Challenges & Struggles to Be Resolved in the Consulting Engineering Practice

To view the figures and tables associated with this article, please refer to the flipbook above.

There is never a boring day for a consulting structural engineer; a typical day brings a new challenge and often one that needs some research or some collaboration with others. When new issues are particular to one project, which the engineer did not face before, there is much to learn, and often technical issues are the easiest ones to address (because the engineer has the proper education and experience to tackle it).

Young graduates may have the impression that consulting engineering can be practiced soon after graduation with a college degree and after obtaining a professional engineering registration. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing is simple about the practice of consulting engineering: an engineering degree, even with registration and with experience, may or may not be appropriate to fully practice engineering.

For a consulting engineer in private practice, joy and frustration, contents and discontents may come in bundles; there is little control of timing. There is a limit to what the consultant can mitigate through quality designs and services since they alone do not prevent the occurrence of claims.

Excellence at work is not an option for a consulting structural engineer—it is mandatory. Personal professional liability is always so extremely high in cost and occurrence that anything else is unimaginable. The competence of a consulting structural engineer is trusted by all in the industry, with his judgment considered as final and accurate.

Despite being so able and trusted, the consulting structural engineer in private practice faces difficulties which are often not recognized, and which often are left without direct consideration. Some examples are listed below.

To know the right thing is often easier than doing it. Issues come up that force engineers to consider difficult and contradictory situations. Examples include 1) non-compliance issues in the field that need the review and approval of the engineer, who is under pressure from the client on one hand and the engineer’s own good judgement on the other, or 2) when a client asks to reduce the cost of construction of structural systems that the engineer believes is not suitable.
Decide what is the right thing to do in every instance is hard. The issues are not black and white; often they are not clear and well defined. Doing the right thing for every case may be one of the most difficult issues a consultant will face in one’s career.

All work done by consulting engineers is communicated to others. Verbal, written, or drawn, engineering communications must be of the highest quality and they must be understood correctly each time. Consider a drawing in the hands of a contractor who understands something different from what the engineer intended. If that happens, the design intent is not followed.

Even the smallest variance—like a misplaced word, or a sketch with missing or incorrect dimensions—might change the intent.

Imagine a cantilever retaining wall designed for a 10-foot maximum height, but the height limit is missing on the sketch—safety may be compromised. And imagine a telephone call between an engineer and a field superintendent where the engineer explains an engineering diagram but is misunderstood by the field superintendent—again safety may be compromised.

Inadequate communications have no place in consulting engineering practice, and the consultant must strive every day for improved communications; it may become a lifetime effort.

A professional liability insurance policy is bought by the consultant at the request of clients. Like anything else he buys, he owns the policy. However, rarely does the engineer himself use the policy.

In real life professional liability is “a pot of gold” for others to use when they want to, and why not? Clients, construction companies and their employees, neighbors, condo boards, 3rd parties, are encouraged to file claims by attorneys because of their fees.

Claims are often made against a consultant for no other reason than the existence of “a pot of gold.” The first question a plaintiff might ask is—who the insurance company is and what is the coverage? The merit of the case is mostly not considered initially, but only later in the proceedings. Claims are brought forward mostly on the promise of a settlement. And yet all claims affect the premiums and deductibles of the engineer regardless of case merit. Thus, the professional liability insurance policy can become a real hardship.

Contracts for engineering consultants are written early in the project when the project is not well defined. Projects often take unexpected directions, and cost overruns can be significant. Many times, contracts do not offer the required added funds.

Engineering compensation is often lacking when compared with other professions. Consider the legal profession which is mostly reimbursed hourly; any change in services in the course of a case is well accounted for when reimbursed hourly.

In the medical field, university graduates enter internships after graduation. These internships enable young professionals to enter jobs with some practical experience.

In the engineering field, many graduates enter the job market directly from college but with little or no practical experience. Practical experience is learned on the job.

For a consulting engineering firm who hires young graduates, this process creates difficulties. Lack of productivity is often associated with engineers in training which affects cash flow and affects senior engineers who dedicate time to teaching.

Nothing stays the same. The only constant is change. That is true in life, and it is true for engineering.

A consulting engineer never knows everything. One must learn all the time. Research is constant for the consulting practice so engineers must spend time learning without compensation.

Consulting engineering work is a source of joy and frustrations, contents and discontents. New challenges require research and knowing, communications and cooperations, designs and productions, management, marketing and more. Unresolved challenges occur because of value conflicts, commercial pressures, public safety, client demands and others. It is hoped that this writing brings these issues into focus and encourage others to discuss them in future writings. ■

About the Author

Neil Wexler PhD, PE, is a consulting structural engineer in private practice. His practice, Wexler Associates, has designed approximately 3,500 buildings. Wexler is the co- author of AISC Design Guide 14 and has contributed to many professional articles and papers in the field of structural engineering.