Joseph Emfield is president and CEO of GSE Machining and a member of CompTIA’s End User Commission. Here he shares his thoughts on the state of tech education.
As information technology becomes more firmly entrenched in both our businesses and personal lives, it appears that technology education is struggling to keep up with the changes.
I’m president and CEO of Michigan-based GSE Machining. We specialize in computer numerical control (CNC) processes that support precise control of industrial cutters. As such, I live at the intersection of the IT industry and the robotics industry, where computers and industrial equipment merge to support advanced welding and fabrication.
My world is filled with people who specialize in either IT or industrial controls, and there are few people familiar with both sides of that equation. In fact, I frequently see a wedge between IT people and the manufacturing technology staff.
For example, my manufacturing technology people can develop a strategy to promote efficiency of process, only to be shot down by the information technology people due to security concerns. The manufacturing team might not understand that security is a critical technology component that can prevent the shut-down of the plant itself. But the IT people might not understand that successful evolution of processes is necessary for the enterprise to remain competitive. Both sides might be equally correct in their positions and intentions, but each tends to step back into a position of righteousness, convinced that those other people just don’t get it.
This scenario spotlights a gap in education. In the new world of technology, one’s specific area of expertise needs to be augmented by enough knowledge of the enabling processes to understand the big picture of delivering high value to our customers. Some individuals are better at doing this than others, but educational institutions need to do more to cultivate those skills.
As I look around me, I see fewer people with degrees from four-year universities. By rough estimates, only 25 to 30 percent of my employees hold the paper that at one time was table stakes to living the American dream. The remainder of my employees were educated through technical institutes, small colleges and trade associations, which, combined with work experience, provide a highly effective springboard to careers in this field.
These two education categories have different metrics for success. Lacking the name recognition and gravitas of larger universities, the smaller institutions must prove their value through a high percentage of employed graduates. This often translates to extensive dialogue with companies in the targeted industry, assessing which talents and skills are most needed from their employees and how will those needs change in the near- to mid-future.
Four-year universities, on the other hand, are typically more focused on graduation rates and test scores. Thus, we see a growing emphasis on how to get high scores and some people might argue that the tests are skewed downwards in order to maximize test scores; a desirable outcome for the student and institution alike.
It’s not my skill-set to tell university administrators how to change their approach, but it is clear to me that universities need a stronger focus on promoting a solid career path, as well as providing training in the more intellectual and humanistic pursuits. I’m sure we would be hard-pressed to find a university president who will say that his school is not focused on career-building. But today’s industries are evolving at breakneck speed and education based on incremental advances to established theory is no longer making the grade. Universities need to identify new sources to assist with curriculum evolution or else they risk marginalizing themselves. In addition, the use of internships needs to be revised in order to better promote hands-on experience, much like apprenticeships were used in long-ago eras.
Today’s business world requires deep, up-to-date knowledge of the individual’s core competency combined with the ancillary skills necessary to understand how different functions and technologies serve the company’s common objective.
Previous generations built educational institutions that were well-suited to their environments. We must do the same for ours.
Joseph Emfield is president and CEO of GSE Machining.
