Engineers Rule: Honda and its culture of engineering

[fbbwsa]

allowing smart people creative freedom seems to solve so many problems that it blows my mind its not more common.

as far as i can tell, thats the thesis behind google's 20% time. i think its even cooler that Honda encourages this behavior and that system is so intrinsic to their culture that they don't even use it as a major selling point to potential employees. just business as usual.

innovation seems to be so rarely rewarded in stiff corporate environments and thats a damn shame.

[krschultz]

It just requires good engineers, and there is a distribution in the quality of engineers just like every other profession.

[msluyter]

The "HP Way" used to be somewhat like this, didn't it?

[ars]

"Engineers have built a contraption of water heater size that strips hydrogen out of natural gas while burning the carbon to provide heat for the home."

Ok, now that's just silly. Why not just burn the methane directly in the car and skip the multiple steps?

Hydrogen is a terrible choice as a fuel, it's very hard to store, and has a poor energy to volume ratio.

I should point out they did also create a methane car, and solar electrolysis, so I'm not really complaining about them.

[nazgulnarsil]

it sounds like hyperbole, but I honestly believe there are two types of people in this world. engineers and everyone else. a smart country would put the engineers in charge and reap the windfall of profits.

[river_styx]

Replace "engineers" here with occupation x, and this statement will be true from the viewpoint of every x in the world.

I have been in companies where engineers with questionable managerial/leadership skills were elevated to top positions. The results weren't pretty.

[elecengin]

I think I agree with your sentiment, but the mindset can be dangerous.

Engineering - if viewed most generally - is simply a pragmatic way of looking at the world, with an eye for improvement. If you use this broad definition, I think there are people who are try to create actionable change, and others who simply are greedy or uninterested.

Its dangerous though to put yourself on a pedestal (I assume you are an engineer)... I have I heard the same comment said about entrepreneurs, and my stomach turns a little from hubris...

[ntoshev]

A smart country?

It is better to think smaller here: put yourself (and possibly other engineers) in charge and reap the windfall of profits.

I am. Well, still working on that "windfall of profits" part. ;)

[krschultz]

I think the group is larger than just engineers. There are technical people and non-technical people. I would say an economist is a lot closer to an engineer than a lawyer.

Both are necessary, but right now it seems that the elected officials are non-technical. A balance would be a lot better.

[hugh]

Interestingly, the only country I can think of off the top of my head with an engineer "in charge" is Iran. I don't think Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a great example of how a country should be run.

[run4yourlives]

One should keep in mind that engineers also produce some of the world's most dramatic failures.

[scott_s]

Where do the scientists fit in?

[kingkongrevenge]

> a smart country would put the engineers in charge

This approach has a horrible track record. Failed "five year plans" all 'round.

I think engineers have a pretty bad track record as policy makers and leaders. Engineers see controllable processes and solvable problems. In a complex system like an economy or society these visions are usually mirages.

[sown]

i wanna work at honda :(

[gaius]

Honda have a series of TV ads (here in the UK anyway) that don't seem to be about any one particular product. There's a chap with a moustache who sings to dream, an impossible dream (don't know the actual name of the song) while operating various Honda technologies, motorbikes to hot air balloons. They seem to be investing considerably in getting the message out that they are a company where good people can do great stuff, rather than just selling things.

[kingkongrevenge]

This ignores the possibility that GM and Ford management have been perfectly rational in opting not to make major capital investments in their auto lines. The finance guys made A LOT of money at GM with GMAC and several big non-auto deals. It's perhaps a bit naive to spin this tale where GM would be doing very well if only they had been obsessive about engineering.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669746125629365.html

GM and Ford's apparent neglect of their US car lines makes perfect sense if you come to the conclusion that there's massive global overcapacity in car manufacturing and the unionized US workforce could never compete anyway. It's early yet to say Honda will even be a winner in the next 10 years. Every two bit country in the world is subsidizing a domestic car industry. My wild guess is it will be close to impossible to make decent profits and smart management would exit the business.

DIGITAL was another company known for technical prowess and a focus on engineering. They got eaten for lunch by the wheeler-dealers.

[Retric]

Honda makes money building cars in the US. Industry's with large upfront capital outlays tend to have a fairly constant and positive ROI for the most efficient participants. Because people don't spend a billion+ to enter the market if the odds of a positive ROI are poor.

[rogersm]

I completely agree with you, the financial guys make a lot of money. And because of that, the core business of GM should be financial and no automotive. So, let's make them sell the automotive part and buy Japanese, German and Korean cars. They know how to make cars.