After forty-five years of managing and mentoring dozens of young structural engineers, I have seen firsthand the various struggles they face in building successful careers in our high-liability profession. To assist a larger group of young engineers, I would like to offer advice on five important topics. …

Who are we to the Public? Do they know or care about what we do? Sadly, the public doesn’t know who we are or what we do. Structural engineers have allowed our clients (architects) to define the meaning of “buildings” and thus have grabbed credit for our work for the past 100 years. An architect represents every project, with no space/room for the technical accomplishments that make those projects happen. …

I believe that the majority of Americans understand the need for some kind of building code to regulate construction. Millennia ago, Hammurabi gave us the “eye-for-an-eye” version of the building code. Since the Chicago fire of 1871 and the San Francisco earthquake of 1906, there have been building codes in America. …

In this, the fourth and final column of a series (“The Idea,” December 2015; “The Future,” January 2016; “An Analysis,” February 2016), I ask you to consider the engineering way of thinking (EWT) as a relatively formal way of adapting to a constantly changing environment (in the broad sense) by enabling variation and selection as safely as possible under sometimes significant uncertainty. I will emphasize two sources: Engineers and Ivory Towers, by Hardy Cross (1952); and Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure, by Tim Harford (2011). Cross is a well-known engineer (think moment distribution) from the mid-20th century, and Harford is an economist today. …

In two previous columns (“The Engineering Way of Thinking: The Idea,” December 2015; “The Engineering Way of Thinking: The Future,” January 2016), I discussed the idea of the engineering way of thinking (EWT) and what it might bode for the future. This column is an analysis of the EWT, performed in a manner similar to how the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein – who received his initial education in engineering – might have gone about it. It consists of a number of statements organized in a way that I hope will lead you to a better understanding of the EWT. …

As discussed previously in this space (The Engineering Way of Thinking: The Idea, STRUCTURE December 2015), engineering is continually evolving as engineers try new tools, develop new designs, and build new or modified artifacts. All of these expand the heuristics that engineers use, but many times lead to failures. Henry Petroski has even argued that engineering advances through failures. …

At the 2013 annual meeting of the National Academy of Engineering in Washington, DC, Mitch Daniels, the former governor of Indiana and the president of Purdue University, said this about the possibility of educating too many engineers: “But even if we were to somehow outrun the market’s need for engineering talent, we will be a far stronger country if the engineering mentality takes a more prominent place in our national conversation.” …

“What are we going to do with Abcd? He’s not as up-to-date with design specifications as he used to be. He no longer wants to work long hours. He really doesn’t want to travel for work and is no longer able to do the more physically demanding field work. What ARE we going to do with Abcd?” …

While relatively uncommon, structural failures continue to occur, sometimes with catastrophic consequences. Investigations of such failures have typically focused on the physical factors involved, which is understandable given the technical orientation and background of engineers. However, the design, construction, and management of structures always involve physical and human factors, and this broader dynamic system is responsible for both the safety and failure of structures. …