As discussed in a previous blog, civil engineering firms are cutting senior staff in favor of hiring less experienced, less expensive technologically savvy engineers. The blog received a variety of comments. Among them was insightful feedback from Principal Civil Engineer Mike Prett, PE. With permission, his comments are reprinted here:
The deeper I get into this business (I’m about 14 years in and in my late thirties) the more I see how invaluable the senior staff is for mentoring, senior oversight, project and program management and client contact/marketing.
I agree that you need tech savvy youth to keep production moving and certain “buzz” type certifications such as LEED and PMP are important in today’s marketplace, but not at the expense of a companies senior staff. (Since I’m smack in the middle I feel like my opinion is pretty un-biased, although I realize no opinion is completely un-biased)
I feel like we are losing site of the fact that civil engineering used to be an apprenticeship-based career and is experienced based after completing the minimum competency requirements of ones bachelors and PE. Typically one starts in design, learns the ropes, gets some certifications, moves into managing small projects has some successes and some failures and so-on. Eventually when you start managing large jobs and programs, some of the fancy computer models you used to say model a water system, do a structural analysis, or run some earthwork aren’t the tools you need as a senior employee. At that point the focus is different. One should be using accounting software, analyzing schedules and building complex PMIS systems. One at that point is focusing on developing staff, keeping clients happy, understanding higher level market trends, management techniques and business development strategies, while still keeping a pretty good understanding of what your more technically based and entry level employees are doing.
I feel pretty strongly there are no short cuts. Hand a $300M CIP project or program to someone with three years of experience to run and I’m guessing it’s headed for catastrophic failure. I don’t really feel that the adage “young and tech savvy” replaces “old and worn out” in our business applies as much in our career as many others. (e.g. high-tech or pharmaceutical sales for instance). All levels in our business can add value if properly utilized.
Mike’s comment about civil engineering’s history as an apprentice based career are on point. When did that practice change? What types of mentoring programs are companies implementing to help staff earn PEs, learn project management, client development and maintenance? With benefit cuts, training programs have been put on a back burner. Now mentors find themselves tossed aside.
Those firms that view senior engineering cuts as an answer to a problem – as a short term fix, will find the long term problems to be costly. When the economy picks up many less experienced engineers who have been without a mentor will leave to join a firm that values the mentor/mentee relationship. They will find that their lack of training will hinder their ability to progress in their career. Companies who have cut senior staff will find themselves with limited senior leadership. And, as Mike suggested, projects may run the risk of engineering failures.
Should civil engineering companies reinvent themselves in regards to staff during this difficult market? How do you think the ousting of the senior engineer will impact the industry?