> TE Home
> About TE
> Contact Us
> Editorial Info
> IEEE-USA

06.08

Opinion: Offshoring and the Future of the U.S. Engineering Work Force and Profession

By Robert P. Morgan

Engineering underwent phenomenal growth after World War II. Engineers’ contributions to the economy, the standard of living, and the national defense have been extraordinary. Yet, as the 21st century gets underway, the U.S. engineering profession finds itself facing major challenges. Among these are a somewhat fractured profession that has difficulty speaking with a unified, strong voice; a predominantly salaried work force with some people feeling less secure and less well rewarded than in the past; and a graduate engineering education enterprise that is heavily dependent on foreign students, coupled with continued difficulty in attracting U.S. citizens. The impact of globalization and offshoring U.S. engineering jobs is providing another major challenge to our engineering work force and the profession. The way engineering is being performed and where it being performed is changing at an accelerating pace.

Engineering is an under-examined, under-scrutinized and poorly understood profession. Nobody is exploring a focused, continuing effort to examine the engineering profession as a whole — it’s structure, components, nature, health, problems, opportunities, and it’s evolving societal role. Because of this void, we do not have a centralized source of data and information to call upon when issues of major importance to the engineering profession arise, as is the case with offshoring. Some of the data are out there but seem scattered hither and yon. Other data are missing. And analyses of important issues facing the profession, the kind that a few dedicated centers devoted to the study of the engineering profession could provide, are not abundant.

Bottom Line Number 1: We need a Center for the Study of the Engineering Profession.

Offshoring engineering jobs has continued to gain momentum. It appears to be becoming a more common element of doing business in the 21st century, a seemingly inevitable by-product of globalization and high-speed, high-capacity communication networks. Companies are moving up the scale by offshoring more high-skill technology jobs and innovation. In engineering, more is written and said about offshoring in the information technology, computer science and electrical engineering fields than other disciplines. However, all engineering disciplines are being affected to some degree. [1]
As the 21st century got underway, U.S. engineers were caught in the double whammy of the 2001-2003 business downturn plus offshoring. Much is unknown about those who were impacted and what they are doing now. Some who managed to stay in engineering had to take salary cuts. Others retired or sought employment outside of engineering. Concerns in the engineering profession about decreasing job security and job satisfaction remain evident. And there continues to be concern on the part of U.S. working engineers and within the U.S. engineering profession about the impact of offshoring on employment, salaries and the attractiveness of engineering as a career for young people.

There have been some recent efforts to try to learn more about offshoring. However, most studies are broad in scope and do not home in on the problems and challenges that offshoring presents for the engineering work force and profession. I am struck by the inability of leaders in government, academia and industry to involve, in their deliberations, working engineers as well as those who have had to abandon their chosen profession. Heavily shaped by corporate inputs, government policy has a profound affect on offshoring and its positive and negative consequences. I do not profess to know the answers as to what the right policies on offshoring would look like.

Bottom Line No. 2: Much more attention needs to be paid by government, industry and the engineering profession to policy responses to offshoring of U.S. engineering jobs — one that involves working, disaffected and prospective engineers.

One important policy issue that needs serious attention is the matter of what can be done to ameliorate, if not prevent, the negative impacts of offshoring on affected and future engineers. Because of growing concern from people with widely varying opinions on offshoring, appropriate responses to this issue are called for. Job retraining, wage insurance, trade adjustment allowances, portable health insurance, reasonable severance packages, a greater sense of responsibility by corporations toward their workers, a stronger role for engineering professional societies, and greater involvement in unions are just some of the varied responses out there. However, it is one thing to suggest something and another to make it happen.

Bottom Line No. 3: All or nearly all of these suggestions appear to be far from receiving detailed, serious consideration and evaluation by policy-makers and the engineering profession at the present time. [2]

I believe that the U.S. engineering profession is being profoundly affected and changed by offshoring. The train has left the station and is gathering speed. Much more attention needs to be devoted to what offshoring means for U.S. engineering employment, practice, education and careers.

Bottom Line No. 4: One appropriate response would be to convene a meeting to discuss the nature of the jobs and career trajectories that prospective U.S. engineers can expect to find and/or create over the next five to twenty years.

The Future of the Engineering Work Force and Profession

So, what about the future of the U.S. engineering work force and profession? What will things look like in five, or 10 or 20 years?

The engineering agenda and scope of work is very much intertwined with the policies and priorities of the larger society — government, corporations and citizens. Those, in turn, are influenced by events, both natural and of human origin. Sometimes decisions are good ones, sometimes not so good. And they matter. It is difficult to know what things are going to be like in 20 years, or ten or even five. Thinking meaningfully about the future of the engineering work force and profession is very difficult and exceedingly important.

As we move further into 2008, the situation for some engineers appears to be looking up, in spite of the latest economic downturn. In the fields of defense and aerospace, the priorities given to the defense sector, coupled with a wave of retirements are increasing the demand for engineers. Furthermore, these are sectors in which work may be less likely to be offshored. A somewhat similar situation is reported in the energy/power sector. It is not unusual for the supply and demand situation for engineers to change substantially over relatively short time periods. The phenomenon of globalization and offshoring adds one more important variable to a complicated situation.

Certain unmet needs cry out for attention, such as our decaying physical infrastructure — bridges, transportation, civil systems and the like. We need to move away from our excessive reliance on non-renewable sources of energy that negatively affect our climate and atmosphere towards affordable, more secure, environmentally-friendly alternative energy supplies and energy conservation. If these areas were to be given real priority and resources, they would represent new, exciting and appealing opportunities for many engineers. These challenges have been around since the 1960s. They are not going away and they are gaining exponentially in urgency. Within these potential growth areas, government policies and legislation can affect the size and scope of the engineering work force.

An Optimistic Scenario

Fast forward to the year 2020. The U.S. engineering work force is doing just fine. Idealistic, motivated students continue to be increasingly attracted to engineering in substantial numbers. They won’t all get rich but there are worse ways to make a living. Engineering workers have become more empowered, both through professional associations and unions. Leaders of the professional engineering societies and corporations have been paying more attention to the needs of U.S. workers. After a disturbing period earlier in the 21st century, the United States has been increasingly pursuing its interests through diplomacy and international cooperation. The nation competes well, but it cooperates in helping to meet basic needs and sharing prosperity around the world. In doing so, it shows a decent respect for the opinions of mankind, which is reciprocated. [3]

End Notes

1. Morgan, Robert P., “The Impact of Offshoring on the Engineering Profession”, A paper prepared for the Program Office of the National Academy of Engineering, 85 pages, 22 September 2006. Copyright © 2006, The National Academies.

2. Since the congressional elections of 2006, more attention has been devoted to the impact of globalization on the American work force. See “The Globalization of R&D and Innovation, Pt. IV: Implications for the Science and Engineering work force”, Hearings of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Congress, 7 November 2007.

3. This paper was based in part on comments I presented at the National Academy of Engineering Workshop on Offshoring of Engineering, Washington, D.C., 24-25 October 2006 and at the STEM National Conference, “Can We Compete: Trends in America’s Scientific and Technical work force”, Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology, Washington, D.C., 1-2 November 2007.

Dr. Robert Morgan is Professor Emeritus of Technology and Human Affairs at Washington University in St. Louis. Comments may be submitted to todaysengineer@ieee.org.

Opinions expressed are the author's.