Chris and Jeff discuss why engineers are sometimes seen as cold, heartless bastards who refuse to be team players. Oh yeah, and how that might be linked to a lack of empathy.
A recent journal article claims that engineering students have less empathy than students in other fields of study. Chato Rasoal, Henrik Denielsson & Tomas Jungert (2012): Empathy among students in engineering programmes, European Journal of Engineering Education, 37:5, 427-435.
Our guest for this episode is Jim Heilman, who appeared previously in our episode on recruiting. He thinks that the whole empathy thing with engineers is a perception problem.
Employers don’t usually ask about empathetic skills when looking for technical personnel, although the ability to “listen” is considered important.
On the whole, women are more empathetic than men, and empathy tends to increase with age and level of education.
We also tend to more empathetic toward those that share cultural and geographical backgrounds. Thus, we may have to work at being sufficiently empathetic towards those with different values and traditions.
Jim believes employers assume all candidates to be sufficiently empathetic, even through the evidence would indicate otherwise.
Taking candidates out to lunch is a common ploy to see how potential employees treat others, especially those who are not in positions of authority.
Chris recalls a quote by Samuel Johnson, “The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good.”
A study out of Case Western Reserve University indicates that firing up the neuron network we use for empathy causes our analytic abilities to be suppressed. Anthony I. Jack, Abigail Dawson, Katelyn Begany, Regina L. Leckie, Kevin Barry, Angela Ciccia, Abraham Snyder. fMRI reveals reciprocal inhibition between social and physical cognitive domains. NeuroImage, 2012
Chris wonders what the biological advantage might be in this trade off between empathy and analysis.
Jim has noticed that women seem expected to show more empathy than men, especially by other women.
There seems to be a gap between the knowledge skills and characteristics that a graduate engineer is expected to hold, and what skills and characteristics these engineers actually have.
Jim feels that engineers may be getting unfairly criticized, as a lack of empathy seems widespread in a number of industries.
This episode covers a few of the various ways in which time influences the work of engineers.
Chris has been busy refactoring electronic schematics; Jeff is preparing for a mechatronics course he will be teaching.
Despite our perceptions of time being quite variable, we often talk about work we need to do, or the distances we need to travel, in terms of the quantity of time that these tasks will consume.
As Albert Einstein put it, “Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT’S relativity.”
Nearly all analysis problems one faces in engineering school are unaffected by the issue of calendar time. On the other hand, many real-world engineering activities are heavily dependent on meeting time deadlines.
One method for judging the temperature dependence of reaction rates is the Arrhenius Equation.
Accurate time estimation is important for project management.
Chris likes the concepts of Agile Management. One of these involves predicting one’s progress for the next two weeks.
Team cohesiveness is always important for acquiring honest assessments of a project’s status and future timeline.
Seasonal issues play a big role in the areas of maintenance and purchasing. Far reaching events, from Chinese New Year to Speedweeks, can influence engineering schedules.
Time is money. Need we say more? However, the conversion rate between these two assets can vary widely.
Some ways to get things done more quickly:
Make social connections, both inside and outside of your employer’s organization.
Plan ahead, even when it’s inconvenient or uncomfortable to do so.
Pay the price, when you’ve got the budget and you’ve run out of other options.
Ask for help… EARLY!
Broadcast progress on a regular basis.
Manage expectations.
Time can’t be managed; its passage cannot be accelerated or slowed. We can only control where our attention is focused.
Some projects just won’t go away, not matter how much you wish they would fade into oblivion.
Chris is anxiously awaiting delivery of his new CNC equipment. More about this in the next episode!
Thanks to Matthew Kirkland for the clock photo, taken at the Old Town Hall in Prague. Podcast theme music provided by Paul Stevenson
Chris and Jeff review the episodes of 2012, and share some of the background stories that didn’t make it to the original podcasts.
Chris enjoys the lack of interruptions that the holiday season brings to his workplace.
From Episode 1, “Jumping Off,” Chris took away the notion that engineering is messy. Jeff harped once again about his “Rule of Pi” for estimating time and costs.
Episode 2 covered the topic of “Feedback.” It sometimes requires some real digging to ascertain what is motivating the end user of a product or service.
In our third episode, titled “Compromise,” the topic of engineers and their emotions was first raised; this now seems like a reoccurring theme for the podcast.
We talked with Jim Tappel about “Design Thinking” in Episode 4. Both Chris and Jeff remain a bit fuzzy about what differentiates design thinking from other customer-focused approaches. However, Jim offered some great stories about his time with design firm IDEO.
“Recruitment” was the subject of Episode 5. Guest Jim Heilman noted that networking is a crucial skill for finding new employment opportunities.
We discussed “Longevity” with Ian Dees in our sixth episode. Chris was impressed by Ian’s effort to provide useful information to the engineers that picked up his projects. Jeff enjoyed the discussion of weighing system complexity against user benefits.
Episode 7, “In the Zone,” covered how engineers can get into a creative state of mind.
We talked about “Influence” in Episode 8. Chris reports the discussion caused to “squirm” just a little bit.
We’ll be offering a survey of our listening audience in 2013. Please participate!
“STEM Education” was covered in our ninth episode. There is a great loss of potential engineers as students traverse the standard path of engineering education.
We talked with Greg Wilson about his “Software Carpentry” program in Episode 10. His focus on the practical implications of software coding was of interest to both Jeff and Chris.
Episode 11 covered the subject of “Patents” with Dave Gevers. It was of interest to Chris that patents can be obtained with a minimal level of legal assistance. Jeff was intrigued by the distinctions between “personal” and “corporate” patents.
Karl Stephan was our guest for Episode 12, which highlighted the subject of “Ethics.” Jeff appreciated the distinction between “macro” and “micro” ethical issues.
In Episode 13, we covered “Free Agency,” talking with Stephen Kesich about his experience as a contract engineer.
The skills and talents that allow individuals to become engineering “Superstars” was the subject of our fourteenth episode. While Chris and Jeff did this episode “on the fly,” it turned out being well-received.
“Talent” was the subject of Episode 15. Chris liked the message that is talent is developed, not entirely innate; he found this a hopeful message. Jeff noted that young people may not develop a passion until they work hard enough to develop a skill set.
We discussed “Critical Thinking” in Episode 16, talking with Jeff Ellis about rational decision making. Jeff found the “Principle of Reciprocity” to be a valuable concept. Chris likes the idea of being on a quest for truth. Alas, Jeff Ellis has recently shut down his website, called The Thinker.
In the seventeenth episode, Chris and Jeff discussed the “DIY” movement with Steve Hoefer. Steve’s sonar glove project really impressed Chris. On the other hand, Jeff was happy just to find out what the show was about, as his internet connection had dropped out early in the recording session.
Engineering disasters were the topic of Episode 18, titled “Failure.” The balance between innovation and technological advancement was of interest to Chris, while Jeff noted the asymmetric relationship between the individual success and the success of the profession.
We talked with James Trevelyan in Episode 19, which we called “Value.” This discussion was wide-ranging, but focused on the economic benefit engineers bring to the workplace.
Jeff is a regular listener of the Security Now podcast hosted by Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte.
Chris and Jeff discuss why engineers are sometimes seen as cold, heartless bastards who refuse to be team players. Oh yeah, and how that might be linked to a lack of empathy.
This episode covers a few of the various ways in which time influences the work of engineers.
Chris and Jeff review the episodes of 2012, and share some of the background stories that didn’t make it to the original podcasts.