
, last edited January 19, 2012One of the mystifying aspects of the PCA industry is the conceit of many licensed “professionals” and how many of them snootily look down their crinkly nose at those in the field that are not registered engineers or architects. Some of the most difficult people I’ve worked with have been licensed engineers who were know-it-alls and were unable to work with a project team consisting of those deemed inferior to their license-confirmed masterful intellect.
I have found that experience matters much more than having a license and slapping some acronym after the formal name that only your mother calls you. Maybe I feel this way because my first apprenticeship was with a very old licensed architect that routinely dozed off at his desk every afternoon… Or perhaps I’ve been in one too many large consulting firms and watched as hoity-toity licensed staff approach an assessment believing they “know” what to expect at a facility. Unfortunately, the result of this type of approach is often an engineer seeing only what they expected to see. The instant we start believing we know virtually everything there is to know about a given type of facility is when we start missing pertinent site-specific data or deficiencies and short-changing our client.
Some of the most talented people I’ve ever worked with do not have any licenses other than the one that allows them to legally drive their car and they probably never will. I’m of the belief that actual field and report writing experience while working with smart men and women that challenge you to do your best is much more important that having put in enough time and being able to take tests successfully to earn a license. In our field, forums like Commonground or certain discussion groups on LinkedIn are great for gaining knowledge and learning from experienced staff.
Sure, there are professionals holding certain licenses that are best suited for certain detailed assessments and assignments, such as structural or civil engineers with experience in preparing seismic probable maximum loss (PML) assessments. But to think that just because someone has a license he or she will do a good job of evaluating field conditions or actually act “professionally” as a leader of a project team is crazy. I’ve witnessed too many boneheaded actions by licensed ne'er-do-wells - The McSnootersons of our industry - to think this at this point in my career.
Comment
I emphatically agree.
It also doesn't help that I know some inexcusably sloppy engineers who, when criticized, get shirty and respond with "excuse me, I'm a blah blah blah engineer with blah blah years of experience, and I won't have my work criticized by unqualified people"
...... and then some punk like me points out that "all your elevations are four feet off and you didn't carry the tens column."
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Great post. I agree with you. This issue is relevant crosses most industries, not just the PCA industry.
I can't help but think about the fact that some of the most successful CEO's in the world were college dropouts - Richard Branson, Michael Dell, Marc Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, ....
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Then why bother with vehicle licenses, business licenses, medical licenses, dog licenses or any other type of license?
The answer is to set MINIMUM standards for public safety. Without proper education, experience and licensing, any industry will go into a downward spiral of crappy products and services.... kind of like what the PCA and PML business is now.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Yeah.... look at what food quality was like before the FDA and USDA started regulating stuff. You think that's milk? Wrong, it's water with chalk in. Bread made with sawdust instead of flour. That sort of thing.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
And the regulations governing construction quality in third world countries speaks for itself....
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Interesting topic. My own field is currently struggling with the issue of "professionalizing" with some form of licensing requirements and I can see both sides of the argument. Experience and ability are THE determining factors on any individuals skill at a particular profession, but without some baseline standards in which to hold particpants to, the overall value of the work you provide suffers.
Initial attempts in my field led to similar outcomes as described by Chuck; "Licensed" professions with little to no experience/ability compared to none licensed. But returning to the days before such attempts at licensing would be harmful as we are still a field plagued by a high cost of training, but generally low salaries compared to the work, thus low retention of skilled professionals. So the only ones that stick around, are the people too incompetent to get a job doing something else.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
Perhaps you are being hypersensitive to a few incidents. While there are licensed professional in the business who provide more attitude than service, I think they are a minority. As with any effective team or working environment, these type of individuals are encountered and the damage they spew eventually needs to be mopped up. Sometimes we simply have to deal with rude people - its just a fact of life.
On the opposite end, I am dealing with a few projects that were initiated by firms with non-licensed individuals. My clients, thinking that they were getting sound advice, proceeded to make serious business decisions based on faulty recommendations. A review of the work completed by the other firms identified incompetence in understanding of regulations or technical issues (e.g. geology, hydro-geology, chemistry, risk assessment). In all cases, my clients were put through very expensive and difficult situations that could have been avoided with proper assessments.
The ideal of professional licensure is to protect the public interests. I suppose you should feel lucky if you are practicing in a state without a licensing board. Where a discipline is governed by a state, they seek out and stop the practice of non-licensed individuals.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this
I totally agree with your observations, except for one item: We have had difficulty in WA, OR, and CA in getting the licensing boards to take any action on unqualified due-diligence providers because "they are not providing design works". The boards fully understand that there are engineering conclusions and recommendations provided in the reports, but for some reason do not, or will not pursue the individuals. Thus, the practice of non-licensed and/or unqualified (licensed but in a different area of expertise) people continues.
Be the first to rate this
|
Sign in to rate this