Download - Royal Australian Navy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Desirable Products • Stakeholder Interviews • T&E Program • Draft OCD (sec. 4 & 5, annex A & D) • Draft FPS • Draft TCD • PD • Committee Endorsed Option • DSTO Study • RANCIS • MARIGOLD FIGURE 3: SEP USED IN OCD, FPS DEVELOPMENT FIGURE 4: C4ISR PRODUCTS AS A FUNCTION OF ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES. OCD, FPS Refinement OCD/TCD SEP FPS SEP NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2003 Draft RFT • Initial OCD • Initial TCD • Final OCD • Final FPS • Final TCD 73
74 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2003 Engineering or management? Nick Hammond spent 35 years as an engineer officer in the Royal Australian Navy, entering the RAN College in 1960 and retiring as a Rear Admiral in 1995. He has had a long involvement in Defence acquisition including the management of the Guided Missile Destroyer Modernisation and the Australian Frigate and ANZAC Ship Projects. In 1992 he became responsible for all Navy Projects as the Assistant Chief of Naval Staff – Materiel. He transferred to the Reserve in January 1995 to become the First Assistant Secretary, Defence Materiel, responsible for joint service acquisition projects and for Defence policy on information management. In January 1997 he took up his present job as Managing Director of Saab Systems (formerly CelsiusTech Australia), a supplier of major systems for the Defence market. He retired as Managing Director in 2003 but remains on the Saab Systems board and is a director of a number of other companies. The following letter appeared in the July 2003 issue of Engineers Australia, the Journal of the Institution of Engineers Australia. May I add a few thoughts to the “Real Engineer” vs “Engineering Manager” debate in your May 2003 issue correspondence? The 1986 review of Engineering education came out strongly in favour of a solid base in the fundamentals. Given the academic background of the leadership and most of the members of the review team, it was not surprising that mathematics and hard sciences were well represented in the fundamentals. The input to the review from industry where most “Real Engineering” is done these days emphasised that people skills, communications and teamwork were more important than the ability to do fifth order differential-equations in one’s head. This awkward information was largely buried in the final report. As a result, the profession continues to attract more than its fair share of individuals whose enormous technical ability is rendered ineffective by their inability to communicate. There is a role and a career path for people who want to move into engineering management without fully developing their engineering skills. Many jobs in project management for example require an understanding of the engineering processes involved but not the ability to design those processes. Good people in this area are readily employable. “Real Engineers” are also in demand. Although many company chief engineers earn more than their engineering manager peers, this career path is probably less well renumerated on average. On the other hand it generally involves less day to day stress and better opportunities for a balanced lifestyle – something the younger generation thankfully seems to be more sensible about than its predecessors. A decision to become a real engineer does not burn bridges. As long as technical skills and people skills are both included in initial and continuing education, transition to engineering management in mid career is quite possible and good engineers with management skills are in high demand. Those who don’t aquire people skills early will have more difficulty but (as Ken Michael points out in the same issue) they won’t progress far in straight engineering either. For undergraduates and young engineers facing career decisions, the choice doesn’t have to be complicated. If “real engineering “ interests you and you have the academic ability, then take that path, but make sure that your engineering training is not at the expense of people skills, particularly effective communication and team work. You can still make a transition to engineering management in mid career. Nick Hammond, FIEAust Adelaide
Page 1 and 2:
NAVY ENGINEERING ISSUE 5 SEPTEMBER
Page 3 and 4:
2 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEMB
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
10 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEM
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24: 22 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEM
Page 73: 72 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEM
Page 77: 76 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEM
show all

Download - Royal Australian Navy

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?