Reliability Engineering for Maintenance

Is there any attitude difference between a rank-and-file personnel and a graduate personnel which may affect reliability?

Hmmmmm.....I've read this question about a dozen times, and I still don't think I understand what you're asking. Mind elaborating?

Josh:

Are you talking about the differences in generations or the difference in education?

But, yes. In the meantime, please find a study that I have been working on that branched off into the 'Workforce of the 21st Century' study performed by Terrence O'Hanlon and I. These studies were developed independently, unfunded by any special interest group. The Workforce study will be available via Reliability Magazine and Reliabilityweb this summer.

Enjoy, I hope that it helps with the question.

Sincerely,
Howard

Rephrased: How does the difference in education affects the attitude of a manager when his background is from a rank-and-file technician or graduate engineer? Eg how does a rank-and-file maintenance manager views his graduate maintenance engineers? Will he says something like: Before you can tell others what to do, you must know how to do it yourself first. I read the article but couldn't really figure out any portion related to this question.

Josh:

In general I have found that if a manager is a university graduate, he will view graduate maintenance engineers with preference over technical or apprenticed maintenance engineers/technicians. They will also have a preference towards other engineers that have graduated from their own university/college. What is also interesting is that I have also found a resistance to new PdM technologies from this type of group versus the technical/apprenticed maintenance specialists.

Now, the technical/apprenticed R&M person tends to look for experience and will usually view technical/apprenticed personnel differently than graduate personnel. I generally found this group more interested in new technologies, but less trusting of EAM/CMMS systems.

I occassionally see differences in the views above, but those are pretty rare.

Howard

My first boss, the guy who hired me, is a graduated mechanical engineer with a masters degree, (me a fresh graduated mechanical engineer)

His attitude: ..get your @s. out there, the problems are not within these four walls!!

My second boss, a rank-and-file technician, veteran from the mining industry
attitude: worse than first boss

That were good times...

Josh,

The great mathematician Fischer used to open his conversations with other mathematicians saying
"Open your mind......"


A University graduate is just as likely to have a closed mind as a non-graduate. People who read a lot, attend Conferences, visit exhibitions etc, tend to be more receptive. I have found many technicians who were more receptive to change than many managers. I am not in favor of a generalization.

That's good if most of the time people are very open-minded. I try not to think that this attitude difference exist but it appears to happen in reality. There are some people who think they don't need to attend or learn anything because they are already experienced. When a new idea is brought in, the first thing they say is NO, we haven't done it! So I'm wondering whether this attitude difference is related to educational background.

We (humans) tend to create a comfort zone around us and when something new come and affect that comfort zone we normally respond with resistance to change which may be expressed with attitude.

"Most" humans create a comfort zone, and "most" humans in these comfort zones resist change. But not all humans create comfort zones. Those that want to excel realize that in order to do so will require that they step outside their comfort zone and learn some new things. I have absolutely no sympathy for those who are unwilling to learn. The past 20 years has shown us what happens to companies that are run by people who are happy to live in a comfort zone. Those people should have never been in positions to run or guide corporations, and they most likely only got to their level of "importance" via the "Peter Principle".

I agree Hans, my intention was not to generalize that all humans do resist to change.

Guys,

Resistance to change is NOT abnormal behaviour. There are good reasons why people resist change. It is OUR job to help them get over such resistance. No single bullet will solve this problem, we have to work each situation out carefully. In genral terms, openness, good two-way communication and a trust-building climate help, all easier said than done.

There is nothing wrong with 'THEM'; think of them as US!

Guys,
I am not too sure that I fully understand what is being asked here, so please let me know if I miss the mark with this post.

I personally have found some differences between those who come up through the ranks and those who come in via some form of graduate program.

These are sweeping generalizations, but I find them to be true often.

• A "through the ranks" (promoted entry) type of person is often more practical, more pragmatic, and more focussed on execution. (Often due to the operational background)
  
  
• Graduate entry types, by the time the reach the BIG office, (and are therefore experienced)are often very deep thinkers in terms of process and the underlying concepts of any approach.
  
  
• Promoted entry types tend to be hard workers, sometimes due to what they percieve as a glass cieling above them. (Rightly or wrongly)
  
  
• Graduate entry types tend to be "smart" workers and often seem to understand know how to influence others, how to get access to funding, and how to use good talent.
  
  
• Both seem to be good leaders and this tends to be more of an individual trait rather than something attributable to an entire group of people.
  
  
• Personally I have found that graduates are more likly to get involved with the heavy end of reliability, although this doent mean that promoted types don't/ Just less likely to.

I came through the ranks initially, I have a number of graduate entry types who work for me, and my boss is a professional engineer. And we all seem to get along okay.

Interesting, if somewhat arcane, subject.