Interdisciplinary Thinking

×

Is infrastructure engineering falling behind in critical thinking? The finance and software engineering professions both focus on critical thinking as a skill. Websites like Farnham Street (fsblog.com) made the topic of mental models a major trend. Shane Parrish, owner of the blog, has interviewed hundreds of people on how they think through decisions. Each of the people interviewed are at the top of their fields. The majority of them are from the finance or software industry.

Why is the finance and software world so focused on critical thinking? The main reason is the competition. Imagine that you’re a financial manager who is able to think 20% better than his competitor. This ability helps you perform 10% better than the competition. Performing at a 10% high return on investment, means everyone comes to you to invest their money. It’s a winner take all field. The same is true for software. A great software company is a monopoly. Just think about Facebook, Google, Microsoft or Amazon. Their core strength is unrivaled.

Software engineers can develop complex algorithms that few people can understand. These algorithms produce immense value in the form of internet products, design software or other programming-based products. Designing the structure of these algorithms requires pristine thought. You will notice the software engineers, at the highest skill levels, have the clearest level of thought among any professional. Read or listen to anything by Paul Graham, Marc Andreessen or Peter Thiel and you’ll notice the clear-thinking patterns. They’ve laid out clear lines of reasoning which have guided them to extreme success.

Similar to these algorithmic thinkers are those at the top of the financial world. Read Howard Marks, Warren Buffet or Ray Dalio and you’ll see the clear thinking on full display. You get smarter every time you read their work. Howard Marks is one of the great examples of this precious skill. His memos hold gems of wisdom on human behavior, economic modeling, and cycles.

Many of these financial and software professionals think like scientist when making decisions. Scientific laws are what guide engineers. Engineers apply these laws, such as the laws of mechanics or thermodynamics, to create the structures of the world we live in. If engineering operates under these laws, then why do I say our critical thinking skills have stagnated. First, we have to be open minded and admit to ourselves that there is a problem.

One piece of evidence that we’ve stagnated are the forms of infrastructure we currently build and operate. Much of the world’s infrastructure has changed by degrees but not in type. Highways are larger but still recognizable compared to their ancestors. Buildings have mostly remained rectangular blocks. Water treatment technology has remained unchanged. Subway systems that were once the greatest achievement of engineering, now struggle to maintain the travel speeds they held when they opened almost 100 years ago.

Another piece of evidence is the inflation of project costs and construction times. Building a new highway that’s needed to relieve congestion and encourage commerce is a 20-year program from planning to construction.

A final example is the hope around automated vehicle and connected vehicle technology. Just a few years ago connected vehicle technology was in the spotlight but co-opting several car makers into agreeing upon a standardized system of implementation seems to have slowed the endeavor to a halt. Meanwhile, Tesla vehicles have made tremendous strides toward Autonomous Level 5 driving and will likely win the race to autonomy long before regulations can be decided on. The most efficient strategy for assisting with AV implementation may be ensuring the pavement markings and signage on existing roads are clear and legible while letting automakers advance their own tech or lease AV software from Tesla.

The reason for this stagnation in engineering could be the increased politicization of infrastructure. This is not a new problem, but it has grown in the new decade. Engineering is adapting to this world where funding and approvals are bargaining chips between conflicting entities. This is not a unique insight. However, as infrastructure becomes more of a political tool, investment dollars become less efficient, as more time is needed to navigate administrative cost. This further hinders engineering progress. The maintenance of the current system supersedes any desire for innovation.

We’ve been spreading the old ideas of engineering, which have taken the industry very far, but what will take us into the next level of design. Eventually we will reach a point where our current technology will not suffice. This is why clearer thinking is important to our profession. It is the only way to address the challenges of the future.

So, where should the industry begin in terms of developing clear thought. The priority is to reestablish a strong connection between engineering and physics. We need to root ourselves in what is physically possible before letting the process of administration discourage an endeavor. By reestablishing the connection, we give permission for unconventional yet innovative ideas to be investigated. This opens the realm of possibility to futuristic construction projects from sustainable nuclear energy, hyperloop enabled transportation, AV only highway lanes and bigger ideas read in sci-fi novels.

Many great ideas die on the vine because no one thinks the regulatory or funding challenges will be overcome. This runs doubly true if you have been in the industry for a few decades. Physical reality is clouded by social norms.

The second step is to expand the time horizon for expected return on investments, while decreasing the time to act. The best way of putting this is to be “Impatient with actions and patient with results.” This is a quote for Naval Ravikant, another clear thinker from the software world. Each engineer needs to be personally accountable for moving a project forward. Infrastructure projects are highly complex not just in their technical aspects but because of the human coordination required to make them possible. Being personally accountable for a project’s success means you’re doing everything you can to push things forward without finding room for excuses.

By combining these two tactics of 1) rooting ideas in physics first and 2) being personally accountable for a project’s success, individual engineers can have an outsized impact in society. If I am correct about the reason for engineering’s stagnation, then the individual engineer will become more important as progress becomes constrained.

Action Item: Reestablish the connection between physics and engineering. Be personally accountable for a project’s success.