IndustryUniversityGovernment Roundtable for Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 46
About This Presentation

IndustryUniversityGovernment Roundtable for Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE


Domestic Accreditation International Substantial. BS Degrees Equivalency ... of the science components of liberal arts curricula and is ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:189
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: stand77


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: IndustryUniversityGovernment Roundtable for Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE

Industry-University-Government Roundtable for
Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE
  • Summary Overview
  • October 2000
  • John McMasters
  • Technical Fellow
  • The Boeing Company
  • Seattle,WA

  • IUGREEE initiated by Boeing - First meeting held
    in Seattle in March 1995 (hosted and paid for by
  • Outgrowth of the Boeing-University Workshop
    process initiated in Feb. 1994 which recognized
  • Many of the problems affecting Boeing in its
    relations with universities were national in
    scope (e.g. ABET accreditation policy) and beyond
    the reach of a single company in a single market
    niche (aerospace) to influence
  • There are many interested parties in
    engineering education reform all have
    perspectives, all of which must be respected if
    real reform is to be accomplished
  • No existing body or organization was working the
    problem of education reform (beyond conducting
    studies with mountains of mere recommendations),
    from an industry perspective although the NSF
    was doing a lot from the government end and IRI
    was working the research part with limited

Industry, University and Government Players in
Technical Education and Research
  • Government

Industry- University research interests
The engineering education legislature
The Big Science lobby
Undergrad Education
The engineering educator faculty club
Professional Societies
for research
IUGREEE - How It Works
  • Operates like a Knowledge Management Community
    of Interest/Practice
  • Purely voluntary affiliation of individuals
    interested or involved in engineering education
    reform and enhancement
  • Initiated, but not led, by Boeing (which remains
    a heavy participant, however)
  • Membership open to anyone based solely on
    interest and willingness to contribute time and
  • Operates under a simple Memorandum of Agreement
    (MOU) with no membership dues or fees, and no
    paid staff (other than services donated from
    various sources, e.g. SAE Foundation for several
  • Meeting hosting expenses borne by donating
    organizations or companies on a semi-round robin
    basis Boeing has hosted 4 out of 11 to date, and
    McD hosted one prior to our merger.
  • Individual travel and meeting related or other
    expenses borne by participants or the
    organizations they represent.

Industry-University-Government Roundtable for
Enhancing Engineering Education
  • Mission
  • Create and sustain an alliance of industry,
    university and government representatives to
    influence the quality of engineering education
    programs needed to produce engineering graduates
    able to meet the professional standards and
    challenges of the business environment of the
    21st Century.
  • Identify and articulate critical issues to which
    academe must respond as perceived from an an
    evolving industrial perspective
  • Develop action agendas to accomplish needed
    changes in engineering education
  • Facilitate implementation through existing
    organizations and institutions, i.e. use existing
    resources to the maximum degree possible

Industry-University-Government Roundtable for
Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE
  • IUGREEE Action Implementation Model

  • ABET
  • Government Agencies
  • (NSF, DoD, NASA, etc.)
  • NAE and NRC
  • Professional Societies (ASEE, IEEE, etc.)
  • Industry Associations
  • (IRI, AIA, etc.)

Policy Steering Team
Council (Advisory Board)
  • Action Teams
  • Academic
  • Programs
  • Enhancing the
  • Profession
  • Knowledge
  • Management
  • Research
  • Alliances

Advocate/ Interact
  • Policy and Steering Team (Chair Dr. Ted Okiishi,
    Iowa State U.) - Guides and integrates the
    activities of the Action Teams (the chairs of
    which are on the PS teams) which in turn
    identify issues and create action agendas in
    their areas of interest.
  • Academic Programs (Co-chairs John McMasters,
    Boeing Wm. Durgin, WPI) - Deals with issues
    affecting students prior to graduation (at
    whatever degree level) including university
    curricula and pedagogy, related ABET
    accreditation standards, and industry-university
    educational alliances. In a 1999 team
    reorganization, Academic Programs absorbed the
    activities of the earlier Career Long Learning
    team and became responsible for continuing
    education issues (curricula, distance learning,
    accreditation, etc.) as well.
  • Enhancing the Engineering Profession Team (Chair
    Bob Waner, Boeing) - Works towards providing the
    infrastructure necessary to support engineering
    education reform and complementary career long
    professional development opportunities once
    individual enter professional practice. Specific
    issues addressed include professional growth and
    recognition as well as supply and engineering
    image building in K-14 education and in the
    public perception.
  • Knowledge Management Team (Chair Adnan Akay,
    Carnegie-Mellon U.) - This team was initially
    formed around the notion of the importance of
    knowledge reuses with all its education
    ramification to the future success of industry
    manufacturing concerns. It has since broadened
    to an effort to include a range of formal
    Knowledge Management issues and concerns into
    university programs.
  • Research Technology Alliances Team (Chair Dave
    Wisler, GEAE) - Seeks to better align university
    research with industry needs and ultimately
    influence the university reward system.

  • The IUGREEE Council is made up of visible,
    senior-level individuals with strong ties to
    industry, professional societies, academe and
    other agencies committed to the goals of the
  • Council functions include
  • Provide credibility and access to the working
    body of the Roundtable
  • Actively assist in recruiting new (especially
    corporate) members
  • Aid in drawing broad external attention to the
    issues identified by the Roundtable
  • Evaluate and enable Roundtable team actions
  • Constructively influence policies and programs of
    Roundtable teams and those of other education
    reform agencies

IUGREEE Critical Issues
  • Development of a viable action (rather than
    mere recommendation) agenda by each of the
    IUGREEE teams
  • Recruiting and retaining additional members,
    especially those from non-aerospace companies
  • Increasing and strengthening (broadening) the
    membership of the Council
  • Strengthening and/or reestablishing relations
    with organizations with needed resources to
    affect change
  • Development of a strategic vision for engineering
    education, beyond the limits of what can be
    accomplished under ABET EC 2000
  • Development of a compelling case for a continued
    broad base of industry support and participation
    in engineering education reform efforts
  • We really need to take a hard look at where we go
    from where we have been and where we are now -
    and why.

Some Major Near Term Issues to Work
  • Continued support for ABET
  • Accreditation of click versus brick education
  • Help define global requirements for ABET
  • Successful full implementation of EC 2000
  • Continue to provide high caliber ABET program
    evaluators from industry (and overcome internal
    company barriers to participation, etc.)
  • Do we really have a serious problem with the
    demographics and pipeline for future graduates?
    If so, what should we do about it?
  • How do we actually affect the faculty (and
    industry/government) reward system to better
    align both university education and research
    programs with real industry needs ?
  • What, if any, impact do the concepts of Knowledge
    Management have on the way universities do their
    business? KM is clearly a big deal for industry,
    but what does it have to do with the way
    individual professors do their jobs?
  • Programs like our Boeing-Welliver Faculty Summer
    Fellowship work well for us, but have so far
    resisted exportation to other companies. Why?
    How can this situation be changed?

Boeing List of Desired Attributes of an Engineer
  • A good understanding of engineering science
  • Mathematics (including statistics)
  • Physical and life sciences
  • Information technology (far more than computer
  • A good understanding of design and manufacturing
    processes (i.e. understands engineering)
  • A multi-disciplinary, systems perspective
  • A basic understanding of the context in which
    engineering is practiced
  • Economics (including business practice)
  • History
  • The environment
  • Customer and societal needs
  • Good communication skills
  • Written
  • Oral
  • Graphic
  • Listening
  • High ethical standards
  • An ability to think both critically and
    creatively - independently and cooperatively
  • Flexibility. The ability and self-confidence to
    adapt to rapid or major change
  • Curiosity and a desire to learn for life
  • A profound understanding of the importance of
  • This is a list, begun in 1994, of basic durable
  • into which can be mapped specific skills
    reflecting the
  • diversity of the overall engineering
    environment in which
  • we in professional practice operate.
  • This current version of the list can be viewed
    on the Boeing
  • web site as a basic message to those seeking
    advice from
  • the company on the topic. Its contents are
    also included
  • for the most part in ABET EC 2000.

ABETs Role In Technical Education
Workplace Rapid Change Classical Business
Info. Tech New Ventures Globalization Tech
nical Competency Socially Complex Desired
Employee Attributes Individual Basic
Education Advanced Degrees BS
Degree Continuing Education
Certification Life Long Learning Educational
System K-12 System Traditional Schools
Universities Non-Traditional Schools AA,
BS, MS, PhD Intl vs. Domestic Schools
Specialized Educ. Corporate Schools ABET
(Role) Pre-College, K-12 Graduate Degrees
Domestic Accreditation International
Substantial BS Degrees
Equivalency Engineering Continuing
Education Technology Distance
Learning Computing Certification
ABET Program Evaluators from Industry
Industry looks to ABET for Accreditation ABET
looks to Industry for Evaluators
Universities (323) provide the education
with accreditation renewal every 6 years for
1555 programs
Industry Want Engineers who are properly prepared
from universities
ABET provides the accreditation for
Engineering education programs
Graduates enter workforce accepted by industry
as qualified to begin careers
Engineers come from industry to serve
The Math 50 schools/year 6-10 evaluators 3-5
from industry 200 industry people/year 1 week of
time training ABET pays travel Companies pay
time ? Industry Needs to Support
Evaluators 50 Industry 50 University
Professional Societies (28) provide Program
Evaluators and support the training of program
evaluators (eg, ASME, SAE, AIAA)
Changing Paradigms In University Education
  • Traditional Model
    Emerging Model ?

A whole system perspective
Aided by adoption of ABET EC 2000
Education (college/university raison detre)
Research (Scholarship and creation of new
Community Service
Create New Knowledge
Community Service
  • Blocked by
  • Continued heavy reliance on (government) funding
    for research
  • Faculty reward system
  • Lack of adequate industry attention

Which of these two archetypal technical employees
is more valuable to The Boeing Company? They
both are!
Growth on this axis is necessary for all
technical path individuals.
  • Tool Makers
  • Information/Knowledge
  • Gathers and Providers
  • System Integrators
  • Product/service Architects

Breadth of Technical Knowledge/ Experience
Breadth of Technical Knowledge/ Experience
Breadth of Business Knowledge/Experience
Deep Generalists
Technical Specialists/ Experts
Log scale
Minimum knowledge/ expertise required
for Technical Fellowship
Depth of Knowledge/ Experience
Boeing Technical Workforce Currently Future (5
yrs ) Technical Specialists 80-90 50
? Deep Generalists 10-20 50 ?
Evolving Trends In Engineering Education and
PracticeIndustry Needs -University Responses
  • Industry Practice Major Industrialized Nations
  • Massive computational/simulation capabilities
  • Testing shift to validation
  • Integrated Product Teams mandatory
  • Lean concepts force closure of engineering
    (design) and manufacturing gaps
  • Heavy emphases on Processes, Costs, Value
  • Heavy emphasis on experiment
  • Limited to slide rule mathematics
  • Heavy reliance on handbook methods
  • Strong linkage of engineering to manufacturing
  • Limited company funded research
  • Continued heavy reliance on testing
  • Steadily increasing computational
  • capabilities (but largely linear math)
  • Widening gap between engineering and
  • manufacturing cultures
  • Greatly increased company-funded RD
  • Greatly increased need for depth of
  • technical knowledge

Engineering Curricula

System Integrators/ Product Architects (Multidis
ciplinary Perspective)
Technical Specialists (Engineering Science
  • Vocational orientation
  • Limited (linear) mathematics
  • Emphases on
  • - data gathering,
  • - problem solving,
  • - design (and drafting)
  • - manufacturing
  • Retain strengths in math and physics
    fundamentals plus enhanced IT emphasis
  • Emphasis on design and manufacturing
  • New emphases on breadth, context and process
  • -Economics, business, project management
  • -Environmental and societal issues
  • -Teamwork and communication skills
  • -Career-long learning
  • Engineering
  • General
  • Practitioners
  • Mechanical
  • Electrical
  • Civil
  • Chemical
  • Increasing emphasis on depth of specific
  • technical knowledge
  • Much attention to theory and math technique
  • Decreasing emphasis on design and
  • manufacturing
  • Needs to publish or perish

Information Age
Cold War Era
Rapid Industrial Expansion
Emerging post-Cold War global economy, enabled
by transportation and communications technology
Big science, rapid technological
advances, international perspective
Transform from Agrarian to Manufacturing Economy
WW 2
Berlin Wall
Desired Elements of a Model Engineering Education
  • Curricula with a proper balance between
    fundamentals (math, engineering sciences, IT,
    etc.) and provision of in-depth experience in
    skills and issues important to professional
  • Fully compliant with the spirit and intent of
    ABET EC 2000 cf. Boeing list of Desired
  • Provides a solid foundation for subsequent
    graduate study, professional practice and
    continued career-long learning
  • Built on strengths in graduate education and
    research programs where these exist
  • Courses and labs team taught to degree feasible
  • Strong emphasis on design-build-test project
    experience from the freshman year through
    graduation (at whatever degree level)
  • A diverse, well qualified faculty
  • Strong teaching as well as research ability
  • Industry and professional practice literate and
  • Willing and bale to function as a team
  • Exemplars of life-long learning
  • Effective mechanisms in place to integrate
    knowledge transfer (teaching, etc.) with research
    and community service
  • Vertically between graduate and undergraduate
  • Horizontally across department, college and
    discipline boundaries
  • Adequate facilities and institutional support
  • Classroom space suitable for cooperative/collabora
    tive learning pedagogical models
  • Dedicated student design-build-test project labs
  • Laboratory and computational facilities with
    modern equipment and technician support
  • Strong external (industry, government, etc.)
    relations and support
  • Use of adjunct faculty from industry, etc. to
    degree practical
  • Strong, effective external advisory boards
    (with industry, government, peer institution
    representation) at both departmental and college
  • Effective networks and exchange opportunities
    with industry, peer university programs (both
    domestic and international) and alumni

The model program outlined here pertains to a
standard engineering core (to which requisite
general education/liberal arts content may be
added) in universities with both graduate and
undergraduate degree programs. Most elements are
applicable to those programs devoted primarily to
providing quality undergraduate education as well.
A Possible Degree and Continuing Education
Structure for Engineering and Engineering
Science Education
  • Pre-professional degree for subsequent graduate
    study in
  • business, law, medicine, finance, etc.
  • Employment as an engineering science
  • Note The traditional BS/MS/PhD degree structure
  • is a legacy of the 19th Century origins of
  • education programs as vocationally oriented
  • of the science components of liberal arts
    curricula and is
  • no longer consistent with the needs of a true
  • Professional Program.

Professional practice in industry, government,
Professional Engineering Degree M.E. - Master
of Engineering
Intern/Coop Encouraged
K-12 Education
Continued Career-Long Learning (Education and
Pre-Professional Engineering/Technology Degree
B.E. - Bachelor of Engineering
Traditional M.S. (Engineering Science)
Traditional Ph.D. (Professional Engineering
Science degree) Professional practice in
academe, research, etc.
5-6 years
About Process Improvement
  • Never tell someone how to do something, tell
    them what you want done . . . and they will amaze
    you with their solutions.
  • Gen. George S. Patton

Industry-University-Government Roundtable for
Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE
  • Some Issues in Engineering Education in Relation
    to Knowledge Management from a Boeing Perspective
  • October 2000
  • John McMasters
  • Technical Fellow
  • The Boeing Company
  • Seattle,WA

World Views of The Boeing Company
  • Heritage Boeing
  • (Puget Sound-centric)
  • Emerging Boeing (Global) Enterprise

Commercial Airplanes
Customer/Supplier Network
TBC Seattle, WA
TBC Global
Note Increasing the size of the company from
its Heritage level presents an organizational
volume problem. Thus, in doubling the size of
the company, according to the square-cube law
the problems of communications, etc.
are increased approximately eight fold.
Global Societal/Political/Economic Context
Technical Workforce Composition Over Time(Toward
a Technical Workforce Stabilization Strategy)
  • Assumption The business remains cyclical per
    past historical trends, but grows (in terms of
    work statement) at an annualized rate of about 5
    per year on average, while attrition stabilizes
    at the historical rate of 5-6 per year.

Relative Technical Employee Headcount
Contingent Workforce -Contractors -Industry
Assist -Off shore teams
Professionals (Math, Science, Eng., Computing)
Core Professionals (Core long-term technical
Notes - While the work statement grows over
time, permanent employee headcount can be
stabilized via process improvements,
mechanization of routine work and strategic
assets utilization and consolidation.
- Stabilization of the workforce against
normal attrition allows beneficial continuous
recruiting regardless of fluctuations in the
business cycle.
Every Technical Employee Has (at least) Two
Multidisciplinary Team Platforms, IPTs, etc.
  • Multi-disciplinary Teams (IPTs, Platforms Teams,
  • Discipline/
  • Technology
  • Specialty
  • TIG
  • Each technical employee must become an
    ambidextrous thinker able to work cooperatively
    in a multi-disciplinary team while maintaining
    the integrity of the discipline(s) in which each
    has particular expertise.

Discipline/ Technology Specialization KM
Communities of Practice
Opportunities in a Balanced Exploration of the
Knowledge Management Domain
  • Opportunities (all quadrants)
  • Wise (balanced) use of resources
  • Intrinsic part of the education/learning process

What we know we know.
What we know we dont know.
Knowledge Re-use
Targeted Research
Curiosity-based Research
Prospecting Hunting Searching
Traps Surprises Competitive Risk
What someone knows, but that we havent found
What we dont know we dont know.
Originally developed by Dr. Lee Matsch Allied
Signal Aerospace and John McMasters under the
auspices of the Boeing initiated
Industry-University-Government Roundtable for
Enhancing Engineering Education IUGREEE in
Essentials of Knowledge Management
  • A KM Taxonomy
  • Wise application of knowledge is situational -
    requiring judgment and experience. There are few
    one size fits all, every time, everywhere
    solutions to most problems.
  • Mentorship is required to reach the higher levels
    of the KM value stream.
  • Knowledge is processed organized, interpreted
  • Knowledge and information is what we put in
  • Information is processed data

Why What How
What How
Perspectives on Knowledge Management(Priorities,
Values and Emphases)
  • Industry Agenda

Education Agenda
  • A KM Taxonomy
  • Customer satisfaction
  • Shareholder value
  • Profit
  • Educated graduates
  • Scholarly publications
  • Research funding

Problem Solution and Data Acquisition Techniques
Tools and Processes
Theory (and economics)
Possible Applications
Why arent they talking?
Create people networks, rather than mere
information technology networks.
Technology Interest Groups(Communities of
  • An Boeing enterprise-wide association of people
  • a community of common discipline/technology
    interest intent on
  • advancing their art while maintaining the
    integrity of the body of knowledge it
  • enhancing the skill and knowledge of its
    practitioners at all experience levels,
  • preserving its heritage and durable lessons
  • purposely making its knowledge and experience
    readily accessible to the Boeing community at

Committees, Teams and Communities
  • Committees/Teams
  • Task/project oriented
  • Direct value (perceived)
  • Membership assigned
  • Culture of action
  • Driven by deliverables
  • Develop by work plan (budget and schedule)
  • Bound by authority (job expectations, rewards)
  • Communities TIGs
  • Goals oriented
  • Indirect (strategic) value
  • Membership open to all
  • Culture of learning
  • Driven by intrinsic motivation
  • Develop organically
  • Bound by sense of common interest and purpose

An Example of a Boeing KM Community of
Practice Aerospace Vehicle Configurations
Technical Fellowship Technology Knowledge
Sharing Forum
  • Basic Premises
  • Aerospace vehicles remain a core of Boeing
  • All the excellent technology and processes in
    the world are
  • useless without the necessary skilled and
    motivate people
  • to apply them
  • Talented designers configurators
    aerospace vehicle
  • system architects are hard to come bythe
  • needs to be cultivated

Education/Training Programs Available to the
entire Boeing community
One-on-One Mentoring
Aerospace Vehicle Configuration Synthesis 699
Experienced Journey-people
  • Mentorship
  • Technical Fellowship
  • Technical peers
  • Outside sources
  • Academe
  • Customers
  • Suppliers
  • Other

Aerospace Vehicle Configuration Synthesis 101
University Auxiliary
  • Improved curricula
  • Enhanced graduates
  • Fresh ideas and methods

Strong ties to other CoPs
A Comprehensive TIG Concept
Technology Interest Groups (TIGs) are Boeing
variants of KM Communities of Practice.
Mutual research interests
University Executive Focal Boeing Fellows on
  • Recruiting
  • - Interns/
  • Coops
  • - New Hires
  • Enhanced curricula
  • Better prepared graduates

Faculty (Welliver Fellows ?)
Cream of the crop
University B
University C
Student Population
Created by Prof. Russ Cummings, Cal Poly-SLO in
collaboration with John McMasters
Boeing Signature Design Competition
  • A Proposal to the Boeing University Relation
    Sub-Process Council
  • Ron Bengelink
  • Steve Kruse
  • Brian Lee
  • John McMasters
  • (with special thanks to Dr. Russ Cummings,
  • Cal Poly-SLO for review and advice)
  • Revised September 29, 2000

Note This proposal was given first
reading approval at the URPC meeting held in
Houston, TX on Sept. 28, 20000.
  • Boeing has an outstanding Education Outreach
    program to advance company interests in
  • Recruiting
  • Continuing education
  • Research and technology acquisition
  • An outcome has been the adoption of ABET
    Engineering Criteria 2000 - an outcomes based
    approach to technical education program
  • New ABET standards require a heavy emphasis on
    design and many schools lay claim to Boeing
    resources to support their programs
  • A Boeing sponsored design competition could
    advance our broad interests while protecting our
    limited resources

What is Wanted
  • A program that directly contributes to desired
    student learning outcomes and objectives that is
    more than a mere second helping of a large
    number of often parochially focused design
    competitions already on offer under various
  • A significant and constructive aid to our future
    college recruiting efforts
  • Directly aids in preparing students with skills
    and attributes the company needs
  • Projects a very positive image of The Boeing
    Company and our core competencies
  • large-scale systems integration
  • Customer knowledge and focus
  • Lean, efficient design and production systems

Designing a Design Competition(Some Basic
  • Enhance the Boeing image
  • Branding
  • Leader in engineering education enhancement
  • Good corporate citizenship
  • Be of real educational value in undergraduate
    technical (and business) education
  • Emphasize overall company technical interests and
    core competencies
  • Enhance the image of the engineering profession
    at national and local community levels.
  • Awareness of colors of money and intellectual
    property issues
  • Offer a prize worth winning while avoiding
    winner and losers problems
  • Should be a multidisciplinary team-based,
    design-build-test project competition
  • Involvement by multi-department and cross-college
    teams should be encouraged
  • Keep it as simple as possible to avoid hidden

Competition Proposal
  • The Boeing Company annually offers up to three
  • prizes of 50,000 each 1/2 to the students and
    1/2 to the school to
  • multidisciplinary teams of undergraduate student
  • from our Focus and Interest schools for the
  • construction and proof of concept demonstration
    of a
  • system or major component of a system (in which
    case the
  • entirety of system of which it is a part is to
    be described) which
  • meets the requirements of a suitable customer
  • be selected by each of the participating teams.
  • Note A suitable customer may be any local
    non-Boeing company or business, service agency,
    philanthropy, municipal government, etc. that
    agrees to work with a student team for the
    duration of the competition each year.

Competition Proposal (contd - 1)
  • The theme of the competition will initially be
  • and will reflect the constructive application of
  • broad range of technologies of interest to The
  • Boeing Company, its customers and its suppliers
  • the needs of the students local communities.
  • Within these broad guidelines, the specific
  • entry to be submitted is left to the discretion
    of the
  • students working with the customer they select.
  • A listing of current Boeing technology
    interests will be provided each year.

Aerospace Technology in Service to the
Boeing Major Technologies(As Identified by the
Technical Fellowship Sub-Process Council in 1999)
Sample only
  • Aerodynamics
  • Aeroservoelasticity
  • Communications
  • Computing
  • Configurations (airplanes, missiles, spacecraft,
  • Electronics
  • Low Observables
  • Materials
  • Manufacturing
  • Multidisciplinary Optimization MDO
  • Propulsion
  • Software
  • Space Flight
  • Structures
  • Systems (Mission)
  • Systems (Vehicle)
  • Testing
  • Other, e.g.
  • Human Factors
  • Safety
  • Noise (Acoustics)
  • Metrology
  • Fuels

Competition Proposal (contd -2)
  • In addition to the prize money offered to the
    winning entries, the company offers preliminary
    funding grants of 3,000 each to the 50 teams
    submitting preliminary project proposals
    (received by time and date to be specified)
    judged most promising according to the
    competition criteria.
  • Notes
  • Failure to receive a grant does not preclude
    entry into the competition
  • Grants are to be given to most promising team
    proposals, with a limit of three maximum per
    school per year
  • Grants are not subtracted from subsequent prize
    to winning teams
  • Teams receiving grants which fail to produce a
    final report disqualify their school from
    subsequent competition entry for a two year

Competition Proposal (contd-3)
  • Competition Schedule (Typical)
  • Competition announcement sent to eligible schools
  • (via Executive Focals) March 2001
  • Students find customers, form teams, develop
  • projects Apr. -Sept. 2001
  • Preliminary proposals submitted
  • ( for Prelim. Grant ) Oct.
    15, 2001
  • Grants awarded Nov. 1, 2001
  • Announcement of following years competition
    April 2002
  • Formal entry packages Final Rpt. and test doc.
  • due May 1, 2001
  • Winners announced June 1, 2001

Competition Proposal (contd -4)
  • Student Team Deliverables
  • Final Project Documentation (Due May 1, 200X1)
  • A final written report in specified format not to
    exceed 50 pages in length including
    illustrations, etc. with a mandatory 2-page
    Executive Summary good practice samples to be
    provided for guidance
  • A video tape or equivalent documentation of
    test/proof-of-concept validation results not to
    exceed 10 minutes in length
  • A letter from the students customer verifying
    the degree to which the project results met their
    agreed upon requirements

Final Report Format and Content Requirements
  • Maximum 50 page limit including all
    illustrations, and required documentation
  • 12 point Helvetica font with standard margins
  • Must include a clear 2-page Executive Summary
  • Must contain a suitable Index and List of
  • Clear, concise description of the customer, the
    project and why it is significant
  • Clear description of customer requirements and
    design objectives
  • Full discussion of design, and the design process
    and methods used
  • Full discussion of the construction materials and
    techniques used and why specific approaches were
  • Appropriation documentation of test procedures
    and results (in addition to video, etc.)
  • Costs incurred, project management plan, and a
    closed business case for potential manufacture
    if applicable
  • Summary of lessons learned
  • Validation letter from the customer

Competition Judging Criteria
  • Quality of Overall Approach and Results
  • Depth of thought and understanding of all product
    and process
  • phases of the project
  • Appropriateness and logic displayed in approaches
    and method used
  • Multidisciplinary aspects of the team and results
    proportion to effort
  • and cost expended
  • Significance and Value of the Problem Solved
  • Importance of the problem as it serves the
    interest and needs
  • of the customer
  • Results obtained in terms of simplicity,
    cost-effectiveness and value
  • Results of the business case analysis
  • Creativity and Imagination Demonstrated
  • The best solution may be the simplest one
  • Innovation for innovations sake is to be
  • Additional Relevant Factors 10
  • Aesthetic appeal, absolute simplicity (in solving
    a tough problem), etc.
  • Truly imaginative or unique selection of a
    problem or a customer
  • Good results from a virtual team of students from
    several universities

Competition Judging Process
  • Judging panel to be formed of company technical
    managers, members of the Technical Fellowship
    (STF,TF,ATF - it is now in their job description
    and we have over 1300), and other company
    technical experts as necessary and appropriate on
    a rotational basis for the duration of a given
    years competition
  • The judges decisions shall be final (except in
    cases of fraud, plagiarism, or failure to follow
    the stated process)
  • The judges shall review 5-page Preliminary
    Proposal packages and select up to 80 student
    teams for 3,000 preliminary funding grants (Oct
    15-Nov.1, 200X)
  • The judges will review the Executive Summaries
    (and test documentation if warranted) of the
    Final Documentation packages submitted and down
    select to a suitable number (about 15-20)
    finalists ( May 1-15, 200X1)
  • The judges with conduct a full review of the
    down-selected packages and recommend up to three
    winners to the URPC (May 15-30, 200X1)
  • Following approval by management of the judges
    selections, winners of the competition will be
    informed on June 1, 200X1.

Additional Factors and Considerations
  • Intellectual property rights for any work that
    may be patentable or copy written will be
    assigned to the students and their customers to
    be dealt with by local precedent and procedure.
    To address IRS issues with Colors of money,
    and avoid as many legal entanglements as
  • There is no single right answer and the playing
    field is level
  • A wide range of customers and problems are
  • A small team that produces good results
    working an a small but significant problem has as
    much chance of winning as does a large team
    working on something grand
  • This proposed competition is a contest within a
    contest within a contest
  • Students must find their own (non-Boeing)
    customers and define with them the problems to be
  • The students must then design, build and test a
  • The students must also demonstrate an
    understanding of the entire Process (including
    the business and project management aspects)

A Competition Everyone Wins
  • The Boeing Company
  • Enhances the company image
  • Enhances the recruiting of students with the
    right skills
  • Serves many university relations interests with
    consolidated use of our always limited resources
  • Students
  • Exposed to and given realistic experience in our
    full list of Desired Attributes of an Engineer
  • Gain exposure to working with a customer on a
    real problem of significance in their communities
  • The Students Customers
  • Gain the benefits of whatever the students are
    able to do, whether they win the prize for the
    competition or not
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)