CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Leadership is a key element for achieving success as an engineering professional in a
highly competitive global economy. The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) emphasized
the importance of leadership skills for engineers with the publication of two reports, The
Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century (NAE, 2004) and Educating the
Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century (NAE, 2005). With
respect to the need for engineers to have leadership capability, NAE stated that;
“… there will be an increasing number of opportunities for engineers to exercise their
potential as leaders, not only in business but also in the nonprofit and government sectors.
´ (NAE, 2004, p. 55)
“ …. Engineers must understand the principles of leadership and be able to practice them
in growing proportions as their careers advance (NAE, 2004, p. 55).”
“… it is necessary to educate technically proficient engineers who are broadly educated,
see themselves as global citizens, who can be leaders in business and public service, and
who are ethically grounded (NAE, 2005, p. 51).”
Although many attributes were discussed in these two reports, they emphasized
leadership as one of the important acumens that modern engineers must possess (NAE, 2005;
NAE, 2004) and they also urged engineering institutions to reform engineering curricula to
prepare present-day engineering students for future careers. (NAE, 2005; NAE, 2004)
Similarly, industry has called for engineers to have broad skills including leadership skills
beyond their technical expertise. (Beder, 1998; Bowman & Farr, 2000; Duderstadt, 2008; Felder,
2
2006; Kaushal, 2011; Kumar & Hsiao 2007; Lamancusa et al., 2008; Mills & Treagust, 2003;
Rottmann et al., 2016; Samavedham & Ragupathi, 2012; Sheppard et al., 2008). Authors have
noted that the industry’s dependency on the ability to hire graduates with deep technical and
broad professional skills, especially, leadership, cannot be overemphasized (Crumpton-Young et
al., 2010; Kumar & Hsiao, 2007; Passow, 2012; Russell & Yao, 1996; Schuhmann, 2010). Thus,
incorporating leadership development into engineering curricula has been advocated to better
prepare engineering graduates for the workforce. (Athreya &Kalkhoff, 2010; Crumpton-Young et
al., 2010; Duderstadt, 2008; Farr & Brazil, 2009; Gordon & Silevitch, 2009; Schuhmann, 2010;
Cox et al., 2009).
1.1 Problem
In response to the calls from the literature, industry, and other engineering regulating
bodies like NAE, several engineering institutions rose to the challenge and incorporated
leadership development training into their engineering programs using a variety of approaches,
including integrated curricula, stand-alone courses and programs, and experiential learning
(Athreya & Kalkhoff, 2010; Cox et al., 2009; Crumpton-Young et al., 2010; Kumar and Hsiao,
2007; Schuhmann, 2010). However, there is a lack of consensus on the definition of engineering
leadership and the specific skills and competencies that should be taught (Hartmann & Jahren,
2015; Passow, 2007; Paul et. al., 2018; Rottmann et al., 2016; Reeve et al., 2015, Rottmann et al.,
2015; Schuhmann, 2010). For instance, Paul et al., (2018) posited that there is still a lack of
clarity on the definition of engineering leadership despite the widespread recognition that
engineering graduates must possess leadership attributes. The authors also stated that there seems
to be confusion in articulating the key differences between general leadership and engineering
leadership.
3
Rottmann et al., (2016) noted that leadership concepts are frequently derived from
management literature as a standard for measuring engineers. However, to be able to develop
engineering students into leaders more coherently or systematically, the authors believed that
engineering educators must first define what leadership means from an engineering perspective.
Reeve et al., (2015) found that most empirical studies on engineering leadership evaluated
engineers against leadership frameworks borrowed from the management and psychology
literature. In addition, Hartmann & Jahren (2015) noted that while both industry and academia
acknowledged the importance of leadership skills for engineering graduates, a consensus has yet
to be reached regarding a unified definition of engineering leadership. Thus, there exists a
debate regarding the nature of engineering leadership, with some contending that it is
indistinguishable from leadership in general, and others asserting that engineering leadership
necessitates the incorporation of engineering design principles.
In addition to this, researchers also pointed out a lack of consensus regarding engineering
leadership skills that should be emphasized in engineering leadership training and discussions.
Rottmann et al., (2016) opined that it is unclear how some authors who have provided a list of
leadership skills relevant to engineers methodologically arrived at their lists or how they have
factored engineering into their research. While Hartmann et al., (2017) noted that despite an
increase in engineering leadership programs and scholarly work, there remains a need to
understand what leadership competencies companies are looking for in graduate engineering
students.
The lack of consensus on the definition of engineering leadership and the specific skills
and competencies that engineering leadership training programs should emphasize has a major
implication which is that the quality of leadership education in engineering programs is impacted
4
by this knowledge gap. There are inherent inconsistencies in engineering leadership curricula
because educators may prioritize different competencies based on their interpretation of
engineering leadership (Rottmann et al., 2015). These inherent inconsistencies which also
translate to having no standardized engineering leadership curricula can lead to varying levels of
preparedness among engineering graduates entering the workforce. Also, developing leadership
programs based on individual educators’ subjective interpretation of engineering leadership may
result in fragmented approaches to teaching engineering leadership, which may hinder the
formation of a cohesive understanding of engineering leadership among the students.
Furthermore, the lack of consensus is an indication that there is no unified voice on the
specific learning outcomes that engineering leadership curricula should target. Thus, the
development of effective assessment methods for engineering leadership education is hampered.
Without a clear understanding of the desired outcomes, evaluating the effectiveness of
different educational approaches and making evidence-based improvements becomes
challenging (Mumford et al., 2007). Finally, a lack of consensus on the definition of engineering
leadership and engineering leadership skills that should be taught may contribute to a gap
between industry expectations and engineering education. Employers may have specific
expectations regarding the skills and competencies that engineering leaders must possess, but
these may not align with engineering educators' expectations and priorities (Passow, 2007).
1.2 Purpose and Objectives
This study aims to contribute to achieving a consensus on engineering leadership by
proposing a definition of engineering leadership from the perspectives of the Accreditation Board
for Engineering and Technology (ABET) leaders and engineering leaders in the industry. The
study further seeks to expound on engineering leadership skills that these leaders considered
5
crucial in engineering leadership training based on their experience as engineering leaders.
Authors have noted that it would be beneficial to engage engineers in leadership positions in
defining engineering leadership and in specifying skills that should be emphasized (Hartmann et
al., 2017, Hartmann & Jahren, 2015; Reeves et al., 2015; Rottmann et al., 2016). This is because
leadership is a phenomenon that is embedded in experience (Block, 2014). Also, considering the
theory of experiential learning as posited by Kolb (1984) which states that learning is a process
where knowledge is created through the transformation of experience, that is, people with
experience in a specific domain can contribute more to explaining or defining the phenomenon
because they have encountered and reflected upon the subject matter. Although a few studies
have attempted to define engineering leadership and the skills that should be emphasized from
the standpoint of engineering professionals in the industry (Hartmann et al, 2017; Hartmann &
Jahren, 2015; Rottmann et al., 2016; Rottmann et al., 2015, Reeve et al., 2015), none have
considered defining engineering leadership from the perspectives of engineering leaders in
engineering regulating bodies like ABET.
Since ABET establishes engineering guidelines that give direction to the curriculum for
engineering institutions, knowing how ABET leaders would define engineering leadership and
important engineering leadership skills, along with the perspectives of engineering professionals
in the industry, can contribute to achieving a consensus and guide engineering institutions to
improve their teaching of engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills. The
following objectives were the focus of this study in an effort to answer the research questions:
1. Investigate how ABET leaders would define engineering leadership and engineering
leadership skills based on their experience.
6
2. Investigate how engineering professionals in industry would define engineering
leadership and engineering leadership skills based on their experience.
3. Verify if there are alignments or differences in the definitions of ABET leaders and
engineering professionals in industry.
1.3 Research Questions
The study is guided by the following research questions:
1. How do ABET leaders define engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills
based on their experience as engineering leaders?
2. How do engineering professionals in the industry define engineering leadership and
engineering leadership skills based on their experience as engineering leaders?
3. How do what ABET leaders define as engineering leadership and engineering leadership
skills align with the definitions of engineering professionals in the industry?
1.4 Positionality
The researcher’s interest in this topic started from a mandatory online certification
training she took as a research assistant during her graduate studies. The training focused on the
social and behavioral responsible conduct of research and there were discussions on a range of
topics such as ethics, conflict of interest, authorship, and so on. This got her fascinated to learn
more about the soft skills necessary for engineering graduates in the workplace. Then, the
semester following the period of this training, she took a course in Foundations of Engineering
Education, and one of the topics brought to light was that the debate to foster soft skills in
engineering graduates has been going on for more than seven decades. This further increased her
curiosity to learn more about soft skills for engineering graduates, and during one of her
7
discussions with a faculty member in the department centered on how to best define engineering
leadership and what skills would be considered engineering leadership skills. Through the
discussion, they couldn’t reach a consensus on what the definition should be, based on what was
in the literature. So, she decided to comb the literature and found that the definition of
engineering leadership and the skills needed were not well established. Especially, in the areas of
defining engineering leadership skills from the perspectives of leaders in engineering regulating
bodies like ABET. Then she decided to investigate how engineering leaders in ABET and
engineering professionals who are leaders in the respective organizations would define
engineering leadership and the skills that should be emphasized. Also, this research took the
insider/outsider perspective with respect to considering positionality in terms of the relationship
with the group being studied. In this study, the researcher has an engineering background
(insider) but does not have ABET membership or work in the industry (outsider).
1.5 Methodology
The research methodology used for this study is qualitative research methodology.
Qualitative research is a research approach that seeks to understand and interpret human
experiences and social phenomena by focusing on the meanings, perspectives, and
understandings of the people involved (Johnson & Christensen, 2017). It typically involves the
collection of data through methods such as interviews, focus groups, and observations, and uses
interpretive procedures to understand participants' perspectives and experiences (Creswell, 2014;
Johnson & Christensen, 2017). The qualitative research design used in this study is the
Phenomenology research design. According to Creswell (2013), a phenomenological study
describes the common meaning for several individuals of their lived experiences of a
8
phenomenon, that is, the focus of the methodology is describing what all participants have in
common as they experience a phenomenon.
The specific phenomenological approach employed in the study is the interpretive
phenomenological analysis (IPA). IPA is a qualitative research approach that is used to examine
and interpret the ‘lived experiences’ of research participants with respect to a phenomenon (Alase,
2017). That is, IPA is best suited to all forms of data collection which invite participants to
articulate stories, thoughts, and feelings about their experiences of a target phenomenon (Smith,
2004). Block (2014) posited that leadership is a phenomenon that is embedded in experience.
Hence, the phenomenon of interest in this study is engineering leadership. Therefore, this study
investigates how engineering leaders in ABET and industry define engineering leadership and the
skills that should be emphasized based on their experience as leaders in the engineering
profession.
The method of data collection employed in this study is the interview. The interview is a
widely recognized method of data collection in qualitative research methodology which helps the
researcher to explore participants' perspectives, opinions, and experiences by engaging with them
in a dialogue using various methods such as structured, semi-structured, or unstructured based on
the objectives of the research (Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). It is a conversation with a purpose,
where the researcher seeks to obtain descriptions of the lived experiences of the interviewee in
order to interpret the meaning of the described phenomena (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). In this
study, data was collected using semi-structured interviews in order to unearth how engineering
leadership would be defined from the perspectives of the engineering leaders who participated in
the study. The collected data was analyzed using the MAXQDA software.
9
1.6 Limitations of the Study
The limitations of this study are:
1. The research participants were selected using pre-established criteria (leadership position
in ABET and industry, size of the industry, etc.), however, the companies from which the
participants were selected are companies that are based in the state of Utah. This coupled
with the fact that qualitative studies typically involve smaller sample sizes may limit the
generalizability of the findings.
2. Research participants in this study were required to have at least two years of experience
in a leadership position in addition to several years of experience as an engineering
professional. Participants might have different perspectives on engineering leadership
definition and leadership skills that should be emphasized due to the variability in the
years of experience.
3. Although purposeful sampling was used in this study, the voluntary nature of
participation in the study may limit the diversity of the participants in terms of gender,
ethnicity, industrial sector, and experience.
4. All the industry leaders in this study are located in the state of Utah and all the ABET
leaders in this study are in academia.
1.7 Assumptions of the Study
This study was conducted with the following assumptions:
1. Participants have held leadership positions in an engineering organization or
establishment.
10
2. Participants in the study do so voluntarily and give their candid opinions of how
engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills should be defined based on their
experience as leaders.
3. The qualitative data collection was administered in the same way by the researcher for all
interviews.
1.8 Definition of Terms
• Phenomenon: An observable occurrence in any aspect of experience, consciousness,
psychology, or science.
• Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET): ABET is a nonprofit
organization that accredits college and university programs in applied and natural
science, computing, engineering, and engineering technology. ABET strives to ensure
that Engineering programs meet the quality standards that produce graduates prepared to
enter a global workforce (ABET, n.d.).
• National Academy of Engineering (NAE): NAE is a private, independent, nonprofit
institution with a mission to advance the welfare and prosperity of the nation by
providing independent advice on matters involving engineering and technology, and by
promoting a vibrant engineering profession and public appreciation of engineering
(National Academy of Engineering, n.d.)
• ABET Leaders: ABET leaders are individuals with a strong background in engineering,
technology, or education who play a significant role in the accreditation process,
policymaking, or administration of the organization. They collaborate with educational
institutions, professional societies, and industry partners to maintain and enhance the
11
accreditation process and uphold the highest standards for engineering and technology
education. An ABET leader may have experience in academia, industry, or both
• MAXQDA software: a software program used for analyzing qualitative and mixed
methods data, text, and multimedia in academic, scientific, and business institutions.
12
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The definition of leadership and what constitutes a leader have long been debated in the
literature. Researchers have noted that there are as many definitions of leadership and there are
authors who have tried to define the concept due to what has been referred to as its elusive nature
(Bargau, 2015; Hunt & Fedynich, 2019; Shepard et al., 1997). In their bid to use definitions to
explore the deep nature of leadership, Raffo & Clark (2018) looked at the definitions of
leadership constructed by prominent leadership scholars and concluded that how we define
leadership reflects what we value as individuals or a group of people, and the message we want
to convey to others as we articulate our views on leadership.
2.1 Leadership Approaches
Despite the myriads of definitions of leadership, common themes have emerged, and
these involve defining leadership in terms of traits, behavior, influence, interaction patterns, role
relationships, and occupation of an administrative position (Yukl, 2013). This further led to
classifying some of the prominent theories and empirical research in the leadership literature into
five major approaches including the trait approach, the behavior approach, the power-influence
approach, the situational approach, and the integrative approach (Jackson et al., 2015; Yukl,
2013). As such, it is believed that each constructed definition of leadership will fall under one of
these classifications.
The major highlight of the trait approach is that it looked to define leadership based on the
attributes of the leader such as personality traits, motives, values, and skills that enabled them to
lead others successfully and it emerged from the great man theory which assumed that leaders
were born with innate characteristics that destined them to lead. The major measures used in
13
traits approach studies are leader self-ratings, tests, coded critical incidents, and ratings by other
people which are correlated with measures of leadership effectiveness like unit performance or
ratings of leader effectiveness by bosses (Yulk, 2013). This approach has been criticized for the
assumption that some people are natural leaders and endowed with certain traits not possessed by
other people. However, over the years, there has been a shift in the assumption of being a natural
leader to identifying the traits, skills, and values that classified someone as a successful leader,
that is, attributes developed and possessed by an individual that resulted in leadership
effectiveness (Hunt & Fedynich, 2019; Yukl 2013, Zaccaro, 2007).
The behavior approach explores leadership in terms of the actions of the individual as
opposed to their personality traits. It defines leadership as the ability of the leader to overcome
constraints, recognize opportunities, handle demands, and resolve role conflicts while carrying
out his or her duties. Hundreds of survey studies and field experiments were carried out to
investigate how effective leaders differ in behavior from ineffective leaders in terms of their
actions and decision-making. As such, it is closely related to the trait approach (Hess, 2018; Hunt
& Fedynich, 2019; Jackson et al., 2015; Northouse, 2019; Yukl 2013)
The power-influence approach also defines leadership from the perspective of
highlighting the different influence tactics explored by the leaders for getting their followers to
do what they want and comparing it with their relative effectiveness. This includes the amount
and type of power possessed by a leader and how the power is exercised. A key component that
researchers looked at in this approach is participative leadership which deals with power-sharing
and empowerment of followers. Most of the studies that followed this approach used the survey
questionnaires’ correlation method to measure the correlation between subordinate perceptions of
participative leadership with leadership effectiveness criteria such as subordinate satisfaction and
14
performance in terms of achieving the organizational goals (Hess, 2018; Shepard et al., 1997;
Winston & Patterson, 2006; Yulk, 2013).
The situational approach seeks to define leadership in terms of situational variables such
as the type of organization, the characteristics of followers, the nature of the work performed by
the leader’s unit, and the nature of the external environment. This line of research attempts to
discover the extent to which leadership processes are unique or the same across different types of
organizations, levels of management, and cultures using a comparative study of two or more
situations. Also, some of the studies focused on aspects of the situation that demanded leadership
effectiveness with respect to the skills, traits, and behavior of the leader (Hunt & Fedynich, 2019;
Yukl, 2013).
The integrative approach is that which uses two or more combinations of these approaches in
defining leadership. The integrated approach examined leadership from the perspective of the
skills and behaviors or actions that enhanced consistent leadership effectiveness across diverse
groups and organizational situations and enabled the leader to influence the follower in achieving
common organizational goals (Yukl, 2013). The approach has been investigated through
measures such as developing and testing integrated leadership frameworks and models that
combine existing knowledge about leadership effectiveness (Shaikh, 2018).
2.2. Definitions of Engineering Leadership
There has not been a unified definition of engineering leadership in the literature, just as
it was for general leadership definition. However, most of the definitions of engineering
leadership have leaned towards the integrated approach of leadership definition by using a
combination of trait, influence, and situational approaches in defining engineering leadership.
There is a school of thought that believes in including elements of engineering in the definition
15
with the belief that the nature of the work performed by engineers is distinct compared to other
disciplines and thus, the definition of engineering leadership needs to emphasize the technical
skills. Another school of thought believes the definition should be constructed based on the
general definition of leadership by emphasizing human and organizational dimensions as well as
the ability to influence others. The majority of the definitions encountered in the literature seem
to follow the school of thought that believed in including elements of engineering in the
definition. An example of such is the definition of engineering leadership by Crumpton-Young et
al. (2010), “Engineering leadership is the ability to lead a group of engineers and technical
personnel responsible for creating, designing, developing, and implementing and evaluating
products, systems, or services (p.10)”. In addition, Paul et al. (2018) noted that one of the
definitions of engineering leadership in the literature is: “Engineering leadership is a process of
envisioning, designing, developing, and supporting new products and services to a set of
requirements, within budget, and to a schedule with acceptable levels of risk to support the
strategic objectives of an organization (p.4)”.
All of these definitions are great attempts to define engineering leadership, but they
appear to be too focused on the technical side of engineering. It should be noted that the origin of
calling for leadership in engineering stemmed from making a case that engineers needed to know
how to work with and lead people from other professions that are different from theirs (Belilove,
1947; NAE, 2004, NAE, 2005). For instance, in his article on how to educate our engineers,
Belilove (1947) advocated that engineers be broadly trained to ensure that the modern engineer is
not just a servant of civilization, who is extremely successful in the area of production efficiency
but unfamiliar with the subject matter of human relationships, rather a leader who is fully
prepared to utilize his engineering expertise to solve intricate societal problems. Hess (2018) also
16
noted that less than 20% of an engineer’s time in high-level leadership or management positions
will generally be spent on engineering‐focused tasks in the workplace while much of their day‐
to‐day time will generally involve interactions with other people and groups of people within and
outside the organization. The author further stated that much of such an engineer’s time will be
spent giving directions, setting goals, discussing performance, and making decisions, which
means more than his technical prowess, he would need to have exceptional people management
skills. In addition, Russell & Yao (1996) noted that an engineer is hired for her or his technical
skills, fired for poor people skills, and promoted for leadership and management skills.
Thus, while it has been argued that engineering leadership should be rooted in the
technical competence identity of the engineer (Paul et al., 2018; Rottmann et al., 2015), research
has shown that technical mastery is not a sufficient skill set for leadership success (Hess, 2018;
Samavedham & Ragupathi, 2012). As such, authors have proposed that it is also very necessary
that a broad view of engineering leadership that takes into consideration everyone in the
organization, both engineering professionals and non-professionals, including the customers or
clients that do business with the organization, are taken into consideration in the discussions of
engineering leadership. Worthy of note is the fact that all of these notions and arguments
contributed to the lack of consensus in the definition of engineering leadership.
In one such attempt to deviate from the norms of technically focused engineering
leadership definition to a broader view of defining engineering leadership, Paul et al. (2018)
proposed a definition of engineering leadership as follows:
“Engineering leadership is an approach that influences others to effectively collaborate
and solve problems. Engineering leadership requires technical expertise, authenticity,
personal effectiveness, and the ability to synthesize diverse expertise and skillsets.
17
Through engineering leadership, individuals and groups implement transformative
change and innovation to positively influence technologies, organizations, communities,
society, and the world at large (p.10)”.
The authors noted that leadership is a process, and by defining it as a process, it ceases to be
about the person `in charge but involves a transactional, continuous social process between the
leader and the followers as they both work together in mutual understanding towards fulfilling
the organizational goals. They reinstated that the leader’s ability to influence the followers is
regarded as a key factor in effective leadership while influence refers to the tactics or actions
employed by the leader to motivate, inspire, empower, and engage the followers toward
achieving a common goal. Most authors that emphasized the human and organizational
management skills more than the technical skills in the definition of engineering leadership tend
to lean towards the traits and influence approach of defining engineering leadership because
according to them, the term “influence” rather than control or dictatorship is the hallmark of
effective leadership, and that “influence” connotes fostering trust through a mutual partnership as
the leader shows respect and fairness to those being led (Hess, 2018; Paul et al., 2018; Yulk,
2019).
It is very important to note that engineering leadership requires technical expertise,
authenticity, personal effectiveness, and the ability to synthesize diverse expertise and skillsets
(Paul et al., 2018). The need for technical expertise in effective leadership cannot be
overemphasized. According to Hess (2018), engineers are often promoted to management or
leadership positions because of the successes they have had in technical positions. As such,
leaders must be experts in their field so that they can be in control of the operations that are
necessary for achieving success and quickly identify moves that could be detrimental to
18
achieving their goals. However, for leadership effectiveness, this technical expertise must be
combined with appropriate soft skills.
Soft skills can be defined as a broad set of skills, work habits, and character traits that
enhance someone’s competence in working or relating well with other individuals and are
believed to be critically important to success in today’s contemporary careers and workplaces
(Ariratanaet al., 2015; Binkley et al., 2012; Voogt & Robin, 2012). Soft skills are also referred to
as people skills, social skills, or human skills and they include communication skills, creativity
skills, teamwork, problem-solving skills, conflict resolution and negotiation skills, ethics, critical
thinking skills, information processing skills, intercultural relations, integrity and emotional
intelligence amongst others. A lot of these soft skills have been identified in the literature by
authors as engineering leadership skills. (Athreya & Kalkhof, 2010; Cox et al., 2012; Farr &
Brazil, 2009; Hess, 2018;)
2.3 Engineering Leadership Skills
Engineering leadership skills have been approached in two distinct ways in the literature,
one of which was including engineering leadership skills among professional skills that should
be mastered by engineering graduates while the other was designating engineering leadership
skills as a stand-alone professional skill with its own separate set of broad skills (Gruber et al,
2022; Hartmann, 2016). The first approach is usually employed by studies that focus on the call
for engineering graduates to be proficient in soft skills (ABET, 2023; Hartmann & Jahren, 2015;
Itani & Srour, 2016) while the second approach is often employed by engineering leadership
educators, engineering leadership researchers, and other engineering stakeholders who choose to
put all the broad or non-technical skills that are necessary for engineering graduates to survive in
the workplace under the umbrella of engineering leadership skills (Athreya & Kalkhof, 2010;
19
Crumpton-Young et al., 2010; Cox et al., 2010; Farr & Brazil, 2009; Kumar & Hsiao, 2007;
Passow, 2012). Although the list is not exhaustive, some of the identified engineering leadership
skills in past literature are highlighted in Table 2.1 below:
Table 2.1
Engineering Leadership skills identified by past studies
Engineering Leadership skills
Authors
Excellent written and oral communication, Teamwork, Interpersonal and
conflict resolution skills, Confidence, and Engagement in extracurricular
activities.
Hartmann et al. (2017, p. 2)
Effective Communication, Courage, Fairness, Accountability, Integrity,
Visionary, People Skills, Willingness to be wrong, Outcomes driven,
Delegating, Technical competence, Good Reasoning, intelligence,
Seeing the big picture, Thinking outside the box, Good listening skills.
Cox et al. (2012, p.66)
Effective communication, Teamwork, Professional and ethical
responsibility, Global and societal understanding, Life-long learning,
Visionary, Innovation, Embracing diversity and inclusion.
Athreya & Kalkhoff (2010,
p.71).
Communication skills, Teamwork, Lifelong learning, Strategic
Thinking, Customer Service, Business Management.
Crumpton-Young et al. (2010
p.12)
Effective written and oral communication, Teamwork, Creativity and
Innovation, Ethical awareness, Economics, and marketing skills,
Enhanced technological savviness, Project planning, Enhanced global
awareness, and Cultural diversity.
Schuhmann, (2010, p.63-4)
Communication skills, Teamwork, Decision-making skills, Adaptability
(master change), Ethics and Courage, Big Thinking, Risk management
skills, Using Power Wisely, Mission that Matters.
Farr & Brazil (2009, p.4)
Effective written and oral communication, Good listening skills,
Empathy, Teamwork, Respect for others, Risk Taking, Technical
expertise, Visionary, and Strategic planning, Integrity, and Good
Customer service.
Kumar & Hsiao (2007, p.19).
2.3.1 NAE on Engineering Leadership Skills
The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) in their two reports, The Engineer of
2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century (NAE, 2004) and Educating the Engineer of
2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century (NAE, 2005) emphasize in both
20
reports the need to train engineers of today in varieties of broad skills that will enable them to
become effective leaders in the society (NAE, 2005; NAE, 2004). They also reinstated that the
modern workplace demands the social interaction of engineers with customers, defying the
prevailing image of the engineer as the "techie nerd" and necessitating that engineers have well-
developed people skills in addition to their technical expertise (NAE, 2005; NAE, 2004). NAE
envisioned engineers without boundaries, who would embrace the potentialities offered by
creativity, and invention while also accommodating new fields of endeavor, including those that
require openness to interdisciplinary efforts with non-engineering disciplines such as social
science, and business. It should be noted that the focus of these two reports is on engineering
leadership skills in terms of why and how to ensure that today’s engineers are fully trained to
possess these skills to help them become successful engineering leaders and professionals. As
such, NAE emphasized the flowing skills in their reports;
1. Communication skills
2. Creativity and innovation:
3. Ethics and Social responsibility
4. Collaboration and teamwork
5. Practical ingenuity
6. Global and societal skills
7. Lifelong learning
8. Strong analytical skills
9. Adaptability
10. Business and management
21
2.3.2 ABET on Engineering Leadership Skills
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) board of directors
approved the Engineering Criteria 2000 (EC2000) as the new criteria for evaluating engineering
programs and the criteria became fully implemented in 2001 (Engineering Criteria 2000,1997;
Prados et al., 2005). A critical component of this criteria is the student outcomes which according
to ABET, are what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of graduation
(ABET, 2023). Listed under the student outcomes are 11 criteria (a) through (k), 6 out of which
ABET called for an increased emphasis on a broader range of knowledge, skills, and attributes
referred to as professional skills in addition to technical expertise from engineering graduates
(Engineering Criteria 2000, 1997). The student outcomes criteria which were effective from the
inception of the EC2000 criteria until it was reviewed in the year 2018 are:
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in lifelong learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
22
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The ABET criteria were reviewed in 2018 and mapped to include what is now known as student
outcomes (1) through (7) as presented in Table 2.2 below:
Table 2.2
ABET Mapping Criteria
Former Engineering Accreditation Commission Criteria
(1997-2018)
Current Engineering Accreditation
Commission Criteria (2018-2023)
Criterion 3. Student outcomes
The program must have documented student outcomes that
prepare graduates to attain the program’s educational
objectives.
Student outcomes are outcomes (a) through (k), plus any
additional outcomes that may be articulated by the program.
Criterion 3. Student outcomes
The program must have documented student
outcomes that support the program’s
educational objectives. Attainment of these
outcomes prepares graduates to enter the
professional practice of engineering.
Student outcomes are outcomes (1) through
(7), plus any additional outcomes that may be
articulated by the program.
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
1. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve
complex engineering problems by applying
principles of engineering, science, and
mathematics.
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data
6. an ability to develop and conduct
appropriate experimentation, analyze and
interpret data, and use engineering judgment
to draw conclusions.
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturing, and sustainability.
2. an ability to apply engineering design to
produce solutions that meet specified needs
with consideration of public health, safety,
and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social,
environmental, and economic factors.
(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
5. an ability to function effectively on a team
whose members together provide leadership,
create a collaborative and inclusive
environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and
meet objectives.
23
Source: ABET Mapping Criteria https://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/C3_C5_mapping_SEC_1-13-2018.pdf
Therefore, the ABET professional skills, otherwise known as soft skills which match
some of the engineering leadership skills earlier highlighted can be summarized as follows:
1. Communication skill (from 3)
2. Collaboration / Teamwork (from 5)
3. Ethics and Professional responsibilities (from 4)
4. Problem-solving skills (from 2)
5. Decision-making (from 4)
6. Social and cultural awareness (from 4)
7. Lifelong learning skill (from7)
In addition, the current ABET’s student outcomes (ABET, 2023) in which it was stated
that engineering graduates at the time of graduation should have, “an ability to function
effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and
inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” (Outcome no. 5), is proof
that ABET recognized the importance of leadership skills for today’s engineering graduates. It
Table 2.2 (continued)
Former Engineering Accreditation
Commission Criteria (1997-2018)
Current Engineering Accreditation Commission Criteria
(2018-2023)
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility
(h) the broad education necessary to understand
the impact of engineering solutions in a global
and societal context
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
4. an ability to recognize ethical and professional
responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed
judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering
solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal
contexts.
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of
audiences.
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to
engage in lifelong learning
7. an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed,
using appropriate learning strategies.
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
Implied in 1, 2, and 6.
24
can be inferred from this stated outcome that ABET expected every graduate of engineering to
have the necessary leadership acumen and skills at the time of graduation.
2. 3. 3. Summary of the Engineering Leadership skills in the literature
This section summarizes the most common engineering leadership skills as highlighted
by the authors in the literature. It can be deduced from the skills identified by authors as
engineering leadership skills in this study (see Table 2.1.) that there is truly a lack of consensus
on what skills engineering leadership educators should emphasize in their teaching of the
engineering leadership program. However, Figure 2.1 shows a summary of the common
engineering leadership skills that are discussed by the participants in this study;
Figure 2.1. A summary of the common engineering leadership skills identified by participants.
2.4 Implications of Employing the Trait Approach to Engineering Leadership
Leadership is often conceptualized using behavioral and trait approaches, and
engineering leadership also follows this pattern of conceptualization. The behavior approach is
C
C / T
C & Inno E & Social
L Learn
S Analytical &
P -S S , Globa & C
A
C & Risk
M S
B Managem &
G C S
S
25
that which primarily explores leadership in terms of the actions of the individual rather than their
personality traits (Hess, 2018; Jackson et al., 2015; Yukl 2013). It defines leadership as the
ability of the leader to overcome constraints, recognize opportunities, handle demands, and
resolve role conflicts while carrying out his or her duties (Yukl 2013). A good example of this is
ABET’s stance on leadership skills acquisition as expressed in the current student outcome
where it was stated that engineering graduates should have, “an ability to function effectively on
a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive
environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives.” (Outcome no. 5)
It can be inferred from this statement that ABET expected engineering students to have
acquired leadership acumen by the time of graduation. The statement particularly focuses on the
things they should be able to do as leaders by virtue of the experience garnered during their
training rather than the leadership skills they should have acquired. However, there is evidence in
the literature that explicit instruction and modeling enhance social skills development (Durlak et.
al, 2011; MacCann et al., 2011; Spence, 2003). This could be the motive why most engineering
institutions teaching engineering leadership employed the trait approach of explicitly teaching
and modeling leadership skills in their programs. Some of these institutions used the ABET
professional skills as a framework for the development of the learning instructions for their
engineering leadership programs (Athreya & Kalkhof, 2010; Bowman & Farr, 2000; Kumar &
Hsiao, 2007; Schuhmann, 2010) while others used the leadership skills in the management
literature as a basis for the skills included in their learning instructions (Rottmann et. al., 2016).
The implication of employing the trait approach in the teaching of engineering leadership
is that it helps in fulfilling the calls for engineering graduates to acquire soft skills in addition to
their technical expertise to be relevant in today’s workplace. Authors have bemoaned the fact that
26
the engineering curriculum is too technically oriented and focused with little or no incorporation
of any managerial, leadership, or life skills into their curriculum (Duderstadt, 2010; Sheppard et
al., 2008; Felder, 2006). In addition, several authors have indicated that there is a significant gap
between what undergraduate engineering students are taught and assessed and what professional
engineers and industry practitioners expect them to be capable of (Radermacher et al., 2014;
Samavedham & Ragupathi, 2012; Scardamalia et al., 2012).
It should be noted that the competency gap reported in the literature between what
engineering graduates can do and what the industry employers expected them to be capable of
has often been on the professional skills not their technical skills. In fact, there is evidence from
the literature that employers value the technical capabilities of engineering students but lament
their lack of communication skills, ability to work in teams, and other social skills (Nair et al.,
2009; Schipper & van der Stappen, 2018; Williams, 2001). Although engineering student’s
technical expertise is not being questioned, however, several authors have asserted that, in
today’s workplace, technical skills without soft skills are of declining importance (Duderstadt,
2008; Felder, 2006; Samavedham & Ragupathi, 2012;).
The reason cannot be farfetched. According to Kaipa et al. (2005), when the focus is too
much on hard or technical skills, the dynamics in the workplace become difficult to manage and
many companies never see their first anniversary because they lack soft skills. This is because,
without soft skills, poor decisions are made, negotiations go poorly, communication lacks passion,
and leadership withers away quickly. The authors also noted that most project failures can be
attributed to breakdowns in communication between executives and the talent, teams, and project
managers. They concluded by asserting that companies sink, or swim based on soft skills
regardless of whether their technologies keep them afloat temporarily. The authors also affirmed
27
that great technology and mediocre management lead to sure failure. All these sentiments point to
one fact, today’s engineering graduates need to be specifically trained in soft skills and the trait
approach of teaching engineering leadership can sufficiently meet this need.
Also, considering the 21st-century skills framework which was introduced in the recent
times, the framework was developed by educators, education specialists, and business leaders to
identify and describe the skills, knowledge, and expertise that students need to succeed in the
contemporary workplace, life, and citizenship (Griffin & Care, 2014; Voogt & Robin, 2012; Beers,
2011; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007). The 21st-century skills include communication,
collaboration, critical thinking, creativity, digital and information literacy, leadership, flexibility,
adaptability, emotional intelligence, and social skills amongst others as shown in Figure 2.2 below:
Figure 2.2. 21st-century Framework and Skills
The 21st-century skills have been introduced into the K-12 curriculum but they are
beginning to find their way into the higher education curriculum because discussions have
•Communication
•Collaboration/Teamwork
•Critical Thinking & Problem Solving
•Creativity and Innovation
L and
I Skills
•Information Literacy
•Media Literacy
•Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
Literacy
I , M and
T Skills
•Flexibility and Adaptability
•Initiative and Self-Direction
•Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
•Productivity and Accountability
•Leadership and Responsibility
L and Career Skills
28
started on bringing the skills to higher education classrooms (Bakay, 2022; CERI, 2022;
Toczauer, 2023;) although there is relatively no scholarly work on this yet. It is believed that
integrating 21st-century skills into college education will better prepare students for the
opportunities and problems they will encounter in the contemporary workplace and personal
lives. It should be noted that even though the commonly identified skills by authors as
highlighted in this study (see Figure 1) do not totally match with the skills highlighted in the
21st-century framework (refer to Figure 2), however, to a large extent it can be seen that the
majority of the skills in the learning and innovation as well as career and life category are
inclusive of the skills identified engineering leadership skills by the authors. It would be
interesting to know how many of the skills that will be identified by engineering leaders in this
study will match the skills highlighted in the 21st-century framework.
29
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research methodology used in this study consisting of an
introduction to the research, research purpose, research questions, the research method, research
design, positionality, participants’ selection, participants’ recruitment, ethical consideration, and
IRB process, data collection, the role of researcher and data analysis.
3.1. Introduction
Leadership has emerged as a critical component for success for engineering graduates
because of the need to adapt to the ever-changing economic landscape in the contemporary
global economy, characterized by rapid technological advancements, increasing
interconnectivity, and heightened competition (Bowman & Farr, 2000; Cox et. al, 2012;
Hartmann & Jahren, 2015; Hess, 2018; Paul & Falls, 2018; Rottmann et. al, 2015; Yousefdehi et.
al, 2017). Thus, engineering institutions are called upon to include leadership training and
development in the engineering curriculum to ensure that engineering graduates have the
leadership acumen necessary to survive in the modern workplace (Crumpton-Young et al., 2010;
Duderstadt, 2008; Kumar & Hsiao, 2007; Russell & Yao, 1996; Samavedham & Ragupathi,
2012). Engineering institutions have responded to this call by using a wide range of instructional
strategies to train engineering students on leadership including direct instruction of leadership
skills and traits, problem-based learning, case studies, experiential education, formative peer
assessment, and team effectiveness inventories (Rottmann et al., 2016). However, authors have
noted that although there has been advocacy, implementation, and evaluation of engineering
leadership in academic institutions, as well as a growing body of literature on the subject, a
notable conceptual gap persists in terms of defining leadership from an engineering standpoint
(Rothmann et al., 2015). Also, Hartmann et al. (2017) noted that despite an increase in
30
engineering leadership programs and scholarly work, there remains a need to understand what
leadership competencies companies are looking for in entry-level engineers. This lack of
consensus about the definition of engineering leadership and leadership skills that should be
emphasized could lead to confusion and inconsistency in the teaching and assessment of
engineering leadership.
3.2. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate how engineering leaders in the Accreditation
Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) and engineering leaders in industry would
define engineering leadership based on their experience as leaders, as well as investigate the
engineering leadership skills that these leaders considered crucial for emphasis in the teaching of
engineering leadership. This is aimed at contributing to bridging the conceptual gap in the
definition of engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills as identified in the
literature (Hartmann et al., 2017; Rothmann et al., 2015).
3.3. Research Questions
The research questions that guided this study are:
1. How do ABET leaders define engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills
based on their experience as engineering leaders?
2. How do engineering professionals in the industry define engineering leadership and
engineering leadership skills based on their experience as engineering leaders?
3. How do what ABET leaders define as engineering leadership and engineering leadership
skills align with the definitions of engineering professionals in the industry?
31
3.4 Research Method
The research method used in this study was the qualitative research method. The
qualitative research method is that which relies on the collection of non-numeric data such as
interviews, observations, focus group discussions, or pictorial, textual, or conversational analysis
which researchers use to explore and understand individual experiences, perceptions, social
interaction, and human behaviors (Borrego et al., 2009; Creswell, 2014; Johnson & Christensen,
2017). The qualitative approach is suitable when there has not been a lot of research done on a
topic, when the phenomenon needs to be investigated and comprehended in greater detail, or
when a researcher seeks to determine the meaning of a phenomenon from the perspectives of
participants (Creswell, 2014). According to Block (2014), leadership is a phenomenon that is
embedded in experience. Thus, the phenomenon of interest investigated in this research is
engineering leadership and this study sought to explore this phenomenon to understand how it
will be defined from the perspective of ABET and engineering leaders in industry based on their
experience as leaders.
3.5. Phenomenological Research Methodology
The research methodology used in this study was phenomenology. Phenomenology is a
qualitative research method that describes the common meaning for several individuals of their
lived experiences of a phenomenon (Creswell, 2013). The phenomenological research
methodology has three main approaches; IPA, hermeneutical phenomenology, and transcendental
phenomenology (Alase, 2017; Groenewald, 2004; Neubauer et. al, 2019). Table 3.1. shows a
description of these approaches. The particular phenomenological approach used in this study
was the interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). IPA is a qualitative research approach that
is used to examine and interpret the ‘lived experiences’ of a phenomenon (Alase, 2017; Kirn et.
32
al, 2019; Neubauer et al., 2019). That is, IPA is best suited to all forms of data collection which
invite participants to articulate stories, thoughts, and feelings about their experiences of a target
phenomenon (Smith, 2004).
Table 3.1
Attributes of the Phenomenological Approaches
IPA
Hermeneutical
Phenomenology
Transcendental
Phenomenology
Focus
Individual experiences
Meanings within a
broader context
Essence of experiences
Research
Goals
Understand subjective
experiences and
meaning-making.
Interpret meanings
within cultural,
historical, and social
contexts
Describe the essential
structure of
experiences
Role of the
Researcher
Interpretation
influenced by the
researcher's
background
Interpretation within the
context of language,
culture, history
Bracketing or
suspending the
researcher's biases
Idiography
It is highly idiographic.
It considers the
uniqueness of
individual experiences.
It is somewhat
idiographic. It moves
towards more general
themes across
experiences.
It is less idiographic. It
prioritizes a universal
essence over variations
in individual
experiences.
Double
Hermeneutics
It is integral to the
approach.
It is integral to the
approach but with a
different focus.
It is not a primary
concern.
Treatment of
biases
Reflexivity; being
aware of and
considering biases
during the research
process
Recognizing the
influence of context on
biases; part of the
hermeneutic circle.
Bracketing;
suspending biases to
achieve a pure
description of
experiences
Analytical
process
Close examination
of participant accounts;
iterative analysis
Hermeneutic circle;
interpret parts and whole
within broader context
Epoche; focuses on
essential components
and shared structure
33
The Philosophical Foundations of IPA
The philosophical foundations of IPA are phenomenology, idiography, and hermeneutics (Alase,
2017; Kirn et. al, 2019; Neubauer et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2009) and they are described as:
• Phenomenology: IPA focuses on exploring and understanding the lived experiences of
individuals. It seeks to uncover the underlying meaning and essence of experiences and
emphasizes the description, interpretation, and analysis of individual experiences.
• Hermeneutics: IPA emphasizes the researcher’s interpretation of participants’
experiences using the concepts of double hermeneutics. Double hermeneutics, according
to Smith & Osborn (2008), is a process by which the researcher seeks to interpret the
participants' interpretations of their experiences.
• Idiography: Idiography is a process by which the researcher engages in an in-depth
exploration or understanding of individual experiences before making any generalizations
(Smith et al., 2009).
The reason for choosing IPA for this study is that, out of the three approaches, IPA is
more suited to answer the research questions which are focused on the inquiry into how
engineering leaders would define the engineering leadership phenomenon based on their
experience. Borrego et al., (2009) have suggested that the choice of methodology should be
determined by the nature of the research question. In addition, Creswell (2013) noted qualitative
researchers carry out the task of reducing individual experiences concerning a phenomenon to a
description of the universal essence by identifying an “object” of human experience (i.e., the
phenomenon), collecting data from people who have experienced it, and developing a composite
description of “what” was experienced and “how” it was experienced for all of the participants.
34
The transcendental approach is not suited for this research because its focus is on the
essence of experiences and seeking to understand the fundamental structures and conditions that
enable experiences to occur with emphasis on identifying the necessary conditions for the
phenomenon to exist and providing a more generalized perspective of the phenomenon. The
hermeneutic approach is not suited for this research because its main focus is exploring the
meaning of a phenomenon within a broader context, that is, it seeks to uncover the historical,
cultural, and social dimensions that shape people’s experience of a phenomenon. Also, the IPA
goes beyond the description of the essence of the experience by incorporating the interpretation
element in which the researcher actively participates in understanding and making sense of the
participant’s experiences (Alase, 2017). The essence of an experience can be described as the
fundamental characteristics and unchanging structure or the core meaning of the experience. The
essence of an experience paints the picture of what makes that experience what it is regardless of
the specific details or circumstances surrounding the experience. For instance, consider a study
exploring “friendship” as a phenomenon, the essence of friendship might include qualities such
as shared interest, trust, mutual respect, a desire to spend time together, and acts of giving or
generosity. Also, consider a study exploring the experience of drinking coffee as a phenomenon,
the essence of this experience might be features such as the aroma of the coffee, the way it
provides alertness and energy boost, the taste and texture of the drink, the warmth of the coffee
and so on. The essence, that is, the qualities or features would remain constant regardless of the
circumstances surrounding the individual’s experience. It should be noted that, although both
hermeneutical and transcendental phenomenology also focus on describing the essence of the
phenomenon as foretold by the research participants, however, the emphasis of their focus is
different from that of IPA (Alase, 2017; Neubauer et al., 2019).
35
It should also be noted that hermeneutical, and transcendental phenomenology underscore the
importance of achieving a shared understanding between the researcher and the participant even
though they recognize the impact of the researcher's perspective on the interpretation of data
(Alase, 2017). Also, the idiographic focus is less pronounced in both hermeneutical
phenomenology and transcendental phenomenology (Smith et al., 2009).
3.6. Positionality
Positionality, according to Hampton et al. (2021), is described as a statement that captures
how the researcher is positioned, personally, socially, and politically to the study’s context.
Creswell (2013) asserted that the position adopted by a researcher will influence every stage of
the research process. According to Herr (2004), three broad positionality perspectives exist
between the researcher and the participants, and they include insider, outsider, and
insider/outsider perspectives. He further noted that it is essential that researchers have a good
mastery of their relative positioning as insiders or outsiders when conducting research, as this
will govern how they formulate their methodology, axiology, and epistemology.
The insider’s positionality can be described as a situation in which the researcher is part
of the group being studied. The outsider positionality can be conceptualized as a situation where
the researcher is not part of the group being studied and has minimal or no interaction with
participants to avoid bias. The insider/outsider perspective has to do with situations in which the
researcher has a substantial degree of relationship or partial interaction with the group being
studied. This study employed the insider/outsider perspective. As an outsider, the researcher
sought to investigate how the participants would define engineering leadership and the skills that
should be emphasized from their perspectives as engineering leaders using the interview data
collection procedure. Thus, there was a collaboration to co-construct knowledge between the
36
researcher and the participants as the researcher tried to understand and interpret the data from
the perspective of the participants. As an insider, the researcher has an engineering background.
She is currently undertaking her Ph.D. studies in Engineering Education at Utah State University,
and she has a bachelor’s degree in computer engineering from Obafemi Awolowo University,
Nigeria.
Personally, the researcher’s interest in this study emerged from an Institutional Review
Board (IRB) mandated certification training on the social and behavioral responsible conduct of
research that she took as a research assistant during her graduate studies. The range of topics
learned during the training such as ethics, conflict of interest, authorship, and so on, got her
fascinated to learn more about the soft skills necessary for engineering graduates in the
workplace. This desire further increased when she took a course in Foundations of Engineering
Education in the semester following the period of this training where one of the topics discussed
in the class revealed that the debate to foster soft skills in engineering graduates has been
ongoing for more than seven decades. This further intensified her desire to learn more about soft
skills for engineering graduates. Hence, during one of her discussions with a faculty in the
department which centered on how to best define engineering leadership and what skills would
be considered engineering leadership skills, she took up the challenge to comb the literature
more and found out that the definition of engineering leadership and the skills that should be
specified varies greatly. She thus decided to investigate how engineering leaders in engineering
regulating bodies like ABET and engineering professionals who are leaders in the industry would
define engineering leadership and the skills that should be emphasized based on their experience.
37
3.7. Research Design
Research design, according to Creswell (2014), refers to the types of inquiry within
qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches that provide specific direction for
procedures in research. The research design used in an IPA study according to Smith et al.,
(2009) is described in three major processes, including participants’ selection and recruitment,
data collection, and data analysis (see Figure 3.1). This was employed in this study.
Figure 3.1. The IPA Research Design
3.7.1 Participants’ Selection and Recruitment
This section describes the processes used to select the participants while keeping the IPA
philosophical underpinning of phenomenology in mind. That is, it is the process of selecting
those who have lived experience of the phenomenon, which is engineering leadership. Also, this
explored the process it took to recruit engineering leaders to participate in this study.
3.7.1.1. Engineering Leaders’ Selection
This study collected data from engineering professional leaders in ABET and industry
professionals. In a phenomenological study, the foremost criteria for the selection of the
participants are that they must have lived the experience of the phenomenon being studied and
that the sample be fairly homogenous (Alase, 2017; Creswell, 2013). The criteria for selecting
the engineering leader recruited to participate in this study is that they have been practicing in the
field of engineering for at least 5 years in addition to occupying a leadership position in ABET or
industry for a minimum of two years. Hess (2018) has stated that:
Participants'
selection and
Recruitment Data Collection Data Analysis
38
“Engineers and scientists are generally promoted into or aspire toward formal leadership
or management opportunities because of the success(es) they have had in technical
positions (p.17)”.
Also, Rottmann et al., (2015) posited that most engineers' normal career paths involve five to ten
years of technical work before moving into project or process management which kick starts
their leadership responsibilities where they now have to manage others to accomplish goals or
meet up with deadlines. It can be inferred from these assertions that anyone who holds a
leadership position in engineering must have had a minimum of 5 years prior technical
experience in the engineering field before becoming a leader. This study therefore suggests that
having a minimum of five years of experience in the engineering field in addition to a minimum
of two years of leadership experience in the organization should be sufficient for the research
participants to be able to conceptualize the definition of engineering leadership and the
leadership skills that should be emphasized as depicted in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.2. Criteria for the Choice of Engineering Leaders in the Study
Other selection criteria considered for this study are the participants’ availability and their
willingness to provide accurate information regarding the definition of engineering leadership
and the skills that should be emphasized in engineering leadership training.
Minimum of 5 years of
technical experience
Minimum of 2 years of
leadership experience
Engineering Leadership
39
Concerning the sample size, Smith et al., (2009) noted that it is essential that IPA studies
are conducted on relatively small sample sizes in order to find a reasonably homogeneous
sample, so that, within the sample, the convergence and divergence can be extensively examined
in detail. Smith & Osborn (2008) also stated that IPA studies have been published with sample
sizes of one, four, nine, fifteen, and more participants, as such, there is no right answer to the
question of the sample size, noting that it partly depends on several factors such as the degree of
commitment to the case study, level of analysis and reporting, the richness of the individual
cases, and the constraints one is operating under. However, the authors did suggest that for
students doing IPA for the first time, three is an extremely useful number. In this study, six
participants were recruited from ABET, and seven participants were recruited from the industry,
making a total of thirteen participants to allow for a deep exploration of the engineering
leadership phenomenon, especially engineering leadership skills. A higher frequency of
emergence of certain themes in an open-ended, unstructured, or semi-structured interview could
be an indication of their relative importance or relevance to the participants (Smith et. al, 2009).
It would be more credible to have certain skills identified by ten participants than by four
participants.
The purposive sampling technique also referred to as purposeful sampling was used in
this study. Purposive sampling requires the identification and selection of individuals or groups
of individuals who are proficient and well-informed about a phenomenon of interest, who are
available, and are also willing to participate in the research (Palinkas et al., 2015). Hence,
purposive sampling is often used whenever there is a need to recruit participants who meet
certain criteria that fit the objective and purpose of the study. The targeted participant in this
study has to meet the criteria of being an engineering professional who in addition to years of
40
experience as a professional in the engineering field must have held a leadership position in an
engineering organization for a minimum of one year. Therefore, this sampling was employed
because participants in this study must meet the stated criteria to be considered appropriate for
participation.
3.7.1.2. Engineering Leaders’ Recruitment
This describes how engineering leaders in ABET and the industry were recruited for
participation in this study.
ABET Leaders
The ABET leaders were recruited in this study through indirect recruitment, as well as
through the ABET website. For indirect recruitment, the researcher was introduced by a member
of the research committee to an ABET evaluator who knows a lot about ABET leadership. This
person assisted the researcher in indirect recruitment by giving the researcher the email contacts
of potential participants. The researcher contacted the professionals by letting them know she got
their email contact from one of their professional colleagues and invited them to participate in
the study. A copy of the electronic letter used to invite the ABET leaders can be found in
Appendix A. A total number of five participants were recruited through this method, but a
closer look at the criteria shows that three out of the five participants did not sufficiently meet the
criteria. This is because although they have held the position of program evaluator for a couple of
years, investigation shows that program evaluation is the entry-level position in ABET and real
leadership in ABET starts from a team leadership position. Also, because the number of
participants obtained from the indirect recruitment was not sufficient, the remaining participants
were recruited by looking at the ABET website for people in leadership roles and checking out
their profiles on LinkedIn and other sources to ensure they have the required experience. The
41
potential participants were sent emails to ask for their participation in the study. Figure 3.3.
shows the participant ABET leader’s recruitment summary, while Table 3.2 shows their data
summary.
Figure. 3.3. ABET Leaders Recruitment Summary
Table 3.2
ABET Leaders’ Data Summary
Engineerin
g Leader
Pseudonym
Economic Sector
Job Title
No. of years of experience
in the Engineering Field
No. of years of
experience in a
Leadership Position
Lilly
Academia
EAC Executive
Commissioner
38
7
Allison
Industry / Academia
At-Large Director
45
9
Kate
Academia
EAC Executive
Commissioner
14
2
Sawyer
Academia
President
35
8
Fredrick
Academia
EAC Executive
Commissioner and
Team Chair
30
5
Maxwell
Academia
EAC Executive
Commissioner and
Team Chair
40
8
42
Industry Leaders
This study sought to recruit two engineering professionals from a small, medium-sized,
and large engineering company, for a total of six, based on company size classification criteria
(see Table 3.3) to explore if there might be variability in their perspectives as they define
engineering leadership and the skills that should be emphasized. Seven industry leaders were,
however, recruited. Table 3.4 shows the data summary of the participant’s companies.
Table 3.3
Engineering Company Classification
Classification
Employee Size
Small
Greater than 10 but not more than 99 employees
Medium-sized
Between 100 and 499 employees
Large
Greater than 500 employees
Adapted from “Measuring the small business economy”, by Highfill et al., 2020,
p.15. Copyright 2020 by Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of
Commerce.
Table 3.4
Company Data Summary of Industry Leaders
Participant’s
Pseudonym
Company
Industry
Employee Size
Classification
Aaron
Company 1
Transportation
Locally 5000
Large
Alex
Company 2
High-Tech
Locally 6000
Globally 161,000
Large
Norah
Company 3
Aerospace
Locally 4500
Globally 100,000
Large
George
Company 4
Manufacturing
Locally 200
Medium
Justin
Company 5
Civil Engineering
Locally 200
Medium
Henry
Company 6
Industrial Automation
Locally 50
Small
Raymond
Company 7
Civil Engineering
Locally 25
Small
43
The engineering professionals who participated in this study were recruited through the
Director of Industry Relations at Utah State University and direct contact. The criteria for the
participants were discussed with the Director of Industry Relations, and the email addresses of
potential participants who were on the College of Engineering advisory board who met the
criteria were sent to the researcher to be used for research invitations. Two participants were
recruited using this method. Another four participants were recruited through direct contact by
visiting the websites of engineering companies in the state of Utah to get contact information of
the people in leadership positions who met the criteria for participation. This was then used to
send them the research invitation. Four participants were recruited using this method. The
remainder of the participants were recruited during the STEM week at Utah State University. The
researcher visited a few of the booths set up by the engineering companies and explained the
purpose of the research and the criteria for participation. This yielded several contacts, and one
participant was recruited using this method. The electronic letter used to invite the industry
leaders can be found in Appendix B. Figure 3.5 shows the breakdown of the industry leaders’
recruitment. Table 3.5 shows the data summary of industry leaders.
Figure. 3.5. Recruitment of the Industry Leaders
44
Table 3.5
Industry Leaders’ Data Summary
Engineering
Leader
Pseudonym
Economic Sector
Job Title
No. of years of
experience in the
Engineering Field
No. of years of
experience in a
Leadership
Position
Aaron
Transportation
Director of Transportation
22
16
Alex
High-Tech
Lead Electronics Engineer
8
3
Norah
Aerospace
Design Engineering
Director
14
8
George
Manufacturing
Engineering Design
Leader
32
25
Justin
Civil Engineering
Director of Construction
and Materials
27
16
Henry
Industrial Automation
Founder
17
14
Raymond
Civil Engineering
CEO
46
34
With regards to the ethical consideration and Institutional Review Board (IRB) Process,
using the IRB online Kuali process, a proposal outlining the details of the procedures to be
carried out in this study was submitted to the (IRB) for approval. In the informed consent form,
the research goal and objectives were communicated to the participants. They were assured of
the anonymity and confidentiality of their responses, the benefits versus risks of the research, the
type of required data to be collected, that the research has minimal risk and is not different from
those usually encountered in daily life events, and their right to withdraw at any time. The
informed consent form is located in Appendix C. Participants were offered an incentive of an
Amazon gift card valued at $50.
45
3.7.2. Data Collection
The data collection method used in this study was the interview method, and the
interview approach used was the semi-structured interview. Semi-structured interview allows a
researcher to use predetermined open-ended questions to collect data from research participants
and also allow other questions to be asked by the researcher that were not included in the
questions earlier formulated, for a detailed exploration of the phenomenon being studied (Smith
et al., 2009). According to Smith & Osborn (2008), semi-structured interviews are likely the best
method for gathering data for IPA investigations, and this method has been used to perform the
majority of IPA studies. The questions used in a semi-structured interview are usually
constructed in a way that would allow the respondent to be able to elicit a more detailed and free-
form response, however, rather than sticking closely to the interview schedule, the constructed
questions are modified in light of the participants’ responses. This allows the investigator to
probe into interesting and important areas that come up during the interview (Smith and Osborn,
2008). Hence, rather than the interview protocol dictating the interview schedule, it is guided by
it. The constructed questions are usually referred to as interview protocol. In this study, the
interview protocol was developed with the assistance of a qualitative research expert in IPA in
the Department of Engineering Education at Utah State University. Smith & Osborn, (2008)
suggest that a researcher using the semi-structured interview should try and establish rapport
with the respondent to put them at ease, should know that the ordering of questions is less
important, and that the researcher is free to probe interesting areas that arise based on the
respondent’s interests or concerns were used during the interview for this study.
In this study, the semi-structured interview lasted between 45 and 60 minutes as
suggested by Alase (2017), that the interview duration of an IPA study should be approximately
46
sixty to ninety minutes. The interview protocol is located in Appendix D. In addition to the
researcher taking notes during the interviewing process, the interview was audio recorded as
suggested by Creswell (2013). The interviews were stored in a secure box folder and the
recorded interviews were transcribed into text format by using professional transcribers from the
company SpeechPad and Descript speech-to-text software. Once the interview transcription was
completed, the transcription was thoroughly read, de-identified to remove sensitive information,
and sent to the participants. This was in accordance with the promise made to the participants
before the interview that after the interview they would be sent a copy of their de-identified
transcript for perusal and approval before using their data for analysis. All the transcripts used for
analysis in this study were approved transcripts by the participants. The transcribed interviews
were then imported into the qualitative data analysis software, MAXQDA 2020 for subsequent
data analysis. MAXQDA is a software program that relies on various methods for systematizing,
organizing, and analyzing non-numeric data and it is designed for computer-assisted qualitative
and mixed methods data.
3.7.3. Data Analysis
The data analysis steps used in this study were adapted from Smith et al., (2009)’s IPA
data analysis method. The authors said that IPA data analysis is an iterative and inductive cycle
that is characterized by a variety of common processes such as moving from the particular to the
shared and moving from the descriptive to the interpretative. They also prescribed guiding
principles like focusing on individual meaning-making within a specific context and being
committed to an understanding of the participant's point of view. They noted that it is customary
to start the process of the IPA data analysis with a single case due to the idiographic commitment
of the IPA method. The idiographic commitment of the IPA requires that the researcher analyzes
47
the first case in detail, then goes ahead to analyze the second case in detail, and on and on before
engaging in finding patterns among cases. However, they stated that their suggested IPA data
analysis steps are open to change and should be adapted when and where the researchers feel
comfortable doing so, especially when working with larger samples. According to the authors:
“If one has a larger corpus, …, the emphasis may shift more to assessing what were the
key emergent themes for the whole group. Here, it may even be the case that one
identifies emergent themes at the case level but holds off the search for patterns and
connections until one is examining all the cases together (Smith et al., 2009, p.106)”
The suggested approach was used in conducting the data analysis in this study as the number of
participants was thirteen. Figure 3.6. shows the steps involved in the IPA data analysis process
used in this study. An illustration of how this procedure was implemented in the MAXQDA data
analysis software can also be found in Appendix F.
Figure 3.6. IPA data analysis Procedure. Adapted from “Interpretative Phenomenological
Analysis: Theory, Method, and Research.”, by Smith et al., 2009. Copyright 2009 by Sage
Publications.
48
The description of the data analysis procedure is given below:
Step 1: Reading and re-reading phase
Here, the researcher first becomes familiar with the transcripts by reading and re-reading
to enter into the world of the participants. That is, the researcher delays the habitual inclination to
summarize while reading through the transcript but instead engages in repeated reading to
understand how the narration binds certain sections of the interview together. Since, repeated
reading allows a model of the overall interview to develop, and the researcher is able to spot the
locations of richer and more detailed sections as well as sections that contain discrepancies or
unexpected findings. In this study, the transcripts were read more than twice to get familiarized
with the transcripts.
Step 2: Initial Noting
This stage is where the researcher further grows in familiarity with the transcript by
identifying specific ways by which the participants think or talk about an issue and make a note
of anything of interest within the transcript. It is a step that examines the narratives and the use
of the language of the participants on a very exploratory level. The aim here is to produce a
comprehensive set of comments or notes on the data and there are no rules about what is
commented upon. In this study, the first initial noting started at the third time of reading the
transcripts (see Appendix F). The types of exploratory comments that the researcher engages in
during this stage of data analysis are:
• Descriptive comments: these are comments that describe which things matter to the
participants or which things are key objects of concern to them. For example, it could be
values, interest, events, places, relationships, process, emotional responses, etc.
49
Descriptive comments have a phenomenological focus because they highlight the objects
or phenomena that structure participants’ thoughts and experiences. The purpose of a
descriptive comment is to analyze the transcript with the aim of describing the content. In
this study, one of the descriptive comments made by researcher while making a note
about a participant’s views on rationale articulation was, “being ready to explain ‘the
whys’ and encouraging your followers to ask ‘the whys’ is one of the hallmarks of
successful leaders”. That is, this was not a quote from the participant, but the researcher’s
descriptive comment to capture the narratives of the participant concerning the
importance of articulating the whys in the workplace.
• Linguistic comment: This is a comment that helps the researcher to understand how and
why the participants have certain concerns by looking at their use of language. This could
be pronoun use, pauses, laughter, tone, repetition, degree of fluency, etc. In this study,
one of the examples of linguistic comment was when the participants were asked to
differentiate between engineering leadership and general leadership, and one of the
participants said, “You know, yeah, it's hard for me to tell. Is there any difference?
Leadership is leadership”. The linguistic comment that the researcher made concerning
this was “hesitation” as it could be seen that this study participant hesitated to share his
views on the difference between the two domains of engineering leadership. Also,
another participant when sharing his views on communication skills said
“Communication in general is super important”. The linguistic comment here is
“emphasis” that is, the participant’s use of the language “super important” shows the
degree of importance he attributed to communication skills.
50
• Conceptual comments: These refer to comments that deal with the transcript data at a
conceptual level and are more interpretive in nature. Here, the researcher engages in
reflection that could even take on an interrogative form, discussion, and refinement of
ideas. The interpretation here inevitably draws on the researcher’s experiential and/or
professional knowledge, or the researcher’s perception and understanding in order to
make sense of and sound out the meaning of the participant’s major experience. The main
aim of conceptual comment according to the authors is that, when making a conceptual
comment, one is using oneself to make sense of the participant and not the other way
round. In this study, one of the examples of conceptual comment was, “technical
knowledge as a guide to knowing the feasibility of a proposed solution to an engineering
problem.” This was a comment made when one of the study participants narrated how he
would have wasted a lot of resources and time on a proposed solution by a subordinate
who was considered an expert if he had not had the technical background to ask
insightful questions that led to the discovery of the long-term impracticability of the
solution.
Step 3: Developing the emergent themes
This is the stage where the researcher engages in turning the notes generated in stage 2
into themes to produce a concise statement of the major points in the various comments attached
to a piece of transcript. Themes, according to the authors, are phrases that capture the
psychological essence of a piece of information that contains enough particularity to be grounded
or foundational, and enough abstraction to be conceptual. It should be noted that the emergent
themes in this situation reflect not only the participants' original words but also the researcher’s
interpretation due to the phenomenological underpinning. The authors noted that the most
51
important thing in this stage is that the emergent themes should feel like they have captured the
necessary points and reflect an understanding. In this study, some of the themes that emerged at
this stage are, “why technical skill is important”, “leadership evolvement”, “Not afraid to fail”
“people are not things”, “big-picture oriented”, “why soft skills are necessary” “explaining the
whys”, “provide mentorship”, “everyone on your team matters”, “engineering leadership
definition”, “communication skills”, and so on.
Step 4: Moving to the next case.
This step involves moving to the next participant's transcript and repeating the earlier
steps. The authors noted that while it is important to treat the next case on its terms to do justice
to its individuality, the researcher will inevitably be influenced by what he has already found.
However, they noted that it is an important skill in IPA to allow new themes to emerge with each
case.
Step 5: Searching for connections among the themes.
This is the step where the researcher engages in looking for connections between themes
and grouping them based on how they fit together. That is, themes that relate to the same aspect
of the studied experience are grouped while some may be discarded. This step is dynamic and
iterative and necessitates the researcher moving back and forth between the entire data set and
the consolidated themes. Some of the specific ways of finding connections among themes as
suggested by the authors used in this study are:
• Abstraction: This involves clustering related themes together and giving the cluster a new
name or thematic label that is representative of the whole cluster. The new theme is called
the super-ordinate theme. Abstraction is a way of synthesizing and integrating the
52
emergent themes to show the relationships between them. In this study, emergent themes
like, “people are not things”, “provide mentorship”, and “everyone on your team matters”
were abstracted to become “teamwork” (see Appendix F).
• Subsumption: This is a situation in which an emergent theme is broad enough to acquire
the super-ordinate status. That is, it is broad enough to subsume or absorb other emergent
themes as part of itself. A good example of a subsumption theme in this study is,
“communication skills”. Emerging themes like, “knowing your audience and what they
value” and “customizing your communication to the audience” were all absorbed into
communication skills (see Appendix F).
• Numeration: This refers to the frequency with which a theme is supported. That is,
numeration is the art of noting the frequency of certain themes across different cases.
According to the authors, it made sense to think of the frequency with which emergent
themes appear as one indicator of their relative importance and relevance to the
participant especially in situations where the interview style was open-ended and
unstructured. In this study, the interview questions were open-ended, and the interview
protocol was semi-structured. Numeration was used to derive the core essences of
engineering leadership which translated to the identified engineering leadership skills in
this study.
• Comparison: Comparison is an attempt to identify themes that relate to shared
experiences or divergent views of the participants, especially across cases. It is somehow
similar to numeration but unlike numeration which quantifies the frequency of themes,
comparison delves deeper into the essence of the participant’s experience by exploring
the depth and nuances of their shared and individual perceptions of their experience. For
53
instance, in this study, a comparison was used to identify the commonality and
differences in the views of the participants on engineering leadership and general
leadership, and it was used throughout the data analysis to explore the shared views of the
participants on the identified engineering leadership skills.
It should be noted that a codebook was created during this step and its use extended to the next
step which has to do with looking for patterns across cases. The codebook can be found in
Appendix E.
Step 6: Looking for patterns across cases.
This step involves cross-case analysis that is aimed at identifying shared themes among
different participants while still preserving the unique aspects of each individual's experience.
According to the authors, this step is particularly a creative task as it usually leads to
reconfiguring and relabeling of themes which helps the analysis to move to a more theoretical
level. In this study, during this step, patterns that led to identifying the conceptualization and
articulation of engineering leadership by the study participants emerged. So, the core essences of
engineering leadership that translate to the identified engineering leadership skills emerged (see
Appendix F). These two themes were used to answer research questions 1 and 2. In addition, the
theme, contextual differences in engineering leadership definition and skills, which was used to
answer research question 3 emerged at this stage, as well as the role of training and experience in
engineering leadership success.
Inter-coder reliability was conducted in step 3, which was the stage for developing
emergent themes, to ensure that the identified themes were not solely influenced by the
researcher’s subjective interpretation but were grounded in the data. A graduate Ph.D. student
54
who is knowledgeable in qualitative phenomenological study was invited by the researcher to
work as the second coder and 30% of the codes were discussed. The second coder was exposed
to two interviews from ABET professionals and two interviews from industry leaders, making a
total of four interviews. The transcriptions were segmented, and both the researcher and the
second coder assigned their codes to each of the segments separately. The codes assigned by the
researcher and the second coder were then compared, and the differences were discussed at an
arbitration session until at least 80% of the agreement was reached as suggested by Saldaña
(2013).
3.8. The Role of the Researcher
The researcher led the data collection procedure and the qualitative analysis for this
study. The researcher, having had experience in both engineering education and information
science, used the expertise acquired from the experience to conduct the interview and analyze the
data. Also, in data analysis, it is customary in an IPA study for the researcher to actively engage
in double hermeneutics, which has to do with being able to interpret the participant's
interpretation of their experience (Alase, 2017; Smith & Osborn, 2015). In addition, the authors
noted that it is very important that the IPA researcher comply with the idiography approach to
data analysis by going over one interview's transcript in great detail before moving on to look at
other cases. That is, starting with “particular” instances and only slowly working up to more
general categorizations or claims. The idiographic mode of inquiry is opposite to the nomothetic
approach in which analysis is at the level of groups and populations and only makes probabilistic
claims about individuals. The idiographic approach takes into consideration the particular
experience of the individual concerning the phenomenon under study. Therefore, the researcher
VY
Vv”
55
engaged in the process of idiography during the data analysis as well as double hermeneutics in
interpreting the findings from this research.
56
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
This study aimed to investigate how engineering leaders in ABET and leaders in industry
would define engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills based on their experience.
Thus, adhering to the principles of phenomenological research, this chapter presents findings
deeply rooted in the participants' lived experiences. Four major themes emerged from the
interpretive phenomenological analysis as shown in Figure 4.1, and a brief description of the
themes is given in Table 4.1. The subsequent paragraphs address each of these themes and their
corresponding sub-themes.
Figure 4.1. The main themes from the findings.
57
Table 4.1
A Description of the Identified Themes in this study
SN
Theme
Meaning
1.
Engineering Leaders
Conceptualization of
Engineering Leadership
This theme sheds light on the diverse perspectives of the
engineering leaders in this study about what they believed to
be the fundamental leadership principles within the
engineering context and how they defined engineering
leadership based on their experiences as leaders.
2.
The core essences of
engineering leadership skills
This theme highlights the personal and professional
characteristics exhibited by engineering leaders and those
they articulated as essential for engineering leadership
success. This provided insights into the identified engineering
leadership skills in this study.
3.
Contextual Differences in the
Definition of Engineering
Leadership and Classification
of Engineering Leadership
Skills
This theme revealed contextual variations in the definition of
engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills by
offering valuable insights into how situational factors
influence the perception and identification of engineering
leadership skills by the engineering leaders in this study.
4.
The Role of Training and
Experience in Engineering
Leadership Success
This theme explores the impact of formal training on
engineering leadership success based on the perspectives of
engineering leaders in this study. It emphasizes the
significance of experiential learning in leadership
development.
4.1. Theme 1: Engineering Leaders Conceptualization of Engineering Leadership
This theme highlights the various ways in which engineering leaders who participated in
this study perceived, articulated, and embodied the fundamental principles of leadership within
the engineering context based on their experience as leaders. It conveys the perspective that is
essential to understanding what it means to lead in the engineering domain. Theme 1 is
structured around three emergent subthemes which are (1) participants’ definition of engineering
leadership (2) the differences and similarities between engineering and general leadership, and
(3) the perceived scope of engineering leadership across organizational boundaries.
58
4.1.1. Sub-Theme 1: Definition of Engineering Leadership
The engineering leaders in this study sought to define engineering leadership in ways that
reflected their professional conduct and technical expertise. When asked how they would define
engineering leadership based on their experience, only five out of the thirteen engineering
leaders were able to directly articulate the definition of engineering leadership, the remaining
eight engineering leaders defined engineering leadership using illustrations or stories often
backed by a statement which summarized their conceptual understanding of engineering
leadership definition. For instance, Allison (ABET leader) was able to articulate and give a direct
definition of engineering leadership based on the ability to motivate the group being led in
fulfilling the goal and mission of the group as follows:
Engineering leadership is pretty much like any other kind of leadership. It's being able to
manage the process flow in accordance with the mission or the goal or whatever you
want to call it, to enable the things that need to be done to get done through the people
because the people are your resource.
Also, Henry (industry leader) was able to directly articulate the definition of engineering
leadership, linking it with prowess to engage people in problem-solving as he said:
So, for me, engineering leadership means seeing the overall picture of what needs to be
accomplished on the technical solution within a business unit, and understanding how to
engage people in solving that technical problem is probably how I would summarize it.
Meanwhile, Norah (industry leader) illustrated her definition of engineering leadership as that
which has to do with professional conduct and technical know-how and noted this was where she
found most success. In her own words, she said:
59
How do I define engineering leadership based on my experience? Um, that is a good
question. So, I think it's important as an engineering leader to be able to understand and
work with the same tools that my engineers have, to practice what you preach. Basically,
I'm telling them they have to go do something. I want to be able to have at least a high-
level working knowledge of how to do that too, so that I can help answer questions or
understand where they may start to have any troubles. And then we can course correct
together. So being an engineering leader, it’s important to have that experience and that
willingness to jump in and understand the problem firsthand. At least that's where I found
the most success.
Similarly, George (industry leader) shared this view on engineering leadership as that which has
to do with exercising sound professional ethical behavior and leading by example when he noted
that:
I think that a big part of engineering leadership is leading by example. I think that a big
part of it is being present to lead. I think that in order to demonstrate effective leadership,
you have to be present, people have to witness it, and they have to witness your actions.
Another thing is I think that you have to have a high enough level of integrity to do what
you say and follow through with that. I think that integrity, not compromising when you
feel like you're outside of ethical boundaries, or when you feel like there are decisions
that harm others as a role, from your role as an engineer. I think that's important. I think
that you need to take that engineering duty very seriously and if you have the potential to
harm others, or you see that risk, you need to stand behind it and take the high ground.
60
Finally, Justin (industry leader) articulated his definition of engineering leadership by weaving it
around a story as having the ability to seek the help needed to solve a particular problem when he
said:
Engineering leadership would be, maybe not necessarily having all the answers, but to be
able to know where to go to get the answers from those around you along the way. I think
engineering leadership is something that people can just sense and will call you for
answers. Within our company, we have lots of people who will just call each other. Okay,
I'm experiencing this situation, what would you suggest I do? As an engineering leader,
you are that resource that helps even if you don't have the answers.
4.1.2. Sub-Theme 2: Diversity and Commonality of Views on Engineering Leadership and
General Leadership
This sub-theme seeks to provide insight into the nuances that differentiate engineering
leadership from general leadership to foster an understanding of the phenomenon as posited by
the engineering leaders in this study. The sub-theme lends insight into leadership principles
across domains, particularly focusing on those that are essential for leaders in engineering.
Regarding the similarities between engineering leadership and general leadership, the
majority of the engineering leaders noted that both are very similar and expressed a lack of
inability to really ascertain whether there is a difference between engineering leadership and
general leadership until when probed further to think about any characteristic that could be said
to be a key difference between the two. For instance, in response to the similarities between
engineering leadership and general leadership, Raymond (industry leader) expressed his views
on both leadership domains as similar when he said:
61
I don't know that I feel that there really is a fundamental difference between engineering
leadership, an engineer who's a leader, and anybody else who's a leader. Now, there
could be style differences, but fundamentally, I don't know that there's a difference.
Also, Alex (industry leader) responded by sharing that he finds it hard to differentiate between
the two leadership domains which means he considers them similar. He expressed this by saying:
You know, Yeah, it's hard for me to tell. Is there any difference? Leadership is leadership.
I think it's just a group of people you're interacting with. Their makeup is different. With
engineers, it is more of a technical environment where the questions are more
fundamental, like, you have to have evidence, because people are going to challenge you.
After all, engineers are curious, right?
Sawyer (ABET leader) also shared his view of the similarity between engineering leadership and
general leadership by emphatically stating that there is no difference between the two domains
with his response that:
Leadership in engineering is no different than any other discipline. Leadership is
leadership, whether it's in a church, whether it's in ABET, or whether it's anywhere,
except the military, the military is different.
When probed further as to why he thought the military is different, he responded that leadership
in the military is different because they have their set or predefined way of looking at leadership.
Other than that, he believed leadership in engineering is no different from leadership elsewhere.
Furthermore, Lilly (ABET leader) responded to this prompt by hesitating to acknowledge that
there is a difference between these two leadership domains which connotes that she considers
them similar to an extent. She stated that:
62
I'm not so sure if engineering leadership is that much different than just leadership in
general.
Finally, Maxwell (ABET leader) added philosophical underpinning to his views on the somewhat
similarity of the two leadership domains. He expressed his views by stating that:
Engineering leadership is leadership in the context of goals associated with engineering,
and philosophically, I don't think that's different from any other leadership.
When asked further to shed more light on the statement, he explained that leaders in both
domains share similar traits which he expressed in terms of interpersonal skills as he said:
Well, look at universities. There are a lot of universities that have engineers as presidents.
So, organizationally, traits of good leaders, that they listen first, they care about people,
they stay focused on the goals, they respect people, those sorts of values and things of
good leaders are, I don't think make a darn bit of difference if you're an engineer or not.
With regards to what differentiates engineering leadership from general leadership, the majority
of engineering leaders believe that leading engineering design efforts or technical competence is
the major thing that differentiates engineering leadership from general leadership. Three of the
engineering leaders emphatically refuted the notion that a good leader could oversee any
company. They noted that while an engineer could venture into leading a group of people outside
the domain of engineering and still grasp the basic understanding required to effectively lead in
that domain, the same cannot be said of someone who does not have an engineering background.
For instance, Fredrick (ABET leader) disagreed with the notion as he said:
I mean, there is a philosophy that, a good project manager can manage any project, or a
good dean can oversee any college, or a good CEO can oversee any company. And I
63
don't know that. I don't necessarily agree with that because I do think that when you're
leading a technical organization or a technical project, you do need to have a deep
appreciation of the technical discipline. Now you might not be a domain expert, but being
a domain expert in some technical discipline gives you credibility with those technical
people, but it also gives you, I'd say, just the broad scalability to assess other people's
technical statements, or maybe at least know the right questions to ask. So, I think that is
what differentiates engineering from other types of leadership.
This view was also shared by Henry (industry leader) who reiterated that technical competence is
a key ingredient in engineering leadership and stated that it would be nearly impossible for non-
engineers to attempt to handle engineering design efforts by saying:
Yeah, I think the technical expertise does need to be there, and so I think having a leader
in engineering would make it easier to have them apply their skill set in other arenas than
it would be for a general leader to apply their skill set in engineering. But I think
engineering, I mean, you get some value for all this trouble of trying to understand the
science behind things, build up this basis, and now you can actually apply that in a whole
bunch of different arenas. A leader in the other space can never, they can never even
attempt to come to engineering…. It would be a lot, a lot more challenging to go in that
direction.
In addition, Maxwell (ABET leader) opined that contrary to what MBA teaches that anyone
could lead just about any company without understanding the product, an engineering company
demands technical competence to understand what goes on there. He noted that:
64
Well, engineering leaders have to be technically competent. Engineers tend to respect
competence. So, you need to be technically competent to understand what goes on in the
project. And maybe that's one philosophical difference because, the MBA school says, if
you have an MBA, you can manage anything from a McDonald's to a car company. You
don't need to understand the product. Whereas I think engineering leaders do need to
understand the core knowledge of their organization. So, technical competence.
In addition to this, some other salient points that other engineering leaders made in support of
this perspective are that having technical expertise helps the leader to have the vocabulary that he
or she can use in working with others. Also, technical expertise gives the leader credibility with
those that they are leading because it connotes that their judgment can be relied on, and technical
expertise helps the leader to know when someone is going overboard with their proposal of
engineering solutions like Fredrick (ABET leader) said:
And so, if somebody is proposing an effort where what it sounds like is dabbling over the
edges of the laws of physics, presumably you've got the expertise to write that
anecdotally.
Justin (industry leader) also shared this view of the usefulness of technical knowledge as a guide
in knowing the feasibility of a proposed solution to an engineering problem when he said:
I think that an engineering leader has an advantage over a non-engineering leader in an
organization that is engineering because of the fact that they just have that basis of
knowledge and I don't want to call it a bias, but it may be that a non-engineer would say,
well, why can't you do this? And that would be great because we love being challenged,
but understanding that you're not going to change the laws of physics, right? Yes. It's kind
65
of important. Yeah. Right? Yeah…. I think it's inherent in an engineering leader that they
understand the principles, especially the knowledge of those that can't be changed would
help.
Another important view that engineering leaders in this study shared is the fact that contrary to
the opinion of some schools of thought that say leadership is not for the engineer, the participants
noted that leadership actually starts for the engineer right from the entry-level into the
engineering field of practice and continues throughout their career. They noted that the only
difference is that leadership is in stages in the engineering profession and an engineer might
decide not to reach the highest stage. In talking about the first stage of leadership, which he
referred to as the self-directed leadership stage, Fredrick (ABET Leader) explained that,
When somebody's hired into an entry-level position, they're still expected to show
leadership. But that leadership at that level is really self-direction. They're expected to
lead themselves. They may be assigned a small activity, but they should be able to do that
with minimal supervision. So, at the early stages of their career, it would be self-
direction.
He proceeded to explain what he called the second stage of leadership which is motivated
leadership. He noted that this level of leadership is initiated when the engineering leader
transitioned into a project management role by saying,
At the next stage of their career, it would be project management. So, probably no
supervisory or management responsibilities beyond project management, and everyone
who's done project management knows it's tough because you have responsibility but
66
often no authority So, the main leadership challenge at that next level is motivating
others.
Sawyer (ABET leader) also shared his views on this stage of engineering leadership and
maintained that project management is a leadership position when he said,
Engineers after a while become project managers, and a project is a leadership position
for an engineer. So, it's going to be working with a bunch of other engineers with less
experience and managing the project.
Fredrick continued his classification of stages of engineering leadership by describing it as the
managerial leadership stage. He explained this by saying that,
The next level, and I wouldn't even call it a change in level because I think it's a
voluntary change in role, some engineers are then drawn to managerial leadership. And
with that comes formal organizational leadership, where not only do you need to motivate
yourself and motivate others, but you also have direct supervisory and personnel
responsibilities that now go with that. And that's where I think, leadership, I mean, maybe
a lot of those tasks, it leaves engineering leadership and goes into the generic category of
managerial leadership where you need knowledge of, personnel policies and supervisory
policies and a lot more. I'd say direct, again, direct managerial as opposed to leadership
responsibilities.
Finally, he noted that the managerial leadership stage is the highest stage of engineering
leadership and that it is the optional or less inviting stage for many engineers. However, he
maintained that every engineering professional will experience the first two stages of leadership
in their career. Explaining his views on this, he said,
67
So, again, I think reasonably not all engineers want to take that path. Many engineers
have no desire or interest in stepping into managerial leadership, but every engineer is
going to have to do those other things, again, self-direction and motivation leadership.
Yeah, that's the way I see it, and again, I think managerial leadership is for some people
and it's not for other people. I would say from a personal perspective, I dipped my toe in
that and decided I didn't like it. And I think a lot of technical people probably have that
same experience.
Similarly, Sawyer while sharing his views of how engineering professionals go through different
stages of leadership in their career, commented on this managerial level of leadership and said,
Engineers after a while become project managers…. And when the project manager does
a really good job, then he/she climbs the ladder and becomes a VP of production and so
forth hopefully by excellent service that they've done, and a lot of times, it all boils down
to how much money you make for the company.
4.1.3. Sub-Theme 3: Perceived Role of Engineering Leaders in an Organization
Sub-theme 3 discusses participants' perspectives on whether the responsibilities of an
engineering leader are confined to engineering alone or extend to influencing other aspects of the
organization. That is, the main focus here is to understand whether the perception of engineering
leadership by the participants is restricted to those with formal engineering training or whether it
is more expansive across the organization to non-engineers and other stakeholders. Concerning
whether the role of an engineering leader in the organization is broad, four out of the seven
engineering leaders in the industry perceived the role of an engineering leader to be exclusive to
leading engineering efforts or mentoring younger engineers, while only one out of seven
engineering ABET leaders shared this view. The remaining six ABET leaders and three
68
professional engineers had a broader outlook on the role of an engineering leader in the
organization. For instance, adopting a broader outlook on the role of an engineering leader in the
organization, Lilly (ABET leader) said:
So, I would say I don't think you have to be an engineer to provide leadership to
engineers, and engineers who are leaders could also provide leadership to other non-
engineers. I think leadership is a bigger umbrella than the profession of engineering.
In addition, Raymond (industry leader) articulated his broad view from the perspective of ethical
behavior by responding that:
I don't think the focus should be on the engineering professionals alone. No, I think it's a
much broader role and I think a key component of this is really engineering ethics and
professional ethics. So, as engineers, we are responsible for the public interest in public
safety. And so, we have an ethical obligation. I would argue leadership in those aspects.
So, we need to engage in the broader society as engineers but look out for the public
interest and safety.
Meanwhile, in contrast to this view, Kate (ABET leader) viewed the role of an engineering
leader in the context of organizational mission as applied to engineering professionals alone as
she stated that:
I guess I see engineering leadership in the context of engineering leadership as applied to
engineering professionals. I guess I see that in the context of organizational mission. So,
in my particular job, when I am dealing as a leader with my fellow engineers, it tends to
be in the context of how engineering specifically relates to our mission, like, in this case,
69
it's the engineers that I deal with as our university faculty and our mission is to teach
undergrads to perform community service and to do our research.
In addition, Alex (industry leader) saw the role of an engineering leader as using his or her
experience to help other younger engineers succeed and stated that:
Yeah. So, I think for that one, it's really about like enabling others to do the best they can.
I think, you know, for example, I may interact with some younger engineers or people that
don't have as much experience as I have, and then, so from my perspective, my goal is to
kind of bring them up to speed so they can be in a position where they can deliver. I think
that's kind of how I see it.
4.2. Theme 2: The Core Essence of Engineering Leadership
The core essences of an experience depict the basic characteristics of an experience that
are universal and presented in particular instances of a phenomenon. The phenomenon being
investigated in this study is engineering leadership. Therefore, this theme sheds light on the
basic personal and professional characteristics of engineering leadership that have been exhibited
in the professional practice of the engineering leaders in this study as they narrate their
leadership experiences. The highlighted characteristics of engineering leadership in the context
of this theme translate to the identified engineering leadership skills. This theme also goes further
to point out those skills that the engineering leaders in this study regarded as essential to
engineering leadership success. Based on Smith et al., (2009)’s assertion that a higher frequency
of emergence of certain themes in an open-ended or unstructured, interview could be an
indication of their relative importance or relevance to the participants, the identified skills in this
study are classified into three categories which are critical, essential and needed skills.
70
These terms used in the classification are defined in the context of this study as:
• Critical skill: This refers to a skill that is of utmost importance without which the desired
leadership outcome or goal may not be successful or achievable.
• Essential skill: This refers to a skill that is necessary or indispensable to achieving the
desired leadership outcome, which even though it may not carry the same sense of
importance as a critical skill is still indispensable.
• Needed skill: This refers to a skill that is required for actualizing leadership purposes or
objectives, which despite its importance, may be regarded as slightly lower in necessity
compared to critical or essential skill.
Table 4.2 shows the total number of participants who identified each engineering
leadership skill as important, while Figure 4.2 shows a classification of these skills based on their
relative importance.
Table 4.2
The total number of engineering leaders who identified each skill as important.
SN
Skills
Total No of participants
Relative importance
1
Technical Expertise
13
Critical
2
Teamwork
13
Essential
3
Communication
10
Essential
4
Listening
10
Essential
5
Empathy
10
Essential
6
Rationale Articulation
10
Essential
7
Humility or Ego Management
9
Essential
8
Problem-solving and Critical Thinking
9
Essential
9
Fearless Exploration
8
Needed
10
Strategic Visioning
7
Needed
11
Lifelong Learning
7
Needed
12
Ethical and Trustworthiness
7
Needed
13
Demonstrative Leadership
6
Needed
71
SN
Skills
Total No of participants
Relative importance
14
Decision Making
6
Needed
15
Collaborative Followership and Delegation
6
Needed
16
Flexibility
5
Needed
17
Organization and Time Management
5
Needed
18
Leadership Identity Awareness
5
Needed
Figure 4.2. Identified Engineering Leadership Skills.
4.2.1. Sub-Theme 1: Critical Engineering Leadership Skill
Engineering leaders in this study identified technical expertise as a critical skill that is of
utmost importance. They opined that technical expertise is the foundation upon which
engineering leadership stands. A summary of the views they shared on technical expertise is
described in the paragraph following.
72
4.2.1.1. Technical Expertise
All of the industry and ABET leaders characterized technical expertise as a core or
critical engineering leadership skill, stating that engineering leadership demands technical
expertise and a host of soft skills, which they also referred to as interpersonal skills. For instance,
Justin (industry leader) was able to articulate the majority of the dichotomous views shared by
the participants when he characterized engineering leadership as consisting of 30 percent
technical skills and 70 percent general leadership skills. He described his view by saying:
I will probably say maybe like 70 percent is just general leadership, but you have to have
a technical understanding and a technical side as well to be that engineering leader.
Well, because I mean, I would like to think I have some leadership skills that will help me
in a community service aspect, right? Yeah. But, when it comes to an engineering aspect,
I need to have that engineering understanding. I mean, we can be the best leaders, but if
we don't have an understanding, then you're not going to have the clout of those that you
work with to come to you, because part of that engineering leadership is the
understanding of that technicality of it as well.
Allison (ABET leader) expressed her views and concluded that technical expertise is very crucial
to engineering leadership, even if it is for the very fact that it gives you the vocabulary to use
when leading technical efforts. She stated that:
Having some technical background in at least some part of the business is helpful if for
no other reason than you now have the vocabulary that you can start to work with others
as you move forward.
73
This view was shared by Aaron (engineering leader) who noted that even though an engineering
leader might not have to use all the technical knowledge learned during his engineering training
in the position of leadership, the knowledge allows the engineering leader to suggest various
alternative solutions that his team might not have thought of. He expressed this view by stating
that:
I think it's inherent in an engineering leader that they understand the principles,
especially the knowledge of those that can't be changed would help. I think of all of the
calculus I had to go through to get an engineering degree, and have I ever used any of it
on a regular basis? I would say no, and especially not as a leader, right? I am not doing,
you know, partial differential equations at all. However, the fact that I know that it exists
and that I know that it can be used to solve certain types of problems helps me as a leader
to kind of guide people and say, oh, by the way, have you thought about using finite
element analysis, or have you thought about, you know, going back to, you know, the
principles that you learn, of water dynamics and how that might apply to this as well. I
think as a leader, because you have that basis of knowledge, you can help to explore
different alternatives that they may not have thought of.
Fredrick (engineering leader) is of the opinion that technical expertise is a necessity in
engineering leadership because it gives the engineering leader the credibility to assess other
people’s technical statements. He expressed this view by stating that:
Now you might not be a domain expert, but being a domain expert in some technical
discipline gives you credibility with those technical people, but it also gives you, I'd say,
just the broad scalability to assess other people's technical statements, or maybe at least
know the right questions to ask. So, I think that is what differentiates engineering from
74
other types of leadership. Engineering leadership is in a, of technical efforts by somebody
with technical expertise or maybe at least know the right questions to ask. So, I think that
is what differentiates engineering from other types of leadership.
Maxwell (engineering leader) also shared that technical expertise helps the leader to understand
what goes into a project and how to measure the success of a project. He said:
So, you need to be technically competent to understand what goes on in the project. And
maybe that's one philosophical difference because, the MBA school says, if you have an
MBA, you can manage anything from a McDonald's to a car company. You don't need to
understand the product. Whereas I think engineering leaders do need to understand the
core of their, the core knowledge of their organization. So, technical competence. They
need to listen, they need to care, and they also need to show they care, and they really
need to stay focused on the end result, because that's ultimately how engineering
management and leadership measure the success of the project.
In support of the views on the need for technical competence in leading engineering efforts, one
of the engineering leaders, George (industry leader), shared that the major challenge he is
currently facing in his engineering company which was acquired and merged with another
company whose senior leaders are non-engineers, is that those non-engineering leaders do not
have the understanding why it is necessary to have some technical expertise in place and how
this is affecting productivity. He stated that:
So, probably the most recent challenge is just trying to convince non-engineers of the
importance of having those people with the technical abilities in those roles. So, trying to
convince the non-engineers that we need that design talent within our organization,
75
reticence or we can't move the projects forward. We cannot grow the organization and we
can't effectively complete the projects. And the projects we complete inherently have more
flaws and more problems without the engineers or those design, those technical types
involved in the process. And so, trying to convince the non-engineers that technical
expertise really provides benefit for everybody, for them, for the organization, for the
project in general. I think that that has been a pretty exceptional challenge, and it has
increased over time like I said it's kind of like, trying to convince people that haven't been
through the process before that, that your contribution is actually influencing it.
Similarly, with regards to understanding what goes on in a project, Norah (industry leader) also
shared how crucial this is to engineering leadership success by noting that having the
understanding of the problem firsthand and guiding her team towards the solution was where she
found success as an engineering leader. She described her experience as follows:
So being an engineering leader, it’s important to have that experience and that
willingness to jump in and understand the problem firsthand. At least that's where I found
the most success…. So, from a technical aspect, you have to be able to know how things
are going to function. Like being able to think that way so that, you know, how you need
to cross-train your engineers and how you need to lay out processes so that they connect
to the right points so that your software engineers are talking to your electrical
engineers.
4.2.2. Sub-Theme 2: Essential Engineering Leadership Skills
The essential leadership skills identified by the engineering and ABET leaders in this
study are teamwork, communication, listening, empathy, problem-solving and critical thinking,
rationale articulation, and humility or ego management. The engineering leaders believed that
76
these skills are indispensable to engineering leadership success but are not as important as the
critical skills. The ideas presented in this section received validation from no fewer than nine of
the thirteen engineering leaders who were part of this study as shown in Table 4.3. This section
summarizes the findings that were echoed by these engineering leaders.
4.2.2.1. Teamwork Skill
Teamwork is identified by both the industry leaders and ABET leaders in the study as one
of the essential engineering leadership skills. They shared different perspectives on various
aspects of managing one’s team as a leader, especially based on the experience they have
garnered over the years as a leader. One of the perspectives was that an engineering leader must
realize that everyone on the team matters. For instance, Allison (ABET leader) gave an analogy
of a restaurant in which she said having the best cook in the world without efficient servers will
still lead to failure in the end. She described this by saying:
It's like a restaurant; if you don't have any servers, you can have the best cooks in the
world, but if nobody can get the food to the table, you're not going to be successful…. In
the university, maintenance folks are often looked upon as…they're not really important.
Well, they are important because if you don't have light, if you don't have heating and
cooling, and if nobody cleans the classrooms, the teacher can't do their job…. If you look
at any organization, there are a whole bunch of people. And if you remove any one of
those people, there's at least the potential that things are going to fall apart.
Another perspective shared by engineering leaders on teamwork is the need for the leader to
recognize that people are not things. This is because engineers have been taught about dealing
with things, but as a leader, it is important to take a step back and realize that people are not
things. People need to feel valued and respected, especially embracing their individuality as well
77
as avoiding overloading them with too many responsibilities at a time. This view was shared by
Lilly (ABET leader) who said:
It's always about the people. I lead people, and people have a personal life and
professional life. And of course, as a leader, I need them to give 100% of their
professional life, but I don't need them to give 150%. And I need to value that each
person finds meaning in their profession differently. And how I find meaning doesn't
mean how other people find meaning. And I think it took me a long time to see that. So
you know, I can't permit slackers, we need everybody to perform, but each person brings
something to the table that is really valuable.
Also, according to Aaron (industry leader), people must be valued and treated with respect.
Concerning this, he said:
The competency of people management is knowing that people are not things, and as
engineers, we're really, really good at dealing with things, right?.... When it comes to dealing
with people who don't understand, or, and I'm talking engineers or non-engineers alike. Yes.
Speaking to them in a way that they feel heard, that they feel, you know, valued. That is not
something that comes naturally to a lot of engineers because we're very by the book, fact-
based, and if you can't handle it, then you move on. And that's just not the way the world
works.
One of the engineering leaders, Norah (industry leader) said she discovered by experience that
people need a lot more assistance or support from their leader to carry out their duties effectively,
which is somehow contrary to the common opinion that leadership is about assigning
responsibility. In her words, she said:
78
I think when I first became a leader, a very first manager position. I thought it was going
to be more just organization, right? Pull people together, give them the information they
need, and let them go on their way. I've learned that people of all functions need a lot
more handholding through the different types of things they need. They need someone to
listen, that trust piece. They need someone who knows that they've got their back when it
comes to their future and their opportunities at work.
On the issue of people needing more assistance or handholding from their superiors, some of the
industry leaders in this study pointed out the issue of the “curse of knowledge”. This is a term
used to describe a situation in which after someone has become an expert, he or she expects the
subordinates to be as good as they are. They noted that the majority of team-leadership failures
come from this situation. They reiterated that patience with team members until they are able to
stand on their own is a result of being conscious of the curse of knowledge and working on it
continuously. As regards this, Aaron (industry leader) said:
I think the second challenge is, we just assume that because I've been in the department
for 18 years, that people know what I know….. And I believe they call it the curse of
knowledge, right? You can't un-know something once you know it. That's it. Yeah. It's
hard to put yourself in a place where you never knew that thing. And so, a challenge that
I have is overcoming the curse of knowledge and saying, you know what? Most of the
people that I've talked to haven't experienced what it's like to be a roadway designer… So
how can I take my experience and put it in such a way that they can understand it?
Also, Sawyer (ABET leader) while giving an overview of what engineering entails noted that
project management kickstarts the leadership responsibility of engineers but the key thing to
know is that this role entails working with engineers with less experience.
79
Do the best you can do, truly the best you can do, you know. Engineers after a while
become project managers and project manager management is the leadership for an
engineer. So, it's going to be working with a bunch of other engineers with less
experience and managing the project.
Justin (industry leader), drawing from his leadership experience, highlighted that it is crucial to
mentor and continue to show love for the team one is working with as a means of creating a
culture of buy-in and earning their loyalty to stay with the company. He noted that it takes 21-24
months for a new employee to become profitable and if they leave in search of job satisfaction
after 2 years, it ends up as a loss of investment on the company’s part. He shared this view by
saying that:
And so, part of a leader is you want to promote, or as a director or a team lead, project
manager, you want…to mentor, continue to love and share that vision…. That's how we're
going to create, loyal employees that will want to stay with the company and not change
jobs as frequently……in the job market in engineering today, you're well aware, I mean,
it used to be the average engineer was with the same company for six years. Now it's
down to like three to four years, and then to tie into that, studies have shown at least that
we've been told, that it takes up to 21 months to 24 months for a new employee to become
profitable. So, if you hire somebody and by the time they become profitable, and then they
leave two years later. You're never gonna get your investment out of them, right?, and so,
part of it is you have to understand, and for our company our culture is, we try to develop
a culture of just buying-in so to speak, that there's something more than the almighty
dollar that, that an engineer would chase.
80
4.2.2.2. Communication Skills
Communication is another essential engineering leadership skill identified by industry
and ABET leaders in this study. They placed emphasis on it using terms like, “super-important”,
“is key”, or repeating it over and over. They emphasized the importance of being able to
communicate to a broader audience and the importance of tailoring one’s communication to the
audience accordingly. For instance, Sawyer (ABET leader) believes that considering the
changing landscape of the educational system where an engineer is required to function with
people from different backgrounds, an engineering leader must be diverse in terms of relating
and communicating with a broader audience. He described this view by saying that:
The whole of education is changing. It's no longer a mechanical engineer that will
function only as a mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, or chemical engineer. They
are going to be working with each other. They're going to be working with a lot of data
and a lot of computing folks. They're going to be working with HR, with management,
with marketing, with all those. So, they have to be able to be diverse in terms of
communicating and relating to these different folks.
Maxwell (ABET leader) shared his views on this by stating that it is important for the
engineering leader to understand that people are different, and as such, learn to customize their
conversation to individuals and situations. He shared this view using his experience when he
stated that:
When I was an associate provost, my immediate boss was a history major. She had a
Ph.D. in history, and she very much brought a liberal arts thinking approach to things.
She did not tend to be numerical. She just had a very different view on how to approach
things. So, a lot of it is understanding that people are different and understanding what
81
she valued, how she wanted to be approached, and how to communicate within that set of
rules.
He further said:
There are differences dealing with people who grew up in different parts of the world.
None of them are horrifically difficult to overcome, but you need to step back and
understand what makes that person tick.
Similarly, Alex (industry leader) considers knowing the audience and tailoring one’s
conversation to their interest as a viable way to engage people who have non-engineering
background in conversation that will foster cooperation. He expressed this view by saying that:
I think you have to think from their angle, like, for example, if you're talking to someone
from marketing, I'm an engineer, right? So, I think from their perspective, you have to
know, okay, what things matter to them. From the information that you have, you have to
kind of pair those two together. Because from their perspective, maybe they don't care
about technical details, but they only care about how the product is going to sell. Is the
product going to be marketable? So, you kind of have to kind of highlight your
conversation towards that angle they have. I think it's kind of like knowing the audience
and shifting the focus toward whatever they may wanna look at.
Also, Sawyer (ABET leader) demonstrated emphasis on the importance of communication by
saying that:
Leadership requires clear communication. Obviously, as I said, communication in the
written and verbal, listening, that's the key. I cannot emphasize it enough. Some people
82
have to fail several times to learn and some just never learn, but again, we're talking
about leadership, the key is communication, communication, communication.
Aaron (industry leader) accentuates the importance of communication to leadership by placing a
strong emphasis on its significance using the phrase” super important”, highlighting knowing
your audience and customizing your message accordingly is essential to effective
communication. He stated that:
Okay, when it comes to a leader, I'm going to go back to communication, be able to
communicate effectively. And there's so much in communication, right? Knowing your
audience, having your message down, you know, face it. In fact, communication in
general is super important.
He further noted that as a means to foster communication skills in engineering students and
suggested that one of the ways that could be achieved is asking them to explain their engineering
solutions to a third grader or a non-engineer in a way that will be meaningful to them. He said:
But as you understand principles of engineering and you're communicating those I think,
having communications classes, right, to be able to say, take this very technical thing and
explain it to a third grader. Oh right, or the one that I like is, you're sitting at dinner with
your mom, who is a non-engineer and you have to explain what you do. How are you
going to phrase this in such a way that will be meaningful to her?
Similarly, Raymond (industry leader) noted that engineering leaders must possess
communication skills to effectively communicate engineering results to non-engineers, such as
policymakers, project owners, and the public. He stated that:
83
I think you could say communication is a leadership skill that engineers have to have.
And it's really not to talk to other engineers, it's to talk to people who are not engineers.
That's the real job of the engineer, to be able to communicate the engineering results to
non-engineers. And that's going to be policymakers, it's going to be owners of projects,
it's going to be the public?.....And I mean, people are generally educated, so it's not a
lack of education, but you got to still talk to them in a language that they can understand.
Maxwell (ABET leader) reinstates the importance of recognizing that the cultural and
professional background of people influences how they convey their message and that must be
embraced to foster effective communication. He said:
A lot of them, like for example, when I was an associate provost, my immediate boss was
a history major. She had a Ph.D. in history, and she very much brought a liberal arts
thinking approach to things. She did not tend to be numerical. She just had a very
different view on how to approach things. So, a lot of it is understanding that people are
different and understanding what she valued, how she wanted to be approached, and how
to communicate within that set of rules.
This view about communicating within the boundary of what people value was also supported by
Alex (industry leader) who regarding effective communication posited that customizing your
information and talking from the perspective of what matters to the people is one of the ways by
which one can effectively communicate to a broader audience. He explained this by saying:
I think you have to think from their angle, like, for example, if you're talking to someone
from marketing, I'm an engineer, right? So, I think from their perspective, you have to
know, okay, what things matter to them. From the information that you have, you have to
84
kind of pair those two together. Because from their perspective, maybe they don't care
about technical details, but they only care about how the product is going to sell. Is the
product going to be marketable? So, you kind of have to kind of highlight your
conversation towards that angle they have. I think it's kind of like knowing the audience
and shifting the focus toward whatever they may wanna look at.
Lilly (ABET leader) approached her view on the importance of communication skills to
leadership from the perspective of internal and external communication. She noted that
leadership requires being able to communicate to the external audience what the internal goals
are and being able to know what is important to each individual when communicating internally.
In her own words, she said:
I think engineering leaders have to be good communicators. So good communication is
both internal and external. So for example, let's talk about external communication.
During strategic planning, when a college is going forward to talk about "We like to start
these new programs. We'd like to change these programs. We're going to need $20 million
to do that," that requires me to be able to be able to communicate well to the external
audience what our internal goals are…. Internally, I think it's understanding the cultural
differences between the departments but also, at some level, cultural differences and
communication differences between the various department chairs….. So internal
communication just requires understanding what is important to each individual.
4.2.2.3. Listening Skills
Another essential engineering leadership skill identified by ABET and industry leaders in
this study is listening skills, emphasizing listening to understand or listening with understanding.
Sawyer (ABET leader) believed that listening is the most important aspect of leadership and
85
intertwines it with communication by noting that it is only when you listen very well that you
can receive the right message that is being communicated to you. Speaking of this, he said:
Number one is listening, listening before talking. So, when I say communication, it means
receiving, making sure you're receiving the right message. That you are receiving the
authentic message that comes from the constituencies or from the stakeholders. Because
then, you understand how to serve them. So listening is probably the most important
aspect of leadership.
When he was further asked about the reason for this viewpoint, he told a story of how he
misinterpreted something that was communicated to him and learned from that incident. He said:
Well, I can tell you, I thought that I heard someone clearly but later found out I heard
them wrong, and I learned my lessons. So, I have had many failures and I have admitted
my failures. I try to learn from those daily, it's a lifelong learning process.
Lilly (ABET leader) attributed her evolvement as a better leader to her ability to know the
importance of listening to all members of her team when she said:
I think I'm a better leader here at my second college than I was at the first college. I
think, at the first college, I don't think I understood as much the importance of listening to
all constituents or valuing the contribution of all departments. I feel like I have a much
better sense now that the whole college in this case is made up of many parts, and each
part is really important. And to ignore a part because, in my mind, I can't see its
importance is on me, not on the unit.
86
Similarly, Justin (industry leader) attributed his leadership maturation to his desire to model his
character after the engineering leaders he looks up to as mentors, specifically citing listening
with understanding. He stated that:
So, I think that's how over time I have grown, I've had great examples and mentors and
leaders, and I can see how they work, and it gives me a desire to be like them. I see how,
for example, I've got one of the owners here at the company, when we have a personnel
problem, they don't talk a lot, they do a lot of listening and see, and me, I just want to
pipe off and say you're fired, and he'll be just listening with understanding. And so, it's
through experiences like that where my leadership, I guess, is growing.
Kate (ABET leader) noted that while problem-solving is a big part of engineering, listening with
understanding should be the first major step of the problem-solving process. According to her:
A big part of engineering, we like to say, it's about imagining things that never were and
looking at the future and saying, why not? And that kind of thing. But really, we're trying
to solve the problems of people and the best way to solve people's problems is to start by
listening to them and trying to understand what their needs are.
Also, Fredrick (engineering leader) noted that he became smarter when he started listening to
others and he pointed out that listening with the understanding that everyone on a team is striving
to do the right thing even though they may be proposing different solutions and updating one's
views or convincing others of one’s view has been the hallmark of every good leader he has
come across. He said:
Hopefully, we learn from our successes, right? And that probably happened with me when
I started listening to people more and suddenly realized, hey, I'm a lot smarter when I
87
listen to other people…...I mean, if you look at things in a very positive, let's say
optimistic way, it may be a naive way, everybody in a project is trying to do the right
thing. And yet, they may be proposing very different solutions. Things that take you in
opposite directions. And the only way to rationalize that is to understand why they're
advocating these very different positions. And if you can never do that if you're the leader,
you can close the door on one and dictate what's going to happen but you're not going to
get the best solution in the best way with that approach. So, that's why I think that every
good boss, every good leader I've ever had has that ability to really listen, to see things
from your perspective and either update their own or convince you of theirs eventually.
Finally, Alex (engineering leader) regarded listening as a way to foster good decision-making in
a challenging environment like engineering where you have to constantly make trade-offs. He
stated that:
So, I think as an engineering leader, you also have to listen to other people because in a
really challenging environment where you have a lot of technical decisions, sometimes
it's not really about perfect decisions. There's no perfect decision. Nothing is perfect.
Everything is about making tradeoffs. So, you have to think, and you have to let other
people have their own thinking. You have to allow yourself to know what they're thinking
so that you know what the best tradeoff is.
4.2.2.4. Empathy
Empathy is another essential engineering leadership skill that industry and ABET leaders
in this study deemed as necessary for successful engineering leadership. They noted that the
ability of the engineering leader to see things from the perspective of others and show that they
care is very key to promoting a healthy work environment, getting an optimal solution when
88
problem-solving, and fostering the resilience needed to succeed when the going gets tough. For
instance, Henry (industry leader) believed empathy is crucial for effective problem-solving, and
through understanding the current situation with the people or market, empathy helps identify a
pathway to achieve desired outcomes. He described this by stating that:
I'd probably put empathy at the top….Okay, I think that is where true problem-solving
can come from. It's understanding the position of the person that you are trying to work
with or the market you're trying to address. I think if you can understand or try to begin
to understand where that person is coming from, you can understand what their needs
are. …..trying to understand where they are today and then link that with a pathway to
get to where they want to be. I think that's why empathy is so important.
Similarly, Fredrick (engineering leader) opined that empathy is crucial for understanding and
addressing problems, noting that looking at things from other people’s perspectives could
potentially lead to more effective solutions. With regards this, he said:
You need empathy. You need to be able to understand people, and, and see things from
their perspective as well as your own….you think of all the problems in the world that
would go away if people had more empathy. I think it's a very important skill because,
first of all, they may be right and you may be wrong. I mean, they may be seeing
something from a perspective, that is, let's say correct better than you and they've thought
this through in a way you haven't and if you cut them off, you've lost the optimal solution.
George (industry leader) regarded empathy as an important attribute of leadership needed for
team members and employees to be invested in, to build resilience within the organization, and
to achieve success as a leader. He stated that:
89
Well, if you're not empathetic to your employees’ situation or to your followers’ situations,
they don’t have any reason to be invested. They're not invested, and their level of
engagement is not sufficient to help them endure in the process, to complete the process,
or to want to succeed. It doesn't help them build any resilience….. If you're empathetic,
they have, they have a tendency to rely on you and to trust that if they just keep pushing
forward a little harder, they will actually achieve the end result they need. You’ll be
successful as a leader, right?
Sawyer (ABET leader) noted that being empathic is the strategy that he used to overcome most
of the challenges he encountered in his career as an engineer and as a leader. In his own words,
he said:
So, I would not react to people who are getting emotional about certain topics, and I
would try to listen to them, listen to where they come from, what are their perspectives.
And I try to see the world from their perspective to understand them. So, I have overcome
not all the challenges that I've had throughout my career, but most of them that way.
Allison (ABET leader) noted that being empathic and letting your employees know that you have
their back is an important characteristic that an engineering leader must cultivate to move things
forward. While expressing her views on this, she said:
You have to take care of the people that work for you. Whether it's a committee of people,
or whether it's people that are your direct employees. They need to know that you have
their back. That if they make a mistake, you're not going to crucify them for it. And you're
going to help them when they have trouble….It is a really important skill if you expect to
90
move things forward…. Sometimes that involves putting yourself in their shoes and try to
say, well, why would they think this way?
Finally, Aaron (engineering leader) admitted that empathy is what has helped him work
successfully with people who are not engineers like himself. He explained that:
I moved into an area that is not engineering-specific…when it comes to explaining
engineering principles, right? I have an opportunity to say, this is why we do what we do
and this is why we choose the projects that we choose and prioritization…our business
manager is like, well, that doesn't make any business sense and so we can analyze it from
a different viewpoint rather than strictly, does it make engineering sense? And so, yes,
I've seen that many non-engineers in this area have expertise in other areas. I'm learning
how to do engineering better just by seeing it from their eyes.
4.2.2.5. Rationale Articulation or Explain the Why
Rationale articulation is another essential engineering leadership skill that the ABET and
industry leaders in this study identified as crucial for effective engineering leadership. They said
that the act of “explaining the whys” behind every decision is the bedrock of motivation. It not
only gives people a sense of purpose, but it also enables them to cooperate and work hard. Norah
(engineering leader) shared her views on this by saying:
Being able to communicate your why is huge, and again, that, I think that goes across all
functions…. I think it's important because you have to be able to give people motivation
on what they're in for, on what they're doing, right? Sometimes the tasks that you give
somebody may feel pointless, right?.... I'm just throwing out examples, right? We're going
to spend two weeks just focused on this one training for this new tool. And if I just say,
91
Hey, cut all your other work and just do this, people aren't going to do it, right? You're
going to have some people to do, but you're not going to have them all. So, you need to
explain. We have to move to this new tool because this is what the customer is expecting
and if we don't comply with this, then we lose money or we have to redo it later…. So,
being able to explain, you know, why are we slowing down is so we can speed up or why
is this simple task of looking at this bolt or something, matter in the bigger picture?
Justin (industry leader) believes that based on his experience as an engineering leader, and one
who has to work with a lot of people from diverse backgrounds, one of the most critical things to
getting people from diverse backgrounds to be more willing to work with engineering personnel
on a project is rationale articulation. He describes his views by saying:
When you're speaking with other engineers, they understand the language in
transportation talk, for example, like clear zone requirements but when we talk with the
public, why does the road have to be so wide? Why do you have to have so much right of
way?.... that's where you just take a step back and explain to them the rules and the
regulations that we have to work with. And just on a simple, basic explanation, have you
ever been driving down the freeway, and you wondered why there's so much flat space off
to the side of the road? And that's where we explain that's called a clear zone, where it's
free of any obstruction. In case an errant vehicle goes off the road, it gives them the
ability to come back on. And so, once you explain the process of why we need such a wide
right of way, for example, they’ll understand it and they're a little bit softer and more
willing to work with you when you do that.
92
Finally, Allison (ABET leader) believes that rationale articulation is essential to leadership
success because people will work hard if they know why what they are doing matters. She stated
that:
The leader also has to be able to articulate to various groups of people what the
requirements are and what this is going to do and why. Why this matters, I think; that's
really key for people. People will work really hard if they understand that what they're
doing makes a difference.
4.2.2.6. Problem-solving and Critical Thinking
The engineering and ABET leaders in this study consider problem-solving and critical
thinking skills as essential engineering leadership skills needed for leadership success. They
noted that it is important that the engineering leader be aware of the fact that contrary to the right
and wrong mindset in engineering textbooks and training, big leadership decisions are often not
right or wrong, but usually on a spectrum. This often requires the leader to take a step back and
consider if there are more nuances to the problem. For instance, Henry (industry leader) shared
his views about this when he said:
Usually, the answer is not going to be nearly as black and white as we want it to be with
the number. Usually, the answer is in the nuance and understanding a little bit deeper
than just the number. So, the numbers might tell us that, no, we can't do this, but if we
look a little deeper into that problem…and if we can release ourselves from that for just a
second and say, all right, yeah, the numbers say this, but let's step back and try to see if
there are any more nuances to this problem that we can solve. That will still make two
truths true at the same time. Yes, the number is correct, but we also have something else
that is correct at the same time. Sometimes, we ignore that second truth.
93
Also, Fredrick (ABET leader) shared the view that the decisions involved in problem-solving are
sometimes not right or wrong but on a spectrum. He stated that:
These big leadership decisions in the end are not right or wrong. They're on a spectrum
from sub-optimal to optimal, and the sooner we get them thinking that way, I think the
easier it becomes to acknowledge that a decision was suboptimal. , and not take that as a
judgment on you personally, right? It's, hey, based on what I did, these are the decisions I
made. These are why I made the decisions. It turns out I could have done better. That's
different than saying you're wrong.
Aaron’s (ABET leader) view on problem-solving is shared from the perspective of working with
people who do not have an engineering background. He noted that in such cases, instead of being
analytical, the engineering leader needs to offer more explanation. He expressed his view by
saying:
Engineers are natural problem solvers and we can dive into the details so quickly when
in reality, a brief explanation would probably go a lot further to help the situation move
forward. But we want to pick apart every detail to make sure that all the analysis is done
correctly when in reality, they just needed an explanation of their question of why. So
that's another challenge is we are trained to break problems down into their minute
details and as you become a leader, you become a manager, and that becomes less and
less important.
4.2.2.7. Humility or Ego Management
Humility is another essential skill that the industry and ABET leaders in this study
considered crucial to engineering leadership success. They noted that engineers, because of their
94
training, often have discipline pride, which makes them think they are better than people from
non-engineering backgrounds. These leaders agreed that a leader in the engineering field needs
to recognize the expertise of people from other fields of study. They also indicated that being
open about mistakes, acknowledging them, and saying sorry to all parties involved, earns the
engineering leader respect, rather than portraying, being perfect, as people can see through that.
With regards to recognizing the expertise of people from non-engineering backgrounds, Fredrick
(ABET leader) said that:
Your technical expertise may be deep and narrow, but, each individual, ideally, each
individual brings some unique expertise to the table…. The people in marketing, the
people in sales, they don't know what we know, that's true, but you don't know what they
need to know too…. A marketing person knows how to position a product, I don't know
how to do that. Now a salesperson is out on the frontline dealing with the customer,
which, maybe, I never do,…. you have to humble yourself and recognize that there's a
vast world of things that you can't do, and you need to depend on those other people to
get that done. And, and I think that's really that's really the key to success.
Similarly, Aaron (industry leader) noted that:
And I think by understanding that you can learn something from anyone….. A little bit of
of humility when you go into these things goes a long way.
Kate (ABET leader) also shared this view about discipline pride, noting that engineering is
training and not synonymous with wisdom, and that humility is an important aspect of
engineering leadership. She stated that:
95
There is something wrong with discipline pride…. Sometimes there's a bit of a tendency
to think that our education makes us better than everyone else, and maybe wiser than
everyone else. But I haven't run into anything that's made me think that's true…. I guess
this is all leading up to humility; is another really important aspect of engineering
leadership…. We're not better or wiser than our fellow men are. We are people who have
a high degree of skill and specific knowledge and that's great. You know, engineering is
training, it's not intelligence. It's training… it's not synonymous with wisdom. It's just my
training…. It's an area that I trained for. It's not something I was born with.
With regard to ego management, Maxwell (ABET leader) noted that admitting any mistake made
in the course of decision-making earns the leader forgiveness and respect while portraying the “I
am perfect” attitude makes people lose respect for such a leader. He took a cue from his
leadership experience concerning this, admitting that he had been wrong at all levels of
leadership, but admitting the mistake and saying sorry is how to manage such situations. In his
words, he explained this by saying:
As you know, engineers tend to be perfectionists. But when you lead people, and you work
with people, you might be wrong. You might say, let's go in this direction, and it turns out
to not be correct. The end. To say, oops, my fault. I was wrong. I have found in all levels
of leadership; I have found I was wrong. I'm sorry. I'm going to do my best to fix it. That
gets you a lot of forgiveness. Whereas, if you sort of pretend, oh, I wasn't wrong, that
doesn't work with people because they can really see through that…. And that I'm
perfect, I'm not going to say I'm wrong, it just doesn't get you anywhere and people lose
respect for you. Because while you have to respect people, the people that you're leading,
they have to respect you too.
96
4.2.3. Sub-Theme 3: Needed Engineering Leadership Skills
The needed engineering leadership skills identified by the engineering leaders in this
study are fearless exploration, strategic visioning, lifelong learning, ethical and trustworthiness,
demonstrative leadership, decision-making, collaborative followership and delegation,
flexibility, organization and time management, and leadership identity awareness. This
was articulated by a total number of five to eight engineering leaders who participated in this
study as shown in Table 4.3. This section presents the findings of the needed engineering
leadership skills as foretold by the engineering leaders in this study.
4.2.3.1 Fearless Exploration Skill or “Not Afraid to Fail”
Fearless exploration, according to the engineering leaders in this study, is described as the
ability of the leader to act without being afraid to fail, while also understanding the risks
involved. Fearless exploration is identified by the ABET and industry leaders as one of the
needed engineering leadership skills necessary for success. According to the participants in this
study, fearless exploration is a means of avoiding catastrophic failures because it involves
making mistakes and learning from them. Also, they noted that failure is one of the ways by
which leadership acumen is acquired. This latter view was shared by Sawyer (industry leader)
who stated that:
So, it (leadership) requires a lot of soft skills. And soft skills, some of them are taught,
some of them you have to acquire through experience, through mentorship, and
sometimes through failure…. Failure is the best teacher, but it's not the most pleasant
teacher, Some people have to fail several times to learn and some just never learn…. So, I
have had many failures and I have admitted my failures. I try to learn from those daily.
It's a lifelong learning process.
97
Fredrick (ABET leader) believes that a leader is fundamentally needed to make decisions,
however, there are times when the decisions made will be wrong. He noted that it is important
for a leader to have the confidence not only to make decisions but also to be wrong. He
expressed his views by saying:
Your job is to fundamentally make those decisions. An indecisive leader, a wishy-washy
leader, a leader that can't make up their mind because there's always another piece of
data that they want to get, to me, those are ineffective leaders. That really ties in with
confidence. I mean, I think those really go together because you have to have the
confidence to be wrong sometimes. The confidence to say, I made a decision, yeah, it was
wrong. We should have gone the other way. To have the confidence to have made that
decision, but also the confidence to acknowledge your mistake.
Raymond (industry leader) also shared this view about the fact that it takes self-confidence to
admit to being wrong when he said:
I think it's hard for anybody who has a sense of pride... to be wrong. And so, that takes
self-confidence to accept that you're wrong, being able to stand up to what you think is
wrong in society, on a project or whatever, that takes a lot of self-confidence.
Maxwell’s (industry leader) perspective on being willing to be wrong could be interpreted to
mean that leadership in the engineering field is not for anyone who is not willing to be wrong.
Sharing this opinion, he said:
It (leadership) has tremendous value because you can do what you can do as an
individual but to be leading a team, to be leading an organization, you can be far more
98
productive that way. It has a lot of value but it takes time. It takes effort. It takes being
willing to be wrong.
Justin (industry leader) opined based on his experience that mistakes are unavoidable in
engineering leadership and he believed that it is a means of avoiding catastrophic failures if
properly managed. In his words, he said:
And so, understanding that, yes, we are going to falter. We're going to fail, but we can fail
forward and we can, you know, get better from that…. I had a friend share with me, um,
the acronym FAIL, F A I L stands for First Attempt In Learning. When you talk about
catastrophic failure, right? Typically, that is multiple failures that add up to something
that's just horrible…. And so, if you can learn from your mistake and make those
changes, the idea or the probability of catastrophic failure is minimal.
4.2.3.2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
Engineering leaders in this study believe that being ethical and trustworthy is a leadership
skill that is foundational to the practice of engineering. They emphasized the importance of the
leader having strong ethics to put their feet down in situations that collide with the engineering
code of ethics. For instance, George (industry leader) shares his views about being ethical and
not compromising when presented with situations that defy ethical standards. He described this
by saying that:
I think that integrity, not compromising when you feel like you're outside of ethical
boundaries, or when you feel like there are decisions that harm others as a role, from
your role as an engineer. I think that's important. I think that you need to take that
engineering duty very seriously. And if you have the potential to harm others, or you see
99
that risk, you need to stand behind it and take the high ground. And I think that is
important as an engineer and to not capitulate or give in to what other leadership
demands are or what other productions strategies require.
Kate (ABET leader) expressed her views on following the code of ethics of the engineering
profession. This is important because it means observing the profession's code of ethics is what
gives identity to a leader in engineering. The implication is that anyone not observing this code
of ethics, even if in principle, such a person is regarded as part of us by training, in practice, such
one is not of us. She stated that:
Well, again, I guess I would define it (engineering leadership) as leadership that's set in
the context of our profession. And I guess when I think about our profession, I tend to
think about the Society of Professional Engineers’ code of ethics. So yeah, I guess I would
define engineering leadership, as leadership that that always has the goals of our
profession in mind.
Similarly, Raymond (industry leader) emphasized the importance of ethical understanding and
conduct to engineering leadership success by saying that:
Yes, you need to have strong ethics. You need to understand the engineering code of
ethics, you need to be multidisciplinary to the degree possible.
Also, Sawyer (ABET) when sharing his opinion on the nature of engineering leadership
categorized ethics as a required skill for leadership in engineering. He stated that:
Well, a part of the leadership for an engineer is something that they can be taught. They
can be taught, while a part of it is inherent in nature. Not everyone is born a leader….
100
but leadership requires clear communication, requires trust based on ethical conduct,
and moralities.
4.2.3.4. Lifelong Learning
Lifelong Learning is another needed engineering leadership skill that the industry and
ABET leaders in this study pointed out as necessary for leadership success. These leaders shared
how they are continuously honing their leadership skills through reading books, training,
podcasts, and experiences. For instance, Henry (industry leader) attributed his leadership
acumen to learning from books. He said:
I listen to a lot of books and those books, many of them have to do with business
management, business management techniques, or maybe entrepreneurial mindset as a
whole, which would help me understand the big picture of operating a business. So, like
we need the accountant to be able to do these things in order to have the business run the
way it needs to run…. I would say would be listening to books and trying to look at the
lessons that I get out of those books in my practice.
Similarly, Sawyer (ABET leader) attested to being influenced by a book he read on leadership
which gave him a perspective on being a servant leader which is the leadership identity that
guides his leadership practice. He explained this by saying:
One of the influences is, I guess a book that I read, which had an impact on me, the book
called Synchronicity (The Inner part of Leadership)…. That book had a lot of influence,
in terms of understanding what is servant leadership and then realizing that, where
Gandhi came from or where, you know, most of the leaders, that necessarily have a
leadership position and are not presidents or vice presidents of this and that, and people
101
still follow them… book influenced me more than anything else. No, it didn’t dramatically
change me suddenly overnight, but it just turned on a lot of lights for me.
Lilly (ABET leader) believes that engineering leaders must be informed about what is happening
nationally and internationally to be able to connect well with the broader landscape. She stated
that:
I think engineering leaders need to get outside of being just engineers and be able to see
the broader landscape, which means doing a lot of either reading or listening to podcasts
or however we gather information today to sort of see what the horizon is. You have to be
able to see what's happening nationally or internationally, you know, to be able to
communicate that really well.
Arron (industry leader) also gave his views on this by emphasizing that adopting a growth
mindset is key to being successful in the engineering field. He shared his views by stating that,
Continuously learning and being of the learner mindset rather than the judge or fixed
mindset. And I think as engineers, we like to be judges because the answer is in the back
of the book, right? I know the right answer. But in reality, we need to bring in things like
politics and emotion. And that is not an easy thing to do because you can't quantify it.
You can't put that down.
Norah (industry leader) described that one of the ways by which she engages in lifelong learning
is to share her leadership experience and listen to other people’s experiences in order to avoid
making their mistakes. She explained this view as:
102
And then being at the level I'm at today, you know, it's just you've got to listen to the
battle scars of other people, and you've got to share yours too, so that people understand
where you've come from, and in that communication and that trust, like you kind of
internalize their experiences a little bit so that you can help not make their mistakes too.
4.2.3.5. Strategic Visioning or Big-Picture Oriented
Strategic visioning is the ability to see the big picture and it has also been identified as
one of the needed engineering leadership skills by the ABET and industry leaders in this study.
Allison (ABET leader) described the importance of having the ability to see the big picture and
aligning that with the organizational mission as vital for effective leadership when she said:
So, to be a good engineering leader, you must be able to step outside of your specialty,
and look at the big picture, and understand how the big picture fits in with the mission.
You have to be very big-picture-oriented. You have to be able to step away from the
individual tasks and see how everything integrates and then you have to be able to
communicate that.
This view was also shared by Aaron (industry leader), who described seeing the big picture as
the ability of the leader to be able to explain why what they are doing is important, and how it
connects to the overall purpose of the organization. He encapsulates this by saying that:
For instance, we have design squad leaders and they are engineering managers and they
are over very technical things and they have to have the technical knowledge and be able
to apply it and be able to communicate to those frontline designers what that means, but
they also have to be able to pull the purpose of the department or that project and be able
to translate that down into their instructions, to say not only here's how you design a
103
curve or here's how you model a roadway, but this is why it's important. This is the bigger
picture.
He further lamented that it took him a long time to realize and understand the concept himself
saying that:
Now, as you move on, you're less and less technically oriented, but you're more and more
big-picture oriented. And instead of focusing so much on the technical aspects of getting
it just right, I would now, if I were to go back into that, I would say, how does what you're
doing improve the quality of life? So, give that bigger vision, the purpose behind what
they're doing. And I've learned over the years that I could have been doing that from the
get-go. I could have, I didn't know it. I didn't understand it myself.
Henry (industry leader) opined that strategic visioning is the hallmark of a good leader as this
connotes the ability to foresee the resources needed to solve a problem within the engineering
team. He mentioned that:
I think in my mind, what makes a good leader is they can look at the big picture and see
all of the resources that are needed to solve that problem and can identify those talents
within the engineering team and apply those talents to the problems that need to be
solved.
Another important construct that emerged from engineering leaders that relates to seeing the big
picture is the ability of an engineering leader to foresee how what they produce will influence
human situations (industry leader, George). Similarly, how their products will be used was also
regarded as another element of the big picture by the participants (industry leader, Norah).
104
4.2.3.6. Collaborative Followership and Delegation
Collaborative followership and delegation skills have also been identified by the industry
and ABET leaders in this study as a needed engineering leadership skill that is very important to
leadership success. They indicated that leaders should be good followers whenever they find
themselves as members of another team. They also noted that to achieve success, a leader needs
to learn to delegate. For instance, when talking about collaborative followership, Sawyer (ABET
leader) shared his views that leaders should also be good followers without attempting to share in
the credit. He stated that:
You know, a good leader is also a follower. Because sometimes you need to follow, and
that's your constituencies, your stakeholders. So you have to understand what your
stakeholders’ needs are so as a leader, can address the needs…you do not have to be in a
leadership position to lead. You can still lead without having a leadership position. This
is another experience that I can share with you throughout my career, I've led quite a few
projects, but I was not in the leader position. I helped the leader, but the leader got the
credit for it, which is fine. The purpose was served, and everyone was happy at the end of
the day.
In the same light, Raymond (industry leader) expressed his views that leaders should aspire to be
good team members and recognize that they don’t have to always be in leadership positions to
lead. He said that:
I think a leader also needs to be a good follower…and if somebody else steps up, or if
you're on a committee, and a committee chair assignment rotates around, a leader needs
105
to be a good committee member, a good team member, and allow for others to lead and
not take over the leadership. Leaders don't always need to be in the leadership role.
In terms of delegation, Allison (ABET leader) believes that it is important to learn, as a leader, to
delegate to free up your time, especially if you have capable hands around. She shared this view
by saying:
And so, leaders have to pay attention to all of that kind of stuff. But they need to figure
how to get rid of the stuff that doesn't matter….. Well, when we say stuff that doesn't
matter, it's not saying it's not important. There are things that are important, that are
relative, that don't require all your skill set. So you also have to figure out, are there
people who can do things for you? Does your admin have the capability of doing some of
these things that you've been doing that are taking your time?, that that individual has
plenty of skills to do it, and can give you the finished product that you can then review,
rather than you taking your time to search the records or whatever it might be. So,
understanding that, I think it's Warren Buffet who said that our most precious commodity
is time, We have to use it well.
In support of this view, Kate (ABET leader) told the story of how she wasted time doing things
by herself when she was new to leadership. She described the experience as follows:
So, like, in my really earliest days, I was not good at delegating, and I actually wasted a
lot of time doing stuff that these are the things that we pay the admin staff for and,
figuring out where, you know, the boundaries between their jobs and my job was a little
bit, I did have to learn to delegate certain things myself.
106
Justin (industry leader) shared his perspective on delegation that a leader in engineering must try
to match people to their skills when delegating to ensure efficiency in engineering product
delivery. This is in contrast to the view that, yes, this person has a background in engineering,
and thus should be able to do this. This approach rather seeks to be intentional about matching
people to their specific areas of interest. In his words, he said:
As a leader, we're going to find, okay, this person likes roadway design. This person likes
surveys, the survey aspect is right of way. And so, if they know that we love them and
we're trying to seek an understanding of what they want, then we're naturally going to
take the old good to great book talks about getting the right person on the right bus, and
then once they're on the right bus, you get them in the right seat…. And just because now
we know what their capabilities are, what their desires are, and try and match our needs
with what they can bring, then it's just naturally going to bloom and it's, the efficiency is
going to be there in the engineering product delivery.
4.2.3.7. Demonstrative Leadership or Leading by Example
Leading by example or demonstrative leadership is another needed engineering
leadership skill that engineering leaders in this study, particularly, the industry leaders consider
necessary for effective engineering leadership. They emphasized the importance of leaders
exhibiting actions or behaviors that they expect from their team. This includes prompt execution
of tasks and upholding of values that foster trust respect, and a positive workplace environment.
For instance, Norah (industry leader) noted that leading by example is an essential characteristic
of engineering leadership and a means of fostering a culture of trust within the team, and where
she has found most success. She expressed this by saying:
107
So being an engineering leader, it’s important to have that experience and that
willingness to jump in and understand the problem firsthand. At least that's where I found
the most success. So again, being that example, leading by example, and showing them
who I am and what I'm doing, creating that culture of trust is a leadership trait that you
can take into any function.
Similarly, Henry (industry leader) attributed the success he found as an engineering leader to
mentoring others and guiding them through the process having walked through it himself and
leading by example. He stated that:
I have found myself regularly in leadership roles within engineering teams, and I think
the reason I find myself there and have found success there is because maybe naturally it
comes to me to be a mentor to other engineers…and because I understood those
fundamentals, I had walked through it myself, I was able to help coach others to walk
through the processes. I think a good leader is someone who can understand the problem
that's being solved by the team and can show by example how to solve that problem in a
good way. And so, they lead by example.
Also, Sawyer (ABET leader) noted that walking the talk and being a role model is the essence of
leadership, which means it is a core characteristic that constitutes effective leadership. He stated
that:
Leaders are the trusted individuals by a group of people that they trust to navigate
through a path, through a direction. Yeah. So, that's the essence of leadership….. As they
say, walk the talk, you got to be the role model of what you preach…. So, be congruent,
108
be aligned with what you say and what you do and follow up with the promises that have
been made.
Justin (industry leader) described a leader as someone who is always trying to train their
replacement when expressing his views on leading by example. He noted that:
Yes. I think an engineering leader Is going to have to have some patience, going back to
that vision of a leader. A leader is one that is always trying to train their replacement.
And so, if you have that vision as a leader, then you're going to have patience in teaching
and, and mentoring and bringing those along, so that you can give them the
experience…. If you can do that and understand that I think that's where being a true
engineering leader, where it boils down to.
George (Industry leader) expressed his views on leading by example from the perspective of
demonstrating actions that people can witness; not just passive leaders who merely give
directions without actively participating in the actions themselves. He stated that:
I think that a big part of engineering leadership is leading by example. I think that a big
part of it is being present to lead. I think that in order to demonstrate effective leadership,
you have to be present, people have to witness it, they have to witness your actions in
order for you to demonstrate engineering leadership.
4.2.3.8. Decision-Making Skill
Decision-making acumen is another needed engineering leadership skill that industry and
ABET leaders in this study considered very important for leadership success in engineering.
They noted that it is important that an engineering leader understands that the key to effective
leadership is making decisions with the information you have at hand and recognizing that
109
you’re never going to have all the information. They also noted that the ability to make quick
decisions based on the data at hand is the hallmark of leadership. Fredrick (ABET leader) shared
his beliefs about this when he said:
The ability to drill down and focus on what you have and make the best decision in the
time possible, to me that’s sort of the hallmark of a leader…. When you're in a leadership
role, people are looking at you, for direction, and decisions. Again, you may be
evaluating different alternatives that different people are bringing to you but you've gotta
pick one and you have to at some point acknowledge that there's always going to be risk,
right? You're always never gonna have all the information.
Similarly, Sawyer (industry leader) expressed his view on the ability to make decisions with the
information at hand as a way to overcome decision-making difficulty when he said:
A lot of times when we become too analytical, we lose sight that we need to make a
decision. So, decision-making becomes very hard for us. In this world, you’ve got to make
a quick decision based on the information you have.
Alex (industry leader) and Maxwell (ABET leader) discussed the importance of decision-making
acumen for leaders in engineering from the perspective of supporting every decision made with
facts or data. They noted that having evidence for what is driving a decision makes people to be
more agreeable. Alex shared his views on this when he said:
Engineers are very detailed as far as the technical goes. So, they really want to
understand, like, fundamentally, what is driving that decision?.... You have to be able to
support your point of view, you know, you gotta have some type of supporting evidence
for whatever you're presenting…. But if you don't show that type of evidence, I think
110
people are going to have questions about, are you really doing the right thing or not? So,
you have to talk about that.
Also, Maxwell expressed his views about this through his workplace experience. He stated that:
Well, the culture of engineering tends to be numerical. So, a lot of leadership has got to
be numbers-driven. What does the data tell you? And, in my university, if you don't have
data, you're not going to win the argument. Any argument or discussion that starts with,
I think or I feel, is destined to be dead on arrival. It's got to be driven by the data.
4.2.3.9. Flexibility
Flexibility, which the industry and ABET leaders in this study described as the ability to
accommodate the views of others and not be rigid about a personal stance is another needed skill
identified as required for leadership success in engineering. They noted that a leader in
engineering must be flexible in their approach to dealing with people as well as when solving
problems. For instance, Maxwell (ABET leader) shared an experience about how he dealt with a
situation in which he had to work with a boss who did not have an engineering background. He
shared this experience stating that:
When I was an associate provost, my immediate boss was a history major. She had a
Ph.D. in history, and she very much brought a liberal arts thinking approach to things.
She did not tend to be numerical. She just had a very different view on how to approach
things. So, a lot of it is understanding that people are different and understanding what
she valued, how she wanted to be approached, and how to communicate within that set of
rules…. There are differences dealing with people who grew up in different parts of the
111
world. None of them are horrifically difficult to overcome, but you need to step back and
understand what makes that person tick.
Aaron (industry leader) believes that being flexible requires adopting a learner’s mindset by
stating the “why” for your opinion and if you have a judger or rigid mindset, it is important to let
it be guided by data or facts, not just an opinion. He shared this view by saying:
There's a difference between opinion and fact. And, uh, I think it's important to
understand that just because you have an opinion about something doesn't make it so,
doesn't make it true. Um, and so when you're a judger mindset, you should base your
judgments on fact, not on opinion. And if you're a learner mindset, right? Like we're
always learning. We say, this is my opinion, and this is why I think this way. And then say,
I am open to being wrong…. I'm open, I'm open to new ideas.
Raymond (industry leader) approached this subject from the perspective of being competent and
not just book smart, and that competency stems from the ability to realize that real-world
situations are not as clean as the textbooks present them. As such, there is a need to be flexible to
realize that if you don’t pay attention to the data or results, you could end up with a wrong
answer. He described this by saying:
You need to be a good engineer from the technical side, and by that, I don't mean only
being book smart, but being competent…when an engineer, a young engineer graduates,
they pass the fundamentals of engineering exam and everything…. So, what they have is
maybe what we'd call book smart…. But when you get out in the actual field and you start
making measurements, one, you certainly realize how difficult it is to measure things. It's
all kind of dirty, the numbers aren't really clean. There are always problems in the data.
112
But you need to be able to recognize when results are, or the data, may have problems
with it. And so you don't just take it because it was in a book. You're able to crunch the
numbers and all that, but you could still end up with the wrong answer. So, there's this
kind of saying that I use with my engineers, it's better to be approximately right than
precisely wrong.
4.2.3.10. Organization and Time Management
The industry and ABET leaders in this study have also recognized organization and time
management as needed engineering leadership skills that are required for effective engineering
leadership. They noted that being organized, being a list-maker, and paying attention to
employees’ requests are very important time management strategies for leadership success. For
instance, Allison (ABET leader) expressed her view on the need to be organized as an
engineering leader, noting that the higher you go, the more things you have to keep track of. She
stated that:
Clearly, you have to be well organized because the higher you go in the organization, or
the larger the group of people that you're trying to work with, the more things you have to
keep track of. So you have to be very organized in that arena without getting bogged
down…. As much as I hate doing it, I am still a list maker. And if I have things I know I
need to do, I write them down. And that enables me to, every day, look at the list and say,
okay, what's most important, what do I have to get done today that's most important.
Also, Fredrick (ABET leader) shared his views about organization and time management, noting
that it helps the engineering leader in making sound decisions. He described his views by saying
that:
113
You do need organization…. Organizational skills; again, nobody has confidence in a
leader that seems like they're rushing, that needs to be told the same thing more than
once because they're not attentive to the details. I think a leader that keeps to a schedule,
that is organized with the information that's provided to them, that provides an
environment where that organization, those organizational skills, pervade what they're
leading,… I think good organizational skills lead to optimal decisions.
George (industry leader) described his views on being organized from the perspective of
attending to employees’ questions or inquiries as promptly as possible, indicating that they are
probably stuck and cannot move forward. So, attending to questions or inquiries promptly, and
removing roadblocks they might be facing, will be to the leader’s benefit in the end. He
explained this view by stating that:
I think that that presence when someone comes to you with a question, it probably can't
wait because they're to a point where they're stuck and without getting that question
resolved, they can't move forward. And, but I think that being present is also like you
mentioned, it's more of a direct interaction and trying to build that rapport with the
people you're trying to lead as well.
Norah (industry leader) expressed her views on this by describing how she helps her team free up
their time to achieve work-life balance and avoid burnout. She described the experience of how
she helps them resolve their to-do list by saying:
There's always a sense of urgency with engineering on, you know, hey, we got to get this
done. And so, helping my employees understand when it's okay to take a breath, when it's
okay to, you know, that'll be here Monday. You don't have to be here all weekend and
114
sacrificing your life for this bracket you're designing, you know, like helping them
understand that time management piece. Because, you know, you don't live to work, you
work to live…. So, something I like to do to help my employees is just one thing, what are
your priorities? Let’s know what's on your to-do list, right? And let's talk through, you
know, when each of those things has to be done, or how do we communicate with if there
are two number one priorities, how can I help you communicate with those leads that,
hey, this isn't going to get done? Hey, I need two more days. Like, this is more important.
You know, how do I help remove those roadblocks so that they can take a breath and not
feel the stress of the world on them?
4.2.3.11. Leadership Identity Awareness/ Know your leadership style
Leadership Identity Awareness is another engineering leadership skill identified by
engineering leaders in this study as needed for effective engineering leadership. The Industry and
ABET leaders in this study expressed their leadership identity awareness by describing their
leadership styles and how they have been incorporating the principles of the leadership styles
into their practice as engineering leaders. For example, Sawyer (industry leader) who adopted the
servant leadership identity attributed understanding that leadership style to a book he read and
described using its principles in his career and as an engineering leader. He expressed this view
by stating that:
To me, leaders are servants. A good example of this is Gandhi or Jesus. There are so
many leaders that they didn't call them leaders. It's basically based on the trust and the
servancy that they have. So, this something that engineering didn't teach me…. I guess a
book that I read, which had an impact on me, the book called Synchronicity and the
Synchronicity book was a biography, a real biography of a person…. That book had a lot
115
of influence, in terms of understanding what is servant leadership, and then realizing
that, where Gandhi came from or where, you know, most of the leaders, that necessarily
have a leadership position and are not presidents or vice presidents of this and that, and
people still follow them…. They're there to serve with every cell in their body. That's their
intention.
He further expressed how he is practicing this identity in his leadership by saying:
So, I have had many failures and I have admitted my failures. I try to learn from those
daily,… the moment of realization that, okay, I made a mistake, I need to apologize. I
need to correct it, and I need to move on. That's what I call humility. That's what I call
humbleness. And that's one of the pillars of being a good servant leader.
Justin (industry leader) also described how they adopted a situational and authentic leadership
style in their company which is focused on knowing the professional love languages of their
employees and catering to that, as well as intentional delegation of roles to people based on their
ability. He described his views on adopting an authentic leadership style to bring out the best in
their employees by saying:
Our leadership within our company, our leadership core, what we'll call our attributes,
first of all, we try to love the individuals that we work with in a professional way, so to
speak. If we show our best interest to them, then they can feel love, to where they will
want to perform at a high level…. So, we did a couple of years ago to understand the
professional love languages of our coworkers or those that we supervise. And if we
understand that, then that's how we cater our leadership style to those individuals.
Lilly (ABET leader) believes that people always have their expectations of one’s leadership
identity or style. She described this view based on her experience when she stated:
116
My challenge when I was much younger was being taken seriously because I was a
woman. Particularly, when I was in a leadership position and maybe it was 90% male,
realizing perhaps I would have a different leadership style; that didn't mean we weren't
going to be successful, but the approach to getting to the goal would be a bit different.
4.3. Theme 3: Contextual Differences in the Definition of Engineering Leadership and
Classification of Engineering Leadership Skills
Determining contextual differences in the definition of engineering leadership and
classification of engineering leadership skills resulted from the phenomenological inquiry
employed in this study. The differences provide insights into how situational factors in the work
environment of engineering leaders and the size of the organization shape their definition and
identification of engineering leadership skills. The two sub-themes that emerged and were
discussed in this section are (1) ABET vs. industry engineering leaders’ perspectives on
engineering leadership definition and (2) the scale of industry and its influence on engineering
leadership definition.
4.3.1. Sub-Theme 1: ABET versus Industry Engineering Leaders’ Perspectives on
Engineering Leadership Definition and Classification of Engineering Leadership Skills
This sub-theme offers an insight into understanding the differences, overlap, or
agreement in the ways which engineering leaders conceptualized and articulated the definition of
engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills in the educational and professional
context of engineering. Table 4.3 summarizes definitions of engineering leadership by the ABET
leaders and professional engineers in the industry. The letters DD stands for direct definition and
PP stands for paraphrased definition.
117
SN
ABET Leaders
Industry Leaders
1
Engineering leadership is being able to manage
process flow in accordance with the mission or
goal to enable the things that need to be done to
get done through the people because the people
are your resource. – Allison, DD.
Engineering leadership involves
technical knowledge and big-picture-
oriented approaches. Leaders
communicate technical concepts and
translate the department's purpose into
instructions, conversations on values,
and mission discussions. - Aaron, PP.
2
Engineering leadership is an umbrella of
leadership which is helping move a group in a
direction I would like them to move because I
see where they could go…. I sort of see
leadership as getting people to follow you. It's
like following the leader. -Lilly, DD.
I think any leadership, but engineering
specific, I think is putting someone or a
team in a position that they can
succeed, and they don't need you. So,
they can have their own thinking and
they can pursue their passions and
enjoy their work…I think it's about
enabling people..- Alex, PP.
3
Engineering leadership is leadership that's set in
the context of our profession. When I think
about our profession, I tend to think about the
Society of Professional Engineers’ code of
ethics. So yeah, I would define engineering
leadership, as leadership that always has the
goals of our profession in mind. – Kate, DD.
Engineering leadership means seeing
the overall picture of what needs to be
accomplished on the technical solution
within a business unit and
understanding how to engage people in
solving that technical problem is
probably how I would summarize it. -
Henry, DD.
4
Leadership in engineering, like any other
discipline, requires soft skills, unlike the
military, which differs in its approach and
structure. – Sawyer, PP.
Engineering leadership is having the
ability to understand and work with the
same tools that my engineers have,
having high-level working knowledge
to answer questions and understand
potential issues and, fostering trust, and
understanding their career
expectations.- Norah, PP.
5
What defines engineering leadership is
leadership over a technical effort. What is
unique about engine engineering leadership is
you can't separate it from the technical side of
what is being done. And the result of every
engineering effort is some sort of technical
project. – Fredrick, PP.
Engineering leadership is leading by
example. I think that a big part of it is
being present to lead, taking
responsibility for one’s decisions and
having integrity not to compromise
ethical boundaries. -George, PP.
118
Table 4.3
A Summary of Definitions of Engineering Leadership by ABET Leaders and Industry
Professionals
In terms of the engineering leadership skills identification, Table 4.4 shows the
breakdown of the number of ABET and industry leaders who identified each of the listed skill as
necessary for engineering leadership success.
Table 4.4
Engineering Leadership Skills Identified by the Participants
SN
SKILLS
ABET
Leaders
(N=6)
INDUSTRY
Leaders
(N=7)
TOTAL
(N=13)
1
Technical Expertise
6
7
13
2
Teamwork
6
7
13
3
Communication
5
5
10
4
Listening
6
4
10
5
Empathy
4
6
10
6
Rationale Articulation
4
6
10
7
Humility or Ego
Management
5
4
9
6
It is leadership in the context of goals associated
with engineering, and philosophically, I don't
think that's different from any other leadership. –
Maxwell, DD
Engineering leadership involves not
necessarily having all the answers but
knowing where to seek them from
others. It requires knowledge,
experience, and love for coworkers,
clients, and jobs. It involves guiding
others through the project process, not
just the technical side.-Justin, PP.
7
NA
Engineering leadership involves
stepping forth to protect the public
interest when clients' interests
contradict the public good. Engineers
have an ethical responsibility to be
resourceful and efficient with client’s
money or resources, but must not
resolve to cut corners.- Raymond, PP.
119
SN
SKILLS
ABET
Leaders
(N=6)
INDUSTRY
Leaders
(N=7)
TOTAL
(N=13)
8
Problem-solving and Critical
Thinking
2
7
9
9
Fearless Exploration
3
5
8
10
Strategic Visioning
2
5
7
11
Lifelong Learning
3
4
7
12
Ethical and Trustworthiness
3
4
7
13
Demonstrative Leadership
1
5
6
14
Decision Making
4
2
6
15
Collaborative Followership
and Delegation
4
2
6
16
Flexibility
3
2
5
17
Organization and Time
Management
3
2
5
18
Leadership Identity
Awareness
2
3
5
4.3.2. Sub-Theme 2: Size of Industry and its Influence on Engineering Leadership
Definition and Skills Classification
This sub-theme highlights how the definition of engineering leadership and the
engineering leadership skills categorization are influenced by the size of the organization. This is
explored through comparing how engineering leaders from the small, medium, and large sized
companies who participated in this study defined engineering leadership and its associated skills.
Table 4.5 shows the engineering leadership definition by engineering leaders with respect to size
of the company, while Table 4.6. shows the distribution of industry engineering leaders who
identified the highlighted engineering leadership skills as important for engineering leadership
success in each size of the company.
120
Table 4.5
Definition of Engineering Leadership by Categorized by Company Size
SN
Engineering Leaders’ Definition
Size of the Company
1
Engineering leadership involves being big-picture
oriented and being able to communicate technical
concepts and translate the department's purpose into
instructions, conversations on values, and mission
discussions. – Aaron.
Large
2
Engineering leadership is having the ability to
understand and work with the same tools that my
engineers have, having high-level working knowledge
to answer questions and understand potential issues, as
well as fostering trust, and understanding their career
expectations. – Norah.
Large
3
I think any leadership, but engineering specific, I think
is putting someone or a team in a position that they can
succeed, and they don't need you. So, they can have
their own thinking and they can pursue their passions
and enjoy their work…I think it's about enabling
people..- Alex.
Large
4
Engineering leadership is leading by example. I think
that a big part of it is being present to lead, taking
responsibility for one’s decisions and having integrity
not to compromise ethical boundaries. -George.
Medium
5
Engineering leadership involves not necessarily having
all the answers but knowing where to seek them from
others. It requires knowledge, experience, and love for
coworkers, clients, and jobs. It involves guiding others
through the project process, not just the technical side.-
Justin.
Medium
6
Engineering leadership means seeing the overall picture
of what needs to be accomplished on the technical
solution within a business unit and understanding how
to engage people in solving that technical problem is
probably how I would summarize it. – Henry.
Small
121
SN
Engineering Leaders’ Definition
Size of the Company
7
Engineering leadership involves stepping forth to
protect the public interest when clients' interests
contradict the public good. Engineers have an ethical
responsibility to be resourceful and efficient with
client’s money or resources, but must not resolve to cut
corners.- Raymond.
Small
Table 4.6
Distribution of Industry Engineering Leaders Identification of Engineering Skills based on the
Size of the Company
SN
SKILLS
Large
(N=3)
Medium
(N=2)
Small
(N=2)
1
Communication
3
1
1
2
Listening
3
1
0
3
Technical Expertise
3
2
2
4
Empathy
3
2
1
5
Strategic Visioning
2
1
2
6
Demonstrative Leadership
1
2
2
7
Teamwork
3
2
2
8
Rationale Articulation
3
2
1
9
Fearless Exploration
3
1
1
10
Humility or Ego
Management
2
1
1
11
Decision Making
1
1
0
12
Problem-solving and Critical
Thinking
3
2
2
13
Lifelong Learning
2
0
2
14
Ethical and Trustworthiness
2
1
1
15
Flexibility
1
0
1
16
Organization and Time
Management
1
1
0
17
Collaborative Followership
and Delegation
1
0
1
18
Leadership Identity
Awareness
0
2
1
122
4.4. Theme 4: The Role of Training and Experience in Engineering Leadership Success
This theme examines the role of formal training in engineering leadership success from
the perspective of engineering leaders who participated in this study. The theme highlights the
role of experiential learning in leadership development from the narratives of the participants.
Most of the participants decried the lack of leadership training in engineering while noting that
they had to learn the hard way, through many mistakes and failures. A typical example is Sawyer
(industry leader) who gave an insight into how he became the leader that he is today, noting that
he has had many failures along the way. He described his experience as follows:
So, it (leadership) requires a lot of soft skills. And soft skills, some of them are taught,
some of them you have to acquire through experience, through mentorship, and
sometimes through failure…. Failure is the best teacher, but it's not the most pleasant
teacher,…. So, I have had many failures and I have admitted my failures. I try to learn
from those daily.
Kate (ABET leader) also had a similar story to tell. She described how she found leadership hard
when she first became a leader because she had no formal training, and that she became better by
failing a lot. In her words, she said:
Gosh, it was hard when I first started because my university doesn't really offer any
leadership training, so I've had to figure it out. So, I feel like, you know, the lack of
training, stumbling around and failing a lot, which is kind of, it kicks stuff out, you know,
like, it's embarrassing. I like to feel like I'm good at my job. And I haven't always
understood what this job is supposed to be. Hmm … there was a really vague job
description and no training, and I do feel like I just picked around for the first several
years and just made some stuff up.
123
Aaron (ABET leader) believed that getting trained on communication skills in college would
have helped him in his career, and he also noted that having interpersonal skills to relate with
others is essential, and working in teams is not the same as having this training. He shared his
views by saying that:
I think it's that communication skills that you could learn in college and, and I think that
that would have helped me a little bit. The other part would be Interpersonal skills and
people skills…. We're very technical, we're abrupt, this is, these are the facts, this is what
I've calculated. But, understanding how to talk with people a little bit more. I think that's
something that you could learn in some courses in college. And to some extent you do
when you work with teams, but it's just not the same.
Raymond (industry leader) is of the opinion that engineering education needs to do more to
enhance the communication skills of their graduates, as the problem about engineering graduates
not being good communicators still lingers. He expressed his opinion that:
Sometimes, my team will send out an email and I'll look at it, oh my gosh, you know, that
could have been worded a lot better…. So, I think one of the weaknesses we have in
engineering education is on the communication side, and engineers frequently are not
initially really good communicators. I would like to see more of that in Engineering
education, I would like to see, both spoken communication, presentation, and all that.
Alex (industry leader) also attested to the fact that it is imperative for communication and
interpersonal skills needed to interact successfully with people, be taught in the engineering
curriculum. He noted that although experience is a major way by which leadership acumen is
124
acquired, nevertheless, there are core skills that can be taught that would be beneficial. He shared
his views by saying that:
I think going back to my time, for example, the engineering curriculum, it's just technical.
You don't get any interpersonal communication. You don't have that unless you do, like,
an MBA. I know people that did both… then an MBA that kind of gives them some
perspective…. School is not gonna be able to teach you everything, you have to learn
things when you go to the field. But I think there are some core skills like that, like you
know, how to communicate and interact that can be taught. I think that those are very
important.
125
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study embarked on a phenomenological exploration to define engineering leadership
and identify critical leadership skills from the perspectives of ABET leaders and professional
engineers in the industry. The study gathered rich qualitative data through in-depth, semi-
structured interviews with six engineering leaders from ABET and seven engineering leaders
from industry, making a total of thirteen study participants.
Four prominent themes emerged from the phenomenological analysis to provide an
understanding of engineering leadership from the perspectives of the engineering leaders. These
four themes are: 1) engineering leaders’ conceptualization and articulation of engineering
leadership, 2) the core essences of engineering leadership, 3) contextual differences in
engineering leadership definition and skills, and 4) the role of training and experience in
engineering leadership success. As such, the four themes and sub-themes are used to answer the
research questions.
5.1. Discussions on Theme 1: Engineering Leaders’ Conceptualization and Articulation of
Engineering Leadership
This theme encapsulates the various ways by which the leaders exemplified the core
principles of engineering leadership based on their experience. This was explored using
approaches the participants used in defining engineering leadership, their convergent and
divergent views on engineering leadership, and their perception of the broadness of the role of an
engineering leader in an organization.
126
5.1.1. The Definition of Engineering Leadership
The classification of prominent leadership theories and empirical research in the literature
resulted in five approaches to defining leadership. These include the trait approach, the
behavioral approach, the power-influence approach, the situational approach, and the
integrative approach (Jackson et al., 2015; Yukl, 2013). Every definition of leadership in any
professional sphere will fall into one of these approaches. The definition of engineering
leadership provided by engineering leaders in ABET can be categorized into trait, behavioral,
power-influence, and situational approaches. Three out of the six ABET leaders’ definitions of
engineering leadership fall under the situational approach with their emphasis being on having
the goal and ethics of the engineering profession in mind as a leader. The remaining three fall
under the trait, behavioral, and power-influence approaches with emphases on having soft skills
as an engineering leader, managing people and processes to achieve organizational goals, and
influencing teams to follow organizational leadership.
Similarly, professional engineering leaders in the industry that participated in this study
defined engineering leadership with definitions that can be classified under the situational,
behavioral, and integrated approaches. Three out of the seven industry professional engineering
leaders’ definitions fall into the behavioral approach with an emphasis on demonstrating ethical
behaviors, leading by example, and collaboration. One out of the remaining four industry
professional engineering leaders’ definitions falls into the situational approach of defining
leadership with an emphasis on engineering leadership that allows individuals or a team to thrive
independently. The remaining three definitions fall into the integrated approach with an
emphasis on having technical knowledge, solving technical problems, and having interpersonal
skills to foster trust and work satisfaction.
127
It should be noted that while the situational approach was more pronounced in the ABET
leader’s definition of engineering leadership, the behavioral approach was more pronounced in
the definition of the industry leaders. According to Northouse (2019), the main focus of the
behavioral approach is what the leaders do and how they act. This approach is composed of task
behaviors which explain how leaders help their members to achieve their objectives and
relationship behaviors, which are how leaders help followers to feel comfortable with each other
and the situation of their work. It is no surprise that industry leaders emphasize this approach in
their definition of engineering leadership since the majority of their responsibilities involve
hands-on technical projects and require them to take on active roles. Meanwhile, the situational
approach focuses on situational variables such as the type of the organization, the nature of work
performed by the leader’s unit, the nature of the external environment, the characteristics of the
followers, and how well leaders can adapt their behavior to lead effectively in those situations
(Yulk, 2013). This resonates with the majority of the definitions given by the ABET leaders
which focus on defining leadership within the engineering context.
5.1.2. The Diversity and Commonality of Perspectives on Engineering Leadership and
General Leadership
The majority of the engineering leaders in this study, when asked to differentiate
engineering leadership from general leadership, or leadership in other domains, found it very
difficult to articulate differences between the two leadership domains, and hesitated in their
responses. For instance, one of the engineering leaders in the industry said, “You know, yeah, it's
hard for me to tell. Is there any difference? Leadership is leadership. Another leader from ABET
said, “I'm not so sure if engineering leadership is that much different than just leadership in
general.” When asked to further explain the reasons for their hesitation and why they think there
128
might not be a difference between the two leadership domains, their responses implied that the
traits and characteristics of a good leader are the same regardless of the leadership domain. The
views shared by these engineering leaders are in agreement with the study conducted by Cox et
al., (2012) in which the authors concluded that there was little difference in engineering
leadership attributes and general leadership attributes. Also, Newstead et al., (2021) posited that
the attributes of good leadership are across multiple domains and situated in being ethical,
authentic, and virtuous.
Furthermore, in examining the divergent views of the engineering leaders on general
leadership and engineering leadership, a further probe in asking these engineering leaders to
share their views on whether there are specific skills or competencies that are unique to
engineering leadership compared to leadership in other domains was conducted. This resulted in
the dichotomous differentiation in which the engineering leaders characterized engineering
leadership as consisting of technical expertise and a host of soft skills, also referred to as
interpersonal skills, people skills, or professional skills. They noted that technical knowledge or
expertise is a major contributor that differentiates engineering leadership from general leadership
and that technical expertise is not only a necessary component of engineering leadership but also
a core component of engineering leadership. This dichotomous view of characterizing
engineering leadership resonated with the assertion made by Newstead et al., (2021) and
described in Figure 5.1 below, that there is evidence in philosophy and social science literature
that the dual-core of good leadership is character and competence. In addition to this, Rottmann
et al., (2015) in their grounded theory study on engineering leadership pointed out that there have
been calls for engineering students to be socialized to view their discipline as having both
technical and humanistic aspects.
129
Figure 5.1. The dichotomous view of engineering leadership.
In further discussing this dichotomous view of engineering leadership, while the
engineering leaders in this study have reiterated that technical expertise is a core characteristic of
engineering leadership, they argue that the interpersonal skills that a typical engineering leader
will need on the job to lead effectively and successfully is more important than the technical
knowledge. This view was generally implied by many of the engineering leaders but was not
precisely articulated. For instance, one of the industry leaders said, “I think of all of the calculus I
had to go through to get an engineering degree, and have I ever used any of it on a regular
basis? I would say no, and especially not as a leader, right?” Also, an ABET leader, when
expressing his views on this said, “So, it (engineering leadership) requires a lot of soft skills.”
However, one of the engineering leaders in the industry was able to articulate this view that other
engineering leaders in the study have been implying but were not able to precisely articulate. He
said concerning engineering leadership that,
“I will probably say maybe like 70 percent is just general leadership, but you have to
have a technical understanding and a technical side as well to be that engineering leader.
130
…. if we don't have an understanding, then you're not going to have the clout of those
that you work with to come to you, because part of that engineering leadership is the
understanding of that technicality of it as well.”
This view was supported by Hess (2018) who noted that typically, an engineer in any technical
position will spend less than 50% of his time on engineering-focus tasks. He asserted that much
of the day-to-day activities of practicing engineers, irrespective of their vocations, will be spent
on interacting with other individuals or groups of individuals in and outside the organization,
where they will need to make decisions and discuss directions, goals, and performance. He
concluded by saying that the percentage of engineering-focused tasks decreases with the
responsibility level, and less than 20% is typical in high-level leadership or management
positions. Gruber et al., (2022) also lend an insight into this view by quoting a research
participant identified in their study who said:
“As a student, I had a view that they (soft skills) were not as important as my technical
knowledge; it is the technical knowledge that would bring the solution of problems or
new ideas. But now, working, I see that you will hardly have the ideas for the problems
alone. And the time you spend dealing with people (or with yourself) is extremely longer
than the time you deal with technical information. In my case it is roughly 90% people to
10% technical. So today I see that these skills are extremely important to achieve a good
performance at work (p.63).”
In addition, Reeve et al., (2015) in their study on the ebb and flow of engineering
leadership orientations noted that on analyzing their data of engineering professionals by
developmental stage, they found that as engineering professionals with at least six years of
experience progressed through their careers from students to junior engineers to senior engineers,
131
and that the percentage who prioritized technical mastery dropped from 69% to 28%, while the
percentage who prioritized collaborative optimization and organizational innovation rose from
20% to 43% and from 11% to 29% respectively. Also, Bowman & Farr (2000) posited that as
engineers advance up the corporate ladder, leadership becomes an essential skill. Senior
management engineers are more interested in the business side of procuring and successfully
managing projects, hence they spend less time on traditional engineering details.
Figure 5.2 shows the dichotomous distribution of soft skills and technical skills according
to the findings in this study while Figure 5.3 shows the relationship between leadership
responsibility and technical skills usage in the workplace.
Figure 5.2. 70-30 Engineering Leadership dichotomous distribution.
132
Figure 5.3. The Relationship between
Leadership Responsibility and Technical Skills Usage.
5.1.3. The Perceived Role of an Engineering Leader in an Organization
Another salient sub-theme that emerged from theme 1 concerning how engineering
leaders conceptualized engineering leadership is the perception of the engineering leaders in
terms of whether or not the role of an engineering leader is expansive across an organization (see
Figure 5.4).
Figure 5.4. The Perspectives of the Study Participants about Engineering Leader’s Role in an
Organization.
Broad view of an
engineering
leader’s role
Restrictive view of
an engineering
leader’s role
Engineering
Leader’s role
Non-engineering
Professionals /
Employees
Engineering
Professionals
Clients,
Regulators /
Associations,etc.
133
Figure 5.4 shows that the study participants who have a restrictive view of the role of
engineering leaders in an organization believe that an engineering leader can relate with other
people in the organization, like non-engineering professionals and clients, but when it comes to
managing or influencing people, they believe that the responsibility of an engineering leader is
confined to engineers alone. However, those with a broad view of an engineering leader’s role
believed that an engineer should not only be able to successfully influence, manage, or provide
leadership to engineers alone, but also to non-engineering professionals in the organization
including clients, regulating bodies, and so on.
Although all the leaders in this study attested to having worked with non-engineering
professionals while carrying out their leadership responsibilities, only 8 out of the 13 engineering
leaders believed that an engineering leader has the responsibility to effectively lead, mentor, and
influence both engineering and non-engineering professionals in an organization. The remaining
5 engineering leaders articulated their beliefs about the broadness of the engineering leader’s role
in an organization as exclusive to leading engineering efforts and mentoring younger engineers.
It appears that the situational variable, which is the organizational environment, must have
accounted for this view because 4 out of these 5 leaders are from industry and only one is from
ABET.
It is important to know that it is not enough for today’s engineering leaders to be able to
work with people from non-engineering backgrounds alone, they must be ready to take on the
responsibility of leading in non-engineering domains as well. This is the major call in the
National Academy of Engineering (NAE) reports in which NAE called for engineering
institutions to commence educating engineering graduates to be broadly educated such that they
see themselves as global citizens who are capable of leading in both business and public service
134
and are ethically grounded and inclusive of all sectors of society (NAE, 2004; NAE 5005).
Specifically, NAE, 2004 stated that,
“…with the growing interdependence between technology and the economic and social
foundations of modern society, there will be an increasing number of opportunities for
engineers to exercise their potential as leaders, not only in business but also in the
nonprofit and government sectors (p. 55).”
Today, the expectation of the engineering leader to function effectively in modern society
extends beyond the scope of being able to work with people with non-engineering backgrounds
alone. It extends to being open to taking on leadership roles in the interdisciplinary spheres, in
society at large, and generally extending their tentacles beyond the traditional engineering field
of practice.
In addition to this, another significant finding from this study is the perspective shared by
some of the engineering leaders in this study, that all engineers are leaders but not all engineers
are managerial leaders. They noted that there are different stages of leadership in the engineering
profession and that every engineering professional goes through at least two of these stages
during their career. A representation of these stages is shown in Figure 5.5.
135
Figure 5.5. The Three Stages of Leadership in the Engineering Profession.
The engineering leaders believed that leadership for an engineer starts from the entry-
level position where the engineering professional engages in self-directed leadership. This
continues until the time that he/she moves into a project management position where the leader
engages in team leadership. The engineering professional then proceeds into higher positions,
such as the department head position, the vice president position, the chief technical officer, or
the chief executive officer position where he/she engages in managerial leadership. The
engineering leaders who gave this perspective noted that typically, many engineers stay at the
second stage for the remainder of their careers because they do not like managerial leadership.
As regards self-directed leadership, Klassen et al., (2017) pointed out in their study on
leadership conceptions in early career engineers, that one of the participants, an entry-level
employee, who was previously an engineering student intern, and was later employed by the
company, considered herself a leader. She noted that even though her role does not involve
working with a team, she still regarded herself as a leader because her manager considered her an
expert on the job. They noted that the participant said,
Self-directed
leadership
Team
Leadership
Managerial
Leadership
Stage 1
Department Head,
Vice President,
Chief Tech. Officer
Chief Executive Officer
Entry-level Position
Project Management
Stage 2
Stage 3
136
“The project that I started on as a student…I have transitioned into being the leader of
that. Not so much of a team. What started off as two of us and now it's just…me. I still
think of it as a leading role because when it comes to talking with my manager he
considers me the expert of it. I tell him what's going on and he trusts that I know the next
steps for the project (p.10).”
In addition, there is evidence in the literature that the engineering industry strongly demands
entry-level engineers possess leadership skills (Hartman et al., 2016). This also lends credence to
this view on self-directed engineering leadership. Rottmann et al., (2015) also opined that the
typical career trajectory of an engineering professional is from technical work, which is more
self-directed, to project management roles, which are people-centric and demand that the
engineering professional learn how to work with people. Thus, it can be said that every
engineering professional goes through these stages of self-directed leadership to team leadership.
Also, this finding on the stages of engineering leadership is similar to Simpson et al., (2019)’s
conceptualization of leadership, in which the authors posited that leadership occurs at four levels
which they referred to as self, team, organization, and society. Therefore, as indicated by one of
the engineering leaders in this study, when referring to the idea that not everyone is interested in
leadership, especially in the engineering field of practice, efforts should be made to qualify the
leadership being referred to as “managerial leadership”.
In addition to this, it should also be noted that this view on stages of engineering
leadership shared by the engineering leaders in this study contrasted with the notion shared by
some of the engineering professionals in the study conducted by Rottmann et al., (2015). In their
study, the authors noted that engineering professionals expressed resistance to the idea of
leadership stating emphatically that “leadership is not us”. The authors did note that this
137
resistance resulted from the conflicting views they had about their identity as engineers and
leadership in general and suggested ways to help foster leadership identity in engineering
professionals. All of this evidence shows the necessity for engineering institutions to be
relentless in their efforts to continue educating engineering graduates, especially in fostering
their understanding of leadership as part of their professional career experience.
5.2. Discussions on Theme 2: The Core Essences of Engineering Leadership
The second major theme that emerged from this study is the core essences of engineering
leadership. The core essence of an experience according to Johnson & Christensen (2017) refers
to the commonality or the invariant structure of the experience. It depicts the basic characteristics
of an experience that is universal and present in particular instances of a phenomenon. For
example, in the case of graduating students preparing for the commencement ceremony, the core
essence of their experience will be a feeling of accomplishment, a feeling of excitement and joy,
anxiety about what the future holds, mixed feelings about the loss of relationships or separation
from friends, and so on. This theme examined the various leadership skills that were commonly
employed by the engineering leaders in this study as they narrated their experiences in the
engineering field. Im et al., (2023) noted that the concept of essence is deeply rooted in
phenomenology, as it seeks to uncover the inner core and meaning of people's lived experiences,
and Alase (2017) referred to it as a 'meaning unit,' which represents the central meaning of the
'lived experiences' conveyed by research participants. The core essence of engineering leadership
as described by the engineering leaders in this study delved into the heart of what it what it takes
to lead in the field of engineering. The narratives of the engineering leaders in this study were
used in identifying the core essences of engineering leadership and these core essences embodied
the leadership skills that the study participants believed are essential for engineering leadership
138
success. Thus, the core essences of engineering leadership, which translates to the engineering
leadership skills identified in this study are grouped into three categories based on the total
number of engineering leaders who identified each skill as important to engineering leadership.
The three categories are critical, essential, and needed skills. Table 5.1 shows the total number of
engineering leaders who identified each engineering leadership skill as important and Figure 5.6
shows their classification based on their relative importance.
Table 5.1.
The total number of engineering leaders who identified each skill as important.
SN
Skills
Total No of participants
Relative importance
1
Technical Expertise
13
Critical
2
Teamwork
13
Essential
3
Communication
10
Essential
4
Listening
10
Essential
5
Empathy
10
Essential
6
Rationale Articulation
10
Essential
7
Humility or Ego Management
9
Essential
8
Problem-solving and Critical Thinking
9
Essential
9
Fearless Exploration
8
Needed
10
Strategic Visioning
7
Needed
11
Lifelong Learning
7
Needed
12
Ethical and Trustworthiness
7
Needed
13
Demonstrative Leadership
6
Needed
14
Decision Making
6
Needed
15
Collaborative Followership and Delegation
6
Needed
16
Flexibility
5
Needed
17
Organization and Time Management
5
Needed
18
Leadership Identity Awareness
5
Needed
139
Figure 5.6. Identified Engineering Leadership Skills.
Technical Expertise
Engineering leaders who participated in this study all agreed that technical expertise is
critical engineering leadership skills (see Table 5.1). They assert that engineering leadership
skills constitute technical expertise and a host of problem-solving, organizational, and
interpersonal skills (see Figure 5.6). Although they pointed out that typically engineering
leadership requires a higher percentage of interpersonal skills, they noted that a background in
technical knowledge/expertise is required to function effectively in an engineering leadership
position. During data analysis, some of the salient points that emerged from the discussion on
technical expertise are: 1) technical expertise gives a leader the vocabulary to use when leading
technical efforts, 2) it gives the engineering leader the ability to suggest various alternative
Fearless
Exploration
Ethics &
Trustworthiness
Lifelong Learning
Strategic Visioning
Decision Making
Collaborative Followership &
Delegation
Organization &
Time Management
Flexibility
Leadership Identity Awareness
Technical Expertise
Teamwork
Communication
Listening
Rationale
Articulation
Empathy
Humility
Problem Solving &
Critical Thinking
Critical skill (All 13 leaders)
Essential Skills (9 – 13 leaders)
Needed Skills (5 - 8 leaders)
140
solutions that the team might not have thought of when problem-solving, and 3) that without
technical expertise, a leader would not have the credibility to assess other people’s technical
statements. Some of the leaders indicated that technical expertise is crucial because it allows the
leader to be able to understand the problem firsthand, and understanding the problem firsthand
helps the leader to be able to guide the group to success. In addition, technical expertise helps the
leader to understand what goes on in a project and how to measure the project’s success. In
support of the latter statement, one of the leaders shared a major challenge he was currently
facing in his engineering company. He mentioned that his company had been acquired and
merged with another company whose senior leaders are non-engineers. The problem he
highlighted was that these non-engineering leaders do not understand the importance of having
some technical expertise in place, and he lamented how this lack of understanding was
negatively affecting productivity.
Technical expertise has also been characterized as a major component of engineering
leadership in literature (Chan et al., 2021; Cox et al., 2012; Farler & Hann, 2021; Farr & Brazil,
2009; Johnson et al., 2015; Li et al., 2022, Paul et al., 2018). A study conducted by Johnson et
al., (2015) shows that technical knowledge is needed for a team leader to provide meaningful
guidance to team members, as well as understand different approaches team members might be
exploring in solving problems. Also, Rottmann et al., (2015) in their grounded theory research on
engineering leadership found that technical mastery included the ability to recognize peer’s
expertise, the ability to comprehend colleagues’ questions and clarify their confusion, as well as
the ability to support their growth through formal and informal mentorship responsibilities. All
these resonate with the themes discussed by participants in this study as the reasons why
technical expertise is important to engineering leadership. Paul et al., (2018) also posited that it is
141
essential that engineering leaders possess technical skills and engineering competency to be
personally effective. In addition to this, a study by Chan et al., (2021) revealed that contrary to
some schools of thought, that engineers must abandon their technical identities to embrace
leadership roles, they found that engineering leaders in the field and those outside of traditional
engineering industry sectors retain technical dimensions of their professional identities. The
implication of this is that engineering leadership is rooted in technical knowledge and
capabilities. Also, Li et al., (2022), in their study about what makes an exemplary engineering
leader, highlighted that technical expertise is essential to engineering leadership and it is the one
factor that serves as the main difference between engineering leadership and general leadership.
Teamwork
Teamwork is one of the essential engineering leadership skills that all the engineering
leaders in this study unanimously agreed were indispensable for engineering leadership success.
One of the central highlights of their perspective is that it is important to recognize that every
member of your team matters. They told many stories and used various analogies to stress this
point. One of the stories told is a restaurant analogy where the engineering leader highlighted
that if you have the best cooks in the world, but incompetent servers or inefficient cleaners, you
are not going to be successful in the business. Teamwork has been identified in the literature as a
key factor in achieving engineering leadership success (Crumpton-Young et al., 2010; Hess,
2018; Li et al., 2022; Simpson et al., 2019; Rasoul & Junger, 2012; Wolfinbarger, 2022). For
instance, Hess (2018) stated that effective leaders recognize that in order to attain success, every
member of the organization is important, and every member of the organization must contribute.
He noted that employees need to be engaged, encouraged to contribute, trusted to perform, and
valued if they are to contribute to the fullest extent possible.
142
Another permeating theme that the engineering leaders discussed centers on “people are
your most important resource; you need to genuinely care about them”, “people are not things”
and more importantly “effective engineering leadership requires an awareness and management
of the curse of knowledge”. They reiterate the need for the leader to value, respect, and embrace
the individuality of his team members. In view of this assertion, Hess (2018) noted that engineers
are trained to solve problems using fundamental principles and make decisions using carefully
generated data. However, “people are not data and do not function in a well-defined manner.
Engineers face diverse situations in their technical careers, including those involving beliefs,
values, biases, and emotions of people, hence the need for them to learn to value people as
individuals and also manage them (p.7)”.
Also, one of the engineering leaders noted that showing love and care for the employee is
a means to create loyal employees who will not change jobs frequently. According to him,
studies have shown that it takes 12-24 months for a new employee to become profitable, and it is
the company that will be at a loss if such an employee leaves after 2 years due to job
dissatisfaction. Maintaining employee loyalty and retention is crucial for sustaining
organizational performance. To achieve this, organizations should focus on increasing employee
satisfaction and fostering a sense of importance. Supporting employees, treating them well,
acknowledging their input, and positively appraising their work leads to a stronger sense of self-
esteem, job motivation, and job satisfaction. This, in turn, boosts their desire to stay with the
organization (Osemeke, 2016; Zanabazar & Jigjiddor, 2021).
Communication skills
The engineering leaders in this study emphasized communication as an essential
engineering leadership skill that is very important for successful engineering leadership. They
143
emphasized the importance of clear communication, knowing the audience, and customizing
one’s information accordingly, as well as being able to communicate engineering solutions to
non-engineers, especially policymakers, project owners, and the public. The importance of
communication skills to effective engineering leadership has been highlighted in the literature
(Farler & Haan, 2021; Farr & Brazil, 2009; Hartmann and Jahren, 2015; Hess, 2018; Li et al.,
2022; Lopes et al., 2015; Paul et al., 2018; Rottmann et al., 2016). For instance, regarding
knowing the audience and communicating with them from the perspective of what they value,
authors have noted that engineering professionals must recognize the importance of knowing and
tailoring their conversation toward the audience if they ever wish to deliver the message or
information in a way that resonates with the recipients (Farr & Haan, 2021; Hess, 2018). They
posited that the message being conveyed must appeal to the perspective and specific
circumstances associated with the audience, and that in situations where the audience is
comprised of people from different backgrounds, cultures, and generations, conveying the
message in as clear terms as possible is the solution. In addition, authors have emphasized that
engineering professionals in modern times need to learn how to speak with a wide range of
people and explain difficult technical subjects understandably (Hess, 2018; Li et al., 2022).
Listening Skills
The engineering professionals in this study also highlighted listening skills as one of the
essential engineering leadership skills that are foundational to effective engineering leadership.
They noted that listening before talking, listening with understanding, and listening to all the
members of one’s team is a skill that a leader must endeavor to pay attention to and develop in
order to be successful and avoid making expensive mistakes. One of the leaders related an
experience where he said he misinterpreted a message because he didn’t listen to understand it
144
and that cost him a lot. He has learned from it and moved on. Authors have pointed out that
listening is one of the most important leadership skills (Hess, 2018; Gruber et al., 2022; Paul et
al., 2018; Yulk, 2013). According to Hess (2018), listening is a very important leadership skill
that is often overlooked and especially lacking in technically trained individuals. The author
noted that listening is a critical component of communication, without which miscommunication
is evident. He pointed out that unless the message being passed is heard and understood, no
communication has occurred, and he reiterated that the act of effective listening, also known as
“active listening”, is a critical skill for which most technically trained persons need
improvement. He noted that effective leaders do not interrupt people to tell them how to solve
their problems, but rather enable them to explain before guiding them, sometimes with insightful
questions, to find their own solutions. Also, Gruber et al., (2022) described active listening as
knowing how to listen to understand, that is, knowing how to listen while trying to understand
the individual or team in a discussion.
The majority of the leaders in this study attested to the fact that becoming a better leader
or evolving as a leader, can be attributed to listening skills. Another leader related as part of his
leadership experience that he realized that he became a lot smarter when he started listening to
other people. In support of this, Yulk (2013) pointed out that there is evidence in the literature
that training supervisors on active listening resulted in higher performance ratings for the
supervisors after one year. He also noted that another study found that human relations training
designed to increase the use of active listening and praising their staff resulted in a 17 percent
increase in worker productivity six months after training was completed.
145
Empathy
Empathy, which was described by the engineering leaders in this study as the ability of a
person to see things from the perspective of others, is another essential engineering leadership
skill identified as indispensable for effective engineering leadership. They noted that a healthy
work atmosphere, optimal solution-finding during problem-solving, and the resilience to
persevere in difficult tasks, are all greatly aided by an engineering leader's capacity to empathize
with their team members and demonstrate genuine concern for their well-being. One of the
engineering leaders noted that he puts empathy at the top of all engineering leadership skills
needed to be a successful engineering leader because, from his experience, empathy is where true
problem-solving comes from.
This description of empathy given by the engineering leaders in this study resonates with
what Paul & Falls (2018) referred to as “perspective taking”. The authors described their view on
empathy as understanding where others are coming from to be able to interact better and being
open to other perspectives. Some of the participants in this study opined that empathy does not
come naturally to engineers, and there is evidence in the literature that engineering students have
significantly lower empathy than students from other programs (Rasoal et al., 2012). Empathy
tends to be undervalued or overlooked within engineering (Wilson & Mukhopadhyaya, 2022).
Paul & Falls (2018) noted in their study that empathy is an essential aspect of leadership that can
no longer be ignored if we want to prevent the continuation of ethical disasters in the business
world. Hence, there is a need for engineering leadership educators to make efforts to emphasize
empathy in the engineering leadership curriculum.
146
Rational Articulation
Rationale articulation is described by the engineering leaders in this study as the ability to
“explain the why” of every decision and it is one of the essential engineering leadership skills
highlighted as necessary for a successful engineering leadership. Almost all engineering leaders
in the study emphasized that rationale articulation is important in getting people to agree with
one’s views, as a person, and as a leader. They opined that the act of explaining the “whys”
behind every decision is the bedrock of motivation, stating that it is an effective means of giving
people a sense of purpose, a substantial means of winning their cooperation, and a viable means
of getting them to work hard. This agrees with Sinek (2011) who explained that rationale
articulation, or explaining the why, is foundational to motivating people and getting them to
work because it gives people a sense of purpose or belonging. He noted that a great leader is
known for his ability to inspire people to act, and the art of inspiring people to act is rooted in
giving people a sense of purpose, by explaining the why. This gives birth to motivation, which in
turn results in followers who would act for the good of the organization because they want to,
and not because they have to. The engineering leaders in this study also noted that aside from
the importance of rationale articulation in the engineering work environment, every engineering
leader who has successfully worked with people from non-engineering backgrounds will attest to
this fact that explaining the why is their “go-to” in breaking the ice and winning the people’s
understanding.
Humility
Humility has been described by engineering leaders in this study as an essential skill
needed for successful leadership, especially in engineering. They noted that engineers tend to
have discipline pride because of their training, and this makes them think that they are better than
147
people from non-engineering backgrounds. The leaders stated that it is important for engineering
professionals to realize that training is not synonymous with wisdom and that there are a host of
things that professionals from other fields, like marketing executives, accountants, musical
directors, entertainers, etc., can do that they (engineers) cannot do. As such, it is important to
recognize the expertise of people from other fields of study. Hess (2018) stated that the
viewpoint of some engineering leaders, that non-technically trained individuals are clueless, is
neither correct nor appropriate, and according to Paul & Falls (2018), having a belief system that
everyone has worth and should be respected, is the hallmark of humility. The authors noted that
although self-awareness is frequently used to characterize humility, it is possible to have correct
self-awareness, yet lack humility, by viewing others as inferior to oneself. Also, Li et al., (2022)
said that engineering leaders need to have the confidence to be humble. The authors noted that
although confidence is more closely associated with pride than humility, it is confidence that
eliminates the anxiety that often hinders a leader from being humble.
Another important construct that the engineering leaders in this study opined was that,
naturally, engineers are perfectionists, and as such, they do not often know how to manage
mistakes. The participants noted that being honest about mistakes, acknowledging them, and
apologizing to all parties involved wins the engineering leader respect, rather than projecting the
image of perfection. They reiterated that people usually see through that, and it makes them lose
respect for such a leader. This view was shared by Hess (2018) who said that many technically
trained individuals usually aspire to be perfectionists, and so have trouble accepting their own or
other people’s mistakes. He observed that a leader who exhibits pride often displays arrogance,
appears indifferent or unapproachable, and believes himself or herself to be perfect. He stated
that such a leader usually does not admit that he or she is wrong, blames others for mistakes, and
148
claims credit for achievements. He concluded by reiterating that all these are detrimental to
effective technical leadership.
Problem-solving and Critical thinking Skills
The engineering leaders in this study highlighted problem-solving and critical thinking as
one essential engineering leadership skills. They noted leadership is rooted in problem-solving-
associated decision-making. However, in contrast to the right and wrong mindset in engineering
textbooks, big leadership decisions are usually on a spectrum, often neither totally right nor
wrong. Thus, a leader must know how and when to step back and critically consider if there are
more nuances to the problem, as well as what the tradeoffs are. Problem-solving skills have also
been identified as an essential component of engineering leadership in literature (Crumpton-
Young, 2010; Hess, 2018; Rottmann et al., 2015). Authors have noted that professional practice
demands graduates from four-year engineering education to be competent in taking up and
solving problems that do not have answers published in the back of books (Kumar & Hsiao,
2007). Also, Hess (2018) shared this view, asserting that engineering professionals in the
workplace are usually expected to use the problem-solving skills acquired during their
engineering studies to address open-ended problems with boundary conditions that require an
"approximate or optimum" solution, such as in the process or product design problems. This is in
contrast to the wrong or right approach that they have been used to in their training. It is
therefore essential for educators to develop awareness and practice dealing with these kinds of
problems with only better or poorer approaches, rather than right or wrong answers.
Bowman & Farr (2000) also posited that students must be taught to think like engineering
leaders in order to produce engineering leaders, and this will have to do with training them to
take into consideration both controllable and uncontrollable factors such as social, cultural, legal,
149
financial, and technical variables during problem-solving. Being able to solve problems in this
manner demands that students learn to improve their critical thinking skills, which according to
Winston & Patterson (2006), involves a leader's use of logic and reasoning to assess facts,
synthesize information, and gain insight into the significance of the environmental factors.
Another important common finding that emerged is that when problem-solving involves
people from non-engineering backgrounds, it is important to offer more explanation than being
analytical. According to Hess (2018), engineers often carry precision and details to the extreme
which other people from diverse backgrounds feel is obsessive and pompous. Meanwhile, they
were just trying to strive for clarity. He concluded by noting that engineers must recognize that
their successful personality traits may hinder their leadership roles, especially when dealing with
people from diverse backgrounds and those who lack a deep understanding of technical details.
Fearless Exploration or Not Afraid to Fail
The engineering leaders in this study identified fearless exploration as the ability of the
leader to act without being afraid to fail while also understanding the risks involved in carrying
out the action. They consider this as one of the needed engineering leadership skills necessary for
leadership success. They noted that failure is one of the ways by which leadership acumen is
acquired and cannot be avoided because leadership is about decision-making, and not all
decisions made will turn out right. This view was also shared by Hess (2018) who posited that
effective leaders are not afraid of or deterred by failure, as they are cognizant of the fact that
failure provides them with fresh information or insight that enables them to discern a better
approach or strategy for action, or, at the very least, an alternative one. Some dominant findings
that permeate the discussion of the engineering leaders on this subject are, “leadership takes
being willing to be wrong”, “you have to have the confidence to be wrong” and “it takes having
150
the self-confidence to admit that you are wrong”. Thus, suggesting that if someone is not willing
to be wrong, such a person should not venture into leadership. One of the engineering leaders
redefined failure as “F A I L - First Attempt In Learning”.
Paul & Falls (2018) in their study on alumni perspectives on their undergraduate
engineering leadership experiences noted that when their study participants were asked about the
most important skills they value in themselves or other engineering leaders they have worked
with, their responses included not being afraid to look stupid, leaving pride at the door, being
willing to be wrong, and not pretending to know everything. This is very similar to most of the
views shared by engineering leaders in this study. Hess (2018) noted that ego often leads to
avoiding risks, as peers and supervisors may perceive failures as being foolish or ill-conceived.
He stated that recognizing that significant advancements can only be achieved through taking
risks and analyzing failures to prevent repeating them. This is followed by self-forgiveness
because the inability to move on after failure can lead to second-guessing every risk we take and
thereby severely limit potential accomplishments. Yulk (2013) also said that ineffective leaders
tend to be defensive about mistakes and failure. They usually react to failure by attempting to
conceal their mistakes or blame others for it. It is common for successful leaders to acknowledge
their mistakes, take responsibility for them, and subsequently implement corrective measures.
Winston & Patterson (2006) posited that followers who are apprehensive about the responsibility
associated with the risk of failure can gain confidence when their leaders engage and collaborate
with them in iterative risk-taking and decision-making.
Ethics and Trustworthiness, Strategic visioning, Lifelong learning
Engineering leaders in this study identified ethics and trustworthiness as another essence
of engineering leadership that is needed to be an effective engineering leader. They emphasized
151
the importance of the leader having strong ethics to put their “foot down” in situations when
client’s interest collides with the engineering code of ethics or is unfavorable to the public.
Newstead et al., (2021), when exploring what constitutes good leadership and emphasizing
ethics, explained that when it comes to training leaders, the goal should not only be to increase
the influence and effectiveness of individuals who hold leadership positions. Rather, engaging in
effective and ethical leadership behaviors should be promoted and fostered in individuals
because today’s modern world features some incredibly effective leaders who wield massive
influence and urge their followers towards ambitious goals. However, many of these goals are
glaringly unethical. Henkel & Ade (2022) noted that being a principled and ethical leader is the
most significant way to get employees to do what is right. They noted that it is important that
leaders adhere to the code of ethics of their profession to avoid poor decision-making or scandal
as double standards will destroy trust and relationships between leaders and their followers and
their clients.
The engineering leaders in this study also identified strategic visioning or being big-
picture oriented as one of the essences of engineering leadership that is needed for success as a
leader. They noted that based on their experiences, being big-picture-oriented as a leader helps
the leader to align his or her work with the organization’s mission. This helps in being able to
explain “the whys” to the team in terms of how their work is connected to the overall purpose of
the organization. This, in turn, enhances the motivation of the team and results in leadership
success. Paul et al., (2018) in their study on the proposed definition of engineering leadership,
noted that one of the constructs that emerged from their study is defining engineering leadership
as the ability to see the big picture and to effectively coordinate people and resources to achieve
project goals. Also, another finding of this research that resulted from this strategic visioning
152
discussion is that this particular skill helps the leader to foresee the resources needed to move the
project forward and succeed. One of the participants described strategic visioning as the hallmark
of a good leader.
Lifelong Learning is an important essence of engineering leadership that the engineering
leaders in this study pointed out as needed for leadership success. They noted that it is important
that a leader adopts a growth mindset rather than a fixed mindset. The leader must be well
informed about what is happening in their career sphere, and what is happening nationally and
internationally to make informed decisions. The importance of life-long learning to engineering
leadership success has also been discussed in the literature (Athreya & Kalkhoff, 2010; Cox et
al., 2012; Hess, 2018; Kendall et al., 2018; Paul et al., 2018; Paul & Falls, 2018; Reeve et al.,
2015). For instance, Hess (2018) posited that a leader's adoption of a growth mindset leads to
leadership effectiveness and efficiency of team and organizational operations. Engineering
leaders in this study also emphasized and shared their experiences about reading books on
leadership and management, attending training sessions on leadership, listening to podcasts, and
paying attention to, and internalizing both their leadership experiences and other people’s
leadership experiences. Effective leadership in today's world requires a desire and willingness to
learn and adapt, especially taking action to address gaps in knowledge, skills, and abilities
throughout one’s career (Cox et al., 1012; Reeve et al., 2015; Yulk, 2013).
Demonstrative Leadership, Decision-Making, Collaborative Followership and Delegation
Demonstrative leadership is described in this study as leading by example, and a few of
the engineering leaders have referred to it as, “walking the talk”. They emphasized the
importance of demonstrative leadership to engineering leadership success by noting that
demonstrating actions or behaviors that they expect from their team, both in performing tasks
153
and upholding values, that promote mutual respect, create a culture of trust and confidence in the
leader as a mentor, and fosters a positive work environment. The five out of the six leaders who
emphasized this are from industry and they reiterated that this was where they found the most
success in their career as engineering leaders. Stressing the importance of demonstrative
leadership, one of the engineering leaders said, “Yeah, so, that's the essence of leadership” and
another one stated that “a leader is one that is always trying to train their replacement”. Leroy et
al., (2022) noted that even though the act of not walking one’s talk in organizations is quite
common, it is very detrimental to credibility and trust, and team members usually lose respect
and trust in such leaders. Also, Van Dyck et al., (2013) reported that there is evidence in earlier
studies that leaders’ walking the talk is positively correlated with outcomes such as trust in the
leader, follower work satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, improved follower job
performance, team priority of safety, and team psychological safety. At the same time, it was
negatively correlated with behaviors such as absenteeism, stress, deviant character, and
professional errors committed in an organization.
Decision-making acumen is another essence of engineering leadership that engineering
leaders in this study considered needed for leadership success. They noted that since leadership is
about making decisions and giving direction, a leader’s effectiveness is known by their ability to
recognize that they are never going to have all the information, and thus make decisions with the
information at hand. They regarded the ability to make quick decisions based on the data at hand
as the hallmark of leadership. Hess (2018) posited that the art of decision-making demands that a
lot of decisions be made with less than adequate data or information to avoid missing the
window of opportunity which is critical in achieving substantial success. He noted that engineers
and scientists seem to find this unappealing as they love to consider all factors. He also indicated
154
that being an indecisive leader who is unable to make important decisions while waiting for
additional information results in being viewed as an incompetent leader by the followers.
Another salient finding that emerged in the discussion on the leader’s decision-making skills was
the importance of data-driven decision-making. The engineering leaders emphasized that from
their experience as leaders, supporting every decision made with facts or data, or having
evidence for what is driving a decision, makes people more agreeable. This relates to the
rationale articulation discussed earlier.
Another needed engineering leadership skill identified by engineering leaders in this
study is collaborative followership and delegation. The engineering leaders emphasized the
importance of the leader being a good follower or team member without trying to share the credit
whenever they find themselves on another team. Paul et al., (2018) said that it is crucial for a
leader to recognize the suitable moments to assume the position of a follower and possess a
genuine willingness to embrace that role In other words, a leader should not view the act of
becoming a follower as a sign of weakness or inferiority. Rather, as an opportunity to foster
collaboration and build strong relationships. Another important finding that permeated this
discussion was that an engineering leader needs to step away from their perfectionist self and
learn to delegate things whenever they have capable hands to do so. Concerning this, they
indicated that a leader needs to know that time is their most valuable asset and should be wisely
managed. Hess (2018) noted that leaders must prioritize effective and efficient time management
in order to enhance their abilities, skills, and accomplishments. He stated that some new
technical leaders prefer relying solely on themselves to achieve tasks, however, time constraints
often make it impractical. The engineering leaders also highlighted the importance of matching
people to their skills, not just their engineering degree, when delegating, to ensure efficiency in
155
engineering product delivery. Cox et al., (2012) said that delegating responsibilities to capable
individuals allows for a more balanced and successful approach to leadership. As such,
engineering leaders should employ this in their leadership.
Flexibility, Organization and Time Management, Leadership Identity Awareness
The engineering leaders in this study also identified flexibility as one of the needed
engineering leadership skills that contribute to leadership success. They described flexibility as
the ability of the leader to accommodate the views of other members of his team when problem-
solving, and not be rigid about personal beliefs. Flexibility has also been identified as an
essential engineering leadership skill in literature (Cox et al., 2012; Hess, 2018; NAE, 2004;
Morell, 2020; Reeve et al., 2015; Wilson & Mukhopadhyaya, 2022). Hess (2018) posited that
inflexibility and narrow-mindedness hinder technical leaders from exploring novel or alternative
solutions and understanding situations from different perspectives. Consequently, followers may
become frustrated, lose motivation, and feel hopeless due to the leader's resistance to
reconsidering choices or decisions. The study participants also noted that flexibility extends to
being adaptable in one’s approach to dealing with people, as well as in the work environment. In
view of this, Cox et al., (2012) said that besides showcasing leadership principles and
demonstrating an understanding of policies, engineers must possess the flexibility to effectively
navigate and adjust to the constantly evolving world and technologies around them.
Organization and time management skills have also been identified as needed
engineering leadership skills that contribute to leadership success. The engineering leaders
opined that being a list-maker to keep track of things is very important in leadership, as nobody
has confidence in a leader who needs to be told the same thing more than once. Heckman &
Kautz (2012) emphasized the importance of being organized when they said that being an
156
organized, hardworking, and responsible individual predicts educational attainment, health, and
labor market outcomes. Also, the engineering professionals in this study noted that part of being
organized is responding to questions or inquiries from employees as quickly as possible,
knowing that when employees come to you with questions, they probably can’t wait because
they are stuck and cannot move forward. Engineers have been credited with being well‐
organized, methodical, and rational professionals (Hess, 2018), and efforts should be made to
maintain the status quo when educating engineers.
Another needed engineering leadership skill identified by the participants of this study is
leadership identity awareness, which refers to the ability of a leader to know their leadership
style. The engineering leaders who participated in this study demonstrated their awareness of
their leadership identities by discussing the leadership styles that they employ, and how they
implement those leadership style concepts into their practice as engineering leaders. For instance,
one of the leaders identified as a servant leader, and another identified as an authentic leader.
Their perspectives on leadership identity connote that having an awareness of one’s leadership
identity helps in leadership performance because it determines the trajectory of one’s leadership
behaviors. Wilson & Mukhopadhyaya (2022) indicated that engineering professionals’ identity
and dominion of influence which determines their day-to-day activities of problem-solving are
formed by a set of beliefs. The implication of this is that what an engineering professional
believes to be their identity will reflect in day-to-day leadership behavior.
157
Proposed Taxonomy of Engineering Leadership Skills
A re-organization and classification of the skills identified in this study was completed
and this led to the creation of a proposed taxonomy of engineering leadership. Taxonomy can be
broadly defined as the classification or categorization of concepts, entities, or objects based on
shared attributes or characteristics which can facilitate analysis, comparison, and understanding
within a particular domain (Abukhader, 2019; Denecke & May, 2023). The taxonomy is
classified into three levels as shown in Figure 5.7 and it can be used as a framework for studying
and assessing engineering leadership skills.
Figure 5.7. Proposed Taxonomy of engineering Leadership skills.
Level 1: Technical Skills (Measurable Skills).
Technical skills refer to specific knowledge or expertise that is directly related to the
profession of engineering, that is engineering industry or field, as well as other abilities that are
Personal Professional Skills
• Humility
• Fearless exploration
• Lifelong learning
• Strategic visioning
• Ethics and trustworthiness
• Leadership identity awareness
Interpersonal Skills
• Communication
• Teamwork
• Active listening
• Empathy
• Rationale articulation
• Collaborative followership
• Demonstrative leadership
• Flexibility
Technical Skills
• Technical expertise
• Problem-solving & critical
thinking
• Decision making
• Organization & time
management
Level 1 - Measurable
Level 2 - Observable
Level 3 – Immeasurable
& Ideational
Level 1- Measurable Skills
-Formal Training
-Experience
Level 2- Observable Skills
-Formal /Informal
Training
-Experience
Level 3- Non-Measurable
Attitudinal Skills
-Formal /Informal
Training
-Self-development
-Experience
158
acquired through formal training and practical experience. They are measurable skills that can be
measured through evaluation, observations, or tests. Technical skills include:
• Technical expertise
• Problem-solving and critical thinking
• Decision making
• Organization and time management
Level 2: Interpersonal Skills (Observable Skills).
Interpersonal skills refer to skills that involve interacting with other people, both
engineering professionals and non-engineering professionals alike, which is why they are often
referred to as people skills, soft skills, or social skills. They are mostly acquired through informal
training, self-study, and experience, but are also acquired through formal training in situations
where their importance is prioritized. These skills assist in building positive relationships and
establishing smooth rapport in personal and professional settings that relate to engineering.
Interpersonal skills are not easily quantifiable, but they can be observed through interactions and
feedback, and assessed using assessment tools like surveys or interviews. Interpersonal skills
include:
• Communication
• Teamwork
• Active listening
• Empathy
• Rationale articulation
• Collaborative followership
159
• Demonstrative leadership
• Flexibility
Level 3: Personal Professional Skills (Non-Measurable Skills).
Personal professional skills refer to a set of skills that reflect the beliefs, values, and
attitudes of the engineering leader. They constitute an engineering leader’s personal efficiency
traits that influence and positively impact interpersonal relationships. They are often acquired
through informal training, self-study, and experience, but some of them could also be inborn
traits. For instance, some people are naturally bold and fearless, and taking risks is second nature
to them. While they are non-measurable skills due to their subjective nature, they involve self-
reflection and personal beliefs. They can be assessed through reflective statements or narratives
that offer insight into an individual’s way of thinking, growth orientation, and values. The
personal professional skills are:
• Humility
• Fearless exploration
• Lifelong learning
• Strategic visioning
• Ethics and trustworthiness
• Leadership identity awareness
It should be noted that this taxonomy is in its early stages and still requires testing, adjustments,
and refinements over time.
160
5.3. Discussion on Theme 3: Contextual Differences in the Definition of Engineering
Leadership and the Identification of Engineering Leadership Skills
This is the third theme that emerged from this study and was explored in relation to how
situational factors, which are the work environment and size of the organization, shaped the
definition and classification of engineering leadership skills by the engineering leaders.
One of the findings, with regards to the contextual differences in the engineering leaders’
definition of engineering leadership, is that out of the six ABET leaders in this study, four were
able to give a direct definition of engineering leadership when they were asked to define the
phenomenon, while only one of the engineering leaders in the industry was able to articulate the
definition. The remaining two engineering leaders from ABET and six leaders from industry
defined engineering leadership using illustrations and stories.
One salient point of view from this is that since this research is a phenomenological
study, the definitions provided by the engineering leaders were based on what they valued as
leaders. Raffo & Clark (2018) said that since there is no standard definition of leadership, how
we define it becomes individualized and represents our values, identities, and the messages we
wish to convey to others when expressing our views on leadership. The authors further stated
that the definition of leadership, including the words and phrases we employ and their underlying
meanings, reveals our attitudes toward leadership and the qualities we look for in a leader. Also,
it was obvious that the situational variable of the organizational environment played a part in the
definitions given. This is because the majority of the ABET leaders who were able to succinctly
define engineering leadership are in the academic sector, while the majority of those who use
paraphrased definitions were industry leaders. It should also be noted that while the situational
approach of definition was prevalent with the ABET leaders, and the behavioral approach of
161
defining engineering leadership was prevalent with the industry leaders. Also, while there are
similarities in the engineering leadership definitions of industry leaders, the ABET leaders'
definitions do not share significant similarities.
Another important finding here is that all seven industry leaders indicated that problem-
solving and critical thinking are very important engineering leadership skills, while only two of
the ABET leaders considered them as important. This could also be due to the work environment
since engineers in industry tend to engage in more hands-on responsibilities of product design
and production.
5.4. Discussion on Theme 4: The Role of Training and Experience in Engineering
Leadership Success
Most of the engineering leaders in this study decried the lack of leadership training in
engineering programs while noting that they had to learn the hard way, that is, through many
mistakes and failures. For instance, one of the engineering leaders in this study said,
“Gosh, it was hard when I first started because my university doesn't really offer any
leadership training, so I've had to figure it out. So, I feel like, you know, the lack of
training, stumbling around and failing a lot, which is kind of, it kicks stuff out, you know,
like, it's embarrassing. I like to feel like I'm good at my job.”
This view is in support of Kumar & Hsiao (2007) who asserted that engineers acquire
skills in management and leadership by learning soft skills the hard way in industry. This
is one of the reasons why many authors have called for the inclusion of interpersonal
skills in the engineering curriculum (Felder, 2006; Prados et al., 2005; Sheppard et al.,
2009; Samavedham & Ragupathi, 2012; Scardamalia et al., 2012). Engineering leaders
in this study believed that colleges of engineering should make efforts to teach
162
interpersonal skills such as empathy, listening skills, communication, and others that are
highlighted in this study. Contrary to the school of thought that many of these skills can
only be acquired through experience, the engineering leaders in this study believed that
the majority of the skills can be taught in the classroom, especially communication,
empathy, and listening skills. Lopes et al., (2015), in their study exploring a key factor for
engineering students to develop interpersonal skills, concluded that interpersonal skills
which signify the characteristics of an effective engineer are learnable and could be
taught within an educational program. Also, Bowman and Farr (2000) in their study on
embedding leadership in civil engineering education noted that even though the focus of
their study was not to argue that leadership can be acquired solely in a classroom, they
noted that those who argue that leadership cannot be developed to some degree in an
academic climate are wrong. Engineering leaders in this study have also echoed similar
sentiments, noting that leadership is acquired through training and experience.
In terms of experience, the engineering leaders in this study advocate that engineering
institutions in their efforts to teach leadership should incorporate activities that will enable the
learners to engage in using the knowledge they have acquired on leadership. They noted it will
remain as head knowledge if that is not done. One of the engineering leaders noted that some of
the worst leaders he had ever met had all sorts of leadership training in their portfolio, but it did
not reflect in their behaviors. He blamed this on the issue of getting trained without putting the
knowledge into practice. A large percentage of the engineers believed that experience is very key
in leadership acumen acquisition. They advocated for the inclusion of volunteering activities,
especially in a non-engineering environment in engineering leadership training or encouragement
of their trainees to participate in student club activities.
163
5.5. Research Questions
Based on the analysis of the themes and sub-themes in the sections above, the research
questions established for this study are answered and discussed in the following sections.
RQ 1: How do ABET leaders define engineering leadership and engineering leadership skills
based on their experience as engineering leaders?
The ABET leaders in this study defined engineering leadership with emphasis on
competency in interpersonal skills in addition to technical skills. This includes the ability to
manage people and processes to achieve organizational goals, and being an ethical leader who
has the goal and ethics of the engineering profession in mind. Four out of the six ABET leaders
were able to articulate a clear definition of engineering leadership while the remaining two used
stories and narratives to illustrate their definition. A synthesis of each of their definitions was
completed and the main themes that emerged from the definition, as well as the approach used, is
highlighted in Figure 5.8.
164
Figure 5.8. Key themes from Engineering Leadership Definitions by ABET Leaders.
It should be noted that the engineering leaders in this study have generally emphasized
the importance of interpersonal skills in engineering leadership. While some of the highlighted
themes described in Figure 5.8 might not specifically mention interpersonal skills, they do have
the undertone of having sound proficiency in interpersonal skills in the process of leading
technical efforts. All the definitions of engineering leadership were compiled and iteratively
synthesized until a succinct definition was deduced. This was compared with each definition
given by the engineering leader to ascertain if it was representative of such a definition. A
resulting definition from the iterative synthesizing of the six leadership definitions provided by
ABET leaders is:
Engineering leadership is the process of using technical knowledge and interpersonal
skills to influence and manage teams toward the accomplishment of engineering mission
goals while also abiding by engineering professional ethical standards.
165
A total number of eighteen leadership skills were identified in this study as very
important to engineering leadership based on the narratives of the engineering leaders who
participated in the study. Figure 5.9 shows the distribution of the number of ABET leaders who
specified each identified skill as important to engineering leadership success. From the figure, it
can be seen that technical expertise, teamwork, and listening skills were the most pronounced
skills by the ABET leaders while demonstrative leadership was the least pronounced.
Communication and humility or ego management were specified by five out of the six ABET
leaders as important to the success of engineering leadership, while empathy, rational articulation
decision-making, and collaborative followership were specified by four out of the six leaders as
important engineering leadership skills. In addition to this, three out of six ABET leaders
mentioned fearless exploration, lifelong learning, ethics, trustworthiness, and flexibility, as
important to engineering leadership. The two ABET leaders cited problem-solving, critical
thinking, and leadership identity awareness as important to engineering leadership. It should be
noted that this is an indication of the relative importance of the skills as identified by the
engineering leaders in this study. According to Smith et al., (2009), engaging in numeration is
good because it could be the only way of indicating the relative importance of some themes.
However, according to the authors, this should also not be over-emphasized because sometimes,
something that unlocks a further set of meanings for a participant might only be mentioned once.
The implication of this is that some of the skills that were not identified by a large number of
participants in this study are also important skills in their own right and many of them have been
highlighted in the literature and engineering leadership skills. This means that in teaching
engineering leadership skills, all of these skills should be considered as necessary for leadership
success.
166
Figure 5.9. The distribution of ABET Leaders who emphasized each of the Identified
Engineering Leadership Skills.
RQ 2: How do engineering leaders in the industry define engineering leadership and
engineering leadership skills based on their experience as engineering leaders?
The definition of engineering leadership given by the industry leaders in this study can be
classified under various approaches to leadership definition, but the behavioral approach was
predominant in their definitions. The main emphasis of their definition is on demonstrating
technical knowledge and ethical behaviors, leading by example, and having interpersonal skills
to collaborate and influence teams to achieve set goals. When asked to define engineering
leadership, only one out of the seven industry leaders was able to articulate a clear definition of
167
engineering leadership. Figure 5.10. shows the various approaches used by the industry leaders
and the emerging theme from a synthesis of each of their definitions.
Figure 5.10. Key Themes from Engineering Leadership Definitions by the Industry
Leaders.
All the definitions of engineering leadership given were compiled and iteratively
synthesized until a succinct definition was deduced. A comparison between each of the
definitions was made to ensure that the derived definition from the synthesis reflects each of the
definitions. The resulting definition from the iterative synthesis of the six leadership definitions
provided by industry leaders is:
Engineering leadership is leveraging on technical expertise and interpersonal skills to
guide teams in developing innovative, ethical solutions that meet the organization's goals
168
and serve the public interest while fostering a culture of trust, autonomy, and
collaboration.
Figure 5.11. Distribution of the Industry leaders who emphasized each of the Identified
Engineering Leadership Skills.
With regards to the eighteen identified leadership skills in this study, Figure 5.11 shows
the distribution of the number of industry leaders who cited each of the identified skills as
important to engineering leadership success. As shown in the Figure, technical expertise,
169
problem-solving and critical thinking, and teamwork skills were the most pronounced identified
skills by all the seven industry leaders. Six out of the seven industry leaders identified empathy
and rational articulation as essential leadership skills. Communication, strategic visioning,
demonstrative leadership as well as fearless exploration skills were mentioned by five out of the
seven industry leaders as needed leadership skills. Leadership identity awareness was cited by
three out of the seven industry leaders, while the remaining four industry leaders identified
decision-making, flexibility, organization, and time management. Collaborative followership and
delegation skills were identified by two out of seven industry leaders.
It is important to note that the skills illustrated in the figure are a measure of relative
importance in terms of what skills are considered important to engineering leadership by the
industry leaders based on their experience.
RQ3: How do ABET leaders' definitions of engineering leadership and identification of
engineering leadership skills align with those of engineering professionals in the industry?
The definition of engineering leadership by the ABET leaders is more of a situational
approach with an emphasis on having technical expertise and interpersonal skills to manage and
influence people in achieving set goals while also maintaining engineering ethical standards.
However, the definition of engineering leadership given by the industry leaders is more of a
behavioral approach with elements of a situational approach. The industry leaders defined
engineering leadership from the perspective of the leader being able to lead technical efforts by
example, have interpersonal skills to guide and manage teams to achieve set goals and
demonstrate engineering ethical behaviors. It should be noted that although the orientation of the
definition of engineering leadership given by the ABET leaders and that of industry leaders is
different, their definitions do not significantly conflict with each other, especially when
170
interpreting or making inferences from each of the definitions. The previously synthesized
definitions of ABET and industry leaders were combined together and synthesized, and this
resulted in an overall proposed definition of engineering leadership, which is defined thus:
Engineering leadership is the dynamic integration of technical knowledge with
interpersonal skills to guide and inspire teams toward achieving organizational goals and
objectives while also maintaining a commitment to engineering ethical standards and
promoting a culture of trust, autonomy, respect, and collaborative problem-solving.
Also, a proposed definition of engineering leadership skills based on the dichotomous views of
engineering leadership shared by the engineering leaders in this study is:
Engineering Leadership skills refer to a combination of technical and interpersonal skills
needed by an engineering professional to effectively influence a group of technical and
non-technical personnel and facilitate communal collaborations and mutual
understanding to achieve organizational goals.
A comparison between the number of ABET and industry leaders who mentioned or
highlighted each of the eighteen skills identified in this study as important engineering leadership
skills is illustrated in Figure 5.12.
171
Figure 5.12. Distribution of the comparison between the number of ABET and industry leaders
who identified each engineering Leadership Skill.
It can be seen from Figure 5.12. that all six ABET leaders and seven industry leaders
identified technical expertise and teamwork as important, while all six ABET leaders identified
listening skills as essential engineering leadership skills, and only four out of seven industry
leaders cited listening. Also, while all seven industry leaders identified problem-solving and
critical thinking as essential engineering leadership skills, only two out of the six engineering
leaders identified this as important. This could be attributed to the work environment. All the
ABET leaders in this study are in academia where a lot of listening and taking is done, while the
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
No of Engineering Leaders
Engineering Leadership Skills
ABET Leaders (N=6) INDUSTRY Leaders (N=7)
172
industry leaders’ day-to-day activities involve providing solutions to certain technical problems
which requires much critical thinking and hands-on problem-solving. This pattern of the effect of
work environment on the identified engineering leadership skills can be seen all through the
engineering leadership skills illustrated in the figure.
5.6. Conclusion
The definition of engineering leadership given by the engineering leaders in this study
falls into various approaches to defining leadership that have been identified in the literature. The
situational approach which has its orientation in the nature of the organization was more
pronounced in the definition of the ABET leaders, while the behavioral approach which focuses
on what the leaders do and how they act was more pronounced in the definition of the industry
leaders. A major highlight of this finding is that their definitions reflect their work environment
as all the ABET leaders in the study are in the academic work environment while the industry
leaders are in the work environment that demands actions in leading hands-on technical projects.
Also, this study found that engineering leaders in ABET were more able to articulate the
definition of engineering leadership compared to industry leaders who employed stories and
paraphrases in defining engineering leadership. In addition, although engineering leadership was
defined based on the lived experience of the engineering leaders in this study, after categorizing
and synthesizing these definitions, it was found that the difference between the definitions given
by ABET leaders and industry leaders was not significant, as both definitions tended to focus on
influencing and coordinating teams using interpersonal skills and technical expertise while
abiding by the ethical standards of the engineering field of practice. An iterative synthesis of all
the definitions resulted in a proposed definition of engineering leadership.
173
This study also indicated that engineering leadership is made up of technical expertise
and interpersonal skills with a ratio of 30 to 70 respectively, and that as an engineering leader
moves up the ladder of leadership, the usage of technical skills decreases, and more interpersonal
skills are used. Engineering leaders in this study noted that while their technical knowledge
provided them with the ability to understand what was going on in a project and mentor their
team, they indicated that more of their engineering leadership success can be attributed to active
listening, empathy, the ability to tailor communication to the audience, respecting their team
members, rationale articulation, etc. This study proposed a definition of engineering leadership
skills based on the views shared by engineering leaders in this study.
This study also found that engineering leaders learn interpersonal skills the hard way, as a
higher percentage of the engineering leaders in this study shared how they failed a lot because
they had no prior training in leadership when they first became leaders and had to learn by
failure as they engaged in their leadership roles. They emphasize the need for engineering
institutions to make more efforts in providing leadership training for engineering graduates.
This study unveiled three stages of engineering leadership which are self-directed
leadership, team leadership, and managerial leadership. The research findings suggested that
contrary to some schools of thought that leadership is not for engineers (Rottmann et. al, 2015),
every engineer actually engages in leadership starting from self-directed leadership to team
leadership, and from team leadership to managerial leadership. It should be noted that most
engineers remain in the position of team leadership throughout their careers because they do not
choose to pursue managerial leadership. This study therefore concluded that all engineers are
leaders, but not all engineers are managerial leaders. The earlier engineering institutions begin to
orientate engineering graduates to adopt a leadership identity the better. In addition, when
174
asserting that leadership is not for everyone in the engineering field, efforts should be made to
qualify that “managerial” leadership is not for everyone.
A total of 18 skills were identified by engineering leaders in this study as important for
engineering leadership success. These included technical expertise, teamwork, problem-solving
and critical thinking, empathy, rationale articulation, communication, strategic visioning,
demonstrative leadership, fearless exploration, listening, humility or ego management, lifelong
learning, ethics and trustworthiness, leadership identity awareness, decision-making, flexibility,
organization and time management, collaborative followership and delegation skills. This study
also found that the work environment influenced the identification of engineering leadership
skills as important to engineering leadership practices. This study further proposed a taxonomy
of engineering leadership skills based on the identified leadership skills in this study.
This study has been able to propose a definition of engineering leadership as a means of
contributing to achieving a consensus on the definition of engineering leadership. In addition,
this study identified eighteen engineering leadership skills that are believed to be important to the
success of engineering leadership based on the experience of engineering leaders who
participated in this study. This study also proposed a definition of engineering leadership skills to
facilitate a shared understanding of what constitutes engineering leadership skills.
5.7. Recommendations
One of the findings from this study is that the majority of engineering leaders could not
clearly articulate a clear definition of engineering leadership, especially industry leaders. This is
no fault of theirs because the typical engineering curriculum is not inclusive of such topics as
leadership education. The resistance to adopting leadership identity by some engineering
professionals has been highlighted in the literature (Paul et al., 2018; Rottmann et al., 2015;
175
Wilson & Mukhopadhyaya, 2022), and this is no surprise because it would be difficult for
someone to identify with what he or she cannot conceptualize or articulate in the first place.
Rottmann et al., (2016) said, “If we as engineering educators wish to more coherently or
systematically develop our students into leaders, we should begin by defining what engineering
leadership means (p. 147).” It is therefore recommended that defining engineering leadership
should be promoted by engineering educators and other engineering stakeholders. This is the first
step in facilitating a clear understanding of engineering leadership and producing graduates who
embrace the leadership responsibilities demanded in the modern workplace.
It is also recommended that engineering educators make efforts in the orientation of
engineering students to start seeing engineering as a leadership profession. This study has been
able to develop 3-stages of leadership in the engineering profession and that all engineering
professionals will engage in leadership at one point in their career, starting from self-leadership
to team leadership, to managerial leadership, which is often optional. Promoting this
understanding will enhance the willingness of engineering graduates to adopt a leader’s identity
or self-identify as a leader. Rottmann et al., (2015) in their study on the grounding leadership
theory in engineers’ professional identities posited that engineering leadership education would
be more effective if there is a widespread recognition of engineering as a leadership profession.
Hence, engineering educators must orientate upcoming engineering professionals to adopt this
mindset.
One of the findings from this study is that the work environment influences the definition
of engineering leadership and identified engineering leadership skills provided by both the ABET
and industry leaders in this study. To better understand and refine the list of leadership skills
176
provided, it is recommended that engineering professionals in fields like healthcare, legal, and
other fields of professionals be included in future studies.
In addition, this study indicated that currently engineering professionals typically learn
leadership skills the hard way. Many of the engineering professionals in this study attested to
having failed severally to the point of being embarrassed. These engineering professionals
emphasized the need to promote interpersonal skills in engineering training. This study therefore
recommends the establishment of engineering leadership laboratories where students can be
trained in engineering leadership skills. For instance, one of the suggestions of the engineering
professionals in this study is to improve engineering graduates’ communication skills by asking
them to explain their engineering solution to a 3rd grader or someone in the liberal arts in a way
that the person will understand. Also, they recommended using active listening skills, which is
listening with understanding and checking with the communicator to ensure that the right
message is passed across, and giving students ill-structured problem scenarios where they will
need to use such skills as humility, respect, and empathy. All these can be implemented in the
engineering leadership laboratory and coursework.
Another important recommendation from this study is the need to include internship
experiences, especially in a non-engineering environment as part of every leadership training
session. This will enhance their ability to be able to effectively communicate and work with a
broader audience. The engineering leaders in this study emphasized the need for this experience
and they noted that leadership training without the incorporation of a period of internship where
the learner can gain experience might not be as impactful as it should be. They emphasized that it
is important that engineering leadership educators in engineering institutions encourage their
students to engage in student clubs and other extracurricular activities within the institution.
177
They should also provide support and incentives for them to do so. This will help them to
translate their leadership knowledge into actions.
5.8. Future work
A total number of eighteen engineering leadership skills were identified by engineering
leaders in this study. Future research should endeavor to refine these skills through empirical
methods to better enhance the understanding of how these skills could improve engineering
education. Furthermore, one of the limitations of this study is that the research participants who
participated in this research were recruited from companies that were based in the state of Utah.
Future studies should further explore this topic from the perspectives of participants from other
geographical locations to substantiate and or compare results from this study.
In addition, one of the findings from his study is that leadership identity awareness
influences leadership behaviors. Future studies should also explore this claim by seeking to
understand the relationship between these two entities.
