A business case for flexibility in the workplace.

Let’s all agree to identify and remove obstacles

Over the past few months, I have written about employment in the structural engineering profession. The first article in the February 2023 issue dealt with the apparent shortage of structural engineers, including an analysis of the potential causes. I concluded that engineers are just as responsible for the situation as anyone or anything else. The second article in the July issue dealt with leadership and mentorship. Again, I stated that we can be our worst enemies but that there is an opportunity for improvement.

Between Christmas and New Year’s, I led a small group from FTF Engineering on a long day trip to the California North Coast to learn from the December 20, 2022, 6.4 magnitude (Modified Mercalli Intensity VIII, Severe) Ferndale earthquake. Our goal was to visit Scotia, Rio Dell, Ferndale, Eureka, and anything else that caught our eye.

In the past few months, I have watched a few webinars on structural engineering topics and have come away wondering why I wasted my time. It wasn’t so much the technical content per se or the knowledge or earnestness of the presenters but the poor quality of the presentations themselves disturbed me so much that I couldn’t focus on the content. The words just became “blah, blah, blah,” I tuned out and became a movie critic with running commentary. Many of you might already be thinking that if I am such a presentation hotshot, why I don’t do them myself and show us how it is done. Hence this article. 

During the past year or so, I have read many articles, some published in STRUCTURE, on the continuing debate about the benefits of working from home versus at the office, mostly or entirely in each case. I think it is fair to say that there are two camps. The work-from-home advocates note a reduction in commute time, more time available to be with family, increased flexibility in one’s daily schedule, getting more done in a day, etc. The work-from-the-office advocates describe better collaboration, more efficiency, more learning opportunities, better mentoring, etc. There is clearly no right or wrong approach because they are all true to me, particularly in the short term.

I was motivated to write following the devastating earthquakes in eastern Turkey on February 6, 2023. As of February 21, 2023, more than 45,000 people have died, most unnecessarily. Unfortunately, tragedies occur all of the time, are observed and discussed for a news cycle or two, but then largely forgotten. That is unless the issue is your issue. Earthquake hazards, risk, and mitigation are my issues, so I want to continue the conversation to lend a different perspective to our readers and to motivate them to advocate for more action, hopefully.

Concluding our series on automation – December 2021 (Installment 1), March 2022 (2), June 2022 (3), September 2022 (4) – I sat down (virtually) in July 2022 with two more industry experts in innovation: Dr. Erica Fischer, Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at Oregon State University; and Ilana Danzig, Associate Principal at Aspect Structural Engineers. Below are highlights from our discussion.

Continuing our series on automation – December 2021 (Installment 1), March 2022 (2), June 2022 (3) – I sat down (virtually) in April 2022 with two more industry experts in digital design: Steve Reichwein, a Senior Associate at Severud Associates Consulting Engineers, and Carlos de Oliveira, a founder of Cast Connex. Below are highlights from our discussion.

Continuing our series on automation (Installment 1, December 2021, Installment 2, March 2022), I sat down (virtually) in January 2022 with two more industry experts in digital design: Matt Sweeney, Production Technology Manager at PES Structural Engineers, and Derek Pedersen, Principal at JVA Consulting Engineers. Both serve on the SEI Digital Design Committee. Below are highlights from our discussion.