How do you align with engineering standards and policies?

In my work combining development and consulting, I've observed businesses adopting mismatched standards. Before prescribing practices, it's crucial to understand the company's context. For instance, a Fortune 500 firm like Company 1 has an established presence, prioritizing sustainability and quality. Their engineering emphasizes security and reliability. Conversely, an SMB fintech like Company 2, ever-responsive to market changes and regulations, emphasizes speed and adaptability in their practices. However, outliers exist, as seen when Google's Bard had to innovate rapidly in response to Open.AI's market influence. In essence, always assess the operational context before deciding on standards and practices.

standards and policies are established with reference to what was known at the time. today with AI much standards and policies can be changed and even when established with the aid of AI still has room for improvement. Change is an essential element of success and the discriminator between excellence and routine Zia

The use of code and standards really depend on the law and contract requirement where the projects executed. In Indonesia, you may find national standards (SNI) used as well as the international standards for each discipline. However, American and European standards are widely acceptable for industrial projects in Indonesia.

Any engineering, procurement and construction(EPC) project, big or small, has to follow local or/and international standards agreed in the job award contract.For almost every EPC project the Prime Contract will enlist the various engineering, safety , environment related standards to be followed. These agreement between EPC consultant and owner/client is sacrosanct and must be adhered to. Any experienced engineering manager or group supervisor in design and construction know what are the standards applicable for specific task/design/construction.There are standards for all engineering disciplnes like , Mechanical, Electrical,Civil,Electronics & Instrumentation, Fire Protection, Environment Protection and so forth.

As an example I can say from my experience from power distribution ( Electrical) Industry, it pays to know the codes and standards pertaining to the product you are designing. More than Compliance and certification, it help to bring in the tribal knowledge of the design best practices, safety measures and helps engineers to go at their job with confidence, especially in industries regulated for Health, Safety, Hazardous environments etc. Understanding the purpose, scope and applicability of each testing/certification standard for their particular product for every engineer is in itself a gold mine of product and use-case understandings as well.

We need to understand the project requirements from the customer perspective, industry, application and country where it is used. This will help us to derive safety, reliability, maintainability, availability, security, and environmental standards. Normally, quality standards are driven by the company. Based on the application, other standards are also applied. For e.g For automotive some of the SAE standards are applicable and for defence you Def Stan, MIL standards, etc.

Compliance with engineering standards and regulations is a complex task that requires a commitment to a culture of excellence. The following core principles will strengthen team's adherence to best practices and policies: 1) Integrity: 2) Transparency: 3) Scholarship: 4) Literature: 5) Quality: 6) Consistency: 7) Accountability: 8) Excellence: 9) Ascendancy: 10) Transformation:

I think it's helpful and important to look at things backwards and forwards. "Know your standards and policies" is forward looking, but understanding gaps and failures against standards and policies is closer to backwards looking. Where have you or similar companies failed to meet policies or standards, and how can you design in fail safes against those known, common failures? Additionally, it can be helpful to review the standards and policies from a risk perspective. Part of knowing them is understanding where the risks of noncompliance are greatest.

One thing I have found useful is that you should start by comprehensively understanding the existing engineering standards and policies within your organization or industry. This includes technical standards, safety regulations, quality management systems, etc.

The engineering Manager(EM), group leader(GL) must read the contract to get a list of standards agreed.They may make a list, make it available to the team . Any specific deviation that owner/client ,consultatnt agreed must be highlighted in general and emphasized in toolbox meetings. The standards are usually available in library or in softform in documentum system. Team must be made aware what edition of standard is applicable in general or any specific task.One hass to select appropriate versions of such standards in commercial softwares used for design and construction. For new joinees/freshers, a refresher presentation on this is a good way to get them oriented. EM,GL must ensure adoption of standards as agreed in contract.

We have our Quality and Compliance Manager introduces company policies and regulations to every employees since day-1 joining the company. While Engineering Manager in our company will provide the guidelines to all technical staffs on how the execute the design related works to International standards. Engineering Manager will review continuously the works done by each discipline prior to release for construction.

The term align is appropriate, because management is often more than just communication; it's connection. If a team member disagrees with a policy, you can just demand it, or you can connect the policy to their own goals, values and perspectives. It also helps to illustrate how these policies connect the team with the rest of the organization, the customers, and the strategy laid out by leadership. Connect them with the big picture.

All the decided engineering standards and policies which the company want to follow are applicable to all employees and projects. This needs to be published and communicated clearly. It's everyone's responsibility to follow. When it comes to projects, additional standards and policies need to be applied as explained in the previous section. It is normally decided by the engineering lead and the project manager of that project.

In engaging with self-organised teams we aim to trust, imposing our views can be counterproductive and reflective of a “red management style.” A collaborative approach in establishing standards, where teams are involved, and certain constraints are communicated, is more effective. People are more inclined to adhere to practices they've contributed to, valuing the acknowledgment of their insights and choices.

Awareness,knowledge and ownership . Embrace the concept and purpose in a practical way. The system must work for us and the ultimate goal .

It is necessary to implement internal design guidelines and well defined gates to perform peer reviews as well as expert approvals so that all the accumulated knowledge can be distributed and applied across the whole organization.

It's well known that people are resistant to change, even if that change benefits them. With that in mind, I've found it helpful to explain the "why" and not just the "what. With regards to standards, policy, or process changes, if you can communicate to your team why the change is necessary (and not just "the policy changed" but WHY the policy needed to change), adoption of the change is much more effective.

It is necessary to identify Key Stakeholders: Determine the key stakeholders involved in setting and implementing these standards and policies. This might include engineers, regulatory bodies, management, legal advisors, etc.

A pretty obvious point, but monitoring and enforcement of adherence to any applied industry standard requires a strict internal process/procedure that references and leverages guidance set by those industry standards. The simplest set of metrics for those internal procedures usually involves, then, some sort of checklist that calls out minimum tasks oriented around the level of effort intended by the industry standard for the output of a process it is being applied towards. Take for instance design for manufacturability - a checklist for designers to guarantee adherence to ASME Y14.5 would help for manufacturing accuracy and uniformity.

Monitor and enforce is included in our internal Quality Assurance Quality Control manual. QAQC manual has been saved into our internal website and everyone can access it. We also include our QAQC program in every proposal which we submit to Clients. As a reputable consultant we are very agile in doing this monitor and enforce aspects included into our QAQAC program.

Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms are the most challenging in my practice. Educating the teams continuously is necessary and the Engineering Manager has a crucial role in these processes. However, without the usage of proper tools, it's almost impossible to ensure that engineers are following the standards and these are not just documents that gather dust on the shelves.

This check & balance is a continuous process thru education, reminder to the team and finally while checking and approving the deliverables like , design calculation, Issued for design/construction drawings. Any deviation from standard has to be agreed based on merit and an alternate standard contractually accepted by the client/owner.This kind of deviation permit has to be communicated to the client, to the entire project team for future followup / adhereance. There must be periodic internal audits by EM /GL /their rep. Based on the findings corrective action to be taken or issue raised with client for deviation permit. External audits like ISO audits do often check about standards followed, any deviation taken and documentaion thereof.

Successful implementation of standards mostly depends on how well the company developed its processes, how well it is communicated to people and most importantly people's behaviour and commitment.

Absolutely, the essence of rules and standards extends beyond their immediate framework. The focal point should be the translation of these guidelines into enhanced value for users, subsequently driving increased revenue to the company. Every rule must be evaluated and justified by its impact on user experience and organizational growth. It’s a holistic perspective, intertwining operational efficiency with customer-centricity, ensuring not just compliance but a tangible contribution to the company's overarching objectives and financial prosperity. In this context, rules are not static but dynamic instruments of value generation.

You can’t improve what you can’t measure . Assign the right indicator to the correct area . An entity cannot be juror and judge . Open humble self critic is the path to excellency .

This entire article reminds me of the stages of the PDCA cycle. It's important during this stage (C - Check), in my experience, to communicate that you are just there - a stage in a cycle for improvement - meaning you aren't at a Finish Line. There may be room for improvement still, and only through compliance to the "new" process will you see how it can be done better. Additionally, this is the phase where you see if you did not have enough buy-in early in the change process. With proper preparation during the "Plan" and "Design" phases of PDCA, you get buy-in and concurrence from those that will be executing the process, as well as inputs for its final design, so that they are fully invested in the success of this phase, too.

An example I’have seen on this is that to implement Monitoring and Compliance Mechanisms one needs to establish mechanisms for monitoring compliance with the new or updated standards and policies. This might include regular audits, performance metrics, and feedback loops

Truly agree that the engineering standards and policies are living documents and can be updated to the latest engineering technology. I worked for several engineering companies, and they keep updating their policy and manuals in order to be adaptable to changing of work environment as well as to improve their agility and quality to serve their clients.

When I was a new hire SWE at a mental health company, I adapted my workflow and expectations based on company policies. When launching a new product, issues emerged as it became available in two continents outside the home country. This led to quick feedback from engineers when dealing with privacy and data issues based on regulations, resulting in reviewing and adapting standards and policies. Adaptability is crucial in nature and being a productive professional.

All the engineering standards and policies are always monitored and reviewed. It will be adapted, improved and evolved over a period of time based on need and change in circumstances.

Several times the standards are behind the last technology improvements. It is fundamental that the developers have available channels to get contact with the with the Standard's committees so that they can solve ambiguities and updated limits, test measurement techniques, etc.

Local statutory or international standards or not so easy to change as these are governed by the respective bodies. However, the EM/GL must raise any issue to the owner/client with standards agreed vs the most optimum that should be followed.This happens in reality that wahtever was agreed in contract may not be applicable since say the standard itself has been revised or a different standard is better for cost and time efficiency without sacrificing quality. Sometimes this deviation permit takes time in educating the client or agreeing for extra cost for a higher standard adoption.Internal standards/specifications are easy to revise based on discussions/feedback/approval.However, such specs can't violate the contractually binding standard.

Absolutely, I wholeheartedly agree. The fluidity and adaptability of engineering standards and policies are essential to ensuring relevance and effectiveness. Being attuned to the continuous evolution of these guidelines, and proactively adapting them in alignment with project-specific contexts, is a cornerstone of project success. The infusion of insights from team members and stakeholders enriches this process, fostering an environment of collaborative enhancement that is responsive to both current and emergent needs. Every project presents a unique landscape, necessitating a tailored approach to standards and policies for optimal results.

This would be the "A - Act" part of the PDCA cycle. It's where you improve based on what you've learned from the earlier stages. Once again, communication and engagement is key, but it's also too late at this point to start doing those. If you did not solicit their feedback and involvement from the first stages, they'll be more likely to be combative and less likely to give valuable feedback if they feel they're only the recipient of this whole process versus a contributing member of it.

It is important to Develop Consensus: Engage stakeholders in discussions to establish consensus on the need for alignment and the desired outcomes. Ensure that all relevant parties are involved in the decision-making process.

Right, there has to be a consistent and well established policies regarding what standards are to be followed and how changes to internal or external standards are to be communicated and resources made available to the project or the entire organization. Many engg companies do have a standard implementaion committee who issues communique to the entore org from time to time. Any specific project may share their observation with this committee or any other concurrent or past project to get any lesson learnt on such implementation issues. Such sharing of knowlwdge with others not only alerts other projects or disciplines about common impending changes but also enhances knowledge about currency of any standard or the way deviation is permitted.

Collaboration and coordination stand as pivotal elements in aligning with engineering standards and policies. Effective communication and information sharing are foundational to ensuring synergy among varied teams and organizations. In my view, the mutual exchange of support, leveraging collective expertise, and harmonizing standards is instrumental in not only avoiding conflicts but fostering an environment of innovation and shared goals. This approach underscores the importance of unity in diversity, where varied perspectives and skills converge to elevate the application and evolution of engineering standards and policies.

In my experience, this works best when done in conjunction with the first step or second step. If something you're doing may contradict another department's work, you need to know before starting, not after implementing. In Quality, the best idea is to build quality into the process, not to try to inspect it out. A process's defect is usually found after it's made because the process was designed such that it could be made. Rather, design the process so defects cannot occur. Considering alignment of standards and policies, which is a process and involves other processes, waiting until the "product" is made - i.e., the alignment is done - is too late. If there are potential failures lying within other departments, understand that early.

Take time to reflect on your work and projects. Analyze what worked, what didn't, and why. Use this information to refine your strategies. It's very important to document the reflections and analysis.

Many deviation permit on standard sometimes become tricky, expensive and may cause dely in release of final design.Either client is not knowledgeable about the alternative proposed or is not agreeable to deviate from the standard they follow. The other scenraio is that agreed contractual standard is bit new to the team and there is a potential cost impact. Either way, discussion, deliberation and presentation of design analysis with new proposed standard is the way. This may cause delay hence is to be treated with all seriousness and punctuality. Communication with higher ups in clinet by PM or director may be required to sort out the commercial/schedule impact. This Lesson Learnt is valuable and to be documented properly for future jobs.

A great place to institutionalize what you learned for something like this would be in your Change Management process/procedures. If you rely on people to remember, the same mistakes will continue to occur. If you make it so the company remembers (by codifying it in processes and procedures), your improvements and learnings will sustain for your next change project.

Ultimately, people make businesses work, and people want to feel like they are contributing, involved, and engaged. When it comes to things like aligning standards and policies, it's easy for a business to focus on the business side and forget the people executing those policies. Engage the people early and often and it'll go smoother long-term. Also, very few people in most companies want to be concerned with standards AND policies, so make sure the policy is a layman's term version of the standard's requirements, and compliance will follow. That being said, creating a matrix of how your policy is compliant with the standard can help come audit time.

Project sometimes throw great surprises. 1. Be aware that violation of standards may lead to over/under design and cause reputational harm and safety failure,litigation and loss of revenue/job. So, sensitize the team about this. 2. During contract formation, the list of stndards to be proposed / agreed must be evaluated by thecompetent subject matter experts in the team/company and onlymost optimum level/version of standards be included in the agrement. 3. Flush out all obsolete standards,get in place the new applicable ones with team/companywise communication. 4. Don't delay on issues for standard deviation permit. It may have expensive time and cost impact on the project. 5. Share Lesson Learnt about standard deviation,how it was tackled.

Change management is usually something that is brought up after a change fails to take hold, but that failure is nearly guaranteed unless you consider the changes being made, and create a plan to transition. Remember to treat your people as people and not robots. Habits are hard to change. People need focus, and can be overwhelmed with too many new procedures and goals all at once. Every change will upset the system and have downstream effects, so your plan will need to adapt as you implement the transition. Setting these expectations properly will help your team not only meet it's alignment goals, but it will keep the team trust and morale high through the whole process.