Articles/Publications
A Judge's Insights: "Engineers Do Phenomenal Things!"
By Douglas MacDonald and Judith Nitsch
Douglas MacDonald, executive director of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA), served as a judge for ACEC National's Engineering Excellence Awards (EEA) competition for the past two years. After hearing him share his experiences as an EEA judge, Insights' Editorial Board member Judy Nitsch captured Mr. MacDonald's comments and suggestions for ACEC/MA's readers. Here he offers suggestions to help your firm increase exposure, improve morale, gain a marketing tool, and help educate the public by submitting a project for the EEA competition.
ACEC's annual Engineering Excellence Awards recognize innovation, expertise, and ingenuity in engineering achievements. For more than three decades, hundreds of consulting engineering firms have entered their best designs in state competitions. These state finalists are submitted to the national competition, where a blue ribbon panel of judges selects one Grand Conceptor Award, seven Grand Awards, and 16 Honor Awards. The distinguished panel of judges includes 20 to 25 professionals with backgrounds in engineering, architecture, state and federal government, media, academe, and the military. The projects entered in this prestigious competition help communicate the importance of engineering to the quality of people's lives.
NITSCH: What did you like best about being an EEA judge?
MACDONALD: Just being involved in the competition was a real pleasure. It's stimulating, and you learn so much from all of the other judges.
NITSCH: Was there a "down side" to the judging?
MACDONALD: Well, I always wish I knew more about each project-but we only get the information on the poster that's submitted. However, one of the judges usually knows something about each project and can explain the nuances to the rest of us.
NITSCH: What is the judging process?
MACDONALD: Each judge is initially asked to review all of the entries in two categories only. Last year I had "Studies, Research, and Consulting Engineering Services" and "Surveying and Mapping." This year I had "Water and Wastewater" and "Water Resources." [Ed. Note: The other categories are "Building Support Systems," "Structural Systems," "Environmental," "Transportation," and "Special projects."] We each propose the best submissions in the categories we examined and, after that, all judges are responsible for reviewing all of the finalists. One judge is assigned to each finalist as the "advocate" for that entry. We try to determine the problem the engineer was trying to solve — the one unifying aspect of all of the entries. This leads to a discussion of what was especially valuable or creative about the engineer's work.
NITSCH: What's the advocate's role?
MACDONALD: The advocate points out the excellence in a project so it can be appreciated most favorably by the other judges. A great example relates to one of ACEC/MA's five submissions this year, which was a national award-winner: Howard/Stein-Hudson's (HSH) Central Artery/Tunnel Maintenance of Access project. The advocate made each project and its innovative features come alive for the other judges. The more the judges talked about HSH's project, the better it fared. That brings up another point: every entry is on the same size poster board, so all firms and projects — no matter what their size — start out even.
NITSCH: Over what time frame is the judging accomplished?
MACDONALD: We start on Friday afternoon, meet all day on Saturday, and conclude on Sunday. It's intense — but our discussions are always spirited. The judges are fair-minded and take their role very seriously.
NITSCH: Is being a lawyer an advantage in the judging?
MACDONALD: Usually only two or three of us aren't engineers. This year I was the only lawyer and, yes, there was the usual quota of lawyer jokes! I must say, however, that some of the engineers were pretty skillful on their feet as project advocates and you might think you had stumbled upon a few courtroom barracuda wannabes.
NITSCH: What makes a project a winner?
MACDONALD: The project doesn't have to be a mega-project to appeal to the judges. In fact, the judges take particular pleasure in seeing innovation in a modes project, such as this year's award-winning St. Casimir's Church Structural Renovation for a $68,000 project cost. A creative insight or an innovative approach is key.
NITSCH: Are there any other misconceptions about what makes an EEA winner that you'd like to clear up?
MACDONALD: Winners aren't always new construction projects — rehabilitations also do well, as do studies. I haven't detected any bias relative to whether the project was submitted by a joint venture, the prime, or a subconsultant on the project. There was plenty of interest in the rural as well as the urban projects.
NITSCH: What about firms who aren't as graphically adept as some of the larger firms?
MACDONALD: Entries are judged on specific criteria and the poster board has to answer that. Graphics and photos that draw your eye help. I would say that good graphical quality on the poster entry really helps the success of any entry.
NITSCH: What else does it take to submit a winning entry?
MACDONALD: The entries are rated on uniqueness and originality, technical value to the engineering profession, social and economic considerations, complexity, and how successfully the project meets the needs. In the national judging, we see the best engineering projects from around the country. The judges come from a wide spectrum of backgrounds and therefore may not pick up the significance of your technical work. Although the advocate is usually knowledgeable in the technical area of your project, firms must be sure to demonstrate how their professional skills contributed to the success of the project. Doing routine engineering very well is a tougher sell than doing something innovative. Creating a better way of doing something that's routine can be award-winning.
NITSCH: What did you get out of being a judge?
MACDONALD: I have an unusually stimulating weekend. I come away with the excitement of the projects — it's the same pleasure one would get from going to a really good art exhibit or the Van Cliburn piano competition. Firms' professional pride and enthusiasm show through. Engineers do work that is very interesting and important to society. It's fun to be exposed to it, especially in the context of the judges' comments. Maybe I should have been an engineer — I might have missed my calling.
NITSCH: Did being a judge increase your knowledge of local firms and, if so, does that create an advantage for them with your agency?
MACDONALD: Yes, I saw firms who did projects in other locales, and I saw some local firms I did not know. I'm in an unusual situation — MWRA kind of vacuums up local engineering talent in the water/wastewater fields, but that's only part of the strong engineering presence in our community. My being a judge and learning more about local firms doesn't give them a leg up in a particular selection at MWRA, but every professional services firm knows that, for the long haul, reputation is critical to success.
NITSCH: Any last words for our readers?
MACDONALD: The EEA program is a great way to showcase what engineers do. I have fun being a judge; it is a rewarding personal experience — but the real reward comes to the firm. More of you should submit next year!
Published in Insights, The Quarterly Newsletter of the American Consulting Engineers Council of Massachusetts, Aug./Sept. 1999