Number 1 on My Top 5

Washington DC—depending on your perspective, it is a hotbed of corruption, intrigue, and scandal or the seat of US democracy and national policy. If you listen to the media, you might think that the former is more prevalent than the latter; but, after a visit to DC on behalf of ISA and the Automation Federation, I am a little more inclined to think that our public servants in Washington work much harder and care much more than I ever thought they did before. Thirty members of the Automation Federation (AF) descended on the Capitol last week to inform our Congressional representatives that the AF is the voice of automation and we have three primary concerns: Cyber Security, Work Force Development, and the need for an Automation curriculum.

I have a list in my head of the top five things I have done during my career. The list includes:
1. Getting a VIP tour of the Kennedy Space Center when I sold equipment to go onto the Magellan Space Probe—I had the privilege of seeing my equipment loaded onto the Space Shuttle.
2. Working with the Getty Research Institute on how to preserve a 3,000 year-old mummy—and getting to actually see the mummy!
3. Flying out to an offshore oil production platform.
4. Visiting the North Slope of Alaska.
5. Touring through the Edmonston pumping plant in California (long considered the largest pumping facility in the world for the volume and head—the water is pumped from the central valley of California over the mountains to the Los Angeles basin via the California Aqueduct).

Well #5 just dropped off, the other four shifted down, and this Washington visit is at the top of the list! I really hate to lose number five…My father was the head of Mechanical Maintenance for the plant for about 20 years. Edmonston is truly an engineering marvel and I credit my father with my innate mechanical ability that prompted my becoming an engineer. But the Washington Fly-in (as we participants refer to our visit) was an extraordinary experience in the extreme. “A-a-wsome Du-u-ude” as my eight-year old would say!

But I digress…Our visit began with our arrival in Washington on a Tuesday evening. We were informed that there was a strict 10:00 p.m. curfew so that we would all be ready to go in the morning! It was a good thing time zone wasn’t specified as I was on West Coast time and had a few hours to visit with my fellow team members in the hotel lounge! The next morning we started the day with a visit to the Department of Labor for a meeting with several people who worked in various functions for the DOL. Both Work Force Development teams attended this meeting and we presented an overview of what the AF was all about and how we might be able to work with the DOL to mutual benefit. They indicated a few other organizations we should work with like Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) and National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). When we mentioned that ex-military personnel often had skills that are applicable to the automation field, they became pretty animated about some of the military websites that we should be a part of…So we have that work to do.

After the DOL, our two Work Force Development teams split up to meet with various congressional representatives. Anyone that has been to DC knows that going from office to office in the Senate office buildings and House of Representatives office buildings can require a fair amount of walking. In retrospect, I wish I had worn a pedometer to know exactly the mileage we logged during the two days—it had to be several miles—in heels for me! Of course the guys were doing there fair share of whining…several had made the mistake of getting new suits, including new shoes, for the trip!

My team’s visits with Congressional representatives were focused on Work Force Development…The concern we have for the baby boomer bust, the lack of students entering science and technology, and the slippage of American technical excellence. What I found fascinating was that in the course of our visits it became apparent to me that about 25% of our government representatives and/or staffers really understand what we’re about. About 50% sort of understand. The remaining 25% have absolutely no clue—a little frightening if you ask me! But we did find that they were all willing to listen—in fact encouraged us to remain engaged so that government knew the needs of the manufacturing sector.

Now before all of you readers outside of the US get uptight and accuse me of being partial or US-centric, keep in mind our audience. We’re trying to get the US government to work with us. We’ll talk about your country’s technical excellence and manufacturing industry needs when advocating in your country!

We concluded the first day with a relaxing dinner cruise on the Potomac. A great way to wind down after a stressful day doing something totally out of my comfort zone!

Day two began with what has to be the highlight of the visit: A meeting between all thirty AF team members with White House Staff members in the Indian Treaty Room located in the White House Eisenhower Executive Office Building to discuss Business and Commerce in general, but also Cyber Security with White House Staff security experts. The room was inspiring in its beauty and grandness, but the conversation that took place was even better! By the end of the meeting the Security Staff personnel were indicating a desire to meet again at another time to have a more in depth conversation about how we could all work together to maintain Cyber integrity.

The teams then split up again to meet with our respective Representatives and Senators, converging again in the Capitol building for a reception where all the people we had met were invited to attend along with a few corporate Government Relations people and other members from Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, and MEP.

What became apparent during the course of the two days was the pace at which our government operates. To the casual, remote observer it would appear to operate at a snail's pace; conversely, when viewed up close and personal, it would appear that the pace is much faster and almost frantic. People are constantly on the go and offices are regularly in a state of flux with people arriving and leaving. I have traditionally been a cynic of government, assuming it was just a broker of legislation for the highest bidder. I’m a lot less cynical and very enthusiastic about what we are capable of accomplishing by working as advocates for our profession in the government arena. My team even had one Senatorial staffer volunteer to implement a program in a high-school with an instrument technician curriculum if we could produce letters from thirty-plus companies saying they would hire these graduates. The Senator would make sure the program was funded and promoted. WOW!

All-in-all, a fantastic trip! You can read additional details at the AF blog at www.automationfederation.org/congressionalflyin.

Dad: I’m sorry your plant has fallen off my “top five” neat things I’ve done list…But can you blame me?

Engaging!

How time flies when you’re having fun…for months many leaders of ISA and the other member organizations of the Automation Federation have been having conference calls regarding a Washington DC Fly-in this week. We have a contingency of about 30 people descending on Capitol Hill to discuss workforce development, Automation curriculum, and Cyber security. When ISA issued a press release about this event it evoked considerable response from members and the automation community in general—the Society and the Federation received numerous responses, all positive. Many moons ago, when discussion of a name change for ISA was in the forefront, industry pundits pointed out that ISA needed to look outward as opposed to inward. This Fly-in is probably our most important outwardly focused event in ISA history.

If we want to elevate the prestige and awareness of the important work automation professionals do and what automation means to industry, making our government leaders aware of our very existence is paramount. We want them to turn to us for our expertise when they are writing legislation that affects our companies and how we do business. More on this next week, after we visit “the Hill.”

On a lighter note…Have you seen Iron Man yet? What a great movie! I saw it this weekend with my kids (8 and 5). The best part for me was when my 8-year old (Cody) said he wanted to be an inventor like Tony Stark (Iron Man). He went on to ask me what kind of engineer would invent a suit like Iron Man’s. Hey! I consider it progress that he knew that Tony Stark was some sort of engineer! Of course I had to confuse him by pointing out that in the real world it would be a team of engineers coming up with the suit that Iron Man wore—Mechanical, Electrical, Computer Science, and last but not least Automation (check it out—a lot of automation involved!). This was all good until Cody decided that he wanted to get all those degrees so he could be an inventor like Tony—the dollar signs floated in front of my eyes for all that education. Not to mention I was planning on having him off my pay-roll before I was an octogenarian!

And then there was the next day at home when Cody informed his friends that he wanted to “invent” water bottle rockets using a bicycle tire pump, PVC pipe, and duct tape. Cody’s friends said he couldn’t do it, which is mom’s cue to prove them wrong (my son can do ANYTHING of course!). When Cody came in the house asking me where the pipe cutters were, I knew I was in trouble; however, being the kind of mom I am, I found the pipe-cutters and pipe glue and helped them build some pretty spectacular rockets. After much experimenting with the proper pressure to pump the bottle to, if water in the bottle was better, and at what quantity, we reached an approximate record of 150 feet with a standard one-liter bottle!

This just goes to show you that there are some very good ways to engage kids in science and technology. All you engineers and technicians out there could probably have built better rockets than we did—and probably have added features we didn’t even think of. But I had four 5-9 year old boys engaged in something other than X-Box for a good 3 hours. I fell a little behind in laundry and other mundane weekend chores…and loved every minute of it!

Now it’s off to Washington for me.

Innovation Engineers

Last week I espoused on skills engineers need to be successful. Of course I was thinking of standard engineering disciplines—electrical, mechanical, chemical, civil, architectural, and industrial. But if we were to wipe the proverbial slate clean and define what “brands” of engineers are needed moving forward, what would they be? Obviously we still need some of the basics listed above, but we would also needed some of the more recent additions—biotechnology engineers, genetic engineers, programming engineers, and I’ll even include computer science/technology.

But what other technologies are crying out for engineers—with a specialty in that particular field? The obvious answer for those who would find their way to this site would be automation engineers. Most of us working as automation engineers probably have a degree in something else—if we have a degree at all—but as companies try to compete in a global market, with tapped out resources and a under-trained workforce, automation is going to become more important than ever before. Of course that assumes automation professionals can be found to do the job!

But are there others? I just read an article talking about “sustainability” engineering—designing buildings, factories, and processes that will have a minimal impact on the environment, be sustainable, and use minimal resources. Think along the lines of designing buildings that produce more energy than they consume and discharge minimal refuse. Some schools are starting to provide courses in this topic, but a degree in such a field certainly doesn’t exist that I am aware of. Then you have sciences that are emerging but would be considered boutique technologies, like nanotechnology or green fuels. When the science becomes more established there will no doubt be a need for engineers with a specialty in these disciplines. And then there are the complete unknown—technologies we haven’t even thought about yet.

Sure, you could pigeonhole just about any science into an existing engineering or science discipline, but is that the right thing to do? As information, science, and technology increases, engineers are being expected to know and do more—perhaps too much more. What really needs focus is production of a new generation of entrepreneurs, innovators, and inventors. Joe Bordogna, Dean Emeritus, the University of Pennsylvania notes: “Civilization is on the brink of a new economic world order. The big winners in this increasingly fierce global reach for leadership will not be those who simply make commodities faster or cheaper….Rather, the winners will be those who develop talent, techniques and tools so advanced, that reaching a dimension of innovation beyond competition is assured.” Reaching a dimension of innovation beyond competition is assured...it was worth repeating.

Whether you are a person, a company, or a country, if you plan to keep up in our ever changing world, innovation will be the key. So as we consider changes that need to occur in our education system, we might consider adding Innovation Engineering to the mix. The problem is, how do you teach innovation?

Skills Engineering Graduates Need

Last week I participated in an Industry Advisory Committee Meeting at a local university. It was my first time being a part of the group, and I found it quite enlightening.

I often think that since my career path has been dominated by sales, marketing, and management, I have an unusual perspective on what engineers need to know when they leave school. My professors would tell you that I was not the best student—practical, but not a “scholar.” This may have had as much to do with working 20-30 hours per week while going to college—and, darn-it, having fun too! Probably too much fun, but that would be a whole other subject!

As I joined this meeting with other engineers from Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Texas Instruments, and a city agency, I realized that what I thought were must-have skills for graduating engineers were not all that different from the opinions held by the group.

First and foremost, engineers must be able to communicate. This not only means written and verbal skills, but the ability to use the electronic tools we now have like web-ex and Microsoft Meeting. Engineers must be able to communicate, not only with each other, but also the financial and business-minds that have the decision making authority at companies they work for. The CFO of an organization does not need to know how a formula was derived and used to draw a conclusion. They will just want to know the final result(s) and the logic or analysis for the technical opinion. Most importantly, the CFO will want to know the economics of a decision. One of my counterparts said it best, “I can teach new-hires the technology they need to know to be successful in our organization. It is much more difficult to teach them the art of communication. When I see a resume or have an interview with a candidate that obviously is not comfortable with written or spoken language, I know that means more work for me to mentor them towards success.”

The group also agreed that the ability to problem solve (not complex trigonometric polynomials, but simple mechanical or process problems) was imperative. This subject came up after a tour of the university labs. The university professors were concerned that their labs might be missing key equipment and technology that the graduates would need to know. It was pointed out that having dated equipment could actually be used to teach the students very real-world problem solving. What technologies could enhance the experiment? What new equipment exists that would improve the performance of their lab problem and what would be the return on investment if the equipment were purchased? These are the types of duties young engineers will have when they enter the workforce. Few companies have the latest and greatest technology. Not when technology is changing as rapidly as it does today! Young engineers will be asked to determine the right technology and at what cost it makes sense. Rarely does this require the ability to perform a La Place transform.

Understanding the math, chemistry, and physics that underlie all that engineers do is important and must be learned; however, being able to communicate and apply critical thinking will take them so much further. The challenge academia has is how to produce engineers with these skills. They are not skills that can be taught in one 3-4 month course; they are skills that need to be intertwined with every class engineers take during their entire scholastic experience.