Memorandum 68
Submission from Warwick S Faville
The following point 1 has questions asked of
Lord Broers in the internet interactive after his final Reith
lecture in 2006. The questions were only partially asked and I
believe they are now more relevant.
1. "Manufacturing in the UK is having
its problems note Rover and Marconi. I would suggest that a problem
is weak engineering management in the UK. Is one of the route
causes elitism in the professional engineering institutions? A
four year degree may be fine to train a technologist but three
years is enough for a manager who will be a project manager. Four
years will put many off entering the profession". "And
as a corollary why do we need 40 plus engineering institutions?"
2. Two years ago going to university was
less expensive than it is today. It is now recognised that the
expense of university is such that it is attracting the young
of middle income rather than lower income families. The fourth
university year required by the engineering institutions and others
for the top level qualification may already be making engineering
less attractive to the young of lower income families. There are
three year engineering degrees on offer but not at the top institutions.
Surely this is unhealthy for engineering.
3. Engineering has insufficient public image.
I would contend that this is in part due to the proliferation
of institutions. The ECUK (can we please call it Engineering Council
and add UK just where needed) has 36 Licensed Members and 14 Professional
Affiliates. Then there is the Royal Academy of Engineering. Look
at other professions where there are less ie accounting, medicine
and architecture and where there are prominent ones ie ICAEW,
BMA and RIBA. There are many ways of classifying engineering.
But perhaps the most sensible is to split it into Build Environment,
Manufacture and Process. Surely the engineering institutions should
be encouraged to merge under these or similar headings so that
there are less institutions and fewer and clearer foci for the
profession. Hence the proposal for merger between the Civil's
and Mechanical's was a misplaced idea. The combination of the
Mechanical's and the Electrical's would have been a sound development.
An automatic knighthood for the presidents of the two lead institutions
would bring focus and would encourage wider participation in professional
affairs.
4. To explain myself-I am a mechanical engineer
who originally trained with a scholarship from Rolls Royce Derby
to attend Imperial College. I then worked with W S Atkins &
Partners in most areas of engineering including nuclear and renewables.
Now nearly retired, I have been freelance for a number of years.
I have been retained by a number of companies. I have been active
with the Institution of Mechanical Engineers committees (technical
not social). As design and product integrity have been main themes
of my career, I have also been active with the Chartered Quality
Institute (formerly the Institute of Quality Assurance). I believe
I made a significant contribution in piloting an experiential
route to full membership.
February 2008
| 
