Reengineering Engineering
I was invited by Olin College President Rick Miller to participate in his President’s Council meeting this week. I am glad I went. President Miller and his team are doing great work at Olin. They are reengineering engineering education. Olin College was founded in 1999 and will graduate its fifth class this weekend. Of course Olin had the luxury of starting from scratch but they have taken full advantage of the greenfield opportunity to rethink every aspect of engineering education. President Miller refers to Olin as a laboratory for developing new engineering education models. How refreshing. A real world lab to enable student centered experiential learning. It is music to my innovation junkie and Business Innovation Factory (BIF) ears. And the early results are in, the unemployment rate for Olin graduates since the program’s inception is one percent. Olin’s aspiration is nothing short of redefining engineering as a profession of innovation.
The best part of the day at Olin was spent with students. Listening to students talk about and share their work was energizing and inspiring. These are future engineers with a mission. Through experiential learning platforms starting in year one and continuing through out the Olin curriculum students apply engineering frameworks and tools in a broad human and societal context. They are all about the creative design of engineering systems that deliver value through entrepreneurial effort. These aren’t your parents’ engineers satisfied being a cog in an industrial era company focused narrowly on product and structure design. They aspire to be organization and community leaders having an impact by designing new customer experiences, business models, and social systems. They know it will be a collaborative effort requiring integration with many other disciplines but they are confident that their 21st century engineering education is preparing them for the hard work ahead. I wouldn’t bet against them.
One articulate student was genuine in voicing a concern shared by many of his classmates. While they are excited and committed to redefining the profession of engineering they have found most employers are still looking to hire traditional engineers content to work in isolated product development silos. His question was how do we convince more companies to buy in to a new definition of what talented engineering graduates are capable of? I have thought about his question ever since. It is a great reminder of the huge gap between 21st century ready people and organizations and those still hanging on hoping the 20th century is coming back. It reminds me of a similar conversation I often have with designers. Their constant lament is that designers are trained to work on interdisciplinary teams to transform customer experiences but most employers still have a narrow view of design relegating designers to traditional product and website design. My answer is the same in both cases. Find people and organizations that get it and avoid those that don’t. The 20th century isn’t coming back and you will only be frustrated working with those that still think it is. Keep moving forward and connecting with people, organizations and projects that understand engineers and designers are key to competing in the 21st century. Demonstrate a track record for creating value and working effectively on interdisciplinary teams and the rest will take care of itself.
While we are at it let’s not stop at transforming the professions of engineering and design. How about also redefining the roles and educational requirements to be a doctor, lawyer, and one that hits close to home, MBA. The biggest barriers to system change are the rigid definitions and qualifications for professional roles established during an industrial era that is long gone. Status quo is protected by current credentialing and licensing systems. How many academic institutions hide behind accreditation requirements as the excuse for not leading the charge to redefine professions and career paths for the 21st century? Maybe we should all undertake a greenfield exercise to rethink our roles, professions, credentials, and titles. Being 21st century ready requires it.
After graduating with a materials science engineering degree almost a year ago from a school that is, in some respects, stuck in the 20th century, I find a bit of comfort in knowing that a newer school is looking at engineering education in a new light. Knowing what my alma mater’s engineering department has and is still going through to remain effective in educating students for the current and future business world, it is a great thing that Olin is taking the challenge head on.
I agree, the 20th century isn’t coming back. At the same rate, it is very much still here. While I am all for moving to the 21st century, I hope Olin students have the opportunity to find companies that ‘get it’ and are well rounded enough to have ‘backward compatible’ skills that allow them to work in their companies that ‘get it’ with companies that ‘don’t get it.’ Companies that don’t get it and are stuck in the 20th century are everywhere and everyone graduating soon will have to know how to work efficiently with them (and potentially help transform them).
On the note of doctors and lawyers. I would like any doctor or lawyer of mine to be trained with the medical skills time has proven works or the rules of the law that exist today (while at the same time being able to innovate creatively).
Saul - it was great to have you as a guest at our President’s Council meeting. Any of us here would appreciate this article. Let me go one step further. One of the more important aspects of the learning process at Olin comes from “teaching-in-context” - incorporating the necessary technical lessons into interesting contextual materials that enhance learning and retention; and, hands-on, design-build projects that put the hard lessons of math, physics etc. into a practical setting that not only enhances the learning experience but prepares students for the real-world collision of their first job.
Cheers
Ron
Dear Saul and all reading this,
I agree and appreciate your thoughts. I work for IBM and we have been working with universities around the world for 6 years now on an initiative called “Service Science,” which asks educators to incorporate “services” context into teaching since most of the world’s businesses are service businesses and to help make their students more multidisciplinary for a services world - having a combination of skills in business, technology, and people/culture. Unfortunately, these subject areas are taught in different colleges within most universities. Olin is an exception and there are more than 400 universities we know who have adopted this theory of service science and multidisciplinary programs. The progressive universities are in a tough situation in that many industries don’t know yet that these skills are available; we need a marketing campaign to let employers know about engineering entrepreneurs, service scientists, and multidisciplinary experts so that they know to ask for these skills in the job descriptions. We need also let large employers know that these special students can fill jobs in non-traditional business units. We need to put these student resumes in front of the right hiring managers who need the systems thinkers. My advice to the progressive universities (Olin has 1% graduate unemployment) - keep doing what you are doing, advertise what you are doing (Rick Miller is an expert in that), and invite key employers to participate in your programs. Everything will connect soon; I am confident.