The Apotheosis of Professional Engineering (Pt. 1)
"What good has it been for engineering to have gained the bountiful rewards of business yet to have forfeited its profession?"
The wisest man to have lived posed long ago a question that is apt for engineers today. “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world,” Jesus asked, “yet forfeit their soul?” What good has it been for engineering to have gained the bountiful rewards of business yet to have forfeited their profession?1
Science, above all, respects the power of the human intellect. Science is the apotheosis of the intellect and the consummation of the Renaissance. Science respects more deeply the potential of humanity than religion ever can.2
Historical Background
Charlie Baker
In Winter 2016, Charlie Baker, a 1982 Kettering University alumnus, came to speak on campus.3 A recalcitrant student in those days, I was not expecting another automotive engineering talk to sow the seeds for changing me so profoundly.
The most important point Charlie mentioned was that we should all highly consider getting our Professional Engineering (PE) licenses4 in our careers not because of the license, but because it would allow us to deeply strengthen the fundamentals of our field.
Wow! What an unexpected point of view. It was the first time someone was honest with me as a student about the reality of not capturing everything from your undergraduate education. I could really get behind that.
The In-Group and Out-Group of “Engineers”
Many conversations in college were almost entirely devoted to in-group and out-group dynamics about our engineering identities. I have long suspected that this was due to every Kettering student’s private lack-of-confidence that permeated campus like a metastasizing cancer.
Why did everyone feel this way? Well, we spent our late-teenage years — when our peers were presumably having fun at Michigan State University parties — in professional work environments fifty-percent of the time with coworkers who didn’t really want us there, and who often felt — or went as far as to verbalize — that we were actively getting in the way of their real work. Not great for everyone’s confidence spending years and paying top dollar to “become an engineer.”
The worst part of it? They were right; we weren’t competent.5
I recall that The Art and Science Group6 performed a consulting engagement that said the highest correlating factor to predict which students would attend Kettering University was not whether the prospective students wanted to do a co-op program, but what the students’ parents’ perspectives on the value of work experience were.7 Surprise!
This, of course, meant that whether you took things apart as a child — like the students who made up the in-group engineers — played less of a role than most might think in whether you were attending Kettering or not. It was very easy to find yourself as an out-group engineer studying engineering: a real identity crisis that is likely an enormous unspoken factor in the university’s high attrition rate.8
In high school, I thought I wanted to become an actuary910, so you can probably guess where I fell in the group dynamics.11 This was augmented by a boss declaring that I wasn’t cut-out for engineering, and should probably just change my major to business.1213
Many students declared that they were getting an MBA as soon as possible after graduation — a tempting idea — because they were “better with people than engineering.”14 This was certainly one solution to the identity crisis, but perhaps it was addressing a symptom, not a root cause.
In retrospect, this all was really just a normal stage of our psychosocial development as adolescents becoming bona fide adults.15 That being said, I’m not disillusioned by how much this wracked Kettering students with anxiety, and how much it continues to.
An incredibly kind colleague at an internship of mine encouraged me to consider taking the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam.16 She said: you’re fresh on the material, you never know if you’ll want to get the PE at a later date, so why not take it?
I vacillated, but mulled over her and Charlie’s points. Maybe they were right.
A Call-to-Adventure to Join the “New” Group of True Engineers
In 2017, I started asking Alan Kay17 a lot of questions on Quora after his How to Invent the Future1819 talks at Stanford were published on YouTube and completely changed my life. These rotated my outlook on how true engineering can dramatically change the future even more than the esteemed startups and tech companies of Silicon Valley ever could.20
I shifted my recalcitrance away from “authority” and instead toward “pop culture,” realized the importance of methodical rigor, and was no longer obsequious to “hacking, tinkering, trial and error, and fucking around” as Saul Griffith21 puts it.22
A large part of this shift came from regret about ethical mistakes of my own that coincided with the exhaustion and depression during-and-after the time of my mother’s death, and a separate academic risk I took to write about the emerging Theranos scandal — in 2016!23 — in my LS 489 course.24
I came to the defining moment that, yes, ethics matter. Period. Ethics also especially matter if you’re ambitious. The higher the skyscraper you want to build, the deeper of a foundation you’ll need.
Note that the in-group and out-group conversations that made many Kettering students feel that they were just "bad at engineering” are completely irrelevant to engineering ethics. It doesn’t matter whether you’re part of the in-group or out-group: the bridge still must not fall, the space shuttle must not explode, the airplane control system must not stop working, the car must not kill, and the building must not collapse.
Nowadays, I think making ethical missteps and correcting our personal ethical philosophies is an inevitable and important part of maturation into adulthood. It’s best to catch smaller mistakes early to both prevent and avoid disasters. Ethics is no joke, and if we resolve to be ethical even when we’re not being effective, we can get the help of others to become ethical and effective.
Alan Kay’s Quora answers eventually led me to Henry Petroski’s work, namely, To Engineer is Human.25 It was in this book that I learned the temperament of true engineers, and also what wasn’t the temperament of true engineers (characterized by what contributed to engineering disasters like the Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse).
On July 17, 1981, the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Kansas City, Missouri, suffered the structural collapse of two overhead walkways. Loaded with partygoers, the concrete and glass platforms cascaded down, crashing onto a tea dance in the lobby, killing 114 and injuring 216. Kansas City society was affected for years, with the collapse resulting in billions of dollars of insurance claims, legal investigations and city government reforms.
The Hyatt was built during a nationwide pattern of fast-tracked large construction with reduced oversight and major failures. Its roof had partially collapsed during construction, and the ill-conceived skywalk design progressively degraded due to a miscommunication loop of corporate neglect and irresponsibility. An investigation concluded that it would have failed even under one-third of the weight it held that night. Convicted of gross negligence, misconduct and unprofessional conduct, the engineering company lost its national affiliation and all engineering licenses in four states, but was acquitted of criminal charges. Company owner and engineer of record Jack D. Gillum eventually claimed full responsibility for the collapse and its obvious but unchecked design flaws, and he became an engineering disaster lecturer.
The disaster contributed many lessons and reforms to engineering ethics and safety, and to emergency management. It was the deadliest structural failure since the Collapse of Pemberton Mill over 120 years earlier, and remained the second deadliest structural collapse in the United States until the collapse of the World Trade Center towers 20 years later.2627
After reading Henry Petroski’s book and also ruminating on the GM ignition switch recalls2829 years earlier that directly threatened our morale as students at the former General Motors Institute, I bought my Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam: Electrical & Computer prep books.303132
Unexpectedly Passing the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam
I remember going through Lindeburg’s book at the Plymouth Public Library after work, and only getting part of the way through. I never saw some of these subjects in my university classes! They looked interesting, but I was disappointed that my atypical school didn’t seem to have a fundamental33 approach34 of touching many broad subjects like other universities.
I hardly touched Wasim Asghar’s book. I didn’t study Computer Engineering (just Electrical Engineering), so I figured I was screwed on the Electrical and Computer Engineering FE Exam. I read through so many forums35 online of people in Internet comments talking about how difficult the exam was and that they failed the first time. I perused the FE Handbook36, but was intimidated by the unfamiliar equations. I don’t think I knew that NCEES had a practice exam37 — I at least certainly didn’t take it.
“Well, I’m definitely going to fail this,” I thought.
I was so certain that I would fail it, in fact, that I didn’t say no to a friend of mine buying tequila shots for me the night before:
Frankly, I almost considered skipping the exam and meeting up with a friend I knew that day in Chicago…but I was too hungover to drive 5+ hours, and just figured I would take the exam (however long it would be).
I drove to the Pearson test center in Southfield, MI and found it hilariously amusing that it was on the ground floor of the Towers Watson building for the convenience of their actuaries.38
I brought my TI-8439 and TI-8940 calculators, and they told me those weren’t allowed. “But how am I going to find the roots of a complex polynomial?!” I almost shouted. I then took my dejected photo of expected failure that is on my passing test result:
Surprisingly, the test was extremely easy for me, and I don’t consider myself a brilliant engineer.41
There was a calculator on the computer that I was able to use, and the entire reference handbook42 was searchable on the test. I could reverse-engineer most of the things that I didn’t fully know, and none of the problems required substantial calculation.
It certainly was nowhere near as hard as Ken Kaiser’s Circuits 2 Test 5 that I took in college.43 He had his PE license and said the PE Exam was extremely hard — and that he brought his own handbook to the test!4445 I figured that the FE must be somewhat like it.
What I realized through the process was not that engineers need to know everything (nor can they know everything), but that they need to have:
An “above-threshold” knowledge of engineering science.
The ethics and awareness to know what they don’t know.
The professionalism to improve and consistently provide due care46 on engineering projects.
This was the best way I could summarize the essence of what the NCEES Model Law47 and Model Rules48 documents seemed to be reaching towards, and it seemed like a reasonable philosophy to uphold.
I did it! I was so happy when I got the exam result that I had passed. I was officially part of the in-group of engineers even if I didn’t do electrical engineering proper in my industry jobs after college.
Which begged the question…
Why was I allowed to work on things in industry that I didn’t really know beforehand or study?
It certainly benefited my growth, and I loved the diversity of projects, but it didn’t feel aligned with the rigor and philosophies of NCEES. Nobody in industry spoke about this — I’ve never worked under any PEs.
Uncovering The Enigma of Engineering’s Industrial Exemption to Licensure
After noticing that many of my peers and superiors in industry had surprisingly less-than-ideal in-depth technical knowledge about what our business units made, I was befuddled. Eventually, I had the idea to create a continuous improvement project for my newer business unit’s work subjects so we could build up our in-house technical competency.
I actually reached out to NCEES for advice on building what would technically be called a competency model (like their exam specifications), spoke to some people associated with the organization, and suddenly became very aware of the discrepancies between NCEES and their understanding of “industry,” better known as my context.
They were surprised that no one had their PEs at my workplace. They basically waved their hands at people who work in “manufacturing” — as they called it — and said they don’t need PEs because it doesn’t affect public safety like what they do in engineering consulting projects...uh, what?
After substantial digging, I found the best paper on the matter, full of ideas that changed my life: The Enigma of Engineering’s Industrial Exemption to Licensure: The Exception that Swallowed A Profession.
The author, Paul Spinden, replied to me with a wonderful email:
Eddie,
Thank you for your e-mail. I am pleased to discuss the industrial exemption, licensing, and credentialing of professional engineers with you — with the understanding that I do claim expertise in these subjects.
You asked how I became interested in the topic. The late Dr. Paul Munger49, a civil engineer on faculty at the University of Missouri-Rolla (now, the Missouri School of Science and Technology) spawned my interest.
I met Dr. Munger in 1981 when he was chairman of the Missouri Board of Architects, Professional Engineers, and Land Surveyors. I was a staff attorney in the office of the Missouri Attorney General and was assigned to serve as legal counsel to the board. In addition to serving as head of the Missouri board, Dr. Munger served on several professional bodies, including (if memory serves me) the NCEES. I believe he was an officer or director of NCEES.
He was quite concerned about the negative impact of the industrial exemption on engineers’ opting to avoid seeking licensure and other credentialing. Not only did he deem it to be detrimental to engineering as a profession, but to engineers themselves, especially in their propensity to avoid exercising independent judgment.
We became close friends, especially after our close work together on the Kansas City Hyatt Hotel disaster in 1982. When, in 2008, I took retirement from my position as judge on the Missouri Court of Appeals to pursue my desire to teach at a law school, my many conversations with Dr. Munger came to mind as I began doing scholarship in relation to the administrative law course I teach. Dr. Munger’s concerns gave birth to the Enigma article.
As for the notion (I believe you referred to someone at NCEES) that most engineers pursue licensure rather than take advantage of the industrial exemption, I am very dubious. While licensure seems to be the norm for civil engineering, the literature I read convincingly suggests that it does not hold true for the other disciplines, especially the likes of electrical in which the vast majority of engineering is done within the corporate context and there is little incentive to seek licensure.
My son is an electrical/computer engineer for a defense contractor. His response to my suggestion that he seek professional engineering status was “why should I? I’ll have to spend gobs of time and effort, and it won’t mean anything to my employer.” Indeed, if I understand what I gleaned from the literature, corporate employers strongly prefer that their engineers not be credentialed — perhaps to avoid the government’s nose from being thrust into the tent?
Dr. Munger became friends with Mr. Roger Boisjoly, one of the engineers at Morton Thiokol involved in the Challenger disaster. The reports he shared with me about the frustrations that Mr. Boisjoly and the other engineers at Thiokol encountered in having their judgment dismissed and ignored were particularly significant in my developing my conclusions in the Enigma paper. Mr. Boisjoly and his fellow engineers were not licensed and discerned little basis for exerting independent judgment. It was only after the disaster and the loss of his position at Thokol that Mr. Boisjoly realized the prudence of Dr. Munger’s advice that he seek licensure. It took him six months or more of intense, full-time study to prepare for the examination after having been away from general engineering study for several decades. Few engineers not in Mr. Boisjoly’s predicament would accept such a challenge (one generally experienced by every law school graduate who readies himself or herself for the bar exam).
You queried what to do about the problem of the industrial exemption. It seems to me that the answer has to come on two fronts: legislative and educational.
I teach law with the expectation that everyone in the classroom will be sitting for the bar exam. We talk about the exam a lot. The bar exam is normative for all but a very few of our graduates (who pursue a career in politics or business). We don’t fret over the merits of taking the bar exam. Because no one can practice law without being licensed, even if the practice is within the corporate context, we don’t need to apologize for or defend the bar. Passing it is simply a necessary step for becoming a lawyer. Dr. Munger suggested, and the literature supports him, that the opposite is true in engineering school. Save for the civil engineers, the expectation is that engineering graduates will bypass licensing requirements and go straight to an engineering job with the government or a corporation.
I suggest in my paper, and I am confident that it is true, that the industrial exemption (unique only to engineering) results from the strong lobbying effort of corporations in early decades of the last century. Until legislators wise up to the detriment that the exemption creates in thwarting exercise of independent judgment, leading to such disasters as the Challenger explosion, it won’t change. Money talks, but not every jurisdiction in the United States allows for an exemption. Legislators can be educated, but it takes a concerted effort.
I’d be delighted to get your perspective.
Paul
Paul gives us something new to consider: the engineers — who were bona fide professionals — who worked on the subsystems that caused the Challenger space shuttle to explode in 1986 weren’t responsible; management was.50
I wasn’t alive during the time of this event, but take a look at the live broadcast to get a feel for its psychological impact that nearly shut down the space program:
Although [Roger Boisjoly5152] was not licensed at the time, he did everything that the public would expect of a professional engineer. He put the public’s interests ahead of his own. He did what men facing such situations rarely do: He laid his job and self-interest on the line and stood up for the seven individuals whose space craft would be propelled by his company’s rocket motors the next day.
During such times as Roger Boisjoly faced, about the most significant effect a professional license can have is to serve as an outside influence — a reminder to the professional that his or her duties extend far beyond his or her employer’s interests to include the public’s interest. It serves as a sort of brooding omnipresence to prick the professional’s conscience during such ethical dilemmas such as Boisjoly and the other Thiokol engineers faced. It is what Martin Goland had in mind when he admonished that, for an engineer to “use his professional talents in a cause he believes to be unworthy is a violation of a sacred social trust.”
There is a lot I could say here, and Paul already wrote a fifty-plus page paper on the subject.
What I can add is a bit more perspective from someone who is an engineer by background.
Paul said, “Indeed, if I understand what I gleaned from the literature, corporate employers strongly prefer that their engineers not be credentialed — perhaps to avoid the government’s nose from being thrust into the tent?”
I’m unclear that businesses under the industrial exemption have any opinion on professional engineering other than total apathy and lack of knowledge of the professionalism they’re sacrificing. Most aren’t even aware of the industrial exemption being a dilemma — they just assume this is how it always worked. I don’t frequently see revolutionaries come from people who genuinely believe the maxim, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”53
The following is an enormous ball of string to untangle, so please don’t assume that my point of view here is absolute.
I used to hold the nuanced perspective that most decisions “made” in “big business” are hardly ever conscientious and deliberate at all.54 We do know that unethical decisions have been deliberately made in business history, but I posit that most people assume these unethical decisions happen deliberately far more often than they actually do.
The vast majority of decisions that end up in unethical scenarios seem to be made from partial neglect from a small number of individuals (still neglect, still unethical), but “enabled” by corporate apathy or little-to-no business systems design that act as a “poka-yoke” for upholding ethics in complex systems engineering.55
[To be continued]
Spinden, P. M. (2014). The Enigma of Engineering's Industrial Exemption to Licensure: The Exception that Swallowed a Profession. UMKC L. Rev., 83, 637.
Atkins, Peter (1995). The Limitless Power of Science.
Kettering University experience has inspired graduate to find ways to give back. Kettering University. (2016, February 16). https://www.kettering.edu/news/kettering-university-experience-has-inspired-graduate-find-ways-give-back.
But we were also eighteen years old, so I think it’s safe to say we weren’t competent yet. Consider the following: how long does it take for medical doctors to become competent? I once heard someone say, “It takes four years to be bad at violin.”
Market-informed strategy. Art & Science Group. (2021). https://www.artsci.com/.
There is a reason why I worked at Hollywood Markets as a grocery bagger against my individual desires in 2010. Obviously, in retrospect, this was one of the best learning and maturation experiences for me.
My dad and granddad were incredibly encouraging of me attending Kettering (despite it not being what accumulated social capital — like The University of Michigan - Ann Arbor — in high school), and my granddad even told me that I was doing what he wanted to do before he was drafted in World War II. Wow.
Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates. Kettering University. (2020, October). https://www.kettering.edu/about/accreditation/undergraduate-retention-and-graduation-rates.
Five times actuaries have been portrayed in the movies. Institute and Faculty of Actuaries. (n.d.). https://www.actuaries.org.uk/news-and-insights/news/five-times-actuaries-have-been-portrayed-movies.
Bartlett, D. D. (1991, October 22). The Art of Actuarial Science. https://www.soa.org/globalassets/assets/Library/newsletters/the-actuary/1990-99/1991/december/act9112rev.pdf#page=3
Some germane quotes:
“It’s a future where we think of ourselves as artists as well as scientists.”
“If actuaries are going to matter, and if we are going to survive, we must change. The actuary of tomorrow will have to put just as much emphasis on actuarial art as on actuarial science.”
“There’s no point in having a vision of the future if nothing is done to get there.”
“Broadening our scope means using the principles of actuarial science that we have all studied and applying those principles to new areas — to any area where there are risks to be evaluated and managed.”
“We claim to be professionals. Being a professional takes courage. We have to have the courage to speak up, get involved, and to assume the risks that will result from a broadened scope for the actuary, the risks that will allow us to fulfill my vision for the future. I challenge all of you to have that courage.”
Schodowski, E. (2018, July 10). Eddie Schodowski's answer to How has Cal Newport's "Deep Work" changed your life? - Quora. https://qr.ae/pGWy9a.
Before completing my B.S. in electrical engineering a couple years later, I designed and programmed the entire electronic system for my senior design project, helping my other three teammates graduate the class during our final semester that some classmates actually failed (an unfortunate story):
I also received one of the kindest recommendations from the hardest professor at the university:
Kettering University graduates a good fit at Harvard Business School. Kettering University. (2015, March 12). https://www.kettering.edu/news/kettering-university-graduates-good-fit-harvard-business-school.
Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, August 5). Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development - Fidelity: Identity vs. Role Confusion (Adolescence, 10-19 years). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#Fidelity:_identity_vs._role_confusion_(adolescence,_10%E2%80%9319_years)[7].
NCEES FE exam information. NCEES. (2021, February 24). https://ncees.org/engineering/fe/.
Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, July 5). Alan Kay. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kay.
Kay, A. (2017, May 25). How to Invent the Future I - CS183F. YouTube.
Kay, A. (2017, May 30). How to Invent the Future II - CS183F. YouTube.
Kay, A. (2017, September 13). What books would Alan kay recommend for people who want to become true engineers? How should they go about building projects? Quora. https://www.quora.com/What-books-would-Alan-Kay-recommend-for-people-who-want-to-become-true-engineers-How-should-they-go-about-building-projects.
Saul Griffith. (2021). https://www.saulgriffith.com/.
Hennessy, L. A. (2014). Decision making and creativity: A qualitative study of MacArthur Fellows. University of San Diego.
Schodowski, E. (2016, September). Theranos: A Kantian Perspective. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ev7wifejic2h52m/Theranos%20-%20A%20Kantian%20Perspective.pdf?dl=0.
Petroski, H. (1992). To Engineer is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design.
Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, July 30). Hyatt Regency walkway collapse. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse.
While it may not necessarily be commonly viewed as an engineering disaster, I believe that our below-average labor productivity growth is a hidden industrial engineering disaster:
Eifler, T., & Howard, T. J. (2018). The importance of robust design methodology: case study of the infamous GM ignition switch recall. Research in Engineering Design, 29(1), 39-53.
Eifler, T., Olesen, J. L., & Howard, T. J. (2014, August). Robustness and Reliability of the GM Ignition Switch-A Forensic Engineering Case. In 1st International symposium on robust design (pp. 51-58). Technical University of Denmark.
NCEES. (2020). Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Electrical and Computer CBT Exam Specifications. NCEES. https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/FE-Electrical-and-Computer-CBT-specs.pdf.
Lindeburg, M. (2015). PPI FE Electrical and Computer Review Manual – Comprehensive FE Book for the FE Electrical and Computer Exam. PPI2PASS.
Asghar, W. (2018). Study Guide for Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Electrical & Computer CBT Exam. CreateSpace.
Hamming, R. (1997). The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn. CRC Press.
Interestingly, in college, I wish I knew more about modern technology and how to build things (like designing printed circuit boards). Nowadays, I look back and wish I knew more fundamentals.
r/FE_Exam - my guide on how I passed the FE electrical and COMPUTER exam on my first try. reddit. (2019, May 29). https://www.reddit.com/r/FE_Exam/comments/bufp7w/my_guide_on_how_i_passed_the_fe_electrical_and/.
NCEES. (2020, May). FE Reference Handbook 10.0.1. https://www.cee.msstate.edu/wp-content/uploads/fe-handbook-10-0-1.pdf.
NCEES. (2020). FE Electrical and Computer Practice Exam Sample. https://core-ncees-org.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/c5caa-2020-ele-practice-exam00-4.pdf?X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAIHJFPKLZRKQERK5A%2F20210825%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20210825T173039Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-Signature=f9f5fffadc311e2c9bcd604b18ded4c24f9d91434fd810d3e8662ba4d949c907.
Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, May 10). Actuarial credentialing and exams. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actuarial_credentialing_and_exams.
TI 84 Plus Graphing Calculator. TI. (n.d.). https://education.ti.com/en/products/calculators/graphing-calculators/ti-84-plus.
TI-89 Titanium Graphing Calculator. TI. (n.d.). https://education.ti.com/en/products/calculators/graphing-calculators/ti-89-titanium.
Beri, S. (2018, March 13). Satvik Beri's answer to Have you ever witnessed the Dunning-Kruger effect first hand? - Quora. Quora. https://www.quora.com/Have-you-ever-witnessed-the-Dunning-Kruger-effect-first-hand/answer/Satvik-Beri.
NCEES. (2020, May). FE Reference Handbook 10.0.1. https://www.cee.msstate.edu/wp-content/uploads/fe-handbook-10-0-1.pdf.
Kaiser, K. L. (2018). Circuits 2 Test 5. Kenneth L Kaiser. http://www.klkaiser.com/images/circuits2/circuits2test5.pdf.
I’m pretty sure NCEES has changed the structure of PE tests now. As they move to computer based tests, no outside references are now allowed.
EP4: Computer-based testing updates and how NCEES exams are created and scored. Spotify. (2021, February 17).
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Due care. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_care.
NCEES. (2019, August). Model Rules. NCEES. https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/Model_Rules_2019_web.pdf.
Fulps, L. (2014, April 28). Longtime civil engineering professor Paul Munger dies. Missouri S&T - News and Events. https://news.mst.edu/2014/04/longtime-civil-engineering-professor-paul-munger-dies/.
Spinden, P. M. (2014). The Enigma of Engineering's Industrial Exemption to Licensure: The Exception that Swallowed a Profession. UMKC L. Rev., 83, 637.
Berkes, H. (2012, February 6). Remembering Roger Boisjoly: He Tried to Stop Shuttle Challenger Launch. NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/02/06/146490064/remembering-roger-boisjoly-he-tried-to-stop-shuttle-challenger-launch.
Martin, D. (2012, February 4). Roger Boisjoly, 73, Dies; Warned of Shuttle Danger. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/us/roger-boisjoly-73-dies-warned-of-shuttle-danger.html.
Malick Ghachem, Jeffrey Ravel, and Craig Wilder. 21H.001 How to Stage a Revolution. Fall 2013. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: MIT OpenCourseWare, https://ocw.mit.edu. License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA.
Darmstadter, H. (2016). The Times and General Motors: What went wrong?. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 3(1), 1134030.
This paper does explain the nuanced perspective that I think is more often in-line with reality, except that it neglects — like these complex situations — the handful of individual-level (albeit not necessarily corporate-wide) decisions that did result in the Challenger explosion and GM ignition switch failures.
https://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/00_2014/06-2014/Valukas-report-on-gm-redacted.pdf
Gutierrez, G., Gardella, R., & Reynolds, T. (2017, February 25). GM Report: Engineer Approved 'Switch From Hell' Even Though It Didn't Meet Specs. NBCNews.com. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/gm-recall/gm-report-engineer-approved-switch-hell-even-though-it-didn-n123791.
Barra also said that the internal review found no evidence of a cover-up. Rather, she said, it found a pattern of “misconduct or incompetence” that prevented company officials from linking the faulty ignition switch sooner to deadly crashes that occurred when the cars suddenly stalled on the road.
DeGiorgio has previously been in the spotlight in the wake of the recall, particularly when Barra was questioned about his role in the mishandling of the ignition switch problem during congressional hearings in April. But the GM report for the first time clarifies the key role he played in approving the faulty part, and how his actions may inadvertently have prevented other GM experts from connecting the dots.