Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Engineers Learn
Soft Skills the
Hard Way:
Planting a Seed
of Leadership in
Engineering Classes
SANJEEV KUMAR, P.E., F.ASCE;

AND

J. KENT HSIAO, P.E., S.E., M.ASCE

ABSTRACT: Todays competitive global market and changing work environment demand
that engineers possess soft skills in addition to technical skills, and they must be able to
understand project goals and have the ability to accomplish them with available resources. Currently, engineers learn leadership and management skills while working
learning soft skills the hard way. In order to meet the demands of this changing world,
engineering programs are challenged to come up with innovative ways to teach classes so
that graduates are prepared to take on the challenges twenty-first century engineers face.
This article provides a summary of engineering leadership and its relationship to engineering education, problem-based learning, and service-learning pedagogies as they relate to engineering education, and an example of implementing these pedagogies in an
engineering course.

JANUARY 2007

...............................................

very engineering organization, big or

small, needs leaders and managers for
the success of the organization and
projects they execute. A quick search
for a definition of leader reveals that
there are several hundred definitions
thatcurrentlyexist.Abasicdefinitionofaleadercouldbesummarized as a person who has the ability to inspire and motivate

others to do what he or she wants them to do with a feeling

that they enjoy doing it. Before discussing engineering leadership any further, it is important to differentiate leader from
manager. A basic definition of a manager could be summarized as a person who works effectively with others to accomplish set goals. We believe that it is a myth that leaders are
born. Instead, leadership could be born out by providing
proper education and training. Although education for leader-

18

Leadership and Management in Engineering

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ENGINEERING LEADERSHIP
AND ENGINEERING CURRICULUM
We have combined professional practice experience of over
thirty years, and have realized that engineers generally focus
on technical details and often overlook the broader picture.
However, todays engineers are asked to do a lot more than
just apply the scientific knowledge to solve practical problems. In a survey conducted by EE Times Bellinger 2002,
77 percent of the engineers reported they have acted as team
leaders and 83 percent have written reports for internal use.
Currently, engineers hone their leadership and management
skills while at work i.e., learning soft skills the hard way.
Traditional engineering classes prepare undergraduate and
graduate students to master their technical skills in a specific
engineering field without much time allotted for discussion
and for leadership practice. Bellinger 2002 reported that
engineering curriculums at many universities are so demanding technically that students dont have the time or inclination to pursue business courses.
Engineering curriculums all over the United States are
under pressure to maintain a specific number of graduating
hours, leaving little or no room to add new courses. Therefore, to obtain soft skills, either the students should take
additional courses something they are not apt to do because
of the time and money commitments, or the existing engineering curricula need to be modified to prepare the engiLeadership and Management in Engineering

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

ship starts at home during childhood, the seed for producing

engineering leaders must be sowed in basic engineering
classes. However, leadership is rarely discussed in traditional
engineering courses. In order to be a true engineering leader,
engineering students must possess technical and nontechnical
softskills,whichwouldgivethemanedgeintheworkplace.
Engineers are frequently overlooked for senior managementpositions;instead,individualswithMBAsorJDs,whose
education better prepared them in communication, leadership,andmanagementskills,areoftenawardedthesepositions
Summers et al. 2004. Engineering Criteria 2000 ABET
1998, the accreditation criteria established by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ABET, places
significant emphasis on preparing graduates so that they can
successfully enter into and continue the practice of engineering, and it is the responsibility of the institution to satisfy these
criteria. Therefore, participation of the industry and/or professionalsinengineeringeducationmustbeanintegralpartofthe
engineering curriculum Kumar 2000. Professional practice
can be defined as the act of working firsthand with situations
for customers by using a combination of highly specialized
knowledge and skills that are obtained through study, training, and experience Aldridge 1994. Professional practice
requires that graduates from a four-year engineering curriculum are capable of setting up and solving problems that do not
haveanswersgivenatthebackofbooksKumar2004.

neers for twenty-first century demands. Preparing engineering students to have sound technical skills is no doubt the
primary responsibility of an engineering curriculum. However, in todays competitive global market and changing
work environment, which demand that engineers must be
able to understand the project goals and accomplish them
with the available resources, engineering programs are challenged to come up with innovative ways to teach classes so
that the graduates are prepared to take over the challenges
facing twenty-first century engineers, and to make these programs consistent with ABET requirements. The National
Academy of Engineers NAE 2004 emphasizes that to
maintain the nations economic competitiveness and improve
the quality of life for people around the world, engineering
educators and curriculum developers must anticipate dramatic changes in engineering practice and adapt their programs accordingly. Arciszewski 2006 considered the lack of
engineering leadership in civil engineering as a crisis and
urged civil engineers to use the present challenges to change
the profession to meet the new demands.
Almost every engineering program in the Unites States
has a capstone design course that is designed, as the name
suggests, to capsulize what students have learned in other
classes. Unless the course is designed and taught to accomplish its real objectives, it gives a false sense of completeness.
Often the instructors of this course have little or no project
management experience in professional practice. As a result,
graduates lack the education and experience to learn the basics of project management and leadership. Moreover, a
broader concern is whether it is fair to believe just one course
to be a panacea.
Lets take a careful look at ABETs Engineering Criteria
2000 1998, points d through j and compare them to
the most common dimensions of an engineering leader.
d. Ability to function on multidisciplinary teams;
e. Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems;
f. Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility;
g. Ability to communicate effectively;
h. Ability to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context;
i. Recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage
in, lifelong learning; and
j. Knowledge of contemporary issues.
Following are the most common dimensions of an engineering leader. These are not listed in order of importance, but
rather as an attempt to map them against ABETs aforementioned criteria.

19

1. Ability to build successful teams and work with team

members to accomplish project goals;
JANUARY 2007

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Careful review of this information suggests that ABET has

placed significant emphasis on preparing engineering students as leaders. Keeping in mind the limitation on adding
new courses in an engineering curriculum and to avoid dependence on only the capstone design course, it is obvious
that the only choice is to modify the existing courses such
that a healthy seed of leadership is planted during engineering educationone able to produce successful leaders with
appropriate nourishment to strengthen the roots during professional practice.
PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Traditionally, engineering courses have been taught in a
straightforward way, starting with a lot of definitions, basic
concepts, and methods for solving well-defined problems,
which in most cases are simplified and idealized Sallfors and
Sallfors 2000. In most of the basic civil engineering courses,
the instructors provide just the necessary parameters to solve
an idealized problem that includes a step-by-step procedure
to efficiently solve the problem. On one hand this is necessary to teach the students basic principles and formulas
needed to make judgments. On the other hand, this way of
teaching is not sufficient to produce engineering leaders
Kumar 2004.
Graham states that if someone asks me how to get
from my office here in the university to a consultants office
in downtown, I can do two things: I can tell him to get
to University Crescent, turn right on Bishop Grandin Boulevard, then north of St. Marys Street, etc. That is, I
can teach him the path to follow. Alternatively, I can show
him on a map where the consultants office is located relative
JANUARY 2007

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2. Ability to motivate, inspire, respect, and reward the

team members;
3. Ability to evaluate potential risk and willingness to
take calculated risk for the success of the project;
4. Thorough understanding of duties of an engineer including service to the community;
5. Sound technical skills within his/her area of expertise,
and ability to identify and recruit other team members with skills needed for successful completion of
the project;
6. Clear vision of potential outcomes and ability to strategize to achieve them;
7. Value transparency, honesty, integrity, and high ethical standards in decision making;
8. Ability to communicate effectively, both written and
oral;
9. Ability to listen carefully and learn from others;
10. Understand the importance of responsiveness to his/
her clients, both internal and external; and
11. Empathy for what he or she does.

Figure 1. Comparison of problem-based learning PBL

and traditional methods IMSA 2004, reprinted with
permission

to the university and let him pick his own way cited in
Couttolenc 2000.
Problem-based learning PBL has been used successfully
by other educators, particularly medical educators, to train
medical care providers. However, use of PBL in engineering
education can best be regarded as at infancy. PBL is a training method that challenges students to think and learn by
solving real-world problems while working in groups and
learning from each other. Most of the components of ABET
Engineering Criteria 2000 could be satisfied by teaching engineering classes, particularly engineering design classes, by using the PBL approach. Fig. 1 shows how PBL compares
with more traditional instruction IMSA 2004. Table I also
shows the difference between PBL instruction and traditional
lecture-based instruction.
SERVICE LEARNING IN ENGINEERING
CLASSROOMS
It is a proven fact that students learn best when they receive
education complemented with experiments or hands-on
training. Traditionally, pedagogies based on hands-on training include at least one or a combination of laboratory experiments, undergraduate research experiences, PBL, internships, and cooperative experiences. Instructors can also use
field trips to provide practical applications to engineering
education. This approach to engineering education has
helped students tremendously; however, it still does not help
students develop soft skills and sufficient confidence to inde-

20

Leadership and Management in Engineering

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23

Table 1. Difference between Problem-Based Learning PBL Instruction and Traditional

Lecture-Based Instruction
Traditional lecture approach

PBL Approach

Teacherdirectsstudentsthinkingandevaluates
students.Studentisapassivelearner.

Teachercoachesstudentsasandwhenneededanddirectstheir
learning,engagesstudentsintheprocessofcriticalthinking,
andassessstudents.
Studentsworkinteams,engageindiscussions,thinkcritically,
developlistofparametersneededtosolvetheprobleminhand,
obtainparameters,andresolvetheproblems.
Discussionsoccurinanenclosedroom,butthereallearning
occursoutsidetheclassroom.

Learningoccursinanenclosedlecturehall.

pendently execute even a small project. Another pedagogy

that comes closer to inculcating soft skills along with required technical competence in students is service learning,
which is a pedagogy or educational methodology that directly and intentionally integrates classroom learning with
service to the community Lima and Oakes 2006. As
Tsang 2000 states, Although service learning has received relatively little attention in the engineering disciplines, it has been well established in the social sciences, and
in disciplines in which clinical experiences represent an important part of the learning process.
Service learning involves integration of several components and partnership among several players, such as the
community, practicing firms, students, and faculty. It is important to understand that students performing service
learning are not doing something for the community, but
rather with the community Lima and Oakes 2006.
Service-learning pedagogy provides students an opportunity
to work on real-world projects that will be built based on
their design, as opposed to working on real-world situations,
which can provide good experience but are not ways to develop confidence and soft skills. Ample literature is available
to understand service learning in engineering.
IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLE
A number of universities now set up engineering courses
where team leadership skills, writing, oral presentations, and
resolution of problems are part of obtaining an engineering
degree Bellinger 2002. According to NAE 2005, curricular approaches that engage students in team exercises,
team design courses, and in courses that connect engineering
design and solutions to real-world problems so that the social
relevance of engineering is apparent appear to be successful
in retaining engineering. We joined academia at Southern
Illinois University Carbondale SIUC, and based on our extensive professional experience we modified several courses,
developed new courses, and modified the instruction of
courses we teach to be in line with the recommendations of
Leadership and Management in Engineering

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Studentslistenandsolveproblemsusing
givenparametersasdirected.

NAE 2005 and to incorporate the PBL curriculum and

service-learning pedagogy in engineering to a certain extent.
Brief information about one of the courses, Geotechnical
Engineering in Professional Practice, developed and taught
at SIUC, is discussed below.
The purpose of this course is to provide understanding
of the concepts of geotechnical engineering in professional
practice and to develop engineering leadership skills in the
undergraduate and graduate students planning to pursue
careers in geotechnical engineering or any other field of
civil engineering. The course objectives include applying
the principles of geotechnical engineering effectively in a
real-world setting; planning, managing, and successfully
executing geotechnical projects; interpreting and using
the recommendations developed by geotechnical engineers;
incorporating total quality management TQM; applying professional liability, risk management, and loss prevention principles to geotechnical projects; training students to
work effectively and efficiently as members of an interdisciplinary team; and satisfying the needs of internal and external clients.
The class is divided into groups of three to four students.
At any one time, each group works on the same project. The
projects selected are real-world projects that are going to be
built in the near future or were recently built. Technical
complexity of the projects selected is similar to the projects
on which engineers are likely to work within the first two to
three years of their professional career. In addition, projects
are selected such that the students practice leadership and
management skills, ethics, and interactions with consulting
engineers and community members. In order to enhance
their communication skills, students write detailed proposals
and project reports similar to those written by practicing
engineers. After completion of their own reports, the students are given the opportunity to review the full original
reports of the project prepared by consulting engineering
firms and compare their work with the work performed by

21

JANUARY 2007

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23

CONCLUDING REMARKS
We are convinced that implementation of the PBL curriculum and service-learning pedagogy in engineering is the
most effective way to prepare engineers for the twenty-first
century. Although modifying a handful of courses by a few
JANUARY 2007

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

registered professional engineers. In addition to the realworld projects, students also work on carefully selected individual assignments to enhance their technical skills.
During the first few weeks of the course, the instructor
coaches the students about intricate details of proposal and
report writing, available resources, and technical standards
and specifications. During the remainder of the semester, the
instructor serves as a resource bank. Students decide what
information is needed and the instructor coaches them on
how and where to get the information. Whenever needed,
the class sessions include technical discussions on developing
design data. Balanced emphasis is placed on developing soft
skills and technical competence. Depending on the size and
complexity of the projects, students work on two to four
projects during a semester. After completion of each project,
the instructor reorganizes the teams and a new project is
assigned.
Student performance assessment and grade assignments
are very challenging for this type of instruction. Individual
assignments are generally easy to assess. However, assessment
and grading of group proposals and projects presents more of
a challenge. The course instructor critically evaluates each
groups proposals and projects and assigns a particular score
to each groups product. Each member of the group also
evaluates his/her team members based on their contribution
to the assignments, leadership shown, work ethics, etc. Each
groups group assignment score is then distributed to the
individual team members based on the evaluation by his or
her team members. The overall grade is then calculated
based on the points each student receives in his or her individual and group assignments.
The student feedback of the course has been extremely
positive, and some of the unsolicited comments from SIUC
alumni who have taken this course include: eight interviews, eight offers of employment; and I attribute half of
the success I have had to the class I took from you, Geotechnical Engineering in Professional Practice. In the past several years, students at SIUC have ranked us as the top teachers in the college of engineering, which is attributed to the
changes that we have made in teaching the courses we teach.
Unfortunately courses similar to the ones we have discussed
are very limited and not all graduates take them. Therefore,
a much broader change in the engineering education is
needed. NAE 2005 emphasizes that the iterative process
of designing, predicting performance, buildings, and
testingshould be taught from the earliest stages of the
curriculum, including the first year.

instructors could enhance student learning drastically, the

real change to the curriculum is challenging primarily because it requires a lot of commitment and dedication from
everybody involved. The implementation also demands that
the faculty members modify their teaching style, which is
not always easy. In addition, it requires administration to
understand what it takes to accomplish this so that resources
can be directed appropriately and the team players can be
rewarded fairly. NAE 2005 recommendations clearly state,
The engineering education establishmentshould endorse
research in engineering education as a valued and rewarded
activity for engineering faculty as a means to enhance and
personalize the connection to undergraduate students, to understand how they learn, and to appreciate the pedagogical
approaches that excite them.
REFERENCES
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology,
Inc. ABET. 1998. Engineering criteria 2000, ABET,
Baltimore, Md.
Aldridge, D. M. 1994. Professional practice: A topic for
engineering research and instruction. J. Eng. Educ.,
833, 231236.
Arciszewski, T. 2006. Civil engineering crisis. Leadership
Manage. Eng., 61, 2630.
Bellinger, R. 2002. Product development stunted
Cancellations, cutbacks beset EE workplaces. EE
Times,
September,
http://www.eetimes.com/
showArticle.jhtml?articleID18307531 accessed September 2006.
Couttolenc, O. 2000. The practical experience of professors on the geotechnical teaching process. Proc., 1st Int.
Conf. on Geotechnical Engineering Education and Training,
I. Manoliu, I. Antonescu, and N. Redulescu, eds.,
Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 409412.
Illinois Math and Science Academy IMSA. 2004. Comparing PBL and traditional methods. Illinois Math and
Science Academy, http://www.imsa.edu/programs/pbln/
comparison/ accessed September 2006.
Kumar, S. 2000. Industry participation in a capstone
design course. Proc., Int. Conf. on Engineering Education,
International Network for Engineering Education and
Research, Arlington, Va.
Kumar, S. 2004. Teaching geotechnical engineering using
professional practice. Proc., Int. Conf. on Engineering Education, International Network for Engineering Education
and Research, Arlington, Va.
Lima, M., and Oakes, W. C. 2006. Service learning: Engineering in your community, Great Lakes Press, Wildwood, Mo.
National Academy of Engineers NAE. 2004. The engineer of 2020. Publication of the National Academy of
Engineers, Washington, D.C.
National Academy of Engineers NAE. 2005. Educating

22

Leadership and Management in Engineering

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23

Leadership and Management in Engineering

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by 103.52.140.167 on 01/15/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

..............................................................................................

the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education

to the new century. Publication of the National Academy of Engineers, Washington, D.C.
Sallfors, L. L., and Sallfors, G. B. 2000. Focus on real life
problems facilitating learning and understanding. Proc.,
1st Int. Conf. on Geotechnical Engineering Education and
Training, I. Manoliu, I. Antonescu, and N. Redulescu, eds., Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands,
425431.
Summers, M., Davis, B., and Tomovic, C. 2004. When
engineering and technology skills are not enough: Engineering leaders out of their element. Proc., CIEC Conf.,
Biloxi, Miss., ASEE, Washington, D.C.

Tsang, E. ed. 2000. Projects that matter: Concepts and

models for service learning in engineering. Publication
of American Association of Higher Education AAHE,
Washington, D.C.
Sanjeev Kumar is a professor and distinguished
teacher in the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering at Southern Illinois University Carbondale,
Carbondale, IL 62901-6603. He can be reached via
e-mail at kumars@heera.engr.siu.edu. J. Kent Hsiao is
an assistant professor in the Department of Civil and
EnvironmentalEngineeringattheSouthernIllinoisUniversity Carbondale. He can be reached via e-mail at
hsiao@engr.siu.edu.
LME

23

JANUARY 2007

Leadership Manage. Eng., 2007, 7(1): 18-23