The successful design of real things in the real world will always be based on a combination of art and science. The process of design includes unquantifiable judgements almost every step of the way. Experiences are a primary component of judgement, because that is the way to be exposed to mistakes, recognise where innovation can occur, and see the unforeseen. Experience by its nature requires a person to be immersed, to be in the thing being experienced, and for it to be personal to them. Judgement can’t be taught directly, since its application requires that that unforeseen be subsequently seen.

Risk, quality and competency are almost inseparable in a well-run business, or, in an astute individual.

Managing risk through effective controls inherently means high quality outputs and high competence levels. A competent person or business naturally produces quality work and operates at lower risk levels. Focussing on quality naturally results in focussing on competence and risk.

A well-established metaphor for good project management is the three-legged stool, representing the tensions amongst managing cost, time and quality. Similarly, but also differently, is the intertwined nature of risk, quality and competence. Manage one well and the others should follow.

I have a ‘misplaced delivery’ story which won’t fit into 100 words. But the learnings from it makes it worth a try.

None of the three parties involved (me, the vendor, the deliverer) technically did anything wrong.

The ‘secure place’ the deliverer put it in shouldn’t have been accessible. I didn’t think of that location. The deliverer’s agent followed the vendor’s security instructions and did not give me details of the location when asked. The vendor had no humans on the problem, only bots.

Security, expediency, and misunderstood expectations were at play. Understanding others’ perspectives helped keep the situation calm.

Maryanne Wolf is a literacy researcher, and she strongly promotes the valuable skill of reading. But not the skim-reading on our phones and screens, she means actual physical books. In a recent article, she addresses the complex activities going on in our brains when we read books. “The medium of print advantages slower, more attention-requiring processes. The digital medium advantages fast processes and multitasking, suited to skimming information’s daily bombardments.”

We bounce around and think we’re going fast, but miss out a lot.

It’s a magical outcome from slow effort to connection and integration, which just doesn’t happen when skimming.

Expert intuition is not magical. It’s not even the purview of someone ‘extraordinarily smart’. Being an expert means being able to associate a situation with appropriate past experience. So, when there’s a cue, the expert accesses stored information in their memory, from previous experience or observation.

But that ability to remember doesn’t quite make you an expert. I may remember how to play tennis, but, that’s about it. So it is contextual. But I remember all my experiences facilitating a workshop or meeting. I use those memories to enhance the experience for everyone, so they benefit. That’s using my expertise.

Today I spent a bit of time in spreadsheets. For one task, I was putting together some data into tables and graphs to show numerical information about participants in a training course. Another had me demonstrating a gap analysis audit for a procedure that was updated recently. The third task was a matrix to identify where a project intersected with competency requirements.

Spreadsheets (I use Excel) are really good at, of course, calculations. They were invented with accountants in mind, but they have morphed into amazing mathematical tools. And also for tables to display information, even if it isn’t mathematical.

Goals and values are related attributes. Your values will influence your goals. Goals will be influenced by values.

Take, for example, the goal of climbing a peak (“summitting”).

Some will want to do it as fast as possible. Others will want to enjoy the journey. This demonstrates some underlying values: quick achievements, versus a meandering path.

Another value might be demonstrated by whether you do it alone, or in a group. Some value the striving for individual achievements, others prefer the joy of teamwork.

Neither example value characteristic is ‘better’ than the other; it’s informative to recognise our different motivations.

On March 4th, I’ll have made another successful journey around the sun. Time is tracked by celestial increments: earth’s rotation for our days, the moon’s journey for months, and a big circle around the sun for our years. Fifty-three is a lot of journeys around the sun, and most of them have been fun.

Three years ago at this time I was skiing. Four years ago, I was recovering from my fifth Ironman. Thirty years ago, I was about to graduate with my civil engineering degree.

Thirty years from now, I’ll be eighty-three, and probably a darn good lawn bowler.

Complex problems are characterised by their ‘murkiness’, and them being difficult to predict the solution, or even what it looks like when they are ‘solved’. By contrast, complicated problems are ones that may be difficult to solve, but you generally know what the solution might look like.

A checklist approach to complicated problems sets a structure for the solution, because you know what you’re aiming for. But complex problems by their nature evolve and change every step of the way. One possible solution is to extract the complicated from the complex, but this is harder to do than to write.

A Japanese martial art concept to describe the stages of learning is “Shu Ha Ri” (learn, detach, transcend). I’ve English-ised it into “Shoe Ha! Re-“.

The Shoe/Shu step is ‘by the book’, where we repeat the known steps. Shoes on the ground.

With Ha!, we start making changes and improvements, achieving the same outcome by different means. Ah Ha! I can do that repetitive calculation by putting it into an excel spreadsheet.

In the Re/Ri step we depart from the book, completely re-writing the way to do the task. Innovation and creativity, sticking to the requirements but ‘re-inventing’ the way.

Experience is so very important when it comes to knowledge work. There is truth to the idea that our learning comes in 70/20/10: 10% formal training, 20% from discussing with others, and 70% from real-world on the job experiences.

I’d also suggest that our opinions hold more weight if there is experience behind it. I can talk about the various challenges of doing an Ironman triathlon, and my opinion has more weight because I’ve done a few. Similarly, if you’re discussing unique welding procedures or tricky construction methods, your opinion (aka judgement), is more trustworthy if there’s experience behind it.

Accountable versus Accessible is the current dilemma for knowledge workers. Our work style (be visible, be on time, be available) was built on the need for production workers to be in the factory making things. It’s so different now; for many, our ‘productivity’ is our ability to add value not necessarily make things. (Though, I support a move back to making things, but only sustainably, so that’s a conundrum for another time).

Our struggle now is to base our value on accountability to things we’re doing, value we’re adding. We shouldn’t base our work on being accessible at any moment.

We should strive to be present to the task we’re doing at that moment. Lately it seems that I’m constantly thinking about what I’m *not* doing in a moment, or lamenting what I “should” be doing at that moment. Instead of being present to the moment’s task.

But that’s not fair to that task currently in play. Even if that task happens to be swimming laps, which may not seem as ‘important’ as checking emails or reviewing a document.

I’ve only just recently figured out that I’m doing this. Just being aware of it helps me to be more present.

I remember noticing, about 10 years ago, how quickly I went from hardly having anything with a battery, to having many multiples of many things needing charging. Our iphones, e-watches, e-tablets, earpods, and many other e-conveniences, need to be plugged in every so often. Every day, for some items.

I’ve also recently replaced my e-bike with a new-fangled one. It was this first one, Nellie (RIP), bought in 2012, that made me aware of the need to know where a plug-in is. It used to be just about ‘where’s the next toilet’. Now it’s, “can I plug this in there?”

There are sixteen capabilities/competencies/commitments, whatever you might label them as, nominated by Engineers Australia as key achievements for engineers pursuing chartered status.

Writing just 100 words about each of the sixteen has been a challenge. One hundred words isn’t enough for any of them, obviously. But by distilling each of them into 100 words, I now have a greater understanding of how to make them ‘real’.

Key skills for any capability or competency are: firstly the ability to notice when you’ve experienced one, and secondly, most importantly, is being able to remember the experience for when it comes up again.

“Deal with ethical issues” is number one in Engineer Australia’s elements list of competencies required for Chartered status.

It’s true that ‘proving’ you’re ethical is more fuzzy than ‘proving’ you’re good at math or that you can finish your work to a deadline. Proving personal ethicality does require some thought.

But don’t romanticise ethics into grand whistle-blower newsworthy cases with heroes and villains. Engineering ethics are shown in our daily tasks and activities: they are in budgets, in spreadsheets, and in daily decisions like resource planning. Everyday decisions that show what is important to you and your company: that’s ethics.

Way back in 2003, I wrote a paper asking what the definition of a pipeline engineer should be, because even back then I saw the wide range of competencies a pipeline engineer could have. With engineering disciplines blurring, these definitions are getting more important.

Over the years I’ve explored how to measure competency, advised on how to acquire it, and helped with frameworks and mapping to visualise it. Being able to assess, acquire and apply appropriate competencies is a fundamental requirement of professional engineers. Part of that exercise is being able to concisely describe what your expertise (main competency) is.

An element of competence for those of us in knowledge work, particularly engineers, is the ability, and willingness, to take responsibility for our work. We should be able to acknowledge our role in decisions and actions (even if they prove to be incorrect).

Taking responsibility includes performing work in transparent and repeatable ways, so that it can be checked. It shouldn’t rely on black magic.

Responsibility also involves seeking inputs from peers and colleagues, and taking that feedback to make improvements to our work. The reverse is applicable too: providing constructive feedback to our colleagues is a responsibility as well.