FREE CLIENT CONSULTATIONS
No obligation. Find out what we offer:- - Global Search
- - Targeted Recruitment
- - Talent Engaged and Retained
- - Recognised by Industry
- - Respected by The Profession
Senior Project Manager
Location » Perth WA
We are currently looking for expressions of interest from Senior Project Managers for a leading design...
Featured Job
Different members, one body - Various skills still not recognised as part of the profession
By John Masters, 14 August 2009
While members of the engineering profession continue to exchange passionate views and diverse opinions on the merits of recognising different levels for their membership - employers have been slow to recognise the value that can be derived from adopting an organisational structure that accounts for the different occupational categories in the engineering team.
This topic has been brought to light by an acute shortage of engineers in recent years. Unable to fill vacancies previously reserved for professional engineers, employers have turned to lesser qualified technologists and even technicians. Surprisingly, these employers often found the knowledge and experience of lesser qualified applicants lived up to the requirements for the role.
Rather than challenge the abilities of members of different occupational categories in the profession, it raises the question of whether employers truly understand the respective roles played by different members of the engineering team, and as such reflect this in their organisational structures.
The occupation categories recognised by Engineers Australia and the differences between them can be summarised as follows:
Professional Engineers: “apply advanced skills… to problem solving and synthesis in new and existing fields”. Require qualifications in professional engineering, normally a degree of four years duration.
Engineering Technologists: “apply skills… to new and existing technologiesin standard design, testing, inspection plant operation, manufacturing or field work”. Require qualifications in engineering technology, normally a degree of three years duration.
Engineering Associates: “generally apply engineering principles and practices in support of, or to supplement, the work of professional engineers, technologists or other professional officers”. Require qualifications in technician engineering, normally a diploma of two years duration.
Project teams and organisational staff structures rarely account for these different occupational categories. Position descriptions in particular often fail to reflect outputs and responsibilities that align with the skill capability of a single occupational category. Reallocation of some tasks into different roles may be required to overcome this, but it will in turn promote better alignment of positions to job grades that recognise these differences and reflect a more relevant reporting structure.
Horses for courses
Team structures built around the occupational categories will improve succession planning by exploiting the relationships between them. For instance, some technologists will be content to remain at a certain level, while study assistance and training can be provided for those that want to articulate to the level of engineer. This provides an alternative resource from which to develop future engineers – many of whom will already have organisational and technical experience when they articulate.
Despite slowing economic activity, employers are still finding it difficult to attract qualified professional engineers into key vacancies, turning away applicants perhaps able to do the job, but lacking the qualification. Reviewing the organisational structure to account for the different occupational categories in the engineering team will decrease the demand for professional engineers by recognising that some jobs may be better suited to technologists or even technicians.
In the meantime it seems that the ongoing debate about the professional identity of the different occupational categories that make up the engineering team is alive and well. Past National President of Engineers Australia, Dr Brian Lloyd argues in a letter to the institute’s monthly journal that associates and technologists “can never be considered members of the profession of engineering,” (Engineers Australia, April 2009).
In response, Engineering Australia’s Manager of Articulation, Dr Eric Hobson, challenges Dr Lloyd to find grounds for this exclusion (Engineers Australia, May 2009). "After spending a considerable amount of time over many years lecturing students on what constitutes a 'profession', I can see no reason to exclude technologists and associates from it." He quotes the ACCC's definition of a profession as: A disciplined group of individuals who adhere to high ethical standards and uphold themselves to, and are accepted by, the public as possessing special knowledge and skills in a widely recognised, organised body of learning derived from education and training at a high level, and who are prepared to exercise this knowledge and these skills in the interest of others.
In a follow-up letter Mr John Muirhead, a qualified engineer, weighed into the debate by disagreeing with Dr Hobson’s view. "I see technologists and associates as part of the industry, not the profession." (Engineers Australia, June 2009.)
Are employers waiting for members of the profession to reach some agreement before they implement any changes? In his letter Mr Muirhead recognises that "technologists and associates make essential and highly skilled contributions to the industry". I believe there is opportunity for this so-called 'leadership' to use its power and influence to introduce changes in the industry that better reflect the defined roles of different occupational categories.
talent torque welcomes comments from readers who have been following this or similar debates as we are looking to explore the issue from a members’ perspective in future editions. talenttorque @ jsmappointments.com.au
COMMENTS
LEAVE A REPLY
No comments.