Difference between SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY and ENGINEERING ?

This morning – a young IT Techie asked me: “What is the difference between Engineering and Technology?” 

I had been asked a similar question about the definition of Science, Engineering and Technology many years ago when I used to conduct an induction training program – and – in response – in addition to answering the question – I had written a blog post on the subject.

Let me delve into my academic writing journal archives and pull out this post which I had written 7 years ago – in the year 2008 – during my “Professorship” days...

SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING
Meaning and Definition
By 
VIKRAM KARVE

From my Academic Writing Archives:

Here is an article I wrote during my teaching days, while conducting an induction training program, around 7 years ago, in the year 2008...

SCIENCE ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY –  SCIENTIST ENGINEER TECHNOLOGIST  -  What is the Difference?

Long back, during my teaching days, once when I was talking to some youngsters undergoing an induction training program, I realized that they did not know the difference between Science, Engineering and Technology. 

Some of the trainees had degrees in Technology (B.Tech. / M.Tech.), some had degrees in Engineering (B.E. / M.E.) and a few had degrees in Science (B.Sc., B.S., M.Sc., M.S).

I called two trainees.

One had a B.Tech. (Bachelor of Technology) degree in Electrical Engineering.

The other had a B.E. (Bachelor of Engineering) degree in the same discipline.

I asked then what was the difference between a B. Tech. degree and a B.E. degree?

They were clueless.

I asked all the trainees if they knew the difference between Science, Engineering and Technology?

No one seemed to know.

Tell me – do you know the difference between Science, Engineering and Technology? ?

In many research organizations – even Engineers and Technologists are designated as Scientists. 

Do you know what is the difference between Science, Technology and Engineering?

Can you tell me what is the difference between a Scientist, a Technologist and an Engineer? 

Let me try to elaborate – in as simple a way as possible.

SCIENCE and the SCIENTIST

Science is the reasoned investigation or study of natural phenomena with the objective of discovering new principles and knowledge of natural phenomena.

The principal goal of a Scientist is to publish a research paper. 

Now-a-days, the sheer manner in which so many papers are churned out it seems that many research papers are seen to be written and not written to be seen.

Of course, a genuine Scientist will try and ensure that a research paper must be written to be seen and not seen to be written. 

TECHNOLOGY and the TECHNOLOGIST

Technology is the practical application of science.

Technology includes the skill, technique and knowledge of the manipulation of nature for human purposes, using scientific results and knowledge.

The principal goal of a Technologist is to produce some physical change in the world. 

ENGINEERING and the ENGINEER 

Engineering is the professional art of using technology (the practical application of science) for achieving the optimum conversion of the resources of nature for the benefit of humankind.

In order to exploit technology, the engineer applies scientific principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes and systems. 

The principal goal of an Engineer is to design, create and produce new tools, machines and systems for practical human means by exploiting technology.

 

WHO IS MOST USEFUL TO SOCIETY – SCIENTIST TECHNOLOGIST or ENGINEER?

In a nutshell:

a Scientist studies nature

a Technologist manipulates nature 

an Engineer exploits technology for human purposes.

While Scientists may, at times, may conduct scientific studies for the sake of discovery, Engineers and Technologists always try to have in mind the ultimate benefit of humankind and results of their work are invariably beneficial for human purposes.

Engineering is the art of optimally using technology and is primarily concerned with how to direct to useful and economical ends the natural phenomena which scientists discover and formulate into acceptable. 

Engineering therefore requires the creative imagination to innovatively apply technology in order to obtain useful applications of natural phenomena. 

It seeks newer, cheaper, better technologies of using natural sources of energy and materials.
 

So it looks like the Engineer is the one who is most useful to society and humankind – isn't it?

Dear Reader – do you agree? 

Or do you feel that the Scientist is more important that the Engineer? 

Or do you think there is no difference between Science, Technology and Engineering? 

Please do give your views and comments.

ENGINEERING – Definition

A Gobbledygook Definition of ENGINEERING

Now I have tried to tell you in as simple a way as possible, but if you prefer Gobbledygook read on:

The American Engineers’ Council for Professional Development  has defined Engineering as follows: 

 

Engineering is:

“The creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or operate the same with full cognizance of their design; or to forecast their behavior under specific operating conditions; all as respects an intended function, economics of operation and safety to life and property”

WHY INDIA IS STILL TECHNOLOGICALLY BACKWARD DESPITE INVESTING SO MUCH MONEY AND HUMAN RESOURCE IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

India could not capitalize on its Scientific Developments since our Engineering and Technology were weak. 

There is no use pursuing scientific research without strong engineering capability and robust technological base. 

There is no use inventing and discovering new things if you cannot utilize your inventions and discoveries for the benefit of mankind.

CONCLUSION

I think I will end with a quote:

“A good scientist is a person with original ideas. 
A good engineer is a person who makes a design that works with as few original ideas as possible. 
There are no prima donnas in engineering”
                                                                     ~ Freeman Dyson

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

All Stories in this Blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the story are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)

GROUPTHINK - A BANE IN MILITARY LIFE - WHERE ALL THINK ALIKE NO ONE THINKS VERY MUCH

GROUPTHINK
A BANE OF MILITARY LIFE
By
VIKRAM KARVE

Where all think alike, no one thinks very much 

 ~ Walter Lippmann

When I was in the Navy I saw plenty of Groupthink. 

During my interactions with the army, I saw even more Groupthink.

I feel that Groupthink is one of the main reasons which hampers optimal decision making, especially in the defence services which have a highly regimented way of thinking. 

Here is an abridged version of one of my lectures which tells you all about GROUPTHINK in a nutshell:

GROUPTHINK

Tradition has it that conflict is bad.

Conflict is something to be avoided.

The culture of many organizations implies explicitly or implicitly that conflict should be suppressed and eliminated. 

It is common for managers to perceive intra-organizational conflict as being dysfunctional for the achievement of organizational goals.

Most of us still cling to the idea that good managers resolve conflict. 

Current thinking disputes this view.

In the absence of conflicting opinions, harmonious tranquil work groups are prone to becoming static, apathetic and unresponsive to pressures for change and innovation.

Work Groups and Teams, even Top Management,  also risk the danger of becoming so self-satisfied, that dissenting views, which may offer important alternative information, are totally shut out.

In short, they fall victims to a syndrome called “GROUPTHINK”

In a study of public policy decision fiascos, I.L Janis identified “GROUPTHINK” as a major cause of poor decision making. 

As he describes it:

‘groupthink’ occurs when decision makers who work closely together develop a high degree of solidarity that clouds their vision, leading them to suppress conflicting views and negative feelings about proposals, consciously or unconsciously.

A manifestation of the groupthink phenomenon is the staggering irrationality which can beset the thinking of the otherwise highly competent, intelligent, conscientious individuals when they begin acting as a group or team and this affects organisational effectiveness.


EFFECT AND SYMPTOMS OF GROUPTHINK

The net effect on the group is that it overestimates its power and morality, it creates pressures for uniformity and conformance, and its members become close-minded, living in ivory towers. 

Some manifestations are the illusions of invulnerability and the encouragement to take great risks and to ignore the ethical or moral aspects of their decisions and actions.

This author has witnessed close-mindedness on the part of several managers which then permeated their teams.

One project manager took this to the extreme and in effect defined his environment as consisting of two kinds of people, either "friends" or "enemies". 

This syndrome is akin to the dialogue from the classic Movie Ben Hur which I call the:

“you are either for me or you are against me” syndrome

Like this Manager I observed, many persons, especially some of my bosses, exhibit this syndrome.

Friends were people who completely agreed with his favoured solutions and supported his project. 

All others were enemies.

Soon his entire project team was echoing similar sentiments having fallen victim to “GROUPTHINK”, resulting in unbending positions, heated arguments and subsequent lack of respect for anyone who disagreed with them. The ultimate consequences can easily be guessed.

The symptoms of groupthink include:

(i) An illusion of invulnerability that becomes shared by most members of the group.

(ii) Collective attempts to ignore or rationalize away items of inconvenient information which might otherwise lead the group to reconsider shaky but cherished assumptions.

(iii) An unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, thus causing members to overlook the ethical consequences of their decisions.

(iv) Stereotyping the dissenters as either too evil for negotiation or too stupid and feeble to merit consideration.

(v) A shared illusion of unanimity in a majority viewpoint, augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent.

(vi) Self-appointed “mind-guards” to protect the group from adverse information that might shatter complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decision.

Not very surprisingly it has been suggested that individuals most susceptible to groupthink will tend to be people fearful of disapproval and rejection and who want to “conform”.

Conversely, an outspoken individualist who freely airs his views and opinions, if trapped in a groupthink situation, runs the risk of being ejected by his colleagues if he fails to hold his tongue.


GROUPTHINK SITUATIONS

THE DOMINANT LEADER

Firstly, because the CEO [or the “Boss”] dispenses all favours, his biggest problem is to avoid being treated like God. Secondly, the “Boss” must avoid thinking that he is God.

Indeed, in many organizations, it is not easy to contradict or argue too vigorously with the boss.

Even when managers feel that they know more than a superior, they may suppress doubts because of career considerations.

Fear, respect for authority, and even admiration for the boss, may make sceptics hesitate when confronted with a confident CEO or dominating superior.

This is less of a problem if the leader acts in the organization’s interests, possesses requisite soft skills, and has strong ethics and cognitive capabilities to make decisions.

However, if a leader does not force serious questioning, he or she will sometimes make mistakes and errors of judgement. 

Colleagues and subordinates will become “yes-men”, and groupthink will take over decision making.

And the dominant CEO may not discover his or her mistakes because fearful employees withhold information.

What can lower-level managers do about the boss who has lost touch with reality and seems to be driving the organization in the wrong direction?

One can adopt three different strategies:

(i) “Exit” (Leave the organization)
(ii) “Voice” (attempt to force changes from within)
(ii) “Loyalty” (accept things the way they are)

Each individual can evaluate the risks and benefits of each strategy.

However, if the organization is really on the wrong track, true loyalty requires an attempt to communicate one’s reservations and concerns to the leader.

How can a confident, independent CEO avoid the pitfalls and temptations of absolute power?

The obvious (but difficult) answer is to make sure that power is never absolute, and surround oneself with other confident, independent people, and encourage dissension and debate on every decision.

In his autobiography ‘A Soldier’s Story’ General ON Bradley has exemplified this aspect in the decision-making style of General George C Marshall, Chief of Staff of the US Army in World War II, a dominant leader who was instrumental in the Allied Victory owing to his resolute management of the entire war effort.

After one week in office, General Marshall called all his staff officers to his office and admonished them: 

“Gentlemen, I am disappointed in you. You haven’t yet disagreed with a single decision I have made. When you carry a paper in here, I want you to give me every reason you can think of as to why I should not approve it. If, in spite of your objections, my decision is still to go ahead, then I’ll know I am right.”

General Marshall did not believe in Groupthink but wanted to hear different and contrarian views before taking a decision. 

Rather than search for views that might reinforce his own, a CEO should seek contrary opinions to avoid groupthink. 

Some suggest using a devil’s advocate methodology for all major decisions by assigning some individuals in all groups and teams to argue against the dominant view.


PARALLEL POWER

This is a “groupthink” situation in which individuals or groups low in the hierarchy are powerful enough to do what they want, even when contrary to organizational objectives. 

Such power may be based on specialized expertise or privileged access to information.

Parallel power can lead to groupthink in two ways.

Firstly, senior managers may accept ideas from lower-level managers that are not necessarily in the organizational interest, either because they have insufficient information to ask the right questions, or because opposition would not seem legitimate.

Secondly, top managers may make decisions without all the necessary information because subordinates do not provide it due to vested interests arising from misplaced loyalties to a limited function, department or team, rather than to the organization as a whole.

Such situations can be mitigated by ensuring that managers rotate between different units and positions.


NATURAL UNANIMITY

When everyone in power instinctively shares the same opinion on an issue, the wise manager should be wary.

Natural unanimity groupthink results in an inward-looking organization detached from its environment.

Escape from this predicament almost certainly requires a fresh perspective that can come only from outside, by hiring new managers or appointing outside consultants.

A CEO may lay overemphasis on staff – line cooperation in the belief that the easiest way to ensure implementation is to recommend only those actions that the line managers agree with.

But this is not necessarily useful to an organization and may lead to mutual admiration and, ultimately, “natural unanimity groupthink”.

The effectiveness of staff - line dichotomy depends on maintaining a certain tension between the staff and the line managers.When the tension disappears, the staff may not be doing its job.

CONCLUSION

The key element in any strategy for avoiding groupthink is to instil checks and balances into the system. 

Formally, this can be achieved through cross-functional teams, staff advisers, external consultants, or procedures like “devil’s advocacy”.

Informally, managers must learn to tolerate dissidence, criticism, contrary opinions, discussion, brainstorming and debate and encourage their colleagues to express doubts about proposals. Propositions from various parts of the organization need to be treated transparently, equitably, and consistently, to avoid groupthink.

In a nutshell, for effective decision making, steer clear of yes-men, ego-massage, sycophancy and groupthink.

VIKRAM KARVE

Copyright © Vikram Karve 2013

Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this book review. 

© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:

All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

NB:

No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve 2013 all rights reserved

Did you like this article?

I am sure you will like the 27 short stories from my recently published anthology of Short Fiction COCKTAIL
To order your COCKTAIL please click any of the links below:
http://www.flipkart.com/cocktail-vikram-karve-short-stories-book-8191091844?affid=nme
http://www.indiaplaza.in/cocktail-vikram-karve/books/9788191091847.htm
http://www.apkpublishers.com/books/short-stories/cocktail-by-vikram-karve.html

COCKTAIL ebook

If you prefer reading ebooks on Kindle or your ebook reader, please order Cocktail E-book by clicking the links below:
AMAZON
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005MGERZ6
SMASHWORDS
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/87925

Foodie Book:  Appetite for a Stroll
If your are a Foodie you will like my book of Food Adventures APPETITE FOR A STROLL. Do order a copy from FLIPKART:
http://www.flipkart.com/appetite-stroll-vikram-karve/8190690094-gw23f9mr2o

About Vikram Karve

A creative person with a zest for life, Vikram Karve is a retired Naval Officer turned full time writer and blogger. Educated at IIT Delhi, IIT (BHU) Varanasi, The Lawrence School Lovedale and Bishops School Pune, Vikram has published two books: COCKTAIL a collection of fiction short stories about relationships (2011) and APPETITE FOR A STROLL a book of Foodie Adventures (2008) and is currently working on his novel and a book of vignettes and an anthology of short fiction. An avid blogger, he has written a number of fiction short stories and creative non-fiction articles on a variety of topics including food, travel, philosophy, academics, technology, management, health, pet parenting, teaching stories and self help in magazines and published a large number of professional  and academic research papers in journals and edited in-house journals and magazines for many years, before the advent of blogging. Vikram has taught at a University as a Professor for 15 years and now teaches as a visiting faculty and devotes most of his time to creative writing and blogging. Vikram Karve lives in Pune India with his family and muse - his pet dog Sherry with whom he takes long walks thinking creative thoughts.

Vikram Karve Academic and Creative Writing Journal: http://karvediat.blogspot.com
Professional Profile Vikram Karve: http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
Vikram Karve Facebook Page:  https://www.facebook.com/vikramkarve
Vikram Karve Creative Writing Blog: http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com/blog/posts.htm
Email: vikramkarve@hotmail.com

Twitter: @vikramkarve

      

© vikram karve., all rights reserved.