Downstream problems with professionals

June 2, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Listen to the people downstream from certain professions for very long and you’ll wonder whether students are getting enough hands-on experience in college.

Take car mechanics, for example. It’s a good thing the engineers who design engine compartments are safely behind desks and not in repair shops when spark plugs are being changed. Some vehicles require so much labor to strip away other equipment in the compartment just to reach the plugs that costs run unnecessarily high, sometimes into hundreds of dollars.

If engineers had to change plugs just once, they’d make it easier, mechanics gripe.

These kinds of complaints pop up occasionally about architects, too. Ask contractors what they think of the profession and it isn’t uncommon to hear stories about ignorance of how buildings are actually put together. More knowledge of the process would cut construction costs and long-term maintenance, the contractors complain.

The points raised here are based on anecdotal evidence. Maybe you’re aware of studies showing mechanics are giddy about engineers and designers.

But the comments come up often enough to raise questions about whether professionals are trained as well as they could be. And maybe not just engineers and architects. Other professions may come to mind.

Should engineers be required to spend time in repair shops in college? Or architect students on construction sites with the hard hat crowd?

What are your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Architects
    It's unbelievable how most Architects design homes. It's like they have never lived in one. A resounding YES is my answer to the question. They should have to suffer through a move or two to see how difficult or impossible it is to get normal furniture into a home!!!
  • Real World Implementation Experience Would Help
    Although I loathe the idea of anybody being "required" to do anything, especially if further institutionalizing more academic requirements for things that are common sense or that people can learn their own there is a point here.

    I recall taking something like 20+ screws out of a desktop computer (in the early 90s) in order to upgrade the memory. I did indeed realize very quickly that the engineer who designed it never had to do this. Today, most are easily accessed with one screw or a pop-off cover.

    Consistently (in houses, computers, automobiles or any other thing) there are opportunities where things could be improved to make ease of repair or enhancement easier. I generally assume things are engineered the way they are for a reason - but wonder if those reasons are always more important than lowering the cost or frustration associated with ownership.
  • They should learn in the field
    Speaking as an architect, I agree that architects should learn from the field. While I have worked a short time in construction, it wasn't through college. Even with the construction experience, not everything I've produced was perfect and took into account all the unforeseen field conditions that are inevitable in construction. We follow industry best practices for detailing the installation and I'm happy to review our design with the construction professionals executing the installation. I know many architects who would argue that the means and methods of construction are the responsibility of the builders and not the architect's concern. I agree to a point, I'm not going to tell them which hammer to use when driving a nail, but I'll be sure we've detailed joints in the construction to provide a watertight system that will perform for the owner and achieve the design intent. What happens often is that a builder will look at the design documented by the architect and find ways to make the construction less expensive through using different systems or removing components from the assemblies they don't think are necessary. When an owner hears a builder tell them "the architect has made this much more expensive" while ignorantly removing insulation, vapor retarders or barriers, and ventilation that is required by state building codes and industry best practices they create buildings with shorter life spans that are less healthy for the occupants. A little field education for the architects is good, and little design and engineering education for the installers is good as well.
  • designer should be user
    My dad told me 50 yrs ago and truer even today - the guy who designs it should have to use. I'm in the bar/restaurant business and this applies to every piece of equipment we have: cash registers, ice machines, kitchen eq, tables, chairs - you name it.
  • Agreed!
    Having done both design and repair, I can state wholeheartedly that no one should be allowed to design a car until they have spent at least a year repairing cars. The same would hold true for houses. A year under a hard hat makes a huge difference in the way one designs buildings. I see nothing wrong with, and a great benefit to, having student engineers and architects spend some course work and time in the field on the other end of someone else's designs.
  • Engineers need more hands-on knowledge
    As an engineer myself, I agree that hands-on experience is necessary for making the best design. I myself have used the knowledge of the people operating the equipment I was responsible for improving. They are the ones that use it day after day. I have also seen engineers design things that appeared to not have much thought applied to how it would be used. I had to fix their designs so that they would be functional. Before an engineer should be allowed to design, they should be involved in the trenches of daily operation.
  • YES
    I agree with hands on training!!!!!!!!!

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The Walgreens did not get a lot of traffic. It was not located on the corner of the intersection, and not really visible from Emerson. Meanwhile the CVS there is huge and right on the corner. I am guessing a lot of people drove by a million times and never knew the Walgreens was there. Although, with the new Walmart market going in, that area could really see a lot of increase in traffic soon.

  2. You folks don't have a clue. There is a legal way to enter this country and to get aid. This left unchecked could run us to ruin quickly. I also heard that 'supporters' were getting major $$ to take them in? Who's monitoring this and guess who pays the bill? I support charitable organizations... but this is NOT the way to do it!

  3. Apparently at some time before alcohol has been served at the fair. The problem is that beer or wine used to be a common drink for people before soft drinks and was not thought to be that unusual. Since many folks now only drink to see how much they can drink or what kind of condition they can end up in it becomes more problematic. Go to Europe and its no big deal just as if you had sodas of milk to drink everyday. Its using common sense that is lacking now days.

  4. To address the epic failure of attracting race fans to both the Indy 500 and Brickyard 400 would take too much of my time to write. Bottom line Boles is clueless and obviously totally out of touch with the real paying fan base. I see nothing but death spin coming for the Brickyard, just like Indy. Get somebody in a place of power that understands what race fans want.

  5. I am a race fan through & through. It doesn't matter if it's Indy cars or Nascar. I love a great race. I go to several other tracks each year and you can see the entire track. I know Indy has tradition, but fans want to see the entire race. I sit in the Penthouse, am almost 60 years old, and would like to see a better TV screen in turn 1 so you can see the entire race. Then I think Indy needs to install an escalator so us old folks can make it up to the Penthouse and down again if we want more options to purchase food and drinks. Just a race fans opinion. Lights won't make the race any better, but you might be able to see the TV better at night. Turn 1's screen needs replaced with a better and bigger screen.

ADVERTISEMENT