Do Engineers Fear Independence?

Does this also mean that whatever one may be capable of, one is always dependent on others for something or other. You have a point. However, there is a class of people who venture out. Now I feel they must be inherently different or they must have fought out their fear of living under no support. Whatever it is, it makes lots of sense to some to be independent and it hardly makes any sense to others, in the larger lot, among us all, more or less similar looking faces.

Two points.
1. To many the work is just a means of supporting/financing their family/lifestyle, if they hapen to enjoy it and be enthusiastic workers they consider it a bonus.
2. Many do not feel the urge to take on the additional responsiblity of working for themselves/setting up a business, or the necessity to 'prove' anything to anyone.

For myself I can say my current job is suffering from a lack of good work for me to do, I'd rather be busy doing interesting new developments. However I have sufficient creative projects in my out of work existence to keep me enthusiastic and motivated...and in the unlikely event of my running out of ideas...Mrs Cat can be relied upon to find me stuff to do.
Del

I think you are the one stuffed by the right kind of stuff in the brain and attitude. This make you one from a strong minded and different type of lot than the wider normally sick lot that suffers a hysteria of joblessness sickness.

Darwin's Hypothesis "Survival of the fittest". One like you who has so many management ideas can easily fit into any tough system.

Creating a business requires creativity and as per Myers-Briggs only 6.25% of the world can truly conceptualize-in-the-abstract, another 6.25% are creative or innovative, and yet another 6.25% are truly good at optimization, and the rest are just followers.

So there you have: By "parallel inductive logic", 25% ( ie plus one more 6.25% group left out) of engineers can venture out and 75% of engineers will not. Then, of course, remember that the "optimers" only come in after the first 12.5% have done with the thinking. So in fact only 12.5% are venture oriented.

Even when there were jobs in early 70s and 80s, 75% people were leaving jobs and trying for something their own as business and only 15% of then ever became some kind of success story and rest went back to job or lived jobless. Business is for very stronger mind and it needs lots of courage to risk.

How about the number that can make a survival story and may not be a great business story. I think women are fit for that zone much better than men. They can leave job to make family and come back again and can also be great at home or what ever it comes to them. I think they are more fit on earth. My wife is tougher than me. I think you all might have had ideas of success more from your mother than father in terms of survival capabilities. Most of the women live with in-laws. Not easy for me to do that. My wife has two homes (one from her father and mother and one that was mine) and I have almost none now. How this gender works out at jobs. I think more men are scared of losing job than women.

Perhaps that is the answer: The 75% of the 1970s and 1980s who left may have all been fascinated with the idea of being business people when in fact all of them - but 15% - belonged in the Myers-Briggs 75% category and the 15% are the ones that belong in the Myers-Briggs category of 12.5%. Now think about it: 0.15(0.75) = 0.1125 which falls within the Myers-Briggs value of 12.5%.

So it is not sufficient to want to go out there and begin to run around, it takes a kind of person, even engineer, to actually become entrepreneurial. Actually, there was a popular book among entrepreneurs in the 1980 here in the USA entitled naturally, The Entrepreneur by White. That book discussed the [mental] make up of entrepreneurs, so that people may better self-evaluate before venturing out there.

Just reflecting.

There is no way to predict that only college educated has skills to survive or the one who has learnt things by exposure. In fact many people who are not college educated find themselves in business of different levels. Business fills the gaps by itself the way forest fills the green carpet with different types of plants and trees.

If there is no big business idea around you then there will be no small business idea also coming up in the zone. You put a power plant and then people come there and they need houses to stay, food to purchase and need some support labor for house etc and then market, hospitals, road and transport and so on start coming up one by one.

Hence, it is always a very good idea for the societies to make a larger collective efforts to develop some large business in each zone that finally mushrooms into many small businesses in the zone. Often seed business is started by the Governments. However, local people can form their own local Governments to run their towns businesses.

I am right now experimenting with people of small villages where some of them can do small things but I want to see how they respond to big things like business ideas. I injected funds into what they know to see how they will manage the show. I have given them time, margin to run into loss for a while and let them themselves find out way to correct the course. I think it is difficult for them otherwise to survive with loss so I am a shock absorber for them right now. I have also asked other good people to support the cause and see how this can be made to success story of the local community that is willing to work and manage a small business show.

I also interact with young people. Age group of 16-21 are often visitors to my place for advises for their future plans in education training and direction for of work in life. I give them different ideas depending on their basic education, interest and capabilities and estimated future prospects for each of them that is somewhat likely to fit better into good living for them. During discussions I often analyze different professions and what one is expected to do in different professions and often they find easy to reject some professions which they otherwise might have opted for just by the attraction of the name of profession. Such early decision making ability and finding the right path is much better among them in such counselling sittings and some do learn in time to know where to go after education or which education is right for them.

I have clear difference between totally uneducated class and educated class of groups that I interact with. Even though this is not a complete real part of my own profession, it has become something of my mind as social obligation. I am no longer living for the self now. I live multiple lives in one life and my experiences also run into many. I have more than enough for myself I may ever need. Hence not working for survival any more.

In business I do take risk and that means I expose myself and my family to same amount o dangers in similar way the rest of the business people face for making living. I do it for a charm of idea of technology or it has become a way of life for me. I have experienced that 90% of the people who do business if they work the way I work may fail. This may be the situation of experience for others also. Each one knows something more than the others know in the general lot and it helps them remain special and in demand to survive competitively better as others often live in ignorance and laziness.

Well, I was not really thinking in terms of the educated and the uneducated. I had mentioned "even engineers" only to emphasize that the assertion of 12.5% cuts across all disciplines and all classes of peoples.

However, that said, your mention of helping your community is rather interesting. In particular I find your thinking to be some what sympathetically interesting as well. Actually we had just posted an article on our website just yesterday, advocating the creating of big businesses by governments in developing, which is titled Keynesian Investments at:

www.gbanalysts.com/Reading Room/Development Thrusts/keynesianinvest.html

In fact the entire section on "Development Thrusts" are report of analysis of socio-economic issues we are working on. You may even find the initial iteration of the concepts of Cooperatives, Crafts Driven Cooperatives and Crafts Based Corporations as rather interesting. Take a look at them and give me a feedback so we can further refine the contents even more.

Personally I think that the entire World has to rise in symbiosis for the World to rise this time around. The fact is after WW-2 most of the manufacturing base in Europe had been destroyed and so US became the de facto leader of manufacturing, however, the technology, the management skill and most other competitive advantages have diffused into the rest of world, and we are in fact existing in a "closed system" speaking thermodynamically that is. So at some point in time the effects of "Punctuated [Socio-Economic] Equilibrium" - to borrow from the language of a one-time famous Harvard Professor - will take effect and the financial crises, such as the World is experiencing, is bound to take obtain.

For the moment let me submit this view for your consideration: The investors of the USA leaves the USA and goes to China to set up businesses because the cost of labor is too high in the USA; China then manufactures the products using manufacturing technology provided from the USA and sells the products to the USA and then China declares trade imbalance with USA. Here is my confusion: if the USA [investment community] owns the bulk of the China-companies and therefore owns majority of the profits as well, and the USA is also the primary purchasers of the goods; then "in the abstract" is the situation then not the same as retaining a worker in the "house" of the USA investment community to do the work, get the worker paid for the services plus bonus, and the USA investment community simply keeping the goods? This view becomes a little clearer if one where to "in the abstract" merge China into the USA.

Just thinking that's all

Yes, I am attached to people by my inner feeling. This has nothing to do with any individual person but has something to do with what I see as a persisting social problem everywhere on earth and a justified working ground for me.

Moving from services and servers on demand to services available for usable by all giving dignity of being self respected and being part of the free choice system, is something I am looking at. Even though the people involved do the same thing, there is difference in personal respect for the person involved in providing services. If one gives job to other person bring in superiority of self over the other. If one uses the freely available service then actually one can thank for the services after using them and it looks much better idea to me. Person providing services runs the risk but in acceptable society such risk is reduced. In villages people used to keep the fire on and never needed a match box to light fire again and this almost killed match box factory. That services are for good, and people should use them requires a continuous education to the society. It will never be a set of rules but a gradual learning process of what is best at any given time.

Even though organized larger sectors and establishments, there is some suppression of dignity level if there are more people interested in getting in and there is little space or scope available for many. There has to be a governing body initially and finally they need to handover the charge to the people themselves or perhaps to selected best among the people. Whenever there is a selection on the bases of extra ability, some kind of level up/down formation takes place but can be acceptable as best possible solution and easily digested by the people involved. It is more like sharing the responsibility with speciality of individual and little competition. Democracy was one such idea which has actually created lot more differences among people who select the governing body and who govern them finally. This may happen in any smaller system also. You can also see that some governing people become very popular also, even though they take tough decisions, as people understand that what is being done is the best possible solution. We have few such systems at lower level working in India at socially acceptable level and among them notable one are Anand dairy in Gujrat and Lijjat papad in Mumbai.

The risk factor can be socially minimized or corrected by the people themselves and group capable of doing so will make a surviving system. It need to undergo iteration the same way as the "Survival of the Fittest" is popularly known.

I am no longer really sure about where the discourse is heading so i should perhaps start off with making some clarifications. First my use of the phrase "sympathetically interesting" was not intended to be descriptive of a weakness. I should explain that because I tend to mix up the English-English meaning of words with the US-English meaning of words, sometimes people get offended by the choice of words. For instance, my use of the word "interesting" is always by the English-English meaning "open to interpretation" and not the US-English of "nice and that sort". So the double use of "interesting" was just that and the qualification with the word "sympathetically" in the second usage simply meant consistent with the overall meaning being "consistently interesting" or "consistently open to interpretation".

Now then moving back into the discourse, I am curious about the role of the entrepreneurial engineer within the context of services you have painted in this your last rejoinder. I ask because I feel that within the group of the unskilled labor the engineer will always have the mark of superiority above the others - seemingly a layer of superiority that you have some reservartions about.

However, if I were to stretch my understanding of this last rejoinder to include that, the point of discourse for which you have the reservations is with respect to the concept of governments undertaking the Keynesian Investments because of the structural layers that are inherent in corporations then I am not able to do much about it. The fact is the government and corporations are organized hierarchically and so the government will always select the person they and their brand of politics feel most qualified. Yet the situation is not eternal because the moment the government divests itself of the corporation then the shareholders may vote in whomsoever they please to run their corporations. Even then I should remark that my introduction of the Keynesian Investments into the discourse was because of your suggestion in your penultimate rejoinder that the businesses you were engaged in can and are caused to mushroom with the existence of large corporations that are sometimes founded by the government.

So if, in fact, as per your disposition you prefer the bubbling up of management based on consensus amongst the employee, then of course that is possible by beginning the business entity as a cooperative based on the Business Trust legal form. This is the case where people come together because they are in the same business - meaning the definitions of their "Company Business" or their roles in the specific industry are the same - and they are engaged in the pooling of resources to the end of achieving Economy of scale in the form of large corporations/businesses; but then I did mention the choice of Craft Driven Cooperatives as a form of the business entity. Certainly this form enables the sort of "bubbling of management into form" such as you prefer. I also did mention the case of Crafts Based corporations which is the case of pooling together of resources that are in different businesses - different "company business" or different roles within a specific industry, although this situation is not so conducive to the "bubbling of management into form" as you prefer, such is nonetheless still possible.

Now I should like to reiterate my question again, what do you envision as the role of the engineer in these constructs, while keeping in mind that the constructs are applicable without regard to the discipline or societal strata of the people engaged in the constructs.

editorgbanalysts:

I'm no fan of Keynesian Investments, (or thinking). Wondering how that turned out back in the former soviet union? I'll take a look at the piece you posted this weekend.

I am a big fan of cooperatives and microcredit (I helped to set up a food coop back in my college days when my hair was longer than my bank statement, if you know what i mean. it was the 1970's...)

Here's a link for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kswC7sLTCMM

I believe that your question/thoughts about balance of trade with China are spot on.

In my MBA classes, I argued that the trade deficit wasn't a country country deficit, it was an inter-divisional wal-mart deficit. It was between units of a US company, not between the US and China per se. (At least the wal mart part; and the GE part, and the motorola part, the GM part, etc. etc. ad infinitum...)

So If I am reading your thoughts correctly, we make the same point.

Nice to see you're still around and contributing.

milo

thank you for the informative link.. GA.

Actually, your 18.75% is frighteningly close to pareto's 20% in the 80-20 rule...

Regards.

milo

Dear Shyam Sir,

This is a first of a kind thread I m seeing in cr4. Which is more about engineering the circuits inside than the ones on which we work on outside.

Firstly, to put up the counter opinion (this is mine, do not know whether the majority feel the same way), the reason why a engineer prefers to work than be independent is the facilities one gets to experiment with in a multi million company. A engineer is not bothered about handling the money, or how the people shall be paid in next month, are all the bills paid on time, do we have permit to construct this etc etc etc.

Running a business is a tough job (tht is one thing we know very well)

Thus we are able to use 100% of our time (well theoretically) for either improving which already exist or coming up with something new.

Which I strongly feel is required.

If you have to run a huge Empire, you need good generals and soilders (the VPs and GMs in todays dictionary), and a good number of them.

And as it is said, everyone has his own way to happiness, you and people with Entrepreneur zeal, who want to make a name of their own in this world, are happy when they are doin something of their own, and doing good.

Then there are some who think they are free to do what they want to and are actually working for someone feel happy when they achieve something extra ordinary for the employee.

Others are happy jus for not being responsible and enjoying life.

And then there are people like me who still don't know what actually shall my plan be tomorrow (b t w I am 23 and wrking, if tht justifies my state :-D) feel happy when my favorite Football team, Arsenal FC wins matches...

About the recession thing, one bone which is generally dormant in Engineers, being out of the comfort zone, has to come back in action.

There are plenty of things which can be done which one feels is not up to the dignity or decorum we carry.

I ll give here example of a Indian IT tech (in India) when he lost his job in the recessions of 92-93, started up with a laundry service.. within one year he had contracts of major Hotels and Restaurants in his city with him and within 2 yrs his turn over was touching 650,000 INR... and growing at a good rate since, no idea how much it is now but he is definately earning more than he could in a job for sure.

Hi Shyam,

thank you for your "challenging" post. as far as I understand this piece, you're basically challenging engineers to "prove themselves better than those are not so much educated?" do you actually consider doctors, lawyers, musicians, artists, professionals of other disciplines who've even earned degrees higher than yours, of lesser intellectual capacity?

and what makes you think engineers (or any other professional for that matter) who are employees are "parasites"?

let me point out that there are lots of fallacies in your argument, to begin with, and it doesn't need a philosopher to prove this. but I won't do that. I'll take you to another view.

you ought to be thankful to God that after giving up your job you've become a millionaire, and are now managing "parasites" (that what you call your employees?).

you see, it depends on WHICH SIDE OF THE FENCE YOU'RE AT.

I remember my previous company which in the verge of collapse. they offered a voluntary retrenchment program in which many, including myself, accepted. after that, those who stayed with the company labelled those who left "cowards". those who left the company and went into business also called those who stayed the same name. after more than 10 years, those "cowards" who stayed with the company are still alive, by God's grace. those other "cowards"? some have found employment outside the country, most of those who tried business didn't succeed and found new jobs, too. but only a few have thriving businesses today.

conclusion? some are born entrepreneurs. most are just employees. it's called DESTINY. so whatever lot is given you in life by God, be happy with it, give your best in it, and bless others with it, as well. but, please, don't say to the fish "fly!" just because you're a bird. cheers!

@ Langyaw

I think you got him wrong here.

By the way I liked that fish and the bird thing. shall use it when get an apt opportunity.

He specified engineers, bcoz this is cr4. Mostly engineers are on this forum. Nothing for the other professions. It wasn to dis-respect them at all.

Secondly, calling the employees parasite!!! aah.... I agree its wrong to say tht but also feel very strongly that the person of his age and authority has done this (if at all) to encourage the people whose moral is 6 feet under coz of the recession thing.

I do not know much about philosophy, but one thing for sure, people who have a dream of making it big in the business world but stop themselves coz of few if's and but's.. they ll be encouraged for sure.

Another thing is the moment I think of doin something of my own I compare how fast can I catch up with Bill gates, or when shall my company be as big as Siemens today.

I forget, Siemens took 200 yrs and more to reach here. Bill gates believed in his idea, not in making money, the idea brought him money.

The benchmark should neither be too idealistic and neither it should be too practical says Swami Vivekananda (An Enlightened soul ), if we are standing at the extremes we are in trouble. If have the right percentage mix, we are the kings.

And as you very rightly said, its all about being happy. (at least you meant the same not with same words though)

Honestly, a employee is much better than a employer who is 24 x 7 in worry to either save or grow his business and forgot the main purpose of all this... is to LIVE.

I am sorry if this has triggred and negative emotions in you and thank you if you have like it.

Hi ashwindoke,

please re-read carefully his post.

the opening question / statement sets the premise of the whole treatise. if you understood him differently, then he worded his piece poorly, or you didn't get it at all.

all succeeding statements have to be taken in the context of the whole treatise, i.e., the opening and closing statements. once you understand that rule in argumentation and discourse, you'll see how he degrades all other professions, while calling the employed engineer (or any employee, for that matter, as implied) a "parasite", "not worthy to be on earth".

Dear langvyw

I think those people moved out of the establishment were brave and they were able to take their decision. It is very much possible that all of them were with ability to manage the funds they might have received for VR. Those stayed back, not necessarily feared the outside world and some may just feel that the place of work may be fine for them in disaster and then they were also brave to stay on.

Here we see that both types of engineers took decision and that is a very good point. They did not commit suicide out of fear.

This trend can also be seen now in more other types of professions. People are learning out faster to survive than ever before. It is no longer a life long profession for many. In earlier times, father to so profession was passed on and today you can have multiple in one life.

I think ashwindoke hit one of the most important points in his first post.

When I was in my early twenties, I started positioning myself for starting my own company, having the "pie in the sky" idea of what happiness and wealth business ownership would bring. But when it came to signing on the dotted line for a what I considered at the time to be a very large loan, I chickened out. I thought, if I failed it would take decades to repay. I've since learned that this was nonsense, but as a self employed contractor, I've also learned the other aspects of business ownership.

I have a wife and three children whom I would prefer to enjoy some time with thoughout life. Business ownership is not a 9 to 5 job, ecspecially while your building your business. As a business owner you can not be jus as engineer. You have to be an engineer, an accountant, and a salesman at minimum. Most engineers would go nuts if forced to work as an accountant for any length of time. You have to be wired differently. Doing what you love to do for a living is a great thing, doing what you hate to do for a living is a curse unto itself.

I think it's important for someone to be able to recognize their shortcomings or weaknesses in certain areas before jumping into their own business, more important than knowing their strengths. Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of large companies started out as partnerships, not from sole proprietership. Of the partnerships that are started, a large portion fall apart because of disagreements on how the company should be run, etc. I think that the ideal business startup destined for success is a partnership or corporation of no less than 2 individuals (who get along with each other well) specializing in different fields, one of which must be sales or accounting.

Hello Everyone,

In general and in my opinion, there are two kind of people. First kind is social person and second kind is individual who like to be independent (in every aspect of life). Social people have no problem adapting to trends that society brings and they can be found everywhere....managers, supervisors, CEO, priests, public related jobs etc. These people are usually found doing 9-5 jobs etc. Its an easy life for them. That kind of people are easily spotted at their early age in school...they usually walk in pairs.

Individuals, on other hand, are ones who have adapting problems nor do they like to change for the sake of trends, or they have a strong personality. They are more independent. They can be found in 9-5 jobs but they are usually not successful in climbing the corporate ladder. However they are good in running their own business if they are trained through apprenticeship (like craftsmanship). Those things do no exists (well ... in Canada and Europe) ..Thus is why running own business today is usually from scratch and it is very difficult. And the best time to start it is at young age...ex. Benjamin Franklin. Of-course, that person also need some personal qualities for a successful business. When I mean successful I don't mean million dollar fortune but sustainable enough to survive.

And I think number one quality needed to run own business is to do what you are passionate about even when there is no profit in it.

About comparing engineers to 'parasite' that is a your personal judgement not a fact.

I live in Canada, I saw a very successful engineers coming to Canada to work as engineer because Canadian government says that they need them but when they got here, some were told that they were overqualified, or don't have Canadian experience and some need to take expensive exams. Almost another long years of expensive school-ing. (Don't forget that these people came with families) So some decided to switch to a different career and later start their own business which usually are successful until they are run over by corporates. My father was one of them. Now at age 70, I saw a lot of talents and potential, totally wasted. I though I will be more lucky but I was wrong because now is a turn around. Now Canadians are wasted because more jobs are taken by immigrants because they provide education and experience that our government doesn't have to pay for it. (but their governments) As a PM I would say its good for business here.

Simply put, not everyone had the same treatment and the same opportunity as you had. I like what one said.....its destiny....

Avro Arrow was scrapped, EV1 was scrapped, Apollo missions were scrapped because its a destiny.

Dear Sir

I am really very much impressed with your touching thoughts.After reading your thread (Of course several times) i am supporting your feelings.I dont know about others but i can consider my self in same situation with some changes in practical.You left your goverment job and started your own business and today you are one of the successful businessman.In my case i left my well settled Job and came to Japan and today I am working very good with a Japanese comapny as Advisor- process engineering & this company is in same field of sensor manufacturing for automobiles. Going abroad and working is not a bis task but mentoring to Japanese is very thing though Japanese are real inventor and follower of production management theories and skills.....I also have a dream like you but unfortunately having not o much money to start my own business moreover I can not afford risk....

It is not bad thing to find a good job, use your training and skill and get paid for your work. In fact you are accepting a challenge to fit into industrial system that uses skill and abilities of workers to run a larger system. Smaller systems like small factory or establishments even though have lower overheads, they need more skill in few and survive on competition with larger due to lower overhead.

It is also true that many people are good for one type of profession and find hard to manage thing like industry. It is not always the financial part that comes in the way but how to manage an industry which includes finance and labor other than legal hurdles, technology, manufacturing and sale, there are number of well planned requirements to run a system for which one may not be ready.

People with ideas can use the idea while they are working for others. Writing your experience is one such thing most of the people can do and can get a great reward out of published information. I published several hundreds of design ideas when I was working for Government. My another friend wrote few books, some others developed new products and either planned to produce them in their factory after leaving job or sold the technology for good return.

Science and Technology department in India and NSF USA and many other agencies are funding innovative developments of technology. This type of financial support is useful for startups.

It is good to try ideas in safe working condition to have more clear idea of risk and advantages ahead of time to venture into business of your own with open risk exposure. Hence, those fear can reduce the fear by reducing the risk factors. Once you have clear idea to make it, fear will go away.

Most of the people are capable to handle things if they plan it out properly and slowly try to understand the needs and develop skill to handle things rather than jump into something that looks great but is a hard to stand on place for inexperienced.

Point hear is that you are running risk even when you are in job, so why not prepare yourself better for worst that may come and do it as necessary evil even though you may never face such risk. You will have greater chance to survive.

Learning management skill helps all types of professionals, and to be taken more seriously. You can help your industry much better if you know how this industry in which you are to be helped collectively (rarely individually even though this idea is for an individuals). In industry individuals can come and go but it must run on its own and that type of systems are called industry. If you try yourself then you are industry and results are also as per your act. If you can not run your industry well then you are also very insignificant factor in larger system. People who make significant impact will make it most of the places they enter.

Dear Sir

I am fully agree with you and i do salute for your moral boost up writing.Of course you ar ehaving a rich experience in your lige and you are one of them who use to make their carrer, their own way by their own hands on efforts.

Since last several years I was also planning to be a businessman but I could never start things in practical way.Sometimes because of my family problems and sometimes because of some problems but in all this one thing is common and that is myself.In real I could not never prepared myself to face the bad situation......resulting I am using my skill and abilities for others.

But your writing hs changed my mind once again and I have started to search some business for me in India and very soon I will be back to India and this time I will not do Job for anybody.I will do something for me, I will start some manufacturing by my own.

Thanks a lot.

Naveen Mittal

I think it s an inappropriate words in an inappropriate time, especially in the financial crisis and economic recession time in the west world.

Not every engineer like to to adventure. Most of them hope to live in peace life by their skill and knowledge. However, society has distinctly divided work and collaboration. Some engineers act as an emperor in a company, as a matter fact, you might see it.

You might be provoked by some west talents who really look down upone you , especially your title, Dr, Prof. Because your action and knowledge and skill is really like an ordinary staff, or member in a lab, has some distance from an engineer level.

They may doubt if you are prof. etc. hehe, only my guess.

As I know, Milo is a prof in a university, but he was very modesty. Some of the west persons are very pride and show off in this chat room. But from their articles, we can find they act as a peasant from countryside or a labour from some outpost.

China and India met a good chance of developing at present. but don't pride, keeping on modesty is our nature.

Hey CNpower. Nice to see you back on CR4. Haven''t seen you post in awhile.

I'm just an adjunct; Dr shyam is the real deal. And he is an entrepreneur.

You are correct when you say that this is an inappropriate time for most people. But an enntrepreneur sees opportunity in times like this and makes it happen.

WHat you call adventure, we would probabbly describe as risk. You are correct most engineers do not like risk- it is our education which helps us minimize risk by employing our talents. But where there is low risk, there is usually low reward.

An engineer with both confidence and capability and that is not afraid of risk is what Dr Shyam is asking about . Do they exist? where are they now? Why aren't there more?

Good to see you posting!

Here's my latest article, Hope you enjoy it.

http://www.productionmachining.com/articles/my-favorite-photograph.aspx

milo

"engineers do not like risk- it is our education which helps us minimize risk by employing our talents."

I think you hit the nail right on the head, Milo. we were trained against it. that's why we always consider the *factor of safety*, *contingency*, etc., in our designs.

the safest people to be around with are engineers.

GA.

"A well reasoned, analyzed and strategized venture is virtually risk free; "

Thy name is Optimist!

Presuming no systemic risks, 100 % of relevant facts considered, and 100% of the thinking to be critical,effective, and correct; and presuming no extraordinary events of global, environmental (by environmental I do not mean just ecology, i mean it to include economic, and social), market, technological, or substantive revelatory change and impact.

My definition of the word 'virtually' is "Not in fact." It implicitly denies the condition it is supposedly supporting. 'Virtually' is a passive aggressive word stabbing us in our amygdalas by marketers.

Knowing that you respect the data, Have a look at this:

http://smallbiztrends.com/2008/04/startup-failure-rates.html

Its US Census Data for a cohort studied in the early 1990's. 25% failure first year seems in excess of "almost without risk."

However, I will concede that perhaps not all entrepreneurs in that cohort were" very thoroughly Analytical." But knowing the scale of investment needed, I'm thinking that all did their best...

Great positive response, as always editorgbanalysts. You always bring well thought out ideas to our discussions. And compel me to get facts and data and think a little more carefully to respond...

milo

Precisely the point I was making.

An entrepreneur needs to be able to recognize patterns and trends and to then manoeuvre around the difficulties. This capacity to recognize trends is the character often defined as "creativity" with which only 12.5 percent are endowed, but remember although 12.5 percent can recognize the impending danger from [how would I say it?] "systemic risks, 100 % of relevant facts considered, and 100% of the thinking to be critical,effective, and correct; and ... extraordinary events of global, environmental (by environmental I do not mean just ecology, i mean it to include economic, and social), market, technological, or substantive revelatory change and impact" only 6.25 percent can effectively conceptualize in the abstract and therefore can construct a solution including even possible repositioning of the venture in terms of redefinition of the "Company Business", redefinition of the "Company Mission" and redefinition of the venture growth strategic goal as to effect a rapid reengineering of the venture so as to survive. No entrepreneur really ends up at the initial goal of the venture until perhaps much later. The whole exercise is quite Optimization Theoretic, and continual optimization based on creativity is essential for survival, particularly when the objective is to evolve into a corporation.

But yes you are absolutely correct, in the statement "knowing the scale of investment needed, I'm thinking that all did their best" as we have been emphasizing on our site, most of the venture failures occur during the Startup Execution Phase and that the primary reason was because of the exorbitant expenses. We have also observed that an entrepreneur must necessarily first develop a Cash-cow before actually undertaking large expense ventures, then, of course, the venture development should be initially focused only on supporting a critical mass operation. The entreprenur must necessarily develop a detailed growth tactic implementation plan and then triple the amount assessed as required for the Execution Phase, and until such is availbale the entreprenur should not even bother to start.

Truthfully, the Execution Phase will switch off the lights. I know this from first hand experience, before we recalibrated.

" most of the venture failures occur during the Startup Execution Phase and that the primary reason was because of the exorbitant expenses. We have also observed that an entrepreneur must necessarily first develop a Cash-cow before actually undertaking large expense ventures, then, of course, the venture development should be initially focused only on supporting a critical mass operation. "

Yeah Baby!

Let the heirs buy the fancy new furniture to replace the door on saw horses that you used when you first started.

milo

editorgbanalysts,

I have to agree that risk aversion and safety consciousness are not the same. Anyone who engages in business has to risk something, but safety is not the thing. A small value of capital, and a bigger value of the labour invested on spec. Investment of productive time if you're not working at a job is.. a sensible thing to do, hard to view it as a risk.

I must admit I am a little sceptical of the idea that 'entrepreneur' is a set of character traits or attributes which represent a fixed percentage of the population. I am more inclined to think that characteristics such as the perception of trends and patterns, are acquired and learned, rather than innate.

The idea that we do work defined by others in a corporate hierarchy, in exchange for pay, is not more, surely, than social conditioning?

The simplest survival business model for an engineer is "many small contracts" instead of "one secure job". The risk capital might be the cost of running an ad in the paper, offering services. Not much to lose. As for the potential gain, the question is, assessing the trends etc. and how your toolset/skillset fits in with the needs. It may not be a blazing career topper, but it is better than jumping out a window: it's a place to start, and a way to hang in there in difficult times.

Engineers in general would seem to be especially fit to learn those more sophisticated entrepreneur skills and to embark on their own business. The basic business models: taking raw material, adding value and selling the product; or taking a set of skills and tools and selling the service; are readily available to the trained engineer, someone who by definition knows how to make things that work, or to make things that stop working, work again... As for the risk, start small. Very small. And move in the direction that opens up for growth.

Think about economy on the humble artisans model - very common in third world countries. These are not some tiny percentage blessed with special skills. They are a good percentage of society, ordinary folk, producing product or offering a skilled service on a "make a living" scale and being their own bosses. Now imagine that instead of 'artisans' the basic skill level is that of engineers... I can envision a very productive economy emerging from this sort of model.

These words are of little value to anyone wanting to be a millionaire overnight or traded on Wall Street. But for any skilled person wondering how to get by without a job, I hope it's encouragement.

Now I must really borrow from my friend Milo [and hopefully he would not bill me for royalty]:

Yeah Baby!

Hi, Milo,

I like to read your articles for you scholar mannar. your point of view is strict. After all, sholar is sholar. I try to access to the link but fail, I can only access to the top level. and find a 5 axis machining. the web site speeds is too slow to access. may it be a not so wide band.

You r right, Sham is a successful businessman. Many may not match with him.

I alway make a mistake for the synonym, Im afraid I can never master this language.

Yes, someone always risks all they have looking for way of making money in this changing times. some of them sucess, others not.

But more and more young guys dont like this adventure, they wish to have a peaceful life, thats why somany student wish to get a goverment job as a public official, in USA, in EUROPE, in Japan, in China etc. I was told the enroll ratio can be 20:1 for their examination.

"But more and more young guys dont like this adventure, they wish to have a peaceful life, thats why somany student wish to get a goverment job as a public official, in USA, in EUROPE, in Japan, in China etc. I was told the enroll ratio can be 20:1 for their examination."

CNPower, You have just made Dr. Shayam's point!

He gave up his gov't job to found his sensor business, because he had confidence in his abilities. He asks us all, why do so few engineers follow that path?

And you give us data - 20:1 would rather have government job.

That is a nice contribution to our discussion!

milo

Good observation! Don't forget, engineers don't like to play dice - they apparently are not very good at it. So don't look for them in the casino. Out of self respect they will go their separate ways - and say nothing. Perhaps, Dr. Shayam's expertise is business and not even engineering. He seems to wonder only why engineers don't follow his path. After all, business is good in the engineering field. He seems to have proved that. He entered the casino and won!

But we should; we can better customize the products during the penetration phase when the products needs to be optimized, we understand the design better than anyone else, and we can better design around an existing patent to enable the venture remain innovative.

The creative ones amongst us should "not go gently into the night, they should rage rage rage [with innovation] into the night" because improving the quality of life is our lot as engineers.

Engineering as existential joy/mission; Shining light (innovating) into the darkness by improving our quality of life.

Darn Near poetry there editorgbanalysts.

'least thats how I read what you said.'

milo

Milo! You found me out: I mean that existential thing.

And yes you are right, it is poem but not by me, the sections I highlighted were by an Irish poet(?) I think.

Good take on the twist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_not_go_gentle_into_that_good_night

You've not heard Dylan Thomas, til you've heard him in the original Klingon! (welsh)

(paraphrased from Star Trek movie 5)

Chris

Well i now know who to turn to for erudite answers to literature: thyself and Editorgbanalysts.

Thanks for the feedback on the klingon... verse

milo

Dear cnpower

All Governments try to create jobs in crises when others fail due to short fall in their capital management and run greater risks for their establishments. Governments use public money and risk it out and then they can not be questioned for even losing all of it and all they have to do it to tax and tax more those have some how made a survival success story. Government hides its failure so are the people who enter such protection system. Government establishments are highly subsidized. They hardly pay anything for place, and let people eat for free, get many concessions like job security, medical, travel, education, retirement funds etc. They are rarely competitive.

Government actions to create Establishments and provide employments are multiple facial. They can do it in the area where no one is expected to invest. They can also do it where no one ever like to move in. They can do it simply to solve the local problem to bring in some kind of survival or equality among the people of different zones. Governments always have in mind the survival or betterment of the people of their countries.

I will not at all commit that people who enter the Government jobs are in any way inferior to those enter competitive commercial private enterprises. It may be just the other way out. As Governments understand their responsibilities so do the people who go there and work. It is often seen that people invest in Government at much lower gain. Government's call is rarely ignored.

There are two types of people in this world. One class is mission oriented and spend their entire life for a set goal and others help them implement it. Almost all professions fit into these two types and left over are usually burdens on the society in some way or the other. People of mission are not always success and only thing is that they are the key people who bring in drastic changes in civilizations. Not that they do all by their hand and often most simple hard working people contribute in their name for little satisfaction. Large lot finds no name in history as history is written in the name of people who are on top of the mission.

Ratio in societies is 0.001% on top to make history and than 1% who run the country and 2%-5% who manage the labour and money and the rest of the lot is the gap filler. Among the gap fillers many try to enter the forbidden zone, and among them many return back safely to where they were and only few find drastic change in their life either good side or worst side.

Then are you indeed a pessimist? For you seem to be saying, that to be a success, one must enter a government protection service; be a survivalist by being non competitive. Further, people that do this are superior to those in private commercial enterprise. One either sets goals, or, implements them. Goal setters will cause drastic changes and contributing implementers will have little satisfaction and only the goal setters on top of the mission will be marked by history - all else will be 'Gap Fillers' and a burden to society. The top of the mission is controlled by roughly 10%; the rest are burdens to society and will be left senseless! I've changed my mind. You ARE an engineer!!

Government activities are to bring bread to all and a sense of equality and private ventures are opportunity and aimed at opportunity and competition to bring in in-equality by helping only some who can make money by whatever means they can.

It is the way it is perceived by all of us and where is my own sense of individuality coming into picture.

If you run a Government then what is that you are supposed to do. You look at those who can not survive and you take help of best people to implement the mission. On the other hand if you are CEO of company then by hook or cook to get money and make yourself rich and through out labor that helped you just to be come little more rich by not sharing with those who help you becoming rich.

I think, it is better for you to clearly understand what goes in mind of different types of professions and responsibilities of the position when people head an organization. I came out from Government Organization so i still have that hangover of helping people around the world but as an industrialist I should do nothing that doesn't pay to me even for sneezing.

In this discussions we discuss everything clearly and there is nothing personal here.

The gap fillers are actual member of the society and in large number, so they are not burden to society but are society themselves. Industrialists may or may not be burden to society and all depends on how they run industry or system. Socially society creates in-equality by finding more capable than average and society gives greater power to more capable and makes then more and more powerful. Result is not always in favor of society but a system is somewhat essential so it goes on with iterations and corrections.

Hi,

East or west, the world is more closer to each other now. Hence, impact is all over.

Sometime we have good people coming up with larger ideas and forming industry for not only for themselves or for their family and Friends but also for engineers and workers putting efforts for them. Their action also helps country and international business. Among them out of competition some cheat others and do things they would have avoided. Workers and engineers do reasonably good job as per their training and skill but some time they become almost like terrorists with highly unpredictable behaviour.

One NDT engineer took the highly radioactive source and finally thrown it in the large canal attached to sea in Chennai, India. This was the out come of his frustration and perhaps related to financial or work condition problem. As this source need to be recovered, Government of India has to come in and they blocked large amount of water, enclosed the water in a trap of well like structure, pumped out all water and finally recovered the source. They might have used an under water robot if they had for such emergency. Government spent lots of money in this problem.

I have even see engineers and technicians simply making the instrument bad deliberately and then correcting it to get big credit as if they found fault and corrected. Actually the person himself might have cut the wire.

We see lots of development across the world so it is good to think that we are moving in positive direction in terms of knowledge. Number of working class of people is also increasing and such job crisis may come and go as these are part of the unplanned planned processes by which industry and governments make iteration to feel the environment.

We alway heard one word knowledge is double edge of a sword. So it was.

But I dont agree to you if an engineer would not have got a good job, they would have acted like a terririst etc.

In our China, we live in most traditional life way. less eduated people like to act as a robber, even in a hard times. They alway s hope to live in all peace life.

I thnk its so do your India, look at this words

Whenever I despair, I remember that the way of truth and love has always won.

Do you know who spoke it?

So your example is only an extra one. sometimes might be only a legend.

There is same example in our China, but the role is a thief who stole the Co60 from the base, he really dont know what it is. he want to sell to get some money. whats result? you can imagine, neednt say much.

I have observed that engineers seem very orthodox by nature. Most will be confused until one accepts their point of view. Not that there is anything wrong with having a different point of view, but, only theirs is acceptable to them. Few will express their point of view willingly, nor, openly - unless it has already been expressed by other engineers and is widely accepted in the engineering field, or, is in a text book. Often if pushed, their replies will be aggressive. Businessmen on the other hand, are engaged in whatever makes money. Most engineers hold jobs. Entrepreneurs, I think, are lower case businessmen, but seem also engaged, as opposed to having a job like engineers and both often create jobs for engineers. Both the businessman and entrepreneur have looked at themselves in the mirror and answered the question "Why CAN'T I?" I suspect that engineers do not have mirrors in their homes. Or, if they do, the question probably changes to "Why should I?" Still we cannot do without them and they do have a lot of answers. Anyway, businessmen and entrepreneurs are generally not hirelings. All three, however, could run a franchise I GUESS.

Dear Mr.SHYAM,

I fully agree with your view that Engineers do not use their talent,

knowledge, capacity and wisdom etc. In our Country the burocracy

headed byso called IAS cadre who are not equal to the ranking during

admission at the professional college degree level, go to arts and science

streme and become IAS later and reach top echelon of the management ladder.

At this juncture the NEWS read by me 25 years back is recalled from

my memory. The matter is this:

You could have heard a famous scientist at USA by name Mr.ChandraSekar,

who is an Indian and took a job at USA and after 7 years of his stay

at USA, wanted to come back to India and take up a scheme which

will give a great benefit to India and submitted a proposal to the Government

of India and sought Prime Minister's appointment for discussions.

The file came to the table of a JOINT SECRETARY and it did not receive

any attention on that subject. Mr. Chandra Sekar waited for 7 days and

managed to meet the Cabinet Secretary and discussed. The cabinet secretary

called the Secretary and told "HE HAS GIVEN SOME PAPER FOR A PROJECT.

AND PUT UP A NOTE TO ME." The Secretary told Mr. Chandra Sekaran

" YOU MEET ME AFTER 3 DAYS SINCE I DO NOT HAVE TIME."

OUT OF FRUSTRATION Mr.Chandra Sekaran told the Cabinet Secretary,

" I can stay in USA and do my job, but I want to come back to my country and achieve something for my country. I am Quite sorrow now- with out knowing the value of the proposal you referred as some paper. Give back my proposal as I do not want my papers to go to dust bin." and left.

Now he is a permanent CITIZEN of USA.

An awakening has to be induced in this regard.

DHAYANANDHAN.S

I have read your idea and i feel you have a big point...anyway it has worked for you very well. I am only two years old in the profession and i already feel wasted as the people out here who have done less demanding professions get better pay and recognition. I do not know whether to quit my job at this point or to change professions???Its quit discouraging especially at these hard economic times anyway it think i should gather enough courage and take a bold step like you did. Instruments Engineer