Defining Automation
It’s 7:15 p.m. on Monday evening, 28 January, and I find myself sitting in a hotel in North Carolina, having just wrapped up a two-day ISA leader meeting. The purpose of this meeting was leadership training and networking; however, the seventy-plus leaders in attendance spent over an hour discussing the definition of “automation.”
If you look back to the first message posted on this site, you know that there was a name change proposed for ISA that didn’t happen, largely as a result of a difference of opinion on how the definition of automation should read. One of the blessings—and curses—of this profession is its breadth. It encompasses instrumentation, systems, and automation; covers so many aspects of industry; and includes a vast number of job descriptions. As the leaders from all levels of ISA, present at the meeting, discovered: If we include every industry job description or title in existence, there would simply be too many words. More words than any person on the street could possibly absorb!
Following the leaders’ discussion, I had what I can only describe as an “aha!” moment. While I was discussing this challenge with my friends John and Mike, I realized that instead of trying to describe what we do, we needed to describe the end game we all want to attain: Improvement in the performance of the plants and industries we serve.
John and Mike helped me develop a simpler way to define automation:
Automation is the creation and application of technology to monitor and control the production of products and services.
I tossed this definition to the group at lunch. It could have gone over like a lead balloon, but suddenly, what has been a very divisive and polarizing issue had people shaking their heads yes. They were saying, “I am included in that statement.” So here is my question to you: does this definition embrace what you do and who you are as a professional?
If you look back to the first message posted on this site, you know that there was a name change proposed for ISA that didn’t happen, largely as a result of a difference of opinion on how the definition of automation should read. One of the blessings—and curses—of this profession is its breadth. It encompasses instrumentation, systems, and automation; covers so many aspects of industry; and includes a vast number of job descriptions. As the leaders from all levels of ISA, present at the meeting, discovered: If we include every industry job description or title in existence, there would simply be too many words. More words than any person on the street could possibly absorb!
Following the leaders’ discussion, I had what I can only describe as an “aha!” moment. While I was discussing this challenge with my friends John and Mike, I realized that instead of trying to describe what we do, we needed to describe the end game we all want to attain: Improvement in the performance of the plants and industries we serve.
John and Mike helped me develop a simpler way to define automation:
Automation is the creation and application of technology to monitor and control the production of products and services.
I tossed this definition to the group at lunch. It could have gone over like a lead balloon, but suddenly, what has been a very divisive and polarizing issue had people shaking their heads yes. They were saying, “I am included in that statement.” So here is my question to you: does this definition embrace what you do and who you are as a professional?
Labels: Defining Automation
posted by ISA at
5:32 AM
7 Comments:
I am an Engineer with a major Automation vendor; with degrees in Control and Instrumentation.
Though a little tongue-twisty, especially the "production of products" part, I like the definition. It is concise yet broad enough to encompass everything that I have been doing for the past 10 years!
-Khalid
My answer to the question is a big YES !
As a process control team leader in a medium-size oil refinery, I find myself engaged almost everyday in a very wide array of activities that are all summarised by the catch-all term "Automation". However It always has been a problem defining exactly what automation covered.
Khalid, I agree with you, cannot we replace "products" by "goods" ?
Yes, that defines what I do.
But then Instrumentation also defines it.
This defimnition for Automation can be used for Instrumentation, as well... I goy a bit confused...
Are we just rebranding Instrumentation to Automation ?
That is what most design Engineering Comapnies did about the time DCSs were introduced.
Yes, it does describe what I do.
But Instrumentation becames equal to Automation, since Instrumentation also can be defined by the same sentence. ...So are we just rebranding our jobs ?
I'm in agreement with this broad definition. It seems to emcompass everything we do, as individuals and companies/ corporations, and as the Society for this community.
"Instrumentation", "control" and "Automation" can be thought of as a pyramid. "Instrumentation" is the foundation upon which "control" can be built. Once working "instrumentation" and "controls" have been established, "automation" can be implemented. With each level of the pyramid comes increased coats and complexity but also increased potential benefits. Our profession today is reaching higher than is implied by the terms "instrumentation" or "control". We need to be implementing "automation" today to provide increased benefits to companies - but that still requires "instrumentation" and "controls". We need a term to describe our profession and "instrumentation" is too limiting. I agree with the proposed definition.
Kim: You ROCK!
Post a Comment
<< Home