power/prestige, and job satisfaction, and in today's society monetary compensation is more heavily weighted than the other two. An engineering career used to provide all three of these essential elements, but an engineer today has only job satisfaction. Call it unglamorous if you wish, but engineering is just plain unprofitable today. A person can make more money with less education in a myriad of other careers, and they don't feel like Rodney Dangerfield.

Laign Eton

Why I chose to become an engineer could be more accurately described as "how" I decided to become an engineer. As with many high school graduates going into college, the task of choosing a collegiate learning path is built upon past experiences and preparation. Many choose "undecided," and therefore, keep options open. That path did not appeal to me -- I simply looked at my skill sets from high school--lots of math, science, and music. I figured music was too competitive (more supply than demand) to excel, and decided that engineering was for me. That was a simple decision.

The lesson learned? If I had not taken math and science, my choices would be more limited. Therefore, I think the issue is, how do we get students interested in math and science so that it's an easy option to choose engineering during that critical day of enrollment? That's a challenge. Personally, I think reading, writing, and math should be the cornerstone of early education so that math is not in competition with such subjects as social studies, health, etc. Once the basics are addressed, then advanced mathematics can be built upon more easily and the touchy/feely studies can be introduced (I'll get off the soap box now).

Simply put, make math and science interesting at an early age, then make it challenging as the student matures. By the time a student starts thinking about college, engineering will be perceived as an achievable option instead of a scholastic path that has many difficult hurdles not encountered by other professions.

Shaun Ray
Wichita, Kansas

I am responding to your editorial of the August 20th issue of Design News.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that there is a shortage of talented engineers in the world. A case in point, my boss had a time of it searching for an electrical engineer for our growing research laboratory here in San Diego, CA. It took as many recruiters as he could contact to find an engineer.

Anyway, my own experience as a mechanical engineer has been about the same. Except for the fact that I am an entry-level engineer and I was searching high and low for an engineering job; the biggest reason I did not get a job in some places was lack of experience.

Thus, we have another reason why there is a shortage of engineers. Mind you, there are many engineering graduates out there for the asking, but many lack the work experience that companies are looking for in a prospective employee. A case in point would be one of my good friends, who like me, is an entry-level mechanical engineer (less than two years of work experience), who also looked high and low for an engineering position. He recently found a job after about a year of searching.

There are many reasons why companies hire mainly experienced workers, but I tend to look at the two main reasons listed below:

1) Universities/colleges emphasize more of the theory than on the practical. While this may/may not be true for all schools, this pretty much sums up why most engineering graduates lack the practical knowledge to do simple tasks (i.e., interpersonal communication skills, computer-aided drafting, etc.). Mind you, I do not fault the schools for not teaching "basic office skills," but I do fault them for not including more hands-on experimentation and research.

[Note: The above is from my own personal experience at an engineering college from 1992 to 1996. It is important to note that since then, my college has started to focus on more hands-on projects for their engineering students as well as an equal amount on fundamental engineering/scientific theory.]

2. The engineering student's/graduate's lack of marketable skills (engineering and otherwise). It is especially important in the 21st century to develop a "toolbox of skills" for today's engineer (as well as for other majors as well). While schools/companies should take the lead in training its students/engineers in these fast-changing times, the duty of training also falls upon the students/engineers themselves.

[Note: In my own experience as an engineer, I have had to do more than just engineering. For example, I have been helping with the maintenance and repair of the company's computer network and engineering database (particularly with the database, since I am the one in charge of it!)]

Today's engineer is more than just someone with a pocket protector and an HP calculator. He/she is also part computer guru/database manager/office manager (at times)/secretary (all the time, remember, I am an entry-level engineer)/dishwasher, you name it! In other words, it is very important to KEEP ON LEARNING!

As for myself, I have been learning more about computers and networks by taking COMPTIA's A+ certification courses and examinations to learn more about how and why computers work. I also plan on taking additional computer/network courses (i.e., MSCE, Network+, Server+, MCDBA, etc., etc.). You can never learn too much.

As for what attracted me to engineering, I would have to say that science fiction (for the most part) got me interested. The very first movie I ever saw as a small boy was, "Star Wars." I remember as a kid taking apart my Star Wars toys and seeing how they fitted together. I also enjoyed building spaceships with my LEGO(R) collection. Anyway, I have always loved to take things apart and put them together again, usually in different and fantastic ways (i.e., LEGO(R)).

As far as inspiring the next generation of potential engineers, I would tell them to use their hands as well as their minds to create things that they can appreciate (be it wood carvings or "nickel rings" I made in metal shop back in junior high school). Dean Kamen's idea of the Robotics Competition is a very good step in the right direction. I wish I had that back in my high school days.

Mark Lagamayo
Associate Mechanical Engineer
San Diego, California

About the only thing that I've found on television that equates engineering with excitement is "Battlebots" or "Junkyard Wars". The kids will watch that, but turn on "Engineering Marvels - the Hoover Dam" and they're out the door.

Both my wife and I are mechanical engineers. Both of our fathers were mechanical engineers - emphasis on past tense. I suppose what got me interested in engineering was that I enjoyed problem solving and still do. Figuring out how to keep my 1959 Edsel on the road was always an engineering challenge.

I have to wonder how good a PR job we do to continue our species. How often do we toot our own horns about our accomplishments? When someone asks "What do you do for a living?" how much farther do you go once you get the blank stare? Most of us are content to move on to other subjects of discussion because it's too difficult to explain. Are your kids bragging to their friends about your profession? Would you want your kids to follow in your footsteps? Is it any wonder that enrollments at engineering schools are dropping?

As for us, we have two daughters. They have just as many LEGOS as Barbie Dolls. They still love coming to work with us every once in a while and playing with the toys in my office - but we haven't gotten "stupid" yet. Would I like them to be engineers? I'm not sure. But I sure hope they learn how to figure things out.

Michael S. Doery
Monroe, CT

This is in reply to your Design News editorial of 8-20-01. I have a BSME degree and I attended college from 1970 to 1974. What attracted me to engineering?

1. My family had a history in the machine trades. My father trained to be a machinist. He left it to become a Chicago fireman because the pay, the benefits, and the job security were better. His father was a laborer in the Pullman shops. My other grandfather apprenticed to be a blacksmith, and eventually made tank tracks at American Brake Shoe in Chicago.

2. You could get a job with a degree in engineering. It looked like interesting work. What can you do with a BA in English? Teach Hemingway to a bunch of sullen high school students? No thanks.

3. I wanted to be part of the space program. I applied for Mission Specialist twice, in 1976 and 1978. NASA turned me down. Judy Resnick was just a much better engineer than I. But I'd still give anything short of a controlling interest in my soul for a flight.

People aren't going into engineering because it's a bad bet. Wages in engineering start out well but quickly stagnate. This is called "salary compression." Job assignments are getting shorter, and new jobs are often hard to find. This is called "the increasing pace of technology." Engineers (as your articles point out) are being told to do more things in less time with less support staff and an inadequate level of improvement in the tools they use. This is called "corporate downsizing." The courses engineers need to get better at what they do are often not available. This is called "academic resource allocation." I've left engineering for technical writing. This is called "a smart move."

Given the big improvements in equal opportunity education and employment in the last 30 years the presence or absence of greater numbers of women in a particular profession says a lot about that profession, and there are still fewer women in engineering than any other profession.

The latest class at the University of Minnesota Medical School is half women. Undergraduate engineering at the U of MN is about 15% women, with even a lower percentage of women in engineering grad school. You know from your own surveys that even if a woman does earn a degree in engineering, she is more likely than her male peers to leave the field. The reason, which no one (especially the CEOs you talk to) wants to admit, is that most of the women smart enough to be engineers are smart enough not to be engineers. There's nothing wrong with the intelligence and talent of half the human race -- there's something wrong with engineering. Smart women look at what it takes, they look at what it gives them, and they look elsewhere. Apparently the same is now true for more and more male students, too.

If you want more engineers, then raise the incentives for American students and American engineers. Stop relying on foreign labor, which distorts the supply and demand equilibrium and wrecks future incentives. This is basic economics, which you probably studied as a freshman.

Do you think people go into engineering thinking, "I want to design hydraulic fittings" or "I have a love of packaging machinery" or "I want to do engineering change orders"? No. We're all chasing a dream. For me it was the Apollo program. For lots of us, it's getting a chance to do creative, worthwhile work that pays well. The dream is down, and so is engineering enrollment. Engineering really is an "unglamorous, math-intensive profession." It's not just a perception.

The book "Chariots for Apollo" describes how Grumman built the lunar module. Most of the characters are engineers. They might be good role models, except that some of them were literally worked to death, and most of them got fired after Nixon folded the Apollo program. There are plenty of engineers in David Halberstam's "The Reckoning" too, but I wouldn't want to work in the auto industry if that's what it's like.

I hope the FIRST program is a success for engineering recruitment. Maybe it will counterbalance what kids read in Dilbert. But to paraphrase Yogi Berra, "If people aren't going to go into engineering, there's no way you can force 'em not to."

Ronald Corradin, PE

Your editorial "Role Models or Robots?" in the 8-20-01 Design News was timely. I write to bring to your attention Project Lead The Way, a not-for-profit educational foundation whose goal it is to, simply stated, grow the nation's engineering and engineering technology work force. Our curriculum can be found in 300 schools in 27 states and our projected growth for the future is strong. I invite you to visit our web site, www.pltw.org , and offer my direct service if I can provide you with further details.

Niel Tebbano
Director of Operations
Project Lead The Way
ntebbano@pltw.org

As one in engineering, I happen to agree with the argument that in America, engineering is perceived as an unglamorous profession. The perception of engineers is somehow very different in other countries. In other countries, engineers rank way up there with lawyers and doctors and politicians in wages, clout, and in the part that they are perceived to contribute to the society. In fact it is the norm for engineers, in other countries, to precede their name with the title "engineer" just as medical doctors and lawyers may precede their name with "Dr." or "Barrister".

Why is engineering perceived as an unglamorous profession in America? I believe it is largely because the achievements and contributions of engineers are not compensated properly and not publicized as are the contributions and achievements of other professions. Does anyone ever recall when last there was a nationally-televised achievement award for the engineering profession? There are all flavors of awards for actors, musicians, politicians, MBAs (Making It By Associations), and athletes. How do athletes and actors really contribute to society? I bet that if one asks, they'll have a million examples. Note that I have not mentioned doctors because I believe that they make significant contributions to society. The fact that doctors earn more money and perhaps get more notoriety than engineers is perhaps commensurate for their contributions to society. The engineering profession is responsible in directing focus on themselves, and thus spur, others to want to get into the profession. Engineers cannot get people into the profession by showing folks how nice it is to be an engineer.

What drives folks into a profession is money, power, and fame. That is the reason why so many gravitate towards law, politics, acting, music, etc. Does anyone believe that Madonna, Michael Jordan, Troy Aikman, Jimmy Carter, or George Bush could be as well known or as wealthy as they are if they were engineers? How many folks know Jimmy Carter as an engineer though his educational background is in engineering?

The world would be nothing without contributions of the engineering professions. When last did an athlete or politician discover anything to help society? I believe that the world can survive without music or athletics or politics. The engineering profession needs a nationally-televised achievement ceremony, a TV show that highlights the contributions and rewards for engineers. I believe that recent shows, such as Robot Wars and Junkyard Wars, have done a lot to publicize the engineering profession. However, we must do more to encourage such publicity and at the same time find ways to make it rewarding to be in engineering or to want to be in it. Otherwise, engineering shall continue to be pushed into the abyss of worthless professions.

Darling Peters

I am afraid you got my dander up with your Editorial of 08.20.01 on Role Models or Robots. I was part of one Robotics FIRST team this past year and offer it and Mr. Kamen all the recognition possible. However, when CEOs complain of the lack of engineering talent, they only need to look at themselves as the cause. This giant, highly regarded corporation used to have a dual career track for salaried employees, whereby an engineer that did not aspire to management could earn both a decent income and recognition and respect. Now an excellent engineer receives an "M3" review rating; meaning that they only meet (M) expectations, and the 3 means "no immediate promotion probability". That means that they not only will not be reviewed again, performance or financial, for at least 24 months, and that any current raise is in the lower levels that management is allowed to offer. That is official policy and openly presented as the right approach to rewards. The key word is that ONLY "Top Performers" are rewarded in this company anymore. However, "Top Performer" is neither a technical nor past performance rating. It is very openly and clearly a "subjectively selected" few. As just one example, no matter how good one is, how many projects, mentoring, etc., they do, one can no longer earn the title of Black Belt, which used to be the company pitch that everyone should aspire to. Now, you have to be "selected" to become a Black Belt, and the official document clearly states that only "top performers", and elsewhere "recent graduates" will be selected for such positions.

I won't go any further, but suffice to clearly state that every single engineer I have talked with, that enjoys engineering and wants to do engineering, is extremely frustrated and many are now looking for other careers. If the CEOs want engineers, then they are the ones that need to show engineers as "role models" of respected and recognized and appreciated employees instead of using them as dime-a-dozen pawns.

Everett Ratzlaff, P.E.

We have even more letters! Click here to read them!