By V. Berba Velasco Jr., Ph.D.
As published on
E-Zine Articles and
GoArticles. Copying of contents, in whole or in part, is
permitted provided that the author by-line is kept intact and unchanged.
Hyperlinks and/or URLs provided by the author must remain active.
I receive way too many technical trade publications nowadays. Machine Design, Electronic Design, Information Week, and more. Nevertheless, I do make a serious effort to read as much of material as I can, knowing full well that I can’t read it all.
It wasn’t always that way, though. There was a time, when I was working for another employer, that I focused primarily on reading books about general engineering and software design, as well as some non-technical texts on leadership, community fundraising, and other useful topics. I deliberately avoided reading trade publications at the time, so that I could focus on these other materials.
This displeased one of my superiors, who said that I wasn’t doing a proper job of educating myself. When I explained that I chose to focus on various textbooks instead, she exclaimed, “Fella, by the time those books are published, they are already out of date! You need to read the trade publications if you want to stay abreast of your field.”
There was clearly some wisdom in her words. It’s equally clear, however, that she was overstating her case. To say that engineering textbooks are automatically obsolete by the time they are published is a gross exaggeration—especially when they deal with more philosophical matters such as effective design methodologies. For example, the design principles espoused by Scott Meyers in his classic texts, Effective C++ and More Effective C++ are just as relevant now as they were ten years ago. Similarly, software development tools such as design patterns and the Unified Modeling Language (UML) are practically timeless. One doesn’t necessarily need to turn to the latest and greatest trade publication in order to sharpen one’s skills.
For that matter, what about merely pursuing a broad education for one’s self? For example, I would contend that, as a general rule, the best engineers also tend to have a strong grasp of the general sciences. The more you understand about physics, for example, the more likely you are to understand how to improve the performance of an electric motor, or why a particular sensor does not perform well. And don’t forget that a great many technical advances have been biologically inspired, such as genetic algorithms and multisegmented walking robots. For that matter, even such diverse fields as language, cognitive psychology, and intellectual property law can be helpful to a motivated engineer.
“But wait one darned minute!” one might ask. “Isn’t is still true that these trade publications are more up-to-date than your beloved textbooks?” Absolutely, which is why I devour them at my current job to supplement my other readings. They do have a serious drawback, though; namely, they tend to have a low signal-to-noise ratio. That is, while their content is more cutting-edge, the trends and technologies that they describe are also more likely to fizzle out—to go nowhere, or perhaps to simply have limited use. That’s one reason why focusing on the trade publications might not be the most productive use of one’s time.
Ultimately, it’s a question of striking the right balance between depth and breadth. Trade publications can provide breadth—a broad overview of the latest trends and developments. Textbooks, white papers, and other materials can provide greater depth on specific topics of interests. Unfortunately, time is limited, and there is way too much information out there for any one person to absorb. Depending on one’s circumstances, it may be necessary to focus on breadth, or depth, or some balance between the two.
About the Author:
V. B. Velasco Jr is a senior crossdisciplinary engineer at a small biotech firm that provides immunology research services, ELISPOT readers and serum-free media.
