Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
I am doing a little soul searching, and I figured this would be a good discussion.
I am a university student, I already have two, two year degrees, Composite Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering. I am on the fence about either a Business degree or a Aerospace Engineering degree. I have raced and built motorcycles since I was 4 years old, I have been to Spain (I am from the U.S.A) as a intern for a Ducati racing team, now I am on a Formula SAE/Student team. I am going to strive to become the team leader, once I get done I will work for some sort of high tech racing team (perferrably in Formula Junior, F1, Le Mans(ALMS) series, or Indy). So I want to hear from you, is a Team Principal (management) or a Chief Tech (engineer) more desirable/more rewarding?
You can't generalise and say "one of them is more rewarding". It depends on you, its really quite simple;
If you enjoy management more = do management
If you enjoy engineering more = stay on the technical side
I managed an FSAE project one year and it was shithouse. I've only done engineering since. Other people will say the exact opposite.
You may want to back up a step and think about this from some different angles. Some things to consider:
1. Why a third degree? Is the cost (both financial and time required to get it) going to get you a return on your investment? Is it going to help you achieve your goals? Consider that Christian Horner started off as a driver, rather than going to school for management. Consider also that Ross Brawn didn't have much if any specific engineering education before joining the workforce.
2. What are your goals? Are they realistic? I feel like while it is good to set ambitious objectives they also have to be realistic to set yourself up for a pattern of success, rather than falling short of the mark. Regardless of how many degrees you get, you're not going to be hired on to manage or direct a F1 (or ALMS or IRL) team straight out of college. If you want to be a technical director at some point, the first step is to get on a professional race team in an entry level position, be it doing data or assistant race engineer or whatever. That IMO should be the short term goal, and from there you can determine what you need to do to achieve it.
3. In some ways, management is management. I can't speak to Newey's specific job responsibilities at RBR, but generally speaking a technical director does just that - directing and managing an engineering department. They are not designing the whole car or whatever project themselves. I would say generally the career path starts off as entry level with being given any number of tasks to perform. As you gain some experience you get the opportunity to lead some small projects and manage some direct reports. If at that time you find it's something you enjoy and are good at, you may be given bigger management opportunities. Or maybe you find that you prefer to do more advanced and challenging technical work and opt to avoid management and become a senior technical analyst or engineer. Either way, I don't see that branch of the career path as being something even worth thinking about for someone still finishing up their education.
In any event being a team lead on a FSAE/FStudent team is an interesting experience for sure. Can learn a lot from it. Often can be a shitshow as Tim alludes to and it will invariably wear you to the bone, but even if you "manage a great FSAE team" you're still going to end up in some entry level spot when it comes time to go pro. Not to mention that IMO some things you learn or get in the habit of doing in FSAE are the exact opposite of what's effective in the real world.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
Whichever path you end up taking, there is no substitute for having technical knowledge. So I would say, no question, go for the Aero degree.
One of my pet peeves is the current thinking amongst MBAs that they can manage a technical business well without knowing the technical part of the business. Lawyers and accountants managing huge chemical companies (and F1 teams) make me sick. How can such a person, theoretically "in charge at the top of the heap" make a rational choice involving technology? He can't, he ends up listening to the technical opinions of others, essentially delegating important decisions. And those technically astute people below him will have the exact same reaction I had when the know-nothings try to make a technical decision: "WT**** did I spend 7 years in college getting advanced degrees, studying engineering and scientific principles, when this accounting MBA ****** can just ignore Mother Nature at will?" *
Even if you end up wanting to be a management leader, you'd be better off NOT going through all that MBA crap. It will mess up your head. The great Kelley Johnson said something like this to his Skunk Works successor, Ben Rich: "Don't waste your time getting an MBA. I can teach you all you need to know about the business side of the Skunk Works in one day, and we'll be leaving early for beers!"
* or, as one of my colleagues put it "he may ignore the laws of physics, but the laws of physics will not ignore him..."
flyboy2160 wrote:One of my pet peeves is the current thinking amongst MBAs that they can manage a technical business well without knowing the technical part of the business.
To be fair, similarly frustrating are engineering managers who think they can do management because they're good engineers.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
Thank you Jersey Tom for the in-depth response, and thank you guys for the reply.
I enjoy all aspects of a build, but at the same time I do not want to compress my design ideas. In labs as a Designer/Engineer I was always the "idea maker", I come up with a lot of different ideas only to get maybe one or a idea off of an idea to get approved. Saying that, I see different team leaders having different backgrounds. Are you saying all Team Principals or project leaders are outside of the design aspect?
Since my last post, I have asked some people I respect that are highly educated what route to take. I am leaning towards a Aerospace Engineering Degree. On a side note before I joined the Formula SAE/Student team, I wanted to work in the corpret world then open up my own company, that was one reason behind the Business degree.
1. I want the third degree for the true engineering knowledge, with the two degrees I have had so far I have landed some high entry labor jobs. Making carbon and glass V.I.P. (Vacuum Infusion Process) molds, machining masters, carbon back-up structures, making composite parts. I want to design and be apart of design teams that make cutting edge and innovative things. With my two degrees, all I can really do is model and write machining programs, I have a good mechanical grasp on what kinds of loads are going on but I can not tell you what really is happening. And I feel if I get a four year Eng degree, I will have the knowledge to do so.
2. As for my goals, Yes I believe they are realistic. I am extremely ambitious when I have a goal set in front of me. I understand I will not be able to get onto a F1 or a Le Mans team straight out of college, but I believe I can make it to that level one day. As stated above I believe if I get my degree (first goal) then I can move up to a racing team despite what level (second goal).
3. I understand some team directors do just direct. It might be my lack of knowledge but I feel as if some directors still have a say so in the design aspect of things. A great inspiration is Frank Williams, he was a used car sales man that was a racer at heart. I believe at one point he had a hand in the design aspect, that is what is appealing to me. I know I do have high hopes, I have always been a dreamer and with high ambitions, knowledge, and surrounding yourself with the right people these dreams will come true.
Are there prototype racing teams out there that have a Adrian Newey and Christian Horner all in one? Maybe Eric Boullier
Jersey Tom wrote:...To be fair, similarly frustrating are engineering managers who think they can do management because they're good engineers.
Agreed. But (especially lately) they are rarer than the MBAs. And my experience with those guys is much, much better than with the MBAs. I could usually talk to the engineer-turned-manger guys and say "Hey this is a little disorganized (or whatever)" and get a reasoned response. The MBAs almost always seemed to be insecurely protecting their position.
Last edited by flyboy2160 on 27 Apr 2013, 18:45, edited 1 time in total.
Personally, the thing I find frustrating is people who think that because someone made a different decision to the one that they would have, they must be a bad manager. I personally am not in a management position, but it never ceases to amaze me how often colleagues berate managers for being "morons", because they deigned to do something different to what they would have chosen to do.
beelsebob wrote:Personally, the thing I find frustrating is people who think that because someone made a different decision to the one that they would have, they must be a bad manager. I personally am not in a management position, but it never ceases to amaze me how often colleagues berate managers for being "morons", because they deigned to do something different to what they would have chosen to do.
That's not what I'm talking about if the decision has some technical validity. here's a true example of what I'm talking about : a "team leader" on a major aerospace project says on the first day of the project that Moore's law says that the computing power of chips doubles every 18 months. therefore we should do the same with the engineering design of this project. we should do it in half or 1/4 the time we did the last one." and when I asked what improvements we were going to use to do that, he said "I don't know, something, we'll find a way....."
In the end his total b.s. schedule and costs weren't met (off by the usual manger b.s factor of pi or pi squared) and he was kicked off the program.
beelsebob wrote:Personally, the thing I find frustrating is people who think that because someone made a different decision to the one that they would have, they must be a bad manager. I personally am not in a management position, but it never ceases to amaze me how often colleagues berate managers for being "morons", because they deigned to do something different to what they would have chosen to do.
That's not what I'm talking about if the decision has some technical validity. here's a true example of what I'm talking about : a "team leader" on a major aerospace project says on the first day of the project that Moore's law says that the computing power of chips doubles every 18 months. therefore we should do the same with the engineering design of this project. we should do it in half or 1/4 the time we did the last one." and when I asked what improvements we were going to use to do that, he said "I don't know, something, we'll find a way....."
Okay, yeh, he does have an impressive amount of special about him.
I run a tiny little motor business in the UK, this is just my honest opinion.
Don't waste your time doing management / business. Out there a bit of paper saying you are an expert really means nothing. And in fact there are probably quite a few other people already trying to do the same "general" management route thing anyway.
I would go for the choice that will give you real skills which you can actually use for something. If you have at least a bit of technical knowledge, that will put you in far better stead to move onwards and upwards. And technical knowledge will bring so many positives if you are going to stay in the same industry.
Knowing what you are talking about, and what is going on whilst ordering people around is pretty crucial. So you would probably need to know whether people are pulling the wool over your eyes.
Furthermore, if you are the right person and prove you are capable, and it is clear from speaking to you that you can deal with people and know exactly what it takes, I cannot see any reason for you to not be able to transition from doing the technical side to managing people.
But it is difficult. It's not like even if you go towards the business route you will jump into a top position from the get-go working for someone else. But at least with a bit of experience , real skills and knowledge that is useful on paper, it will give you a little bit better of a chance.
EDITTTTTTTTTT
JUST RE-READ YOUR POST
If you already have all the knowledge needed. I would go straight to wanting to run my own team! Much more rewarding than being stuck in the details.
In my Mclaren mindset, a technical person is much more disposable than someone who can run a business.
Glyn wrote:If you already have all the knowledge needed. I would go straight to wanting to run my own team! Much more rewarding than being stuck in the details.
In my Mclaren mindset, a technical person is much more disposable than someone who can run a business.
A couple 2-year degrees, an internship, and a little FSAE experience might be a little light in the experience department to go into running a pro team... just my opinion.
I dunno, depends on the person's interests. Personally I enjoy being "stuck in the details," learning new things, and working on outdoing counterparts on other teams. Or at least, there's a lot more I'd like to do before getting out of the hands-on work, and doing more hands-off management. I'd also make the argument that really good technical people in racing can be very hard to come across and very valuable. That is, people who unique and/or broad experience, can excel at whatever is thrown their way, and thrive under pressure and tight constraints.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
Jersey Tom wrote:... I'd also make the argument that really good technical people.....can be very hard to come across and very valuable. That is, people who unique and/or broad experience, can excel at whatever is thrown their way, and thrive under pressure and tight constraints.
Glyn wrote:If you already have all the knowledge needed. I would go straight to wanting to run my own team! Much more rewarding than being stuck in the details.
In my Mclaren mindset, a technical person is much more disposable than someone who can run a business.
A couple 2-year degrees, an internship, and a little FSAE experience might be a little light in the experience department to go into running a pro team... just my opinion.
I dunno, depends on the person's interests. Personally I enjoy being "stuck in the details," learning new things, and working on outdoing counterparts on other teams. Or at least, there's a lot more I'd like to do before getting out of the hands-on work, and doing more hands-off management. I'd also make the argument that really good technical people in racing can be very hard to come across and very valuable. That is, people who unique and/or broad experience, can excel at whatever is thrown their way, and thrive under pressure and tight constraints.
I didn't mean go straight into running my own team per se, but moving towards that. Depends what excites you more, securing funds / contracts. Making sure you are getting the best out of everyone, seeking the best personal, keeping an eye on the figures, or having a hand in the technical side and doing it really really well all day every day.
Second point, .. Exactly! technical people are very hard to come across. Which is why you don't see many of them becausee.... it is probably very difficult to achieve. But if think you have what it takes to become a superstar designer then go ahead! I am sure if you are a good designer, you can build a bond with people and make yourself irreplaceable.
