1. "What is Engineering?" The Summary!
2. Engineering Profession References
3. Where do I go for information about engineering?

Engineer as Hero -- engineers in the movies

The definition of "professional engineer" is considered in another FAQ, and will not be taken up here. The simple definitions of "engineering" commonly used within the sci.engr groups are as follows:

• Applied science, applied with an eye toward ethical behaviour.
• Designing and building things that meet customer requirements.
• Using scientific information for practical purposes.
• Applying technology toward human needs.
• The art of applying science to the optimum conversion of natural resources to the benefit of humankind.
• The bridge between science and art.

Common threads in many Usenet discussions of this subject:

• Some call it an art, some a science, some both.
• Nearly all recognize that engineering is an act performed in response to some human need or another.
• Most agree that engineering cannot be performed with indifference to "ethics," or without "professionalism." Some even consider a "moral element."

"Every technological product has to be designed and its fabrication overseen, and this is what engineers DO."
-- Samuel Florman, The Civilized Engineer

"Engineering is the art of directing the great sources of power in nature for the use and convenience of man."
-- Thomas Tredgold, 1828

"The ability to compute separates the engineer from the technician. An education in engineering mathematics generates an insight into...physical things which cannot be attained in any other way and...the generation of new QUALITATIVE ideas which will work.

"This process iterates around three elements:

1. QUALITATIVE DESIGN. The generation of ideas, structures, concepts, combinations, configurations and patterns. The results are expressed in sketches, layouts, schematics and diagrams.

2. QUANTITATIVE DESIGN. The computation of the magnitude of the elements in a qualitative design. The results are expressed in numbers, usually with physical units (e.g. length, voltage, temperature).

3. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN. The use of physical models and tests to compensate for both qualitative and quantitative uncertainty."

-- from Kamm, Real-World Engineering

A good scientist is a person with original ideas. A good engineer is a person who makes a design that works with as few original ideas as possible.
-- Freeman Dyson

...(that) any general system of conveying passengers would ... go at a velocity exceeding ten miles an hour, or thereabouts, is extremely improbable.
-- Thomas Tredgold

The above quotes, and thus much writing by non-engineers about engineers, deal with "universal truths" about engineers:

1. Purpose. The scientist wants to understand the way the universe (or some particular part of it) works; the engineer wants to design some mechanism or system to work according to known laws and applied to specific needs.

2. Routine. The scientist will develop a theory and test it -- when the field allows. In some fields the scientist will collect and analyze data and *then* develop a theory to describe the results. (This theory may lead to an equation or some other tool used by the engineer.) [See what happens, then describe it.] The engineer will instead collect information, draw up a plan, build and test a prototype, iterate out the kinks, and go to production and marketing. [Build it, then see what happens.]

3. Goals.

Your mileage may of course vary. The most often cited difference between engineers and scientists is the inability of engineers to have a "control," or something from which the influence of various effects can be examined. Is this because systems generally cost so much more, or are so much more complex, then measurement devices or simulations?

Things get fuzzy when (a) engineers need to explore ground previously uncharted by science, or (b) scientists need to design and build experimental facilities. Then they pretty much have to work together, and most of the contributors to the discussion think that that aspect of things tends not to go all that well.

Amazon.com is pleased to have the Engineer's Companion in the family of Amazon.com associates. We've agreed to ship books and provide customer service for orders we receive through special links on the Engineer's Companion.

Amazon.com associates list selected books in an editorial context that helps you choose the right books. We encourage you to visit the Engineer's Companion often to see what new books they've selected for you. Thank you for shopping with an Amazon.com associate. Sincerely, Jeff Bezos, President, Amazon.com P.S. We guarantee you the same high level of customer service you would receive at Amazon.com. If you have a question about an order you've placed, please don't hesitate to contact us.

For Practicing Engineers
Adams, J. Flying Buttresses, Entropy and O-Rings (Editor's Choice) Deming, W. E. Out of the Crisis (Editor's Choice) Florman, S. The Civilized Engineer (Editor's Choice) Florman, S. Blaming Technology (Editor's Choice) Florman, S. The Existential Pleasures of Engineering (Editor's Choice) Fredrich, A. Sons of Martha Gordon, J. Structures Hapgood, F. Up the Infinite Corridor Huie, W. B. Can do! The Story of the Seabees Kamm, L. Real-World Engineering Kidder, T. The Soul of a New Machine Landers, J. Engineering in the Ancient World Levy & Salvadori Why Buildings Fall Down Meehan, R. Getting Sued & Other Tales...	Morowitz, H. The Thermodynamics of Pizza Neumann, G. Herman the German Petroski, H. To Engineer is Human (Editor's Choice) Petroski, H. The Pencil Petroski, H. Engineers of Dreams Petroski, H. Design Paradigms (Editor's Choice) Reid, P. Well Made in America (Editor's Choice) Rolt, L. Victorian Engineering Salvadori, M. The Art of Construction Salvadori, M. Why Buildings Stand Up Shute, N. Slide Rule Vincenti, W. What Engineers Know and How They Know It White, P. The Idea Factory (Editor's Choice)
Petroski's To Engineer is Human is also available in video form and includes examples of spectacular engineering failures, such as the Tacoma Narrows bridge and the Kansas City Hyatt Regency skywalk. The video, like the book, examines the causes and prevention of failures. NOVELS
Crichton, M. Airframe Crichton, M. Jurassic Park Frankowski, L. The Cross-Time Engineer Grossbach, R. A Shortage of Engineers Lodge, D. Nice Work Schumacher, A. Engineered for Murder Shute, N. No Highway Vonnegut, K. Player Piano

Most engineering societies have sites and you can obtain their addresses & phone numbers there for further information.

The Engineering Societies Survey is Copyright 1995 by Ron Graham and was used to weigh the pros and cons of membership in a professional society. There were 25 responses to the following questions:

1. Are you a member of any? Which? Are you an officer?
2. What benefits have you incurred from your membership?
3. Do you feel your membership cost/volunteerism is justified?
4. What role does the professional society play in the advancement of the engineering profession?
5. What is the outlook for the future of the society you know best?
6. How does your employer feel about society membership?
7. What other comments would you like to make on this subject? Are there any references to which you can point?

1. (Are you a member of any? Which? Are you an officer?) Of those surveyed, 85% are members, and only one person surveyed was never a member. Of the members, 40% were officers. Keep in mind as you look at this result that of course members or former members will be the ones most likely to respond. The number to note here is the 40% officers -- there's a high level of activity among these folks.

2. (What benefits have you incurred from your membership?) Here are the benefits of society membership, grouped into personal, professional and technical categories.
   • PERSONAL
     • group insurance
     • credit cards
     • social events

   • PROFESSIONAL
     • development of business skills
     • local networking
     • opportunities to publish
     • interaction with students
     • help with proposal writing
     • promotion of workplace diversity

   • TECHNICAL
     • access to BBS
     • new vendor releases

   Some also point out that the society's magazine may be particularly useful, with meeting and event notices and descriptions of advances in the field. In all fairness, however, some point out that none of these benefits are strong enough to be worth the price. Which leads us to...

3. (Do you feel your membership cost/volunteerism is justified?) Of those surveyed, half felt that the cost of their memberships was justified. And, half didn't. Those who felt their memberships were justified were usually very active ("it costs to much to be 'just a member'"), and felt that what they got out of it grew with what they put in. The prospect of having influence on societal policy was particularly attractive among these folks.

   Those who felt their memberships were not justified usually cited wasteful spending as the reason. Publications are costly (although, in fairness, they often contain information you can't find easily elsewhere) as well.

   The split down the middle is significant -- it indicates that even active society members see significant opportunity for improvement in customer service.

4. (What role does the professional society play in the advancement of the engineering profession?) Here are the roles played by the professional society:
   • publishing periodic employment and salary surveys
   • assisting with employment and ethical guidelines
   • enhancing corporate awareness of engineering
   • preparing certification and accreditation standards
   • preparing technical standards (and sometimes funding research)
   • offering independent reviews of engineering designs
   • advocating engineering standards to government

   Again, some disagree that any roles are played at all. A few others indicate that some of these roles need to be enhanced, particularly as pertains to relationships with government.

5. (What is the outlook for the future of the society you know best?) Of those surveyed, half thought the outlook for the future of their society was good. On the other hand, 25% thought it was neutral and 25% not good. The comments below may indicate some reasons for this.

6. (How does your employer feel about society membership?) Of those surveyed, half felt their employers supported their involvement fully, including with money (e.g. time off for meetings or springing for the cost of a banquet ticket or membership). On the other hand, 25% thought that support was neutral (a couple even made it sound as though management was "cool" toward the idea), and 25% thought their employers didn't support it at all. Fortunately, I could read no indication that any individual employer tried to actively dissuade anyone from being active in a society.

7. (What other comments would you like to make on this subject? Are there any references to which you can point?) Here are the comments. They are not repeated verbatim from what I received, because several people would point out the same ideas, and it fell to me to condense them.
   • Societies often depend on employers for financial backing and (possibly as a consequence) to provide officers. This may mean that the views of all customers (much less the needs of all the world at large) are held in high regard. Who is the customer here? The individual member or the corporation?

   • Some societies (again, possibly related to lack of clear customer recognition) represent too many interests. This of course dilutes the effect on any single interest. This shows up particularly in the areas of energy and environmental policy, where societies have in part taken a back seat to zealots.

   • Societies should band together to lobby Congress (in the USA) and governmental agencies (everywhere needed).

   • Societies must reach out to more than simply their own members with information and knowledge. Again, this goes to the issue of customer recognition and service.

   • Since real incomes are decreasing for engineers, so should real costs imposed by the society. Although societies in general grow and change with their respective disciplines, this area is not one of the ways they do it.

     Some societies have proposed ways to "unbundle" the cost of membership, in order to have members "pay for service," or pay for what aspects of their memberships they actually use. Though overall costs would be reduced to members, some services would be eliminated -- and they might not be missed until they're gone.

     There is, in the USA, a conflict for many societies between their need to lower costs and the desire of members to lobby the government: they are 501(c)(3) (i.e. non-profit) organizations. These organizations are not permitted to lobby the US government. If they were to lose their 501(c)(3) classifications, they would have to raise dues, or solicit serious underwriting from corporations. The former would cause a conflict with members wanting to unbundle costs; the latter with members who want policies independent of corporate interests.

   • Again, as regards both individual real income and corporate support of the society, there is in some groups a shift of membership makeup away from practitioners and towards academics. (The responses indicated no numbers.) A balance between the two is needed to keep a gulf from opening between them.

   • The society must (and in some cases does) recognize the "temping" of engineering functions. Taken to its limit, the temping of engineering can result in the profession becoming more like law and medicine in the way it is marketed. This could greatly increase the value of the society to the practitioner. (The value of registration would go up, too, but that's another thread.)

Finally, one person suggested that the professional society is what "distinguishes us from other people in suits sitting in front of computers."