Feedback Session 2-3 Future Scenario: Removing Time and Geographic Constraints in the Workplace Roel VanDoren President,

, Europe. Emerson Process Management.

Following the inspiring future scenarios presentation from Roel van Doren of Emerson Process Management, all picked upon the double dip demographic described (that there is a shortage of engineers entering the workforce, and in age range 40-50 who can replace retirees). Also that currently there is a war for talent a serious problem with trying to attract and retain new young engineering talent into his industry. Partly this is a recurrence of an age-old problem, repeated here by a Gen C representative that an engineering degree is harder, often longer, and perceived as less interesting than other degree options for young talent (e.g. marketing). But its not just degree qualifications which industry needs. In order to take critical operational decisions, a level of know-how is required which can typically take 10 12 years of operations experience to obtain. But those currently with this experience and know-how are the over 50s, who are approaching retirement faster than industry can train up their replacements. One of the biggest challenges faced is that of transferring knowledge between older, experienced knowers and younger Gen Cs. Harvesting this knowledge and know-how whilst it is still around is a major issue for all of Europes process industry.

The unattractiveness of the process industry as an employer of choice for engineering graduates was illustrated by the 4D illustration - that industry workplaces are frequently one or more of dirty, dangerous , dull or distant. The latter was apparently of most relevance to Gen C, who according to current perceived wisdom, though not confirmed by our own Gen C sample, would prefer to work where they want to live and not have to live in the (increasingly geographically distant places) where industry is located. A short side discussion outlined that a distant location was a significant factor which led to a career in CB&I (a major multinational EPC contractor) being voted second behind only Toyota Motors Europe as most attractive employer from ten process industry candidates in a recent EIIL Generations Club event. But that CB&I currently had European home offices in attractive incity locations in Den Haag and London, as well as the exciting client outpost locations was considered a major factor in their ability to retain engineers once the excitement has worn off (for partners and families, if not for the talent in question). Large process industry clients tend towards large sites with concentrations of integrated process plants providing a variety of jobs and career progression in a single location. But, largely because of the first two ds, these locations tend to be remote from cosmopolitan locations, and retaining talent, particularly those with partners, who require a more urban lifestyle is apparently an increasing challenge.

So one major challenge to be faced by industry is the transfer of knowledge between the generations. Our Gen C representatives pointed out that there is a conflict between the competitiveness of Gen C and the business requirement to share information. Gen C like to share things which make them appear attractive to others (in their networks), but when it comes to sharing information which is able to give them a competitive edge over peers, then this is not likely to be shared. It is essential that current leaders in the industrial workplace develop a sharing culture amongst their operations teams, and that this prevails even on the introduction of Gen C into this workplace.

Some special attention to cultural aspects of sharing may mitigate what might otherwise be a risk for integration of Gen C into tomorrows workplace. One company example was a questionnaire provided to its Asian new starts to help them become familiar with what to expect in terms of behaviours from their non-Asian colleagues. This was reportedly a real success, as measured by the number of times it was referenced during team meetings / discussions when some example of typical behaviour was exhibited by a team member.
It was discussed that the competitiveness of Gen C might be used in a companies favour, e.g. rewarding them publicly for sharing appropriate information, in order to help them integrate into a sharing culture.

A key requirement in order to harvest the experience of seniors is to get seniors to share their knowledge. But it is not so easy to encourage a senior close to retirement to go out and share what you know. In the best cases, an undefined audience with undefined needs leads, together with continuing focus on the day job, can lead to inefficiencies. In the worst cases there could be real reluctance because the knower may choose to retain that knowledge which will ensure he is retained as a consultant long into his retirement. It is a firm EIIL belief that developing young talents to overcome their fear of / respect for the hierarchy, and to encourage their natural inquisitiveness can, and in many cases has, led to effective inter-generational knowledge transfer through Learner driven learning. Tasking young talent with seeking out the most relevant experience, and through their (group) interviewing of the seniors, downloading the anecdotes which illustrate the theory most memorably, is more effective than tasking seniors to prepare a programme to share. This return to the oral history traditions of many cultures may not seem to have much to do with Gen C, but they do seem to be more receptive to the initial requirement; which is to overcome their fear of the hierarchy, and so should be more adept than todays young talent. Additionally, and frequently unknowingly to the senior, and therefore possibly illegally, Gen C have the habit of clicking on record on their various smart devices, whenever they are engaged in something of potential wider interest. To encourage (and legalise) this, would also mean that any anecdotes of experience would become available in-house on-line to other Gen Cs in their networks (a self-driven wiki replacing or at least supplementing, the Gen Y driven user specified software systems favoured (and failing) today to deliver comprehensive Knowledge Management databases.

One solution to the 4D challenges was the Integrated Operations Centre (or iOps) . Using remote sensors and actuators, and communicating over internet, the plant could be controlled by a skeleton crew, with the major control and optimisation functions being carried out in remote control rooms. These control rooms successfully countered the 4D problem, being in safe, clean, urban office environments, and additionally, with the ability to control many plants from the same control room, they would see the excitement of a plant incident more frequently. More importantly a companys experienced operators and engineers would be concentrated from several plant control rooms into one; an opportunity to share information, experience and good practice with each other, and also to pass this on to Gen C talents choosing to work in the more attractive environment of the iOps centre. One potential negative to this otherwise widely regarded as attractive industrial workplace was the possibility that operators may lose a degree of motivation by their being remote from, and therefore not personally involved with, the plants in their care. Stories were exchanged of operators who were apparently able to sense whether a pump was running well or not by a perceived difference to the normal sound when turning a particular corner during a plant walk. It will be some years before technical capabilities would enable the remote 3D walk through capability to be enhanced by sound and vibration information to replicate the real life plant. Still more years before it was, if indeed it ever would be, considered financially viable.

One observation was that, in his company , Experts need to contribute wherever they are, and fast . Currently experts can be found distributed between major engineering centres, and are frequently called on to join ad hoc problem resolution teams on projects with which they are not directly involved. There is an expectation that the expertise would not be sought if it were not required urgently, and so every effort is made to respond quickly, and to join the team from wherever the expert is located. There seems therefore to be no obvious need to centralise experts (into an iOps) in order to get this response time benefit. This argument (from an EPC contracting company) led others to suggest that perhaps companies could replicate many of the benefits of iOps by creating a virtual centralised expertise hub using social media tools available today. But this view was countered by those from operating companies (with frequently shorter timescales to mobilise and utilise geographically distributed expertise) . It was also commented that physical proximity much reduces the time to transfer learning, and also that certain types of knowledge which needs to be transferred, (e.g. explicit knowledge procedures, properties etc.) is easier to transfer via virtual (social ) media than is another type (e.g. tacit knowledge / know-how).

This led to a discussion of how concepts like iOps could be used more extensively to attract Gen C into industry. There are several You Tube online operator training modules explaining unit operations in the refining and other process industries, but these are considered even by Gen Y to be pretty dull and uninspiring. Several of those present had personal experience of operating near misses, and also of some excellent after the event analysis and reporting of real incidents which would go a long way in demonstrating to Gen C that the process industry is as close to real-life gaming as is possible, with real life and death decisions, as well as simple economic optimisation decisions taken on a daily basis. It is clear that much of this remains un-transmitted in any attempts to attract future operators and engineers into a career in industry, and this must surely be a missed opportunity when the target to attract is a gaming-obsessed, adrenalin-fuelled Gen C. Could companies collaborating in iOps- like solutions, with innovative providers such as Emerson Process Management, be persuaded to share some of their own operator training simulations with universities in order to demonstrate the excitement of process plant operation as well as its value to society through the products it produces. Future scenarios, such as the iOps, which address the limitations of the 4D workplace will certainly become a consideration for more companies in order to attract Gen C in fierce competition with other sector career opportunities. That such technology could be used at universities to make the industry itself more attractive to Gen C by revealing its largely hidden excitement, is something which should be encouraged. Surely the most attractive university courses of the future will be those which work with their industry partners to provide (and promote) such excitement.