Engineering As Law

Both law and engineering are practical rather than theoretical activities in the sense that their ultimate purpose is to change the state of the world rather than to merely understand it. The lawyers focus on social change whilst the engineers focus on physical change.It is the power to cause change that creates the ethical concerns. Knowing does not have a moral dimension, doing does. Mind you, just because you have the power to do something does not mean it ought to be done but conversely, without the power to do, you cannot choose.Generally for engineers, it must work, be useful and not harm others, that is, fit for purpose. The moral imperative arising form this approach for engineers generally articulated in Australia seems to be:

• S/he who pays you is your client (the employer is the client for employee engineers)
• Stick to your area of competence (don’t ignorantly take unreasonable chances with your client’s or employer’s interests)
• No kickbacks (don’t be corrupt and defraud your client or their customers)
• Be responsible for your own negligence (consulting engineers at least should have professional indemnity insurance)
• Give credit where credit is due (don’t pinch other peoples ideas).

Overall, these represent a restatement of the principle of reciprocity, that is, how you would be expected to be treated in similar circumstances and therefore becomes a statement of moral law as it applies to engineers.

The Art of Communicating Engineering Judgement

Tim Procter shares his experience as a graduate engineer developing engineering judgement and his approach to communicating this knowledge to various stakeholders. This article was originally published at Engineering Education Australia.

As a graduate engineer (some years ago) moving from university to the workplace I was surprised to discover just how vast and varied engineering knowledge actually is. After completing an intensive degree and gaining what felt like a good understanding of engineering fundamentals, it came as something of a surprise to realise that becoming expert in just one engineering sub-sub-discipline could truly take a lifetime.

Science fiction legend, Arthur C. Clarke noted that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. To the qualified but inexperienced engineer that I was, a senior engineer discussing advanced engineering knowledge appeared quite the same; the outputs were comprehensible, but not their derivation. Such knowledge was generally referred to as demonstrating ‘engineering judgement’.

Engineering judgement is used when making a decision. It involves an engineer weighing up, in their own mind, the pros and cons of the potential courses of action being considered. This process may be formal, intuitive or deliberate or, in most cases, an intricate combination of the three.

As a graduate I regarded this engineering judgement with a sense of awe, as I considered the years of experience my seniors wielded when pronouncing how the engineered world should be. Surely, I thought, one day in the (distant) future my engineering judgement will arrive. And then I too will have the knowledge!

Oddly enough, I found personal development tends not to work this way. My engineering judgement gradually developed with my experience as I dealt with problems of greater complexity. I discovered that I understood the decision required, the options available, and the best course of action, but the act of explaining the decision was often more difficult than simply knowing the answer.

This knowing/telling paradox gives a clue as to the source of my graduate self’s confusion and awe of my senior colleagues’ wisdom. While the best solution may have been found, a problem persists; sometimes this judgement must be explained to a non-technical layperson, including graduate engineers.

Explaining engineering judgement to non-technical persons happens in a range of contexts – financial, managerial, corporate, governmental, legal, and the wider community. It is especially important for these stakeholders to understand the decision-making processes when dealing with safety, the environment, project management, operations and a whole host of other engineering considerations. This means that engineering jargon and equations will often work against the goal of communication.

The most effective approach I have found to communicate engineering judgement is to explain the options considered, their gradual exclusion, and the specific reasons each excluded option was considered unsuitable. It requires a clear explanation of critical success factors and how each option supports or hinders each of these goals. This best reflects the engineering process, where much of the time the ‘best’ option is actually the ‘least worst’ option, given the constraints it must meet and the corresponding trade-offs in time, cost, quality, and efficiency.

I find this process is generally understood by non-technical persons and helps prompt structured and useful questions from listeners: Why was this option not appropriate? How were the specific benefits of this option considered? This provides a good enquiry framework for engineering graduates and others to both understand and develop their own engineering judgement.

It is critical for graduates to develop their engineering judgement and the ability to communicate it. It brings confidence to both the engineer and their stakeholders, as each better understands the others’ needs and decisions. It is, in many ways, the single most important skill I have developed in my career, and something that each day I practise, in both senses of the word.

My advice for graduates is to take any opportunity to do the same. Make your best decisions for the problems you face, and then discuss your judgements with your managers, mentors and teammates. And when more complex engineering problems arise you’ll be able to not only solve them but also explain them. And that’s something that every engineer should be able to do.

Also published at:

https://eea.org.au/insights-articles/art-communicating-engineering-judgement

https://frontier.engineersaustralia.org.au/news/the-art-of-communicating-engineering-judgement/

EA College of Leadership & Management Event

In his capacity as Victorian Committee member, Tim Procter organised and MCed the recent winter seminar for Engineer Australia’s College of Leadership and Management.Daniel van Oostenwijck (VicTrack) and Clive Domone (EY) spoke on The Mobile Office – Working Anywhere, providing insight to help leaders and managers achieve high performance when leading distributed teams. Daniel and Clive made many interesting points from their experience as both leaders and team members, prompting audience questions and discussions.With around 30 attendees in person and another 90 registered to watch online the seminar was well attended. The event was recorded as a video webinar for future viewing. The link to view the webinar is here:https://livestream.com/accounts/5690925/events/7597877(The password is ‘Gradedge2017’; the webinar begins at the 16:00 minute mark.)

Apto PPE Launch

Apto PPE is a new entrant into the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) wear marketplace.  We produce fit for purpose women’s work wear that is safe, comfortable and stylish.  Our workwear range can be worn from the boardroom to site with confidence.

We produce fit for purpose PPE clothing for women only, including a maternity range. Clothing that is purpose designed for safety, comfort and practicality, to wear on the job in industries including construction, engineering, factory work and mining.

Co-founded by Michelle Shi-Verdaasdonk, Laurice Temple and myself representing R2A’s interest, the journey for Apto has been an exciting and interesting experience so far.

Fit for purpose women’s workwear was an initiative developed by Engineers Australia’s Women in Engineering National Committee after identifying a gap in the industry. Michelle and I were part of the core team in establishing and executing the initial stages.  In 2010, a working group was set up to develop prototype garments which were showcased at the gala dinner during the 15^th International Conference of Women Engineers and Scientists (ICWES15) in Adelaide in July 2010.  Following an overwhelming response the committee joined with John Holland to complete a pilot.

With permission and the good wishes of Women in Engineering, Apto PPE was founded and officially launched on International Women’s Day 2012 to take this initiative to its full potential and fill the gap in industry.

During 2012 we worked in partnership with our Australian designer Linh Thai from the Designer’s Assistant to develop three shirts and two pant styles as part of our Signature and Maternity ranges. These were then tested on site and refined to ensure optimum safety, comfort and style.

Two babies (two mother’s) and a successful battle with breast cancer later, we are excited and proud to launch our Signature and Maternity women’s work wear range on Wednesday 5^th March as part of International Women’s Day celebrations.

If you are interested in attending our launch or would like further information about Apto, please email me.

2014 R2A 9th Edition Text Update and Outlook

In February 2014, we hosted an event to launch the 2014 Update of the R2A text, which was well received.

With many changes to various legislation in Australia, R2A has concluded that the text will be updated annually at least.

Matters of interest in the 9th edition text update include:

• The introduction of the Rail Safety National Law which is complimentary but subordinate to the model WHS legislation.
• The expected approval in the new year of the Engineers Australia Safety Case Guideline (3 Edition). This specifically rejects the Risk Management Standard (AS 31000) as being able to positively demonstrate due diligence for high consequence – low frequency events.
• Why SFAIRP (so far as is reasonably practicable) can never equal ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable) legally.
• The logical limitations of Monte Carlo simulation for demonstrating project due diligence.

R2A – in partnership with Aboriginal Literacy Foundation

R2A, in partnership with the Rotary Club of West Footscray and Rotary District 9800 are supporting the Aboriginal Literacy Foundation (ALF) backpack program. The ALF backpack program provides backpacks filled with books, stationery and learning tools to disadvantaged Aboriginal children from remote communities. R2A and Rotary are funding the distribution of 1,500 backpacks containing approximately 9,000 educational books and resources to children in the Indigenous communities of Kowanyama and Pormpuraaw in Far North Queensland.

There is an enormous gap in the English literacy rates of indigenous and non-indigenous people in Australia. The gap is even wider for indigenous people living in remote and isolated communities. Benchmark testing of students has found that by year 7, less than one in five children living in very remote indigenous communities can read at the accepted minimum standard. The books will be provided to primary school children with the aim of encouraging the joy of reading and improving literacy levels at an early age when children are most receptive to learning.

We will be providing updates on the blog during the year of how the program is progressing and any other updates.