Do Your Manager Bypass Engineers and Go To Drafters Directly to Make Designs/Drawings? 1

[ThinCap]

Since I started working at this new place, I found many interesting things I never experienced before (I posted some here already). So here is another one:

I am a design engineer. Now I found my manager can go to a drafter directly to make designs/drawings without my knowledge. And none of them have any engineering training/knowledge...

Is is normal in your company too?

 

[fel3]

I haven't experienced this in civil engineering. Most of my career has been in infrastructure design (water, sewer, storm drainage, roads, correctional institutions, etc.) and most of that has been on public works projects.

I have never had a manager make unilateral changes to my designs by working directly with the drafters. In every case I can think of where a manager spotted something amiss, he brought it to my attention to deal with and usually didn't even mention it to the drafter. That's the professional way to be an engineering manager.

I would be VERY annoyed at a manager who is doing what yours is doing. Besides being unprofessional, both in behavior and by lack of experience, bypassing you makes your technical job at least more difficult, if not impossible, to do well. I don't know your situation, but I would put my foot down (I have done this with managers before, just not this type of situation). You and your manager and the drafter(s) need to implement and follow a rule that says all design change requests on your projects go through you.

==========
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill

 

[ThinCap]

Agree! Let's see if anybody else has similar experiences...

 

[miningman]

Before we all get our knickers in a knot , Remember RHIP. Rank has its priveldge

 

[fel3]

Yes, but rank without engineering expertise (e.g., the OP's manager) can be dangerous. This is especially important to deal with if the OP is designing stuff under his professional license (as opposed to an exempt engineering design, like in manufacturing) because there are also appurtenant legal issues.

My world is mostly design under a professional license and I would taser anyone who attempts to bypass me on my designs. It's unprofessional and, for designs that require a license, it is almost certainly illegal. It also shows a complete disregard and lack of respect for the real engineer (the OP).

I have had one non-engineer manager. Her background was urban planning. She knew more about engineering than most non-engineers, but it more big-picture than detail. She knew her strengths and weaknesses and so she never even attempted to insert herself into the design process. She always asked good questions about our designs, but she also trusted us to use our superpowers for good, not evil.

==========
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill

 

[ThinCap]

Agree. Otherwise Trump would make all designs...

 

[IRstuff]

He certainly takes credit for everything ...

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[truckandbus]

Yes, it happens. When it does, I've always had the design engineer report the change request back up through the chain of command to either the group supervisor or myself and then we would access the impact of the change. It always effects negatively the timing of the deliverable, and then may have further repercussions on either that specific project or on other projects that were depending on having that designer resource available.

Even if 'the boss' is making the request they need to understand the impact.

I've explained to program managers and other senior staff that the best way to get their feedback incorporated into the design is to let me or the group supervisor know what the request is and we will manage the resources to make it happen including managing the unintended consequences, and that if they do go to the designer directly it only delays implementing their change. Most of them understand this when it is explained to them as they don't understand the big picture.

This also applies to my design engineers - if they want to add scope to what they are working on it needs to have the impact understood and communicated.

 

[DGrayPPD]

ThinCap,

I feel your pain. This has been a common problem in my organization as well. But that does not mean that it is normal nor should it be.

I am (supposed to be) responsible for managing the workflow and backlog for the piping and drafting teams in my organization. I have been fighting an uphill battle ever since being asked to take over the role, as most of the managers above me still find it easier to bring any and all work directly to whoever is available to do it. The reason being time and an inability to adapt. They believe that it is just quicker to bring it to whoever is available to work on it rather than letting me allocate the work to the proper individual. The problem with this though, is that it leads to poor quality work, excessive rework, inconsistency, and errors. Some situations I have faced are:

1) P&IDs given to civil drafters (with no knowledge or training on P&IDs)​

2) Electrical one-line diagrams given to structural drafters (with no knowledge/training in anything electrical)​

3) Pipers given civil drawings (no knowledge or training)​

4) Employees completely unfamiliar with the project being given someone else's work to finish (no clue why certain things were done the way they were)​

5) etc.​

And while I'm all for cross-training employees to give more flexibility, this isn't what is happening. The managers "need the drawings quick" so they bring it to whoever is available, which I think is more poor planning on their part than anything. It also violates a principle of management known as the unity of command. Employees should only have to report directly to one supervisor. Otherwise, you end up with a completely inefficient organization because the subordinates have no clue who to report to, there becomes overlap among instructions and communication suffers greatly, and a conflict arises between managers.

I would continue to emphasize how important it is to maintain that unity of command principle, and ensure that the right people are given the work so as to not increase your risk of errors and rework. Because it will end up costing a lot more money to the company in the long run if those things happen consistently, rather than taking a little bit more time and doing it right the first time.

"The only limits in life are those which we impose upon ourselves."

 

[ThinCap]

Thank truckandbus and DGrayPPD for all your input!
Does something like this happen more often in small (private) companies than large (public) cooperations?

 

[DGrayPPD]

Well, it can happen in a company of any size. But I would think it probably has a little more prevalence in smaller companies, yeah. Larger companies, especially public, don't have a choice but to have the structure, organization, and internal controls in place in order to succeed for their shareholders, but that doesn't mean everyone is perfect and does what they should.

My company is a small business (between 40-50 people), but we have grown pretty rapidly over the last 5 years or so. But before then the company was about 5-10 people and most top management was pretty involved in all technical aspects of the business, as well as running the business. And that's how they operated for about 40 years, so it has been a little difficult for them to let go of some of that control and trust their managers to do their jobs.

Like I said, it's been an uphill battle for me, but I have seen signs of improvement, so I'm hopeful for the future.

"The only limits in life are those which we impose upon ourselves."

 

[truckandbus]

This is a problem that can happen anywhere. A larger company though may have tighter controls over how work is authorized to be done versus a smaller company.

Rule of thumb for me is the designers never refuse the task but rather indicate that they will 'see what they can do' and then check with the group leader or design services manager about how to proceed.

A conversation with the request originator usually clarifies the true scope and priority of the request and allows for proper execution. Often a designer is afraid to question the direction from a manager

"Tom, I know you asked Sara to move the control panel up 6" but she's actually leaving for vacation for 6 weeks - are you okay with that wait?"
"Tom, you asked to raise the control panel 6", that will require a new frame; if you raise it 5" or raise it 7" we can avoid that work"
"Tom, we need 4 days to finish the current job and then we can look at your request to reposition the control panel, I'll need to move out the next job for Bill a few weeks or we can bring in a contractor to work with you"

 

[IRstuff]

Size of the company is irrelevant. What's relevant is the existence/lack of process, and managerial discipline.

It's human nature to push boundaries, but if there are no boundaries to start with, you get chaos.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[CWB1]

I've never worked for a non-engineer, so my stance has always been that if the boss wants to do something he's well within rights based on experience and position to do so. Most of mine have stuck mostly to managing and "big-picture" work outside of design reviews, but occasionally I've had them handle quick/easy projects and details.

 

[ThinCap]

If managers can do engineers' jobs, they usually don't hire engineers...