It is most definitely bad engineering as having a more gradual curve would’ve made it completely acceptable. Elements of corruption and “not my job” mindset.
"Seven Engineers fired for refusing to design bridge"
Unemployment is a different constraint, but still a very real one. Doesn't matter now principled you are, there's always someone who'll take the money that isn't. Maybe these seven were the scabs and the heroes who said "no" are just forgotten.
Have you never worked on projects where the management wants to do things a certain way but you know it’s just plain wrong. The only option sometimes is to let the slow rolling disaster unfold or risk your own job. Obviously this only applies where you aren’t risking people’s lives, but there is an entire subreddit dedicated for this. (r/maliciouscompliance)
Is it possible that the people who set the constraints are different from the people who design the bridge, who again are different from the people who approve the design? Yes, that's how it works in the real world.
As a design engineer, all you can do is explain to the stakeholders how the constraints will affect the outcome and suggest alternatives.
Ultimately, the engineers will have to work with what they are given, and as long as the outcome is safe and its limitations are communicated, they can't be blamed.
I periodically get told by my Product Manager that I’m thinking with my managerial hat on, again.
I joined a company as lead [software] engineer because I prefer that track while I have experience in management and C-Suite. dumb product and marketing decisions impact some engineering work, and I know the solutions for
I mostly avoid saying anything except when solving those things is the answer to the goals the PM keeps asking me about. When I do say things I’m told not to.
misaligned incentives between different government fiefdoms led to nearly impossible constraints, which led to a design silly from an engineering perspective
meanwhile, I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers had to choose between refusing to design something silly, vs putting food on the table for their family
It is not a 90 degree bridge but more of a 120 degree bridge as seen here: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/action-taken-against...
It is most definitely bad engineering as having a more gradual curve would’ve made it completely acceptable. Elements of corruption and “not my job” mindset.
I believe you meant more of a 60 not 120.
Potentially both. If there are impossible constraints, then at a certain point you do _not_ build the impossible bridge, you say no instead.
"Seven Engineers fired for refusing to design bridge"
Unemployment is a different constraint, but still a very real one. Doesn't matter now principled you are, there's always someone who'll take the money that isn't. Maybe these seven were the scabs and the heroes who said "no" are just forgotten.
It's still bad engineering. "They made me do it" isn't an excuse.
2 replies →
I am at a loss with all of the “well they were forced into it” comments. Don’t build it.
Have you never worked on projects where the management wants to do things a certain way but you know it’s just plain wrong. The only option sometimes is to let the slow rolling disaster unfold or risk your own job. Obviously this only applies where you aren’t risking people’s lives, but there is an entire subreddit dedicated for this. (r/maliciouscompliance)
9 replies →
Is it possible that the people who set the constraints are different from the people who design the bridge, who again are different from the people who approve the design? Yes, that's how it works in the real world.
As a design engineer, all you can do is explain to the stakeholders how the constraints will affect the outcome and suggest alternatives.
Ultimately, the engineers will have to work with what they are given, and as long as the outcome is safe and its limitations are communicated, they can't be blamed.
2 replies →
I periodically get told by my Product Manager that I’m thinking with my managerial hat on, again.
I joined a company as lead [software] engineer because I prefer that track while I have experience in management and C-Suite. dumb product and marketing decisions impact some engineering work, and I know the solutions for
I mostly avoid saying anything except when solving those things is the answer to the goals the PM keeps asking me about. When I do say things I’m told not to.
Enjoy your proverbial 90 degree turns!
I have this problem two, in both directions!
When I don't bring things up, I wind up sitting in a tedious and insulting retrospective meeting about "what went wrong"
When I do bring things up I get told "don't worry too much about that, that's the PMs job and they have it all figured out"
That is why I build a "paper trail" via email or chat when I predict things might go wrong and managers still insist to doing things.
potentially both, driven by misaligned incentives
misaligned incentives between different government fiefdoms led to nearly impossible constraints, which led to a design silly from an engineering perspective
meanwhile, I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers had to choose between refusing to design something silly, vs putting food on the table for their family
Why not both?