Thoughts on the Engineer of 2020An Aerospace Industry Perspective: Thoughts on the Engineer of 2020 An Aerospace Industry Perspective Marlene Nelson Director, Aviation Safety Boeing Commercial Airplanes October 3, 2006 Excerpted from the writings of John H. McMasters, Technical Fellow, The Boeing Company john.h.mcmasters@boeing.com and Affiliate Professor, department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA


Presentation Overview: Presentation Overview Background and Context Aerospace Technical Workforce of the Future Enhancing College Education Programs


Origins and Sources for this Presentation: Origins and Sources for this Presentation AIAA Distinguished Lectures (2002-2007) Sigma Xi [national scientific research society] Distinguished Lectures (2005-2007) Membership on the Boeing Higher Education Integration Board (HEIB) and predecessors since 1993 Ed Wells Partnership program manager (since 1999) All Boeing Technical Excellence Conferences (BTECs) and Help Engineer Your Career (HEYC) events Affiliate Professor, Dept. of Aero. and Astro., U. of Wash. (since 1990) Approximately 50 years experience in aerospace, and 30 years in Boeing Commercial Airplanes Engineering. The opinions expressed in this presentation are solely those of the author and do not represent an official position of either The Boeing Company or the University of Washington


A Developing World-Wide “Perfect Storm” ?(Some Global Challenges for the 21st Century): A Developing World-Wide “Perfect Storm” ? (Some Global Challenges for the 21st Century) Increasing World Population Engineers must play a fundamental role in any solutions “I’m sure glad the hole isn’t in our end…” Global Climate Change Cultures/Institutions Unable or Unwilling To Change Finite Supply of Key Natural Resources (Oil, Water, Minerals) We, as a global community, are all in this together.


Boeing’s Business Transformation: Boeing’s Business Transformation Commercial Airplane Manufacturer Product Focused Hardware & Platforms Exporter 1996 - 2006 Balanced Aerospace Company Business Focused Systems & Solutions Global


Aerospace May Be Used as a Lens for Examining Broader National and Global Issues: Aerospace May Be Used as a Lens for Examining Broader National and Global Issues To sustain an industry that continues to find a multi-billion dollar a year market for its products and services and contributes heavily to our national security and a favorable balance of trade…… What positive vision of our future can be created? How many engineers (and scientists and technicians) do we need in our foreseeable future? What skills and knowledge will they need? How do we attract a diverse next generation technical workforce that possesses a much broader “multi-disciplinary” and “systems engineering” perspective? How should we enhance our technical education system (beginning at the elementary school level)? How do we attract and retain a student population (especially women) that more completely reflects the demographics of our society?


Where Should We Place Our Priorities ?: Where Should We Place Our Priorities ? Technology Development Process Development/ Enhancement Workforce Development (People issues) Advances in technology are not ends in themselves but enable New and/or better products/services Improved processes Wise and effective use is a “people issue” How we do work is a key to business success. Our “intellectual capital” (our people – properly utilized, developed, rewarded and motivated) The best Technology and Processes in the world are useless without the right People to develop and employ them.


Aerospace* Engineering Need & Supply: Aerospace* Engineering Need & Supply 2000 2010 2020 Years Economic growth Increased population Growth in commerce Globalization National security needs Societal challenges and needs (environment, etc.) Automation Better tools & methods Increasing productivity Use of non-USA talent Aerospace Industry Engineers (USA) (Are these various factors compensatory ?) Growth Consolidation ~150K* * “Aerospace Engineering” needs include aerospace, mechanical, electrical, computing, etc. in the USA Data based on Bureau of Labor Statistics Aerospace is a small segment of the Engineering Profession ? ? ?


Slide9: Engineering Bachelors Degrees 1973 - 2000 Engineering Bachelors, Masters and Doctoral Degrees 1991 - 2000 Replenishing the Engineering Workforce Data from the Nation Science Foundation We must find ways to assure an adequate supply 2005 “Star Wars” era peak


Slide10: To address societal needs and sustain an industry that continues to contribute to our national and global economy: Build an effective, efficient and safe global air transportation system Contribute to our national security in the face of an increasing number of non-traditional threats Provide an important component to the “affordable access to space” 21st Century Challenges for Aeronautics


Presentation Overview: Presentation Overview Background and Context Aerospace Technical Workforce of the Future Enhancing College Education Programs


Objectives of a Comprehensive Technical Workforce Development Process: Objectives of a Comprehensive Technical Workforce Development Process Develop a flexibly deployable, multi-skilled and systems integration-oriented technical workforce to meet current and future company business needs Enhance employee job satisfaction, employability, career growth and retention Evolutionary development and replenishment The technical workforce that has created our past success Future technical workforce Global, Lean, LSSI - capable Transition Strategy ??


“Up the Value Chain”Increased Demand on Core Technical Workforce: 1980 Basics Basics Basics Methods Methods Methods Design Design Design Integration Integration Integration Requirements Requirements Requirements Knowledge Management (Knowledge Capturing & Re-Use) “Up the Value Chain” Increased Demand on Core Technical Workforce 2000 2020 Configurators System Architects Technical Specialists “Farther, faster, higher” “Quicker, better, cheaper” “Leaner, greener” ? (better, cheaper, quicker, etc.)


Technical Excellence By Design: Technical Excellence By Design Which of these two archetypal technical employees is more valuable to the Boeing Company? They both are! “Breadth” of Technical Knowledge “Breadth” of Business Knowledge/Experience “Depth” of Knowledge/ Experience Log scale “Breadth” of Technical Knowledge Technical Specialists/ Experts “Tool Makers” Information/Knowledge Gathers and Providers “Deep Generalists” System Integrators Product/service “Architects” Program/project managers Minimum level needed to mastery New grad We need both types of individual, the question is: “In what balance?” Toward an LSSI technical workforce


Boeing List of “Desired Attributes of an Engineer”: Boeing List of “Desired Attributes of an Engineer” A good understanding of engineering science fundamentals Mathematics (including statistics) Physical and life sciences Information technology (far more than “computer literacy”) A good understanding of design and manufacturing processes (i.e. understands engineering) A multi-disciplinary, systems perspective A basic understanding of the context in which engineering is practiced Economics (including business practice) History The environment Customer and societal needs Good communication skills Written Oral Graphic Listening High ethical standards An ability to think both critically and creatively - independently and cooperatively Flexibility - the ability and self-confidence to adapt to rapid or major change Curiosity and a desire to learn for life A profound understanding of the importance of teamwork Global awareness (knowledge of at least one language other than English) http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/pwu/attributes/attributes.html Diversity –wanted and needed


Knowledge of Many Skills with Career Choices Based on Talent, Ability, Interest and Ambitions: Knowledge of Many Skills with Career Choices Based on Talent, Ability, Interest and Ambitions Foundational Technical Skills Math Science Analysis Computing Engineering Skills Design System Integration Professional Skills Communications Team Work Networking Interpersonal Business Skills And Acumen Cost accounting Scheduling Planning General knowledge and life experience Technical Subject Matter Experts Designers System Architects Program Managers Customer and Service Engineers Marketing Note: Many of the jobs shown here are difficult to “outsource” or “mechanize” out of existence. System Integrators Process Engineers A Well-Rounded Engineer


Some Major Technical Competencies Important to the Aerospace Industry: Some Major Technical Competencies Important to the Aerospace Industry Systems and “System of Systems” Engineering Program and Project Management (good ones are always in short supply) “Customer” Engineering (all the jobs requiring face-to-face interactions) Human-Machine Interactions An extension of what used to be called “human factors”, but which now extends to the whole suite of issues involved in how humans interact appropriately and effectively with machines of all kinds, especially in an IT and “robotics” context. This requires a knowledge of not only the traditional technologies involved, but also of advances in neurophysiology, cognitive psychology and perhaps even cultural anthropology. Materials The current need for many more engineers with knowledge of how to design and manufacture composite structures is only a significant subset of what one needs to know to invent future “designer” materials with unique properties which require re-thinking how one designs with them and then manufactures the products which use them. Nanotechnology is a major subset of this topic. Energy and the Environment The looming prospect of “peak oil” and global climate change raise a huge suite of interacting issues regarding the fuels to be used in the future for transportation, and how alternatives to traditional fossil fuels may interact with the environment.


Presentation Overview: Presentation Overview Background and Context Aerospace Technical Workforce of the Future Enhancing College Education Programs


Slide19: “The mind is not a receptacle; information is not education. Education is what remains after the facts that have been taught have been forgotten.” Robert M. Hutchins (after Benjamin Franklin)


Slide20: Evolving Trends In Engineering Education and Practice Industry Needs–University Responses Industry Practice 1900 1950 2000 WW 2 Sputnik Berlin Wall Rapid Industrial Expansion Cold War Era Transform from Agrarian to Manufacturing Economy Big science, rapid technological advances, international perspective Information Age Emerging post-Cold War global economy, enabled by transportation and communications technology Heavy emphasis on experiment Limited to slide rule mathematics Heavy reliance on handbook methods Strong linkage of engineering to manufacturing Limited company funded research Engineering Curricula “Vocational” orientation Limited mathematics Emphases on: - data gathering - problem solving - design (and drafting) - manufacturing Engineering “General Practitioners” Mechanical Electrical Civil Chemical Continued reliance on testing Early computational capabilities Gap between engineering and manufacturing “cultures” Increased company-funded R&D Increased need for technical and scientific knowledge Massive computational/simulation capabilities Testing shift “experiment” to validation “Integrated Product Teams” mandatory “Lean” concepts close engineering and manufacturing gaps Heavy emphases on Processes, Costs, “Value” Emphasis on technical knowledge Emphasis on theory and mathematics Decreasing emphasis on design and manufacturing “Publish or perish” Technical Specialists (“Engineering Science Technicians”) System Integrators/ Product “Architects” (Multidisciplinary Perspective) Retain strengths in math and physics Enhanced IT emphasis Emphasis on design and manufacturing Emphases on breadth, context, and process: - Economics, business, project management - Environmental and societal issues - Teamwork and communication skills - Career-long learning WW 1 + 9/11


Our Engineering Education System and Thus Our Technical Workforce Pipeline Under Stress: Our Engineering Education System and Thus Our Technical Workforce Pipeline Under Stress There are several important disconnects College/University Engineering Programs K-12 System Professional Practice/ Industry Needs Societal change Declining standards Decreasing interest in science and math Rapid, continuous change in practice Changing priorities Globalization Aging workforce and lose of experience base Tradition bound Slow rate of change Costs rapidly escalating Heavy dependence on funded research Failure to attract/retain women and minorities Inadequate sense of urgency Societal Concern Industry concern Company concern Our future supply of engineering talent is threatened and we in industry must pay part of the “taxes” needed to fix the problem.


Why Reform Engineering Education ?: Why Reform Engineering Education ? Our future supply of engineering talent is threatened. Current programs are failing to attract and retain an adequate number of students, especially women and minorities Most undergrad programs still look more like “preparation for a Ph.D. program” than “preparation for professional practice” in many schools. The great majority of faculty have almost no significant industry experience, and have too little understanding of rapidly evolving employers need. Engineering education costs too much for what we get. Engineering education programs are expensive to offer and costs are rising alarmingly – while student are not getting full value for their money and/or are turned off by what is offered (especially women and minorities). Employers pay the full (often hidden) bill for teaching graduates what they need to know, but aren’t taught in school. A better sharing of costs is necessary. There is a potential major net savings for industry in investing early in the educational process, rather than paying the bill later. Major opportunities for reform exist but remain to be exploited. Significant advances have been made in our of knowledge of how people learn and develop, but much of this is unknown within engineering academe New teaching methods and curricula organization have been demonstrated, but have not been widely accepted. Little has changed in delivery in the past 50 years New ABET EC 2000 accreditation rules encourage rather than block educational experimentation “Need” “Costs” “Opportunity” Engineering education in the U.S. is more broken than is generally acknowledged. Created by: Bill Wulf (NAE), John McMasters (Boeing), and Bruce Kramer (NSF) in 2002.


A Puzzle for Engineering Academe:How to align many competing interests ?: A Puzzle for Engineering Academe: How to align many competing interests ? There are at least three diverse constituencies to be satisfied by each department or program within a given [research] university. Wants include: The university itself (faculty, administrators, [legislators?]) Good public and peer institution image and reputation Prestige (personal and vicarious) A steady (generous and pristine) stream of research funding High quality students (primarily grad students for research) Students (and their parents) A quality education (commensurate with tuition paid and costs incurred) Adequate preparation for a job (or possibly even a career) of choice which is both interesting and satisfying – ASAP. Employers (and other outside parties who depend on program outputs) Graduates (generally at the B.S. level) well prepared for the work for which they are to be hired (at around market rate). “Just in time” continuing educational services – conveniently available Research results and technical consultation services are good to have available if the price is right, but tend to be of a lower priority


A Puzzle for Engineering Academe:How to align many competing interests: A Puzzle for Engineering Academe: How to align many competing interests Puzzles Faculty Graduate curriculum Under Graduate curriculum Department Program Employers Give me grads who can do my work. Give me students who can do my work Teach (and look for talent) Get research funding ! Support labs and students Publish, publish, publish Students Education JOBS !! Research $$ available (from where, for what?) Faculty talent and interests Curricula Jobs (potentially and actually available) A good alignment too seldom exists and needs to be established


Changing Paradigms In University Education – circa 1994-5: Changing Paradigms In University Education – circa 1994-5 Traditional Model Emerging Model [?] Research (Scholarship and creation of new knowledge) Formal Curriculum Education (college/university raison d'être) Community Service Educate Create New Knowledge Community Service A “whole system” perspective Campus Life “Three discrete jobs” model The current centroid for most research universities in the U.S. Thanks to Joe Bordogna and John Prados of the NSF A better balance is needed. While research and community service have value In their own right, they should be thought of primarily in terms of how they contribute to and enrich the educational process – at both the graduate and undergraduate level.


Desired Elements of a Model Engineering Education Program: Desired Elements of a Model Engineering Education Program Curricula with a proper balance between fundamentals (math, engineering sciences, IT, etc.) and provision of in-depth experience in skills and issues important to professional practice Fully compliant with the spirit and intent of ABET EC 2000 [cf.. Boeing list of “Desired Attributes”] Provides a solid foundation for subsequent graduate study, professional practice and continued career-long learning Built on strengths in graduate education and research programs where these exist Strong emphasis on design-build-test project experience from the freshman year through graduation (at whatever degree level) A diverse, well qualified faculty Strong teaching as well as research ability Industry and professional practice” literate” and experienced Willing and able to function as a team Exemplars of life-long learning Effective mechanisms in place to integrate knowledge transfer (teaching, etc.) with research and community service Vertically between graduate and undergraduate programs Horizontally across department, college and discipline boundaries Adequate facilities and institutional support Classroom space suitable for cooperative/collaborative learning pedagogical models Dedicated student design-build-test project labs Laboratory and computational facilities with modern equipment and technician support Strong linkages to Colleges of Business, etc. and programs important to professional practice Strong external (industry, government, etc.) relations and support Use of adjunct faculty from industry, etc. to degree practical Strong, effective “external advisory boards” (with industry, government, peer institution representation) at both departmental and college levels Effective networks and exchange opportunities with industry, peer university programs (both domestic and international), and alumni The model program outlined here pertains to a standard “engineering core” (to which requisite general education/liberal arts content may be added) in universities with both graduate and undergraduate degree programs. Most elements are applicable to those programs devoted primarily to providing quality undergraduate education as well.


Slide27: Non-Systems Thinking In a Global Environment “I’m sure glad the hole isn’t in our end…” Thanks to Peter Synge Industry Academe Government Sea of Red Ink


Slide28: “I don’t know why people are so frightened by new ideas. It’s the old ones that frighten me.” John Cage American composer