As their creations grow ever more disruptive, engineers' image problem takes
on new dimensions

One vivid memory i have from my student days was dropping by the lab of a
good friend who had gotten involved in medical research. I was curious to
see what he was up to, because his new obsession seemed out of character.
outgoing and popular, into jazz and athletics, the guy didnt fit the techie
mold.

The night i stopped by the lab, he was there alone, working on a hunch about
why cells become cancerous. As he was showing me his experimental apparatus,
he confessed it was there in that lab, pondering cell metabolism into the
wee hours, that he was happiest.

I understood immediately what he meant. Technical work isnt glamorous; often
it's tedious. But there's satisfaction in focusing on a problem, educating
yourself, mustering the discipline to embark on an uncertain journey toward
some unknown revelation.

I understood--but those who have never had the experience themselves,
whether in an academic lab or with a hot startup, might not. And that goes
to the heart of the engineer's "image" problem.

The image of scientists and technical people as eccentric, socially inept,
obsessed with impersonal mechanisms and arcane ideas, is probably as old as
scientific pursuit itself. The modern stereotypes range from the adolescent
geek to the corporate drone to the mad scientist, staple of the horror film.

This is cause for concern, because as engineers happily pursue their
satisfying careers, the fruits of their labor continually create disruptive
problems for society. Instantaneous access to information threatens personal
privacy. Advanced medical technology is affordable only to a privileged few.
Advanced weapons systems- an attractively high-gorwth area these days- are
attaining frightening levels of lethal effectiveness.

In an ironic twist, the brilliant work by electronics engineers that enabled
modern computing and the Internet now threatens their own jobs and
well-being. The Internet facilitates the outsourcing of software and,
increasingly, hardware design. That has had a direct impact on tech-job
security while eroding the prestige and argaining power of technical
specialists. At the same time, the pace of the market is continually
accelerating as engineering tools become more effective, and the speed with
which systems have to be developed has become a major source of stress for
engineers.

Who EEs really are=97their likes, dislikes and job satisfaction=97is, of co=
urse,
a matter of concern to us at EETimes. We conduct plenty of surveys, run
focus groups and maintain feedback channels to take the pulse of the
profession, in order to know our audience better.

Last year, we conducted a major survey of EEs'attitudes about their work and
profession ("Dispiriting days for EEs," Nov. 14, page 1). As the headline
indicates, the image of the dedicated engineer happily engrossed in a
fascinating,innovative project doesn't tell the whole story. And the geek
label stings.

Reading through the report, I was struck by how much the survey seemed to
reflect my own job experience. These days, the press doesn't get much
respect either. The Internet has greatly accelerated publishing schedules
and has made it harder than ever to find some story or angle that hasn't
already been covered. The new world of multimedia=97cable and satellite
delivery, iPods and other portable, lowcost media devices=97has fundamental=
ly
changed the publishing business model. We're game, but we are racing to keep
up, and much of the time it leaves us a little frazzled. Indeed, that's a
problem that cuts across most businesses=97and it's the result of seemingly
limitless technological innovation. Open-source software development,
facilitated by the Internet, is enabling sophisticated systems that let
upstarts challenge major corporations.

So what do we say to the EE glued to his oscilloscope? Get out there and
relate, get an image makeover? I'd hesitate to give that advice, because I
don't think engineers are all that concerned with image.

Image is absolutely critical to marketing and business, of course. How your
company is perceived is central to how many people will buy your products.
But in a real sense, image is noncritical to engineering. Who you are, what
you look like, what your friends and family think of you may be important on
one level, but they're not going to get you through the workday.

And the work is still what counts, because most of the time, the benefits of
the resultant technology continue to outweigh the negatives. I certainly
wouldn't trade in the information tools I work with now to go back to a
telephone and typewriter, just to get a little peace of mind. I have
experienced firsthand the benefits of some amazing feats of engineering as
the tools of my trade have evolved, in just a little over two decades, from
the typewriter to the minicomputer-based publishing system, then to
modem-equipped desktops and on to the ever-shrinking portable with Wi-Fi
card.

Next up, the pundits say, will be wearable computers and truly
fashion-oriented electronics. It's the new face of technology, we are told.
Advanced electronic systems become image makers.

None of this would be possible without the hardwon engineering work that has
focused on how to organize matter at nanometer scales. A modern electronic
product is made from a hefty proportion of the 98 elements. Polymer
chemistry, liquid-crystal systems, lithium battery technology, immensely
complex ICs=97all of those had to be understood by engineers sitting at a l=
ab
bench, focusing their intellect on the world of materials. Somebody had to
put aside the complexities of modern life for a time and become immersed in
that rarified level of reality. And it is at that level that engineers gain
satisfaction from their work.

Here at EE Times, we promote the image of engineers as innovators and
creators of technology. Nothing wrong with that; it's what they are. The
fact that they debate=97in a language understood by few=97burning issues th=
at
will only be understood 10 years from now is just part of the package.

"By Chappell Brown (cbrown@cmp.com), managing editor of Design Currents and
Technology for EE Times"

Source: EETimes Newsweekly Issue 1413, Page 4, (6 March 2006)
-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist