​Just how quick and dirty is engineering?

Or: Scientist, Drug dealer, Hitman, Engineer

You might have seen the bit by Don McMillan (the engineer who became a comedian) about what it takes to be an engineer.
Take a look if you have not seen it. It’s only a minute and it is funny.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Don McMillan (@donmcmillancomedy)

​There is, however, something that this video raises that is noteworthy.
The notion of engineering being quick and dirty.
I think Don McMillan is right when he compares engineering to science. Especially the type that leads to a Nobel Prize – we just can’t wait that long, most of the time, for engineering solutions.
It’s worth noting that we had steam engines powering the industrial revolution before we understood how they worked. If we always waited for the science to be complete, then engineering would not have pushed society along as fast as it has done.
Still, some engineers, I have found, push the quick and dirty aspect more than is ideal.
You can certainly progress a solution to an engineering problem without obsessing over some of the academic questions. And you do sometimes need to start solving a problem to sufficiently understand it.
Nevertheless, your solution should still be sufficient. Sometimes that can mean near enough is good enough. But sometimes the engineering solution is the optimised one. Especially when you are in a competitive industry – due to commercial factors, the nature of the challenge, or maybe regulatory needs. And in this case, while you are not pushing for a Nobel Prize, you need to ensure you have been thorough.
So always be mindful of how refined your solution needs to be given the nature of the challenge and its context.