IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Strategy for the 21st Century
Topic Summary: Nothing for the electricals?
Created On: 20 August 2012 09:10 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 20 August 2012 09:10 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



dlovelock

Posts: 19
Joined: 02 May 2002

I was prompted by an email to review the IET's strategy document. I leave it to others to comment on whether the management buzzwords (key drivers, value model....) have been used appropriately but was shocked to find not one single mention of "electrical", "electricity", "electronic", "radio" - I could go on - in the entire 16 pages. As a chartered electrical engineer I parted spiritual company with the Institution when we became "IET" and frankly only pay my subs to keep my CEng registration (and that's only vanity), but I'm interested to note that the forums remain predominantly electrical in nature (today 75% of the latest topics are in the wiring, energy or communications categories). My concern is that leadership groupthink is concerned more with challenging the other specialist engineering and science institutions for supremacy than with serving the needs of its core membership and advancing electrical and electronic engineering science and practice. Am I alone in this?
 21 August 2012 12:48 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

Oh gawd...having seen these postings I went and had a look at the strategy brochure. It really is pretty dreadful. But then, having been at last year's volunteer's conference it had pretty much been presented there so it's no great surprise (I came away from that conference feeling very depressed with the IET).

What would be nice would be if the IET engaged with some real engineers and found out what they actually wanted. The IETs drive is, as far as I understand it, to put the tools in place and then hope that the engineers will just make lots the useful information available. Sorry, we haven't got time for that - even ignoring the fact that most of us are in employment so are hardly going to give away our employer's IP for free.

Don't get me wrong, my experience of the IET staff is that they are a very hardworking, committed and professional team. The problem is with the concept of "the IET" as a whole, and what it is for. I have yet to see a good answer to the question "what is the role of a professional body in the 21st century?".

In the meantime I too basically stay as a member to keep up my CEng, although I do try to do as much as I can in my local IET network to support local engineers. I just wish the IET would see local groups in that light, rather than as recruiting agencies for the greater good of the IET...

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
 21 August 2012 01:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ectophile

Posts: 540
Joined: 17 September 2001

My biggest issue with the "strategy" presented is that it isn't a strategy. It's more of a "vision" - with all the fluffy niceness they want to achieve, but light on detail as to how they intend to achieve it.

-------------------------
S P Barker BSc PhD MIET
 24 August 2012 03:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



yenkles

Posts: 9
Joined: 27 March 2006

The Strategy for the 21St Century is the highest level document the IET has, except for its Royal Charter and Bye-Laws. It aims to set out a vision for the IET and the high level strategy to achieve it. It is underpinned by the IET Plan, which is reviewed and revised each year and states in more detail what the IET will do to achieve its vision. This in turn is underpinned by more detailed plans for each part of the IET.

The IET's vision is "Leading the development of a global engineering and technology community, sharing and advancing knowledge to enhance people's lives". This is intended to encompass "advancing electrical and electronic engineering science and practice" but doesn't identify electrical and electronic, or other disciplines, explicitly. The IET recognises that engineering is interdisciplinary and therefore broadened its scope beyond the discipline of electrical engineering in 2006 when it merged with the IIE.

The IET is committed to understanding what engineers and technicians want and through our Professional Home for Life programme we have sought to meet their needs throughout their studies, careers and into retirement.

In line with this, all four elements of the Strategy for the 21st Century are about serving the needs of the IET's membership and advancing engineering science and practice:
. Value is about providing something worthwhile to members and the wider community
. Knowledge is about advancing engineering science and practice by disseminating knowledge and offering other products and services that help engineers make use of that knowledge
. International is concerned with improving the IETs offering to members outside the UK, which we feel will in turn add value to members in the UK (access to a wider community of peers, to more content etc)
. Agility is about the IET responding more quickly to members and customer needs and expectations

A fundamental part of "sharing and advancing knowledge to enhance people's lives" is promoting professionalism and standards amongst the engineering and technology communities.

The IET works with its corporate partners (employers of engineers and technicians) and its academic partners (universities around the world) to uphold standards and promote professionalism. We do this by accrediting employer professional development schemes and university degree programmes. We will continue to work hard to promote the value of having professionally registered engineers and technicians in the workforce.

And of course the IET works with individual members to help them towards professional registration and encourage continuing professional development throughout their careers. Some of the IETs activities that do this are: professional registration, professional skills training and technical events, mentoring services, jobs board, IET communities and our magazine and journals.

Finally, the Strategy does not refer specifically to "electrical", "electricity", "electronic", "radio", but instead refers very often to "engineering", "technology", "engineers" and "technicians", in line with the IET's interdisciplinary scope.

The IET has a technical scope defined by its sectors and TPNs (Technical and Professional Networks). This has not changed since 2009 and so was not specifically referenced in this update to the strategy.

Sarah Jenkins
Manager, Strategy Development & Planning
The IET
 30 August 2012 01:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



dlovelock

Posts: 19
Joined: 02 May 2002

I'm grateful to Sarah for her lengthy reply, which misses my original point completely. Of course "engineering is interdisciplinary" and throughout my career I have successfully managed projects that embraced every shade of technology as I am sure my fellow civil, mechanical and other engineering colleagues have. But within such projects there has to be reliance on practitioners who are expert in their own discipline: I would not, for example, ask a chemical engineer to design a communications mast. That is where the IET's Vision is faulty - if it means what it says and intends to be undeniably generalist, it has pulled the rug from under the electricals who no longer have a "home for life" that caters specifically for their specialist needs.

So what is the IET for? If it aims to be a "home for life" for civils, mechanicals, chemicals etc. is it capable of giving them appropriate specialist support? Probably not - but why should it, they have their own institutions! If it aims to be a "home for life" for electricals above all others, why not admit it and make this clear in the Vision? Surely this is the reality? Look at the IET's accredited degree list! It is heavily dominated by electrically-oriented degrees. Look at its journals and other publications! They are almost exclusively electrical in nature.

I would therefore expect the IET's Vision to explain which of the following strategies it is pursuing:
1. To retain its specialism in electrical engineering only and remain an electrical engineering institution in all but name.
2. To retain its specialism in electrical engineering and to develop comparable specialist support in other engineering disciplines, thus setting itself up in competition with the other engineering institutions and eventually subsuming them.
3. To abandon its specialist roles altogether (leaving electrics to the IEEE?) and become the champion of an integrated engineering concept (jack of all technologies, master of none) and publisher of a glossy magazine.

Tell us honestly Sarah, is it 1, 2 or 3? - we would love to know!

David Lovelock
BSc CEng FCMI MIET
 05 October 2012 03:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

Hi David,

Well I am someone who has joined the IET specifically because it isn't just for electrical engineers. If it was the IEE, I doubt I would have joined.

I have a maths and physics joint honours degree. I work as a research engineer in the field of electromagnetics. I would not consider myself to be an electrical engineer.

The next closest institution for me would probably be the IOP but they do not really represent engineering and the IET for me ticks the right boxes.

Rhys
 09 October 2012 10:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



simongallagher

Posts: 148
Joined: 28 July 2005

I agree with you David, the IET membership is mostly Electrical Engineers and Technnicians, but the seem to be trying to avoid 'Electrical' of late. Look at the E&T magazine, a glossy magazine that feels like it is published for the public, not Engineers.
 10 October 2012 10:00 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

Are they really avoiding electrical or are they just not making it a primary focus based on the fact that this isn't the IEE?

As for the magazine, I agree it isn't a specialist publication. But I do wonder how easy it would be to make one that covered all types of engineering - the electrical engineers would not necessary want technical in depth articles on mechanical engineering for example.

I'm not saying E&T works but I struggle to see what the other options are.
 10 October 2012 03:19 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

Are they really avoiding electrical or are they just not making it a primary focus based on the fact that this isn't the IEE?

As for the magazine, I agree it isn't a specialist publication. But I do wonder how easy it would be to make one that covered all types of engineering - the electrical engineers would not necessary want technical in depth articles on mechanical engineering for example.

I'm not saying E&T works but I struggle to see what the other options are.
 10 October 2012 07:36 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



jcm256

Posts: 1841
Joined: 01 April 2006

I would respectively disagree with that, the IIE, (before the IIE was swallowed up by the IEE and disappeared), was and had an Electrical/Mechanical magazine and a joy to read, mostly written by engineers, also informative the mechanical articles, and so much related to electrical engineering. The magazine we have now, what is it for, certainly not something for CPE or CPD.
To be fair though, the IET caters well for the electrician/Engineer tech. with the informative wiring matters and IET BS7671 and associated books.

What happened to all the mechanical engineers, well apart from seeing the odd time begging for an IET forum for mechanical engineers, I do not know.
Regards

J Moore I Eng MIET.
 10 October 2012 09:56 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



simongallagher

Posts: 148
Joined: 28 July 2005

If a Mechanical Engineer wants an insitution that looks after his/her needs, they have the IMechE, if a Civil Engineer wants an institution, ICE, if an Electrical Engineer wants an instituition.....

The IEE looked after Electrical Eningeers, who does the IET look after?
 11 October 2012 09:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

Originally posted by: jcm256

I would respectively disagree with that, the IIE, (before the IIE was swallowed up by the IEE and disappeared), was and had an Electrical/Mechanical magazine and a joy to read, mostly written by engineers, also informative the mechanical articles, and so much related to electrical engineering. The magazine we have now, what is it for, certainly not something for CPE or CPD.


But now the IET encompasses *all* types of engineering - to cover that in one magazine would be very difficult to do in any amount of detail. Realistically it has to be watered down to make it work. It isn't meant for CPE or CPD. It's meant as a general interest magazine for its members, just as Physics World is for the IOP, Mathematics Today is for the IMA and Spectrum is for the IEEE - I receive copies of all three of those publications and whilst the subject area is more constrained and therefore slightly more detailed, it is still essentially an interesting magazine, not a journal.

The other option would perhaps be to have separate detailed journals/publications for every type of engineering. I have no idea how feasible that would be in terms of effort and cost though.
 11 October 2012 09:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

Originally posted by: simongallagher

If a Mechanical Engineer wants an insitution that looks after his/her needs, they have the IMechE, if a Civil Engineer wants an institution, ICE, if an Electrical Engineer wants an instituition.....

The IEE looked after Electrical Eningeers, who does the IET look after?


Everyone has a choice - mechanicals can choose between IMechE and IET (or both as many do), civils can choose between ICE and IET, electricals and electronic engineers can choose between IEEE and IET (or both as many do), chemical engineers can choose between IChemE and IET, applied mathemticians can choose between IMA and IET, applied physicists can choose between IOP and IET...

I don't deny that there is perhaps a very good argument and even a need for a seperate UK based institution solely for electrical engineers. But that isn't what the IET is for.

I for one am quite glad of this - I see the IET as being a home for all STEM professionals to be honest and as someone who studied maths & physics but now undertakes an engineering role which is related to electricity, but not really electrical engineering, it's the best/only professional home for me.
 11 October 2012 09:45 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 99
Joined: 18 January 2003

Originally posted by: rhysphillips


But now the IET encompasses *all* types of engineering - to cover that in one magazine would be very difficult to do in any amount of detail. Realistically it has to be watered down to make it work. It isn't meant for CPE or CPD. It's meant as a general interest magazine for its members, just as Physics World is for the IOP, Mathematics Today is for the IMA and Spectrum is for the IEEE - I receive copies of all three of those publications and whilst the subject area is more constrained and therefore slightly more detailed, it is still essentially an interesting magazine, not a journal.



The other option would perhaps be to have separate detailed journals/publications for every type of engineering. I have no idea how feasible that would be in terms of effort and cost though.


The problem with IET/E&T now is that before E&T was 'invented' we had IEE News for all members plus one of a selection of more technical publications (mine was "Computing & Control Engineering") included with our subscriptions. These were publications that had some weight and substance in their technical fields. They were only about 6 a year, but the average practitioner could actually learn from them, so they made a contribution to CPD.

There is no way that E&T comes anywhere close to this value and, as a result, I think many members would feel the value of the institution to them is significantly diminished. We can't all afford to subscribe to the full-scale academic papers/proceedings that IET seem to think we have available if we want anything technical.

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 11 October 2012 10:28 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 99
Joined: 18 January 2003

Originally posted by: rhysphillips


Everyone has a choice - mechanicals can choose between IMechE and IET (or both as many do), civils can choose between ICE and IET, electricals and electronic engineers can choose between IEEE and IET (or both as many do), chemical engineers can choose between IChemE and IET, applied mathemticians can choose between IMA and IET, applied physicists can choose between IOP and IET...



I don't deny that there is perhaps a very good argument and even a need for a seperate UK based institution solely for electrical engineers. But that isn't what the IET is for.



I for one am quite glad of this - I see the IET as being a home for all STEM professionals to be honest and as someone who studied maths & physics but now undertakes an engineering role which is related to electricity, but not really electrical engineering, it's the best/only professional home for me.


"But that isn't what the IET is for." The problem that arises here is that is exactly what it was for before the decision to take over the world. Althought the old IEE was never as narrow as you're implying. Basically anyone with any connection with electrons, electromagnetic radiation or software was covered. After all, when the institution was founded electrical engineering was anything to do with electricity.

The present state of the IET stems from moves some years ago to attempt to merge the big chartered institutions that failed at an early stage when IMechE declined to merge with IEE.

The big difference in the choices you suggest we have is that the other discipline'schoices are UK charter institutions that grant CEng etc status while the IEEE is a US organisation which is primarily a community of interest and whose membership grades have no real relevance in this country (or, I think, much in the US). And how many IEEE events are there in the UK each year?

I know you're an active participant in IET. Could you participate in the same way with IEEE if you wanted to?

By the way, my degree is physics too, I work in control in the Petrochem industry and would be equally eligible for IChemE membership, but I joined the IEE over 20 years ago.

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 11 October 2012 09:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



simongallagher

Posts: 148
Joined: 28 July 2005

I could not agree more with Stuart.

When I joined, the IEE was an institutions for all spectrums of Electrical & Electronic Engineers, quite a broad approach with one that worked. I was interested in Power, so I got the IEE news magazine, and the Power magazine (every 2 or 3 months I think). That magazine was good, and was relevant to Power Engineers, just as the other specialist magazines were. Now we have E&T, which is of use to no one, apart from perhaps non Engineers interested in STEM matters.

Ryhs,

We have met a few times, so I know how involved you are in the institution, and am glad you have a professional home, but that is at the expense of the majority of members who are Electrical/Electronic Engineers. The other UK Professional institutions you mention cannot really be compared to the IEEE.

I have got involved in the IET, chair a sub-committee and sit on 2 committees, but if my employer was not paying for my membership, I would probably leave. I do enjoy giving something back in the form of the committees, but I do not have any professional interest in the IET.

Maybe someone should stand for the BoT on a platform of making the IET relevant to the majority of it's members......
 13 October 2012 09:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



SAVIO

Posts: 343
Joined: 07 May 2002

I'm also an electrical engineer and I was voted against the formation of the IET in 2006. The UK is nothing like countries in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Singapore, Malaysia, etc. where a single engineering institution is formed for every engineering disciplines. The IEE failed to join with the IMechE and the ICE to form the IET in 2006. It is confusing for the IET to claim itself as mutli-disciplinary engineering institution where there are so many different engineering disciplines institutions existed in the UK. Where in some occasions, people in civil engineering discipline asking for admit to the IET with CEng professional registration and the IET would suggest they should approach the ICE. As I don't see all different disciplines engineering institutions in the UK will join together in one single engineering institution in the near future. Should the IET reconsider to reposition itself to one more focus engineering discipline to represent its majority members.
 15 October 2012 02:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rhysphillips

Posts: 71
Joined: 01 April 2010

I don't deny that that was exactly what the IEE was for. And I'm aware of where the IET came from, the failed merger with IMechE etc. Perhaps if it wasn't before my time I would feel stronger about it (but I doubt I would've been a member of the IEE anyway).

As I said before, there may be well be a strong case for there being an equivalent now of what the IEE used to be. But I personally would not like to see that happen at the expense of what the IET now stands for.

In fact, I came away from the UK Communities Together event this weekend truly feeling proud to be an IET member.

Simon - perhaps you should stand for the BoT? That's the place where you could make a difference and we need the people who are passionate and active about the institution to be leading the rest of us!

Rhys
 15 May 2013 01:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rcapol

Posts: 17
Joined: 23 December 2002

I have to agree with SAVIO.
I also voted againt the formation of the IET for the very reason the institution has become what it is today. In my opinion, existing for the sake of it. It appears to try to make engineering popular, not aspirational or professional. No really actively working on behalf of it's members. Just look at the Facebook /Twitter links popping all over the IET websites. These are social media groups, are they really aimed at professional activities such as The IET?.
Undoubtedly there is alot of activity being 'done'. But what are the hard results has it achieved for it's EE members. It is not even pushing for a basic requirement of professional registration (and as a result comptency) to practice in some key EE engineering roles in industry. Such as regulatory or legislative approvals. Surely this is an important issue to be addressed?
If it there were an alternative Electrical and Electronics Institution that was able to focus on the EE discipline, and still be accredited by the Engineering Council UK (to maintain professional registration and assesment), I would join tomorrow and leave the IET. Maybe the IEEE should step in to fill the gap
CEng
 15 May 2013 05:44 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

I'm sure many of us would defect to the IEEE if it could offer CEng, as it is far more relevent to electronic engineering (can't comment on electrical). But it isn't going to happen.

It is a very interesting point as to how far the IET is actively pushing for registration to be recognised as a requirement for critical roles?

I would, however, disagree re your comments on Facebook/Twitter, these have become de facto means of professional communication across many industries. But it is interesting that ABC news yesterday highlighted the fact that LinkedIn seems to be growing while Facebook may be declining.

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.