So what is the best economic system for engineers?

Or: How engineers are the best things for any economic system

In the past two articles I have compared communism and capitalism asking which is best for engineers. This was to explore the explicit question and also using the process to provide insights into to how different economic systems could influence engineering practice, skills and habits.

The two articles showed pros to each system for engineers: there was no clear winner. One can find not only examples of engineering excellence from each, but cases from each where engineering had suffered.

So what does this mean?

It means that we asked the wrong question. We implicitly asked which was better: communism or capitalism. And OR questions are always dubious. As I mentioned in my book, once you ask an OR question you need to compromise. You should therefore ask an AND version of the question or perhaps a different question altogether.

So we should have asked: how do we get the best engineering outcomes of both communism and capitalism in one system?

Or, the question in the title: what is the best economic system for engineers?

If you have read my book on how to master the core skills of engineering expertise, then you can likely guess the answer already.

Our man Joseph Schumpeter.

Joseph Schumpeter was an influential economist who argued that all improvements in societal wealth and the standard of living of the average person come from innovation and its commercialisation. Society needs ongoing innovation and its implementation so that we have Creative Destruction – where the old is replaced with the new (and better) so that things improve for everyone.

Schumpeter did not care if this came from an entrepreneur (although he thought that spirit was essential) or a large corporation or government-funded institutions (although for the latter two he noted the benefits in having organisations that could fund R&D). What mattered is that the innovation was implemented.

As an engineer, when you stop and think about this, it makes sense: all improvements in quality of life and the wealth of modern society can be tracked back to some form of technological innovation. Also, it leaves you feeling a little taller and content with yourself. For it is engineers who are so instrumental in this act of commercialising and implementing innovation. You realise not only how the right kind of economy can offer more engineering opportunities, but how more engineering activity means a better economy.

So the best economic system for engineers is a Schumpeterian one. And this also means engineers are essential for a healthy and growing economy.

So now that we understand what is best, economically, for engineers, what do you do with this as a global engineer?

Whenever you are considering a move to a new role, assess the culture (be it the company or the location the company operates in). Is it one that values innovation and entrepreneurship; does it expect engineers to be a driver of improvement? If the answers are yes and yes, then you are more likely to be in a role that will be satisfying and offer you a chance for professional development.

And if you are looking to employ an engineer, then such places are more likely to produce expert engineers who will be of greater value to you. Just make sure that the place in question valued both innovation AND its implementation. The former without the latter is just academic.
​
So think now about how Schumpeterian your past places of employment have been. Have you been well served, or is it maybe it is time for you to change so you can develop further?