Defining Automation, Part 2

I recently read an article in a Section newsletter basically berating me regarding the definition of automation and the proposed name change for ISA. I found it interesting that one of the key points of the article was that automation eliminates jobs, which is a bad thing—right? I’m not so sure.

For those of us working in automation, the financial justification often involves the economics of fewer employees; however, I would venture to say that there is so much more. Is it bad to allow automation to reduce the number of people and the hours they must spend in a dangerous environment? Chemical plants, refineries, and other potentially dangerous processes are trying to protect workers as much as their bottom lines when they choose to automate. Is it a bad thing to automate when facing a shortage of qualified workers? Many “craft” positions are going unclaimed from a shortage of trained personnel. A few examples are welders, pipe fitters, and mechanical operators. Newsflash to parents: It may not be glamorous, but in the 21st century you might make more money as a plumber than as a doctor or an attorney!

Another thought: Is automation really eliminating jobs? Or, is it trading one employee’s skill set for another? For every job lost because of automation, how many are created in the technology sector supporting automation?

Most companies I have worked with that were considering the automation of a manual process really didn’t consider the reduction of heads as significant. What was more interesting to management was the possibility of more consistent or better quality control, the increase in throughput, the reduction of downtime, and the elimination of the need for “tribal” knowledge to keep a plant operating. Perhaps I am Pollyanna, but I don’t believe that companies are as interested in removing humans from their plants as much as they are in removing human error.

Automation does not guarantee a “better” product but it does provide consistency. In many cases this may not be desired—like when you want something personal with character, like art. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my Ibuprofen, Splenda, or peanut butter to have “character,” I want them to be the same every time I use them!

So I want to thank all those who commented on the proposed definition of automation (especially my fellow CAPs!), your input did modify the definition slightly:

Automation is the creation and application of technology to monitor and control the production of goods and services.

We were looking for a definition that embraced ISA’s traditional (instrument) members and controls people, control systems people, as well as people in professions we do not traditionally associate with instrumentation, systems, and automation—like IT and other professions/technologies we haven’t even thought of yet. The above definition may be “soft,” as the newsletter author suggested, but we were looking for a definition that could be “timeless” and “open.” After all, there is one certainty in life and in ISA—change.

ISA Sections

Occasionally I get communications that would indicate some members are concerned that ISA is forgetting about local sections. Some of the communications are very accusatory that the Society is trying to get rid of local sections. Let me assure you, nothing could be further from the truth! Sure, much of our marketing is about global and government outreach and our technical programs, but that doesn’t mean that the Society isn’t interested in the health of local sections.

Local sections are and always have been the life blood of ISA. Look at how the organization was founded—it was a group of local societies that realized they had a common interest. This was back in 1945, and a lot has changed since then. We don’t have to rely on a live meeting to exchange information. The Internet has changed that dynamic drastically. We also don’t have to attend a trade show to get product information—again, many customers let their fingers do the walking over their computer keyboard to access this information. But the Internet has not eliminated the need for human interaction. One core value of membership in any organization is the networking. Although nowadays this can be done electronically, it is much more successful when done in person.

Sections (and Divisions) are where leaders are born and raised. Many local sections produce two things that members crave most: a local newsletter and a local directory. But the real key to section health lies in programming. Build it and they will come.

Let me share an event I recently attended in Los Angeles, CA—granted this is my home section and I like to brag about some of the good things the local leaders do, but this was truly a great event. The locals call it Tech Nite but the title recently changed to Instrumentation…period. Many years ago two sections of ISA and the Southern California Measurement Association sponsored an exhibit and short course. Back in the late 1990s the event died a quiet death. The Los Angeles Section recognized a need for training opportunities and a small exhibition, so they started “Tech Nite.” The rules of engagement were that exhibiting vendors had to have something “hands-on” for the technicians to do and no ties were allowed. This was a small event—one evening, about 20 exhibitors, and a few hours of technical presentations—but, the baby has grown and Instrumentation is now a full day of technical courses covering a wide variety of subjects, important today. The exhibit had something like 75 participants and the foot traffic was busy. They even had a couple Universities on site with remote controlled vehicles on display wowing the attendees with their capabilities.

There are many events like this that occur around the world. Good technical presentations and educational events happen daily. The Society at the global level recognizes this and thanks all the volunteers that make these events happen. The Society does not want to sacrifice sections in our endeavor to increase awareness and esteem of the Automation profession, but if we are to succeed in providing the one thing members ask of the Society—recognition of the profession—then we have to look outward. Walt Boyes of Control said it best when he pointed out that we have to stop looking at the profession from our “insider” perspective and see it from an “external” view. While we work on gaining recognition for the profession at the Society level, we have faith that our section leaders will continue to represent the face of ISA at the local level in ways that their members desire. The Society will continue to pump out technical information and work on advocating for the profession to the outside world. By working together, we will all succeed.

Automation’s Image

Others have said it, and I agree. We—automation professionals or even engineers in general—need the help of Hollywood to enhance our image. Most movies and television shows do technical people in general a real disservice by presenting them as geeky social outcasts, if they make note of them at all. Despite all this, there is hope!

There have been a few movies that presented engineers, scientists, and “smart” people in a positive light. One movie that did the most for aerospace engineering was Apollo 13. Disney’s Meet the Robinsons presented the smart kid in a more positive light than is typical; and my kids love the Nickelodeon show “Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius” (Jimmy is a little bit of a nerd, but he gets the girl (Cindy) in a couple of episodes). Another movie, where the scientist, or in this case the machinist, is the hero, is Chain Reaction. Yes, there is hope.

If I were to imagine a movie about technology and the people that create and apply it, what would it be about? Perhaps there is a story line in cyber security or safety. Just imagine a drama about an evil-doer breaking into a major chemical facility and changing their product from something benign to something horrific. Or perhaps a biopharm facility where Ibuprofen is turned into biological warfare material…hmmm…the possibilities are endless.

Who would be the ideal cast? When I think of some of my favorite thespians I would put Donald Sutherland, Morgan Freeman, Dame Judy Densch, Kyra Sedgwick, Matt Damon, and Danniel Day-Lewis at the top of my list. Could you imagine them collaborating as engineers and scientists? I would see the flick!

But while we wait for Hollywood to pick up the idea and type the cast, we have lots of opportunities available in our reality-show based world. “Dirty Jobs”, “How its Made”, “Modern Marvels”, “Extreme Engineering”, etc., are all looking for story lines. If you have a dirty job, a product that people might wonder how it’s made, etc.—send your ideas in. The more we get the media into our plants and operations, the more understanding the world will gain, and the more our image will be enhanced.

It can’t hurt to try!

Women in Engineering

Workforce Development…You see the phrase everywhere. There are few industries and professions that aren’t facing the inevitable baby boomer bomb—departure of all those baby boomers for very long vacations called retirement. For science and technology sectors this problem is magnified, particularly in the US.

Despite this looming departure, there is hope!

There is a huge, largely untapped resource for science, engineering, and technology: Women. I like to say that Science and Technology remains the last bastion of male dominance (Enjoy it while it lasts guys!). Despite more and more women entering the field, they are still significantly outnumbered. Women have entered other “non-traditional” fields in droves (the medical and legal professions and politics, to name a few), almost surpassing their male counterparts. So, why are women slow to enter Science and Technology?

From my very American perspective, the problem is the conditioning of young girls. As long as we continue to bombard them with messages that they are princesses waiting for Prince Charming, while we tell little boys to aspire to be super-heroes and save the world, men will outnumber women in Science and Technology, and probably the Executive Suite.

But we all have an opportunity to persuade young girls that there are other options. See the information (as sent to me) below regarding a very noteworthy event: 2008 Global Marathon For, By and About Women in Engineering.

Do your part! Participate and steer a young girl into an exciting, technical profession.


24-hour Global Marathon For, By and About Women in Engineering

MEMO

To: Engineers Week Partners
From: Leslie Collins, National Engineers Week Foundation

You are invited to join your engineering, business and volunteer peers around the world for the 2008 Global Marathon For, By and About Women in Engineering. The purpose of this message is to introduce you to the regional leaders for the 2008 event. You will find them at
http://www.eweek.org/site/News/Eweek/2008_marathon/index.shtml.

The marathon is the only event of its kind and a terrific opportunity to build global collaboration. Our 2008 marathon is truly global. The participating regions, in the order we follow the sun for 24 continuous hours, are North America, Mexico/South America, China, India, Africa/Middle East, UK/Europe, and, we conclude back in North America. Each region is responsible for developing its own programming and engaging audiences. We have a wonderful group of executive volunteers and they need your support.

The regional contacts, National Engineers Week Foundation staff and leaders from Verizon Business invite you to join us right away. Please encourage your business locations, affinity and outreach partners, and members to get involved. There are opportunities to make presentations, help build audiences for the global event and join a regional planning committee.

Please contact the respective regions directly and let them know how you can help this important effort for the engineering profession. Or, feel free to contact the National Engineers Week Foundation office at 703-684-2852 or engineeringwomen@eweek.org .

Thank you.


North America – Chaired by Verizon Business
Cybelle Long
Cybelle.long@verizonbusiness.com
Norma Henry
norma.henry@verizonbusiness.com

Mexico and South America – Chaired by DuPont
Lizbeth Medina
Lizbeth.medina@mex.dupont.com
Katia Hamada
Katia.r.hamada@bra.dupont.com

China – Chaired by CIE-USA and IBM
Ray Tan
raytan@cn.ibm.com
Shou Hui "Carol" Wang
shwang@cn.ibm.com

India – Chaired by Motorola
Deepa Singhal
a15480@motorola.com
Richa Dham
a22423@motorola.com
Soumya Lakshimi
a13908@motorola.com

Africa/Middle East - Chaired by IBM
Vikki Jackson
VIKKIJ@za.ibm.com

UK/Europe – Chaired by BP
Deborah Grubbe
Deb.grubbe@uk.bp.com
Meredith Short
Meredith.short@uk.bp.com
Teresa Schofield
tmschofield@theiet.org

North America
The 24 hours conclude in North America.