Read on Twitter
Why I'm Likely Leaving Structural Engineering - A Thread:
@PJJefferis @jjsolly
I’ll start with the challenges that I think are universal across the industry, followed by my personal
experience…
@PJJefferis @jjsolly
I’ll start with the challenges that I think are universal across the industry, followed by my personal
experience…
I don’t think we train young engineers to have successful careers, because those training them are using an outdated playbook. Several of the companies I’ve worked for have espoused a “mentor/mentee” or “apprenticeship” type relationship as being key for developing talent.
Having an effective mentor/mentee relationship takes a lot of work. At the same time, the design process has been accelerated due to unrealistic timelines, so it has become much more assembly line like out of necessity to stay competitive.
This means I’ve met multiple (ex)engineers that spent their first three years on nothing but shop drawings. Becoming well-rounded takes time and effort, and it’s easy to keep assigning the same tasks because they’re “good” at it, and there just isn't time to teach/mentor.
In the 2018 @se3project survey, there was a spike of people considering leaving the profession at that 2-4 year point. No surprise, since structural engineering education would have you believe you’ll be analyzing and designing a super-tall building at your first job…
This initial career dissatisfaction means that a lot of young engineers move around… a lot. Almost everyone in my graduate class (that is still an engineer, 75% are no longer in the profession) has worked at two or more firms, which has led to the larger issue of brain drain…
Brain drain is the biggest challenge facing the structural engineering industry. It is increasing common for a megaproject to burn out an entire analysis/design team to the point that they all quit before the project is completed.
This means that aside from the person providing the PR sound bites (and stamp of liability), the company has effectively lost its ability to execute the same kind of work that will then be plastered across their PR material and used to win NEW work.
But there are calc packages and docs, right? You don't have total knowledge loss!
But the level of documentation req'd to execute a project is well below that of what is req'd to replicate the same type of project (let's not talk about analysis software documentation...)
But the level of documentation req'd to execute a project is well below that of what is req'd to replicate the same type of project (let's not talk about analysis software documentation...)
These days, given how often software upgrades are rolled out, it’s entirely possible you won’t be able to open a two year old analysis model (let alone a ten year old analysis model). This isn’t because software has gotten better, it’s just because it’s on a subscription cycle.
The current workflow for analysis and design is also extremely inefficient. The software we use at best often only has an Excel export. We constantly copy and paste thousands of cells, drag down formulas, rinse/repeat every time a tweak is made to an analysis model.
We use Excel because of issues with engineering software, mainly in transparency. I find engineering analysis and design software extremely lacking in transparency and usability. I don't think it's great for developing intuition about how a building behaves. I'd like to fix that.
Other universal challenges: standing up to architecture firms that have zero interest in sustainability (looking at you, starchitects), racing to the bottom in times of economic turmoil (twice since I started studying/working), and lack of computer literacy...
On a more personal note, I have deeply struggled to find my footing as someone that does not have a traditional engineering background for the number of “years” of experience you can attach to my name. I started my career running complex analysis models in bridge engineering.
This led to an interest in programming/computational design and an attempted PhD in the field. I won’t get into how much I regret that in terms of dealing with a sexist research group/program and a verbally abusive PI, but it did instill just how important *good* mentorship is.
Despite everything, I still wanted to come back to the building industry to build things… with code! I still think that embracing digital technology is one of the best ways the profession *can* move forward.
I still really want to build things with code, and I don’t think I’m totally shit at it either (not spending time continuing learning certainly doesn't help). As long as my job title doesn’t include “software” instead of “structural”, I don’t think that is in the cards.
My last two times of interviewing for jobs, I have brought small samples of fun applications I’ve built for practical design purposes (entirely in my free time). Great for the interview, but the job has still been the standard engineering job.
I haven’t figured out how to put the two together, and if my title says “structural engineer”, project work will always come first, which will continue to put me behind the ball in terms of progressing in software.
One of the best decisions I *have* made in my career was to spend 3 months @recursecenter last fall. And I guess I’ll end with a shameless plug about how I’ll actually be talking about something I worked on during lockdown in my free time at @PyGotham next Friday.
If you made it to the bottom of the thread, here are some bonus cat pictures of Nova and Luna, who have kept me entertained throughout this crazy time.
