Leadership and Management in Engineering

Structural engineering is both an art and applied science. Traditionally, students of structural engineering were exposed to the art along with the science of the profession by teachers who themselves were practitioners of that art. Over the past thirty years, the art of structural engineering has been almost completely replaced by science, which many times is performed for its own sake. This growing emphasis on “studying” rather than “creating” is leading to a crisis in the structural engineering profession. This paper makes a case for reform by reviving art and practice in structural engineering education, and calls for separation of structural engineering education from general civil engineering undergraduate programs.

Coaching is extremely popular in many organizations and among many executives, managers, and ambitious wannabes. The functions coaches perform are not new but the term is more marketable than were earlier names. Capitalistic motives have drawn service providers to assume the name “coach.” Various types of helpers and others have adopted the title for its cachet. Given that there are a myriad of coaching choices, this article covers some of the history, background, objectives, selection, and evaluation issues to consider. While there is no guarantee, informed buyers may make better purchasing decisions.

An ancient African proverb states, “It takes a village to raise a child.” The truth behind this statement is that success in nearly any endeavor requires people who care, who pitch in to help when life becomes challenging. The same concept can be applied to the role of various professions in our modern world. That is, it takes a variety of dedicated professionals working as a team and in their respective disciplines to deliver services that enhance the quality of life. Note: This article is derived from a presentation Professor Russell delivered in a May 2007 Chicago Section APWA meeting on workforce development and leadership.

“Leadership” is different from “management”; many just know it intuitively but have not been able to understand this difference clearly. These are two entirely different functions based on their underlying philosophies, functions, and outcomes. Similarly, leaders and managers are not the same people. They apply different conceptualizations and approaches to work, exercise different ways of problem solving, undertake different functions in the organizations, and exhibit different behaviors owing to their different intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Although discretely different, the terms “manager” and “leader” are often confused and used interchangeably. This paper attempts to address this issue at various levels, including etymological, development, conceptual distinctions, definitional complexities, functional divergence, and behavioral differences. It is argued that in order to be competitive, future organizations need to develop as many leaders as possible, but that these leaders should also have sufficient management knowledge and capabilities. Organizations also need effective managers who possess adequate leadership skills for better problem solving and overall functioning in the teams.

Few studies have documented effective safety performance in the high hazard construction industry and examined why some companies are able to experience success in reducing injuries while their peers have not. This paper reviews the literature related to safety performance in the construction sector. Several questions are raised by this research: What role does management play in improving safety performance in the construction sector? What organizational factors are responsible for effective safety performance? The data in this research suggests that safety and health programs can only be successful if program elements such as management commitment, employee involvement, hazard anticipation, hazard abatement, and training are present.

The construction industry is recognizing the need for leadership development and succession planning. Industry has typically responded to this need by enacting succession planning programs that identify a handful of high-potential personnel at an early stage in their careers, and expose these candidates to specialized leadership development and mentoring programs not available to their peers. Recent research at Clemson University by the authors compared the leadership behaviors of two groups of construction project managers within a major international, U.S.-based construction company. The top performers were also the best leaders, as proven by a $360\text{-}\text{degree}$ leadership analysis. The analysis also identified specific causal influences for achieving top performer status. This article provides justification for the “all-hands” approach to leadership development programs as a way of producing sufficient highly qualified professionals in the quest for succession planning in the construction industry.