We are rapidly reaching a point where the older engineers are retiring and taking with them the institutional knowledge of the last 30 to 40 years. Apprenticeships were the normal path for the junior engineer coming up through the ranks, but apprenticeships have been nearly abandoned in favor of mentoring programs.

While I am a big proponent of on-the-job mentoring, I'm not sure they are worth the effort and expense involved. In my risk management reviews and interviews with company personnel, I hear people talk about how little time they have to devote to anything but the task at hand. That's unfortunate, but trends show that young people today also do not have the time to spend with their "elders" and are "too busy" working or dealing with a full social calendar.

The industry is losing the institutional knowledge that some of the "greats" in the engineering and construction world have to share. The knowledge can't be handed down unless the time is dedicated to gain the knowledge that has made these "greats" successful. The news media carry word of their deaths every week.

Here's the dilemma: is technology changing so quickly that whatever was done over the past 40 years has no relevance? State-of-the-art technology helps keep a person keep ahead of the pack. But we also learn many lessons during our careers that go well beyond technology alone. Lessons in basic concepts of engineering—just because information comes out of the computer does not make it right. Lessons in people management—just because the music one listens to seldom changes, how we treat people has changed. Lessons about approaches that work well in securing work. Lessons about client relations—it isn't all about lunch and dinner. And the simple lessons of what worked in the field and what didn't and what we have done to make our work more efficient and effective to complete the job on time and on budget.

Given the increasing number of megaprojects along with the increasing value of claims when things go wrong, a lot can be said regarding the need for institutional knowledge. Yet, despite the industry cry for best practices, in many cases, the more experienced engineers are not called on to critique or to opine. If they are, they are still required to fill out forms and applications to demonstrate their "competency" in a particular area. Appreciating the need for competency, there must also be an appreciation that by the time one reaches his or her sixties, filling out forms and applications simply isn't at the top of the "to-do" list.

The challenge to our industry is how to tap these great minds, this storehouse of experience. Let's figure this one out soon, before the institutional knowledge is lost.

July 26, 2007

I tend to agree with your comments. I have observed a radical change in the practice of civil engineering. Where we once considered software one of many tools we would use to engineer and design works to a current state of practice, to where software is the only tool. Software today is very easy to use and doesn't require much talent. I could easily train a high school student to push buttons for less cost than an I would pay an engineer. I do believe that within 5 years, we will have likely dumbed down our engineering field to the point of extinction.

Gene Stacey

July 25, 2007

Amen sister, Amen.

Michael Thompson

July 23, 2007

This is entirely true in the engineering field as well as many other fields. We are in a real 'brain drain' that may put us at a competitive disadvantage.

Jim Pickett