The scene:  It is a steamy day in this Bold New City of the South.  Our main character, a forty-something woman wearing bright, casual walking garb and wide-brimmed hat, is enjoying a tour of stately historic homes dotting the riverbank neighborhood of the city.  While pedestrians and bicyclists meander from home to home with tickets in hand, children sell lemonade on the corner and porch fans spin.  It is a scene frozen in time.

Our protagonist emerges from one “shoes-off-at-the-door-please” manse, and takes a seat on the spacious wraparound porch as she waits for the rest of her party to emerge from the home.  She ponders which truth she should embrace: She Lives in a Hovel, or She is Incapable of Such Self-Indulgence?

Taking a seat next to her is a heat-weary gentleman with a cane.  This nice, talkative fellow turns out to be the homeowner taking a break from his hosting duties, something he can do as he is blessed with a gracious horde of volunteers inside.  The niceties move past compliments of his home and the fine taste of his professional decorator wife to the topic of work.  A retired doctor, he travels the country speaking at engagements, which explains his facility for making new friends quickly.  “The key to connecting with people,” he tells his guest, “is to speak at their level.  You can’t elevate them to your level, but you can get down on their level to make them comfortable.”  This will enable them to “hear” you better, he tells her.

She raises her eyebrows and smiles politely.

“What do you do for work, my dear?” he asks.

“I am an executive recruiter in engineering and planning consultancy as it relates to transportation infrastructure such as airports, roads, rail, transit and ports,”  she responds.

He sits up attentively: “What do you think of this fast train they want to build down in South Florida?”

Her amusement that, in this part of the world, Tampa and Orlando are considered “South” Florida quickly dissipates as she struggles with how to respond to this question.  Recalling that Southern ladies do not generally talk politics with strangers, she smiles and responds:  “Of the proposed lines in the United States, the Tampa-Orlando project is the most shovel-ready. They could start building it today.”  She thinks this is a nice, neutral response.

“Do you think the government should have to pay for that?  Do you think we as taxpayers should have to pay for that?”  One hand on his knee, one waving in the air as he leans in, she can tell he won’t be settling for her compact answer.

No calculations are required to determine this gentleman’s position on the topic, so she chooses to answer the question by explaining why the anti-high-speed-rail camp’s position is weak.

“People who oppose this project are not opposed to building it; they merely think it should be a privately funded endeavor, operating for profit.  However, they are not measuring our current transportation network to the same standard.”

“The costs of our road system are widely distributed.  We fund the building of our roads through tax revenue and selling of bonds, the latter of which is debt our taxes pay over time.  This cost includes acquisition of the land for the roads.  We fund the significant operations and maintenance activities of this road system through annual budgeted tax dollars, including security and safety such as the Highway Patrol.  The drivers — you and I — pay for our own equipment and for the operation and maintenance of that equipment.  We also pay for gas, tolls, our own liability through insurance each of us is required to carry and any parking costs at our destination.”  She pauses for the grand finale:  “Add to this the cost of defending our interests in oil-producing regions of the world, and suddenly driving doesn’t really look so cheap.”

“Assuming that the equation on the roadway side is now complete, there is no reasonable way to expect a private operator to pay for its land, track, equipment, liability, operations, maintenance, fuel, staff and safety, then roll that into an individual ticket price and actually compete on a per-trip basis.  Why?  Because the driving public cannot add all of the ways it pays to drive on the same per-trip basis; it’s not an apples to apples comparison.”

Her point made, she slides up to the edge of her seat.  She can tell she has his attention.  “We are here today because we obviously appreciate beautiful things.  What we have to decide is whether we want to respond to a future requiring increased capacity by building 20-lane highways — and bearing the associated direct and non-direct costs of that decision — or provide a dependable and dignified alternative to travelers so that they develop habits that will mitigate a future overwhelmed by concrete and cars.  That future is not only unsightly, it will continue to deceptively bleed each of us of our hard-earned cash.  From a long-term perspective, we are painting ourselves into a very expensive and ugly corner by not grabbing the opportunity to build this project.”

Silence falls.  He looks at her and squints, “You’re good, very good.”

He turns to her fellow tour-goers, who meandered into the scene as it unfolded, points to our heroine and says, “She’s good.”

They nod.

Curtain closes.

~~~~~ THE END ~~~~~

Ten years ago, I was often tasked with search assignments that required identifying a “rainmaker.”  A practice may have been thriving, struggling, or just starting up, but the need for investment was always crystal clear:  Someone had to be there to “own” the sales funnel.

Interestingly, I seldom hear this term any longer.  “Rainmaker” seems to have exited the consulting lexicon.  In fact, it makes me bristle to just hear it, let alone use it.

If you aren’t in the agriculture business or involved in ancient Indian rituals, a “rainmaker” is defined as an executive who is very successful at bringing business to his or her firm. Doors open for individuals like this.  They have established and cherished relationships with the client base, and are respected figures within the business communities they serve.

Relationships always matter, but was a rainmaker cultivating them or capitalizing on them?  Were  these capable folks truly making rain or catching it skillfully?  In a world where the demand for their services far outstripped the available supply, part of the challenge was picking the right battles — i.e. knowing where to be and when.   Just the image of rain says it all:  It happens quickly, sometimes torrentially, and then it makes things grow.  If you’re efficient and resourceful, you want to make sure you’re directly underneath the storm.

Lately, the landscape has not been abundantly lush.  Your firm may be having success, but you certainly aren’t hubristic about it.  The term “rainmaker”  implies a brash confidence.  If you were a “rainmaker” ten years ago, you operate very differently today.

As firms begin to recover from the drought of the last few years, I see new, strategic hiring in key roles with business development responsibilities.  However, never is the term “rainmaker” invoked.  Firms are no longer looking at the work being let around them and thinking “we need to hire someone to bring some of that our way” because the market is not in that stage of abundance.  Instead, someone’s business development acumen is measured by his or her ability to plan, position and nurture while ensuring that everyone in the organization gets involved with the action.  If executed successfully, there will be a harvest and food on the table.

We are now all farmers.

We see it in the news, and have discussed it here as well: the U.S. does not produce an ample supply of skilled workers in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) disciplines to meet future workforce needs.  Two underlying reasons are most commonly cited for this shortage.  First, our education system is not producing students with the skill set necessary to pursue STEM careers; second, our culture does not value leadership in these careers.  Do you think the former is a function of the latter?  I do.

Upon first recognizing the gravity of the STEM shortage and what it means to the civil engineering industry, I wondered why other countries produce so many students interested in studying engineering in the U.S. After an informal survey and some anecdotal discussions, I concluded that the supply issue has a lot to do with demand. Young people in the U.S. want to run after what we have taught them to value: the glamour of obscene internet riches, Wall Street largess, professional sports paychecks, and the superstardom of Hollywood and reality-TV.

In other nations, students learn the names of top engineers.  These admirable men and women are regarded as heroes and held in high esteem in their communities, regionally and sometimes nationally.  Engineers are celebrated in the press, by politicians and by the education systems for the admirable things they do, not how much they earn or their propensity to “live large.”

Can Americans influence today’s youth to value engineers and the contributions of civil engineering?  We have a celebrity-obsessed culture, so maybe, with an audaciously creative outreach plan coordinated with school systems, we can generate some awe and wonder about our achievements and innovations.

How about a travelling tour of engineering wonders, coming to your city’s grand auditorium or convention center where engaging, playful engineer-educators with amazing props offer hands-on demonstrations to our little sponges about why a cable-stayed bridge doesn’t collapse or wash away, how high-speed trains stay on the tracks or how we decide where to build a road and why?  Is this too ambitious?  How about a video series of demonstrations by a team of appointed discipline-specific gurus that the kids could follow through years of instruction via a curriculum that builds in complexity with each grade level?  Your ideas?

Is there anyone in the industry brainstorming this stuff, and is there anyone willing to fund it? (*see postscript)

Coming down to the ground, and with all seriousness, I suggest that, at the very least, let’s stop enabling a society that takes everything you do for granted!  Every lower elementary school-aged child should:

• visit a water or sewage treatment plant (what an eye opener!),
• receive lessons on their state’s most complex contemporary public works/infrastructure project, preferably inclusive of a field trip guided by an engineer-educator, and
• witness in-school demonstrations of the engineering disciplines that touch their lives on a daily basis – civil, mechanical, electrical – so they understand exactly how these skills apply to the world around them.

If we open this generation’s eyes to the wonders of engineering that affect them every day, and celebrate those among us who are responsible for our infrastructure marvels, children will naturally choose to emulate what they gaze upon.

At the time, I remember thinking that constantly looking for your next gig sounded like an exhausting way to make a living. No benefits? No career development? Was this new model a good thing?

More than a decade later, how exact was this foretelling in terms of what actually happened in A/E? In our market space, the closest we’ve come to this scenario is outsourcing, and this occurs pretty rarely. Other industries are better-suited to effectively utilize outsourcing than ours is.

However, this doesn’t mean that there hasn’t been a change in the A/E consultant’s employment paradigm; change has certainly occurred.  But, unlike the scenario proffered above, this change has been employee driven rather than employer driven.

Our industry generally hires talent for specific types of projects with the inherent promise that a machine is in place to continually “feed” the employees work as key projects pass through the funnel.  While an individual performs a functional (technical) role, they simultaneously glean skills in maneuvering the team, office, organization and market as a whole. Functional skills and organizational skills represent two different axes on the career development chart.

As organizations have become flatter and “corporate ladders” have shed rungs, employees have adjusted the way that they perceive their careers.  Employment tenures are shorter, as in the contract-for-hire scenario, but professionals’ demands for diversified experiences are what is causing this. We now look at each axis to find potential growth opportunities.

For example, Mike can bring his functional skills – highway-centric NEPA planning — to a new employer, where he will apply his expertise to passenger rail corridors.  The resulting experience serves to grow Mike’s functional domain.  Karen can move on to hold the same function in another organization – that of Manager of Traffic Engineering – yet fulfill an additional organizational role of business development lead, a role that was very competently covered at her last employer’s operation by someone else.

Career paths are now plotted in this fashion:  Employees set long-term goals and look for a mix of experiences that add to the figurative toolbox necessary to achieve those goals.  Often, this means making the choice to change employers at each juncture rather than wait out the inertia of an organization which has no desire to shake things up.

The fact is, companies don’t have the infrastructure they used to…the ladder is often very short (and broad), and you can’t ascend it in a direct fashion. Consequently, professionals have adapted. No longer is your career defined by a ladder of progressive responsibilities as you “climb” the corporate hierarchy with an ever-increasing technical or organizational domain in your purview.

Your value today and your ability to contribute to any organization is better defined by the parts in your greater body of work.  If we’ve ever talked, you know I call this your professional toolbox, and in it you hold skills developed while fulfilling a number of different — often lateral — roles that are technical, organizational, and sales related.   Your objective in this modern-day game of life is to collect the right tools to provide you with the foundation to reach your professional goals.

Often, acquiring these tools requires you to change companies and jobs.  From my view, this is the extent of “contract work” in the A/E consulting marketplace…Here YOU, the employee, are in the driver’s seat.

The producers of this video, engineers themselves, analyze cat ownership and care with hilarious results.

Today’s headline about the drop in the newly unemployed is good, I guess.  I tend to look at this cynically….after all, we’re boasting about how few jobs were lost, yet the number is not small at all.  I guess it’s all relative.

But herein gives me a chance to point you in the direction of one of my favorite statistics:   Unemployment By Educational Attainment.

You’re smart, so I won’t interpret this data for you, but I will highlight what is most interesting to me:  Unemployment among those with a Bachelor’s Degree or higher is at a mere 4.9% (Nov. ’09).  Show this stuff to any aimless students in your household; Perhaps it will provide some motivation.

I have been doing a lot of reading lately – some of which, admittedly, is several years old – on the fact that there is a pending significant skilled worker shortage here in the U.S.  No one dares write about this topic now, amidst high unemployment, but the current circumstances are merely distracting us from the truth:  We in the U.S. are not producing the highly skilled workforce, in labor or the professional sciences, which can meet the demands of a normally functioning economy.

At this very moment, several industries are facing a dire skilled workforce shortage.  These industries include healthcare, skilled manufacturing, and engineering.  Yes, I said engineering.  You and I both know that this is a very broad brush stroke, but that’s beside the point.  I can tell you that, in my own experience and from speaking with many collaborators, there is a supply void for engineers in all facets of mass transit, water resources, and energy/renewables/sustainability (According to Manpower’s 2009 Talent Shortage Report , only 19% of companies indicated that they had trouble filling positions in 2009. The #1 recruiting trouble spot? Engineers).  When it comes to infrastructure, there may be a good supply of engineers who know how things have been done, but there is a shortage of those who can meaningfully contribute to the way we will move, drink, power up and live in the 21^st century.  To paraphrase a now defunct automaker, this is not your father’s infrastructure.

Not everyone agrees with the panicky warnings of the skilled worker gap, but all agree that the skills needed to meet the challenges of a modern market are different from those of the past, therefore creating great challenges in certain niches – even amidst “The Great Recession.”

Here are some of the trends which are said to predicate a massive skilled worker shortage within the next five to ten years:

1. Demographics. Baby Boomers are making up a large number of the senior ranks right now, and although they don’t seem to be going anywhere at this moment, when they do decide to stop working, there are fewer workers in the generation succeeding them to fill their shoes.   Apparently, the boomers were so busy working and enjoying their relative wealth, they didn’t see fit to make a lot of babies (also an issue in funding social security).  So, in summary, you have people leaving the workforce in greater number than the U.S. has replacements for them.  This part of the crisis doesn’t even require job growth, since it is all about maintenance of productivity.
2. And speaking of productivity, I have something to share which will be mildly scandalous to my Gen-X peers: When baby boomers do need to be replaced, it is suggested that they will need to be replaced by more than a single worker. Why?  Baby Boomers are renowned “workaholics,” yet their succeeding generation is more likely to hold sacred a “work-life balance” by placing a greater emphasis on home and family.  As such, they are less likely to give up leisure and personal time to the organization on a day-in, day-out basis.  Some scholars (such as those referenced) think this means we of the Gen-X crowd are less productive.
3. Lack of Emphasis in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) subjects in education systems throughout the nation. I, personally, think this is a cultural issue and the problem in offering courses of study is a result of the laws of supply and demand.  I believe if communities work collaboratively to place greater emphasis and value upon the sciences, then bright young minds will gravitate in that direction. My hypothesis is based on empirical evidence only, including the fact that I know way too many chemists from Boston (what did Boston do to make this happen?) and the observation that many STEM students are foreign nationals.  (As a solution, my husband recommends mandatory class field trips to the wastewater treatment plant or the county landfill.  I think it’s a good idea, and a great eye-opener. )
4. Limitations on Immigration and Work Authorization will drain the U.S. of much of its STEM talent: Security issues leading to more stringent immigration policies may choke off the supply of foreign nationals who come to the US to study in the STEM disciplines;  Or these students who attend U.S. universities, will unsuccessfully seek work visa status, and have no choice but to return to their home countries to apply their newly-minted knowledge.

I would like to hear from everyone on this topic, but especially corporate recruitment departments and managers everywhere.  Do you subscribe to prognostications of a dire worker shortage on the horizon?  What are you doing to get ready for the crunch?