Log in to the online community

Want to post a reply? You'll need to log in
Creation of IET (Web) Sites for Disciplines like Civil, Mechanical, Electronics etc.
Nouman Abid Chuhan 91560531
Joined 11/10/2007 - 273 Posts
Hi All

The IET is a multidisciplinary Professional Engineering Institution. 

I have noticed that there is a dedicated site for the Electrical Discipline named "IET Electrical" covering the UK National Standard for Electrical Installations BS 7671 and all relevant information.  It is another debate whether the BS 7671 is followed by other countries of the world or not.  It is not my topic now.

Likewise, I would like to suggest that there may be dedicated sites for other disciplines of Civil, Mechanical, Electronics, Chemical, Aerospace etc.  

Looking forward to your opinion/comments, please.

Thank you.
54 Replies
Alasdair Anderson 11001195585
Joined 02/02/2017 - 952 Posts
Not necessarily. If there was a chance to filter the topics so the BS7671 area could be deselected this would have the desired effect.
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Alasdair Anderson:
I was having similar thoughts but didn't want to be the first to suggest it. I do find the wiring regulations posts to be interesting, but as you say the other posts are suffering. I was away on holiday for a week and when I came back there were twelve pages of new topics to sift through.
I do think there may be other solutions, though, and with all the disruption the BS7671 forum have had I wouldn't wish a further change on them just yet.

Then the answer is to move all the other topics to a different forum.
 
Alasdair Anderson 11001195585
Joined 02/02/2017 - 952 Posts
I was having similar thoughts but didn't want to be the first to suggest it. I do find the wiring regulations posts to be interesting, but as you say the other posts are suffering. I was away on holiday for a week and when I came back there were twelve pages of new topics to sift through.
I do think there may be other solutions, though, and with all the disruption the BS7671 forum have had I wouldn't wish a further change on them just yet.
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts
Now having spent a little bit of time on these forums I can see that the wiring regulations section needs to be spun off in to its own domain.   It's hugely active which is swamping out the other sections of the IET forums to the point where you can't find the latest posts or topics from the lists in the main page.

I'd also suggest that this may be advantageous to the electrical side too as it would then allow for further subdivision to better serve members.
 
Roy Bowdler 603091
Joined 25/07/2008 - 807 Posts
Lisa

I had assumed it was part of a cunning plan to drown out alternative views and/or my sometimes long-winded contributions
😉. In my own defence, it isn’t really possible to address the complex issues around development and recognition of Engineers and Technicians with a few soundbites.  I have been posting here for around a decade now and for much if not all of that time, there has been at least one thread criticising the actions or policy of the IET and/or Engineering Council. Some were driven by personal grievances, sometimes legitimate and eventually resolved satisfactorily.

At the beginning I would characterise my position as “defending” the IET, although not as a “spokesperson”, but by explaining the context and trying to explore both (or multiple) sides of any argument. I was also initially supportive of Engineering Council, who I worked closely with for a time on a couple of issues. However my trust was lost, since respect has to be mutual unless your perspective is a deferential one, which mine obviously isn’t. I won't pursue the details of that here.

I wonder where such a critical debate could or should take place in an open way if it wasn’t here in an IET forum? “Traditional channels” are inevitably carefully controlled, through committees, by editorial decisions and “tyranny of the majority”, with dissent or “dirty washing” inevitably supressed, rather than addressed. At least we have here a controlled space where opinion can be respectfully expressed and criticised.     

I wouldn’t have wasted my time if I didn’t believe that what I wrote here had some influence with those who are more able to make a difference at strategic level.  I worry that by becoming lost in a “wood for the trees situation" any debate here may become diminished in its potential influence.  

I am enjoying the technical and other discussions recently migrated here, although the volume is at times overwhelming. I am perhaps fortunate to have relevant understanding and experience of much of it and curiosity about most of the rest (good CPD). I suspect, but don’t know that most of those contributors are not much interested in “politics”.  I would hope that in due course, it will become much easier for participants to select their interest and therefore limit the volume of material that they are exposed to.






 
Lisa Miles 76762696
Joined 30/05/2003 - 1194 Posts

Simon Barker:
 Now that old forum has been closed, and Wiring & The Regulations has been moved over here, it's left the Engineering Communities completely dominated by wiring-related posts.

As we've also discussed here the potential for topics within the Wiring Regulations discussions to flood the recent activity or 'latest' content areas was something that we recognised early on in the project to retire the old form software. It is on our to do list (i.e. in the backlog of our Jira project board) to look at ways to amend the settings or redesign the display of latest forum content within the community in order to address this while still giving exposure to the Wiring Regs discussions but also equally to discussions within other categories as well.

The reason that the Wiring Regs discussion category is in the public forum area as opposed to a separate community group is purely down to it's nature and usage. Many members of the general public visit and participate within that category to ask questions or find answers about their electrical installations etc.  Therefore it's not really suitable for a separate community group around the subject.

Now the base of regular users/electricians who help to answer the questions is indeed a 'community' (and a very fun one at that 😉) however because of the amount of interaction with the general public that takes place in that forum category, separating them out into a group would not be the right thing to do. 
Simon Barker 22060613
Joined 17/09/2001 - 611 Posts
It's been an unfortunate fact that the old Wiring & The Regulations forum got more posts per day than all the sections of the Engineering Communities combined.  Now that old forum has been closed, and Wiring & The Regulations has been moved over here, it's left the Engineering Communities completely dominated by wiring-related posts.

I haven't yet found any good way to find a good "what's new" on these Engineering Communities.  I can see the latest posts, but that includes every post to every thread, and has no "Previous" button to go to earlier posts.  Once a post has fallen off page 1, it's gone.  I can instead see the latest threads, but then I don't know what's been posted to them since I last looked.  For a wonderful new bit of forum software, it's pretty poor in that respect.
David McQuiggan 20724244
Joined 22/05/2012 - 87 Posts
Nouman Abid Chuhan, Roy Bowdler, Alasdair Anderson , John Sim , Simon Barker , Andy Millar   et al,
Some interesting points, worthy of a broader discussion, have been brought up in this discussion thread.  While it's understandable that the IET would have a dedicated site to support the BS 7671-IET Wiring Regulations for training, publications, resources, purchases etc at https://electrical.theiet.org/, it's curious that it is the only technical interest group on Engineering Communities that features it's own discussion forum on the site-wide forum menu above, whereas other narrow technical interest community posts are in their own discussion forums, under their respective technical communities sites.  A casual user or visitor to the Engineering Communities site is often given the impression that forum post are primarily related to wiring regulations and related matters and not the broader interdisciplinary interests of the institution and its members. This seems at odds with the IET's fifth strategic priority of "Working across disciplinary, corporate and geographic boundaries to improve innovation and impact." available online at: https://www.theiet.org/about/vision-and-strategy/the-iet-strategy/.
One recommendation the  Online Community Manager and Online Community Platform Development Manager might want to consider is creating a BS 7671-IET Wiring & Regulations community site and move their discussion posts there.
The Engineering Communities services, that the IET provides, could become a truly transdisciplinary online platform for the global engineering and technology community with the ability to connect and collaborate with engineers from around the world within their own areas of interest, whether industry sector, technical discipline, geographic region, standards or practices.
Supporting and developing Engineering Communities to be a trusted online environment could enable the building of trusting relationships across the global engineering community to facilitate trusted and professional social networking, in order to foster professional engagement across all communities of interest and practice related to engineering and technology.
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts
The current Rule 9 (https://www.theiet.org/about/governance/rules-of-conduct/) reads:
 
Members shall neither advertise nor write articles (in any medium) for publication in any manner that is derogatory to the Institution or to the dignity of their profession. Neither shall they authorise any such advertisement or article to be written or published by others.
 
I would include Facebook in that.
I'm sure the rules have been updated since I joined over 30 years ago.

Are you stating that you shouldn't ask how your membership fees are being spent?   Or where the relevance is to engineering?
 
Ultimately, if you don't like what the club you're a member of does, you're free to leave and join a better one. 
 
Do members not have a right to ask questions on the governance and direction of the club?   It is, after all, their club.
Simon Barker 22060613
Joined 17/09/2001 - 611 Posts

John Sim:

 

Nouman Abid Chuhan:
Does the IET website obey this para?
 

I don't think it's just the website where the issues lie but also on the social media platforms.   Facebook, Instagram etc.

I've even had the IET deleting my comments on their Facebook page because I questioned the relevance to engineering of some of their posts!   And had a rebuttal from them.

" The IET values every one of our members and we encourage and support you to use and comment freely on social media to help make a difference to the work we do. We understand not everything we post on social media will be agreeable with everyone; however, all of our members are expected to comply with the IET’s rules of conduct, as they agree to when they join. This includes being mindful of your obligation to exemplify professional behaviour in relation to content you post in the public domain, and in their relations with fellow members and the Institution. "

"Comment freely" but they deleted my comments!   "Comply with the IET's rules of conduct" which is funny because when I joined the IEE Facebook wasn't even thought of!   What I had done was comment on the relevance of the pictures chosen in their photo competition to engineering.   They also initially claimed it was marked as "spam" by Facebook and automatically deleted yet also were able to tell me that my comments weren't relevant.   Seemed to me either they seen the comments and deleted them, or they didn't but somehow managed to criticise them as not being relevant?

Even the E&T magazine is fairly lightweight.   Stories that you've probably already picked up in the general media.   Not even telling you what's happening in the IET, such as member events both what happened in past meetings or notification of future ones local to you.   Distinct lack of local member level activity.

There is a lack of engagement with members and when your critique of what they're doing doesn't conform to doctrine you are censored.   Hence why I don't think the IET is for me or other engineers any longer.

Neuman, I do genuinely believe that your idea of a purely professional registration institute is probably the best option because I think the IET is failing their members in all other avenues.
 

 

 
The current Rule 9 (https://www.theiet.org/about/governance/rules-of-conduct/) reads:
 
Members shall neither advertise nor write articles (in any medium) for publication in any manner that is derogatory to the Institution or to the dignity of their profession. Neither shall they authorise any such advertisement or article to be written or published by others.
 
I would include Facebook in that.

The IET does also publish a Member News from time to time in addition to E&T. It also does other things than professional registration - training courses, local groups, responding to government consultation, volunteers in schools and so on.

Ultimately, if you don't like what the club you're a member of does, you're free to leave and join a better one.  (That reminds me of a topic that's in the news quite a bit at the moment, but it's best not to go there!)
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Nouman Abid Chuhan:
Does the IET website obey this para?
 

I don't think it's just the website where the issues lie but also on the social media platforms.   Facebook, Instagram etc.

I've even had the IET deleting my comments on their Facebook page because I questioned the relevance to engineering of some of their posts!   And had a rebuttal from them.

" The IET values every one of our members and we encourage and support you to use and comment freely on social media to help make a difference to the work we do. We understand not everything we post on social media will be agreeable with everyone; however, all of our members are expected to comply with the IET’s rules of conduct, as they agree to when they join. This includes being mindful of your obligation to exemplify professional behaviour in relation to content you post in the public domain, and in their relations with fellow members and the Institution. "

"Comment freely" but they deleted my comments!   "Comply with the IET's rules of conduct" which is funny because when I joined the IEE Facebook wasn't even thought of!   What I had done was comment on the relevance of the pictures chosen in their photo competition to engineering.   They also initially claimed it was marked as "spam" by Facebook and automatically deleted yet also were able to tell me that my comments weren't relevant.   Seemed to me either they seen the comments and deleted them, or they didn't but somehow managed to criticise them as not being relevant?

Even the E&T magazine is fairly lightweight.   Stories that you've probably already picked up in the general media.   Not even telling you what's happening in the IET, such as member events both what happened in past meetings or notification of future ones local to you.   Distinct lack of local member level activity.

There is a lack of engagement with members and when your critique of what they're doing doesn't conform to doctrine you are censored.   Hence why I don't think the IET is for me or other engineers any longer.

Neuman, I do genuinely believe that your idea of a purely professional registration institute is probably the best option because I think the IET is failing their members in all other avenues.
 
Nouman Abid Chuhan 91560531
Joined 11/10/2007 - 273 Posts
I can not live without quoting the following para (Para No.3) of the IET Royal Charter here:

3. The objects and purposes of the IET are to promote the general advancement of science, engineering and technology and to facilitate the exchange of information and ideas on these subjects amongst the members of the IET and otherwise.

It is very much clear from above that the IET is not specific to the Electrical/Electronics and covers all disciplines/sub-disciplines of science, engineering and technology.

Does the IET website obey this para?
Should the IET refer to its Non-Electrical/Electronics Members or Associates towards the other PEIs for the sake of duplication?
 

Roy Bowdler 603091
Joined 25/07/2008 - 807 Posts
I don’t think that we have a complete picture of how IET members define themselves , but they do span an enormously wide spectrum of practice including those who have spend their entire careers with a highly specialised focus and others who have followed different varied pathways.  If we take as a baseline The IET at it's creation, it absorbed a wide variety of specialists from its predecessor institutions.  Because the IMechE pulled out at the last minute our largest and strongest grouping became former IEE members, the most powerful voices becoming Chartered Engineers from that background.  There was a niche contingent of Manufacturing/Production engineers from an earlier merger and the Institution of Incorporated Engineers which also has some CEng members, which was a merger of once separate and substantial Electrical & Electronic and Mechanical Institutions. At the time of the merger the IIE was a Chartered Institution and one of the five largest under Engineering Council regulation.

Approaching fifteen years later, the IET has evolved in response to its environment, some types of practice have become rare, some more common and new areas have emerged. Temporarily wounded (in 2006) IMechE became determined to ensure that its distinctive proposition was a success and developed a formidable sales and marketing capability, growing membership and ensuring that potential Chartered Engineers were engaged and registered rather than be allowed to delay or drift away. Other Institutions have also been reasonably successful in attracting members to their proposition.  Therefore, the IET has been slower to build significant numbers of engineers and technicians, where another more specialised Institution offers a strong proposition.  As I said in an earlier post, it is not our role to be a monopolist, but we should as a matter of course always be building our capability, reputation and resources to support members in whatever way they practice.

As I see it there is an element of “chicken and egg” when it comes to prioritising our efforts. We could invest to build up our capability in a specialist area where we are not currently strong, in order to compete for new members or support small numbers of our existing members from that area.  I have been intimately involved in supporting members working in the built environment in a non-electrical ways, towards Chartered Engineer Recognition, which requires the IET to be very rigorous in complying with Engineering Council regulations. This proved challenging as some of our own members just thought that “they should go to another specialist institution”. However if our member doesn’t want to, then it is our duty to seek to serve them.  I’m sympathetic to Nouman’s suggestion and like David’s post. I trust these will be taken up at the level  of IET strategic management/governance. John offers critical feedback about our communication/marketing, which we can consider.  


 
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

David McQuiggan:

you'll note the language has changed from:

 informing and influencing our members, engineers and technicians, 

to:

Notice how they dropped "Our members" from their list of objectives.   Even dropping engineers and technicians.   It's giving the impression they really don't care for their members.   

With the rebrand and new website design I'm unsure what exactly they're trying to achieve.   The site and their social media output is chocked full of stock-images.   Today's was a girl sitting at a computer, but that same image is used by many different outlets too.   This is taking away the uniqueness and character of the IET.   Dumbing down what should be a celebration of engineering.

https://www.masterfile.com/image/en/6117-07494140/focused-college-student-studying-at-computer

If this was a Dilbert cartoon mocking the marketing department it would be funny, but sadly it seems like a marketing exercise gone wrong.

Nouman Abid Chuhan 91560531
Joined 11/10/2007 - 273 Posts
I think we should focus on the Royal Charter of the IET regarding its multidisciplinary status.  

Does any other PEI of UK claim itself to be multidisciplinary like the IET?

Now the IET should not care about the duplication but play a leading role by accrediting, registering, standardizing and developing to all E&T disciplines. 

If the IET is not willing to do that to save and promote the other PEIs then I reiterate, the IET must get amend their charter and should become an Electrical & Electronic PEI only.

By the way, has the IET developed only the BS.7671 Standard in Electrical till now?  Just look at the IEEE Standards as far as Electrical Standards are concerned.

It is not possible to all the IET members to get memberships simultaneously of other PEIs or E&T Societies of the UK and/or the World.  is it a feasible solution? 
David McQuiggan 20724244
Joined 22/05/2012 - 87 Posts

... but the IET do promote themselves as the only multidisciplinary PEI ... 

To be fair, I do not believe the IET makes the marketing claim quoted above from a previous post in this thread.  It's clearly not true. If you compare the "About Us" paragraph on the newly rebranded site (https://www.theiet.org/about/ ) and compare to what was there (
https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/en/archive/20151201125738/http://www.theiet.org/about/index.cfm?utm_source=web&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=carousel1), you'll note the language has changed from:

The IET is one of the world’s largest engineering institutions with Over 163,000 members in 127 countries. It is also the most multidisciplinary – to reflect the increasingly diverse nature of engineering in the 21st century. The IET is working to engineer a better world by inspiring, informing and influencing our members, engineers and technicians, and all those who are touched by, or touch, the work of engineers.

to:

We are the IET and we inspire, inform and influence the global engineering community to engineer a better world. As a diverse home across engineering and technology, we share knowledge that helps make better sense of the world in order to solve the challenges that matter. It’s why we are uniquely placed to champion engineering.

It's also notable that the word multidisciplinary has been almost completely eliminated from the main site and the new brand guidelines, brand voice and messaging, but the IET has not made clear why.
As a member, I would have hoped that the IET use the rebranding opportunity to continue its evolution from:

  1. an intra-disciplinary organisation primarily centered around electrical, electromagnetic and electronic knowledge areas and applications (e.g. see the early years of the IEE and its antecedents in the IET family tree) to...
  2. a multidisciplinary organisation drawing on knowledge from different disciplines without necessarily duplicating knowledge products from within existing disciplinary boundaries (e.g. see Inspec content and coverage of multiple disciplines) to...
  3. an interdisciplinarity organisation that fosters analyzing, synthesizing and harmonizing knowledge links between disciplines into a coordinated and coherent whole (e.g. Inspec Analytics semantic mapping technology is a good example of one element of this) to...
  4. a transdisciplinarily organisation that fosters an holistic approach to engineering and technology, that truly integrates and transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries.
It would be helpful if the IET were more explicit and specific in this regard with its vision and mission. It is only addressed vaguely in the third and fifth of its five strategic priorities, but they could easily be refined to provide clearer alignment to items 2-4 above.
My recommendation to the IET would be to focus its resources more on evolving items 2, 3 and 4 above, rather than item 1, in order to differentiate the IET as distinct from, but complimentary to, more focused intra-disciplinary PEIs without duplicating their knowledge product focus.
Challenging and more complex engineering projects today are increasingly requiring a transdisciplinary approach by enabling inputs and scoping across
STEM and non-STEM stakeholder communities and facilitating a more holistic way of addressing today's challenges.
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Andy Millar:

Personally I'd have no problem if the IET stopped trying to be a source of technical information, which is almost impossible for it to realistically achieve across the breadth of engineering disciplines, and just carried on as a professional registration body (and perhaps conference facilitator). (As I've said here many times afore, back in the IEE days it was famously hopeless at supporting those of us who were electronic rather than electrical engineers. So we joined the IEEE for the info and the IEE of the CEng. Worked just fine.)


Given how little the IET is supporting engineers that's probably all they're doing for most engineers.   A professional registration service.

If that's an option then close down Savoy Place and sell it off.   How much could the IET membership fee be reduced if it focused upon just professional registrations?
 


Apologies that I'll just be lobbing this into the debate and then heading for the hills again...
 

Please stay and discuss how you'd like to see the IET supporting you more.   You're paying them - you've ever right to!
 
Andy Millar 33788107
Joined 28/05/2002 - 1670 Posts

Julie Hudson:
Do engineers even think of themselves as an electrical engineer, civil engineer, mechanical engineer etc. any more? Are engineers themselves more multi-disciplinary and the IET is trying to reflect that?

Some do, some don't. Loads start off as "single discipline" engineers but then find themselves working as project engineers managing whatever discipline they need to manage that day. And many of us just morph into bizarre engineering roles that are hard to define - if anything I suppose I'd describe myself as a "safety critical innovations engineer" but there's no ISCIE 😃 But some do stay in niches throughout their careers which match the traditional institutions.

I just spotted this thread because of Roy's mention of IRSE, I'm a member of that as well (not instead) because it's professionally useful, even though I don't consider myself a 'proper' railway signalling engineer. And I organise joint IET / IRSE events for my LNs, which makes sense for both groups. Just because you join a bird watching society doesn't stop you joining a camera club as well!

Given that - sorry IET! - more members (I suspect far more) join in order to get professional registration than join to get technical info, what's probably more relevant than what's on the website is whether non-electrical engineers find that the registration process works equally well for them. Not having helped many non-electrical engineers through registration I don't know if this is the case or not.  

Following on, I think the only really serious point is whether there is a sector of engineers who actually can't find a route to professional registration, because that can affect their careers (plus all the other reasons I'm an advocate for professional registration). With the current remit of the IET this should not be a problem, so that's good (as long as it works). Whereas 20 years ago there may have been more chance of people falling between the gaps.

Personally I'd have no problem if the IET stopped trying to be a source of technical information, which is almost impossible for it to realistically achieve across the breadth of engineering disciplines, and just carried on as a professional registration body (and perhaps conference facilitator). (As I've said here many times afore, back in the IEE days it was famously hopeless at supporting those of us who were electronic rather than electrical engineers. So we joined the IEEE for the info and the IEE of the CEng. Worked just fine.)

And as to whether the arrangements of these forums is biased towards electrical engineers (to, I think, come back to the original point) that's completely irrelevant as this whole forums area is nearly impossible to find anyway! Had I mentioned that before? 😀 

Apologies that I'll just be lobbing this into the debate and then heading for the hills again...

Cheers, Andy
Roy Bowdler 603091
Joined 25/07/2008 - 807 Posts
By coincidence I’m attending an IET event about Railway Signalling this evening , the presentation is being given by an IET member who is also a member of The Institution Of Railway Signalling Engineers (IRSE). The IRSE perhaps illustrates a good example of a tightly focussed “learned society”, that has been sustainable over time and developed an international footprint. It helps to “pay the bills” of another PEI by renting offices from it and collaborates with The IET on issues of mutual interest. I googled their newsletter which is quite “traditional” and perhaps this is what some IET members would like to see for their specialist interest?

I cannot see any useful purpose in the IET trying to duplicate their proposition, just to save some members from paying a modest amount for dual membership. However, I would hope that in the unlikely event that they were in trouble, we would help. For example, we took on the members of a smaller institution recently when it could no longer continue.  If we consider other major professional institutions, it makes no sense to “compete” with them for pre-eminence in their field, except where there is natural overlap and some “competition” is inevitable.  Very obvious overlaps include with IMechE , CIBSE, BCS. Do your own analysis of others if you wish, it’s a complex patchwork. The option of dual membership is open, if enough value is added to someone and perhaps we should work harder with more institutions to offer packages? IEEE has been mentioned and if someone can’t access enough of their information via IET, then membership is an option.

If I come into contact with someone who I think might obviously be a more natural fit with another institution then I encourage them to explore that option before deciding to make their home with us, because I see that as the ethical position. We can’t be everything for everybody, but we should improve our proposition and service, including for those who find the limitations of other institutions difficult.  Some institutions are very prescriptive and unwelcoming to anyone who doesn’t fit their "ideal model”.  

In my experience of professional registration, our capability in some specialist areas, has only built relatively slowly to support our over-arching membership aspiration. As a result we have let some people down, which is very regrettable, but we haven’t denied this when it has occurred. These examples don’t include electronics, but have included some other specialisms, especially at Chartered standard.  Because our process relies on the expertise of our members, there are some areas where we are weaker than we would like to be. On the plus side we have some delighted members who gained a fully deserved registration that would have been unreasonably denied elsewhere, or who strongly disliked the ambience of an alternative institution. Some former members have gone to find an easier pathway via another institution, but our member led governance committees rightly expect The IET to set high standards.

I have no objection to Nouman’s suggestion, but we should be careful to ensure that any websites are honest, accurate and signpost a full range of options. In the long run we gain nothing from unhappy members who feel that they have been misled.  This is a different situations to members who “fall out of love” which can happen with the passage of time, like in any aspect of life that involves a relationship of some kind. If the relationship is simply transactional, then there isn’t an emotive element but the relationship between the IET and many of its members is much deeper than that. This tends also to apply to some other professional bodies as well, so we need to take care and be respectful towards them.  As I said in an earlier post the professional engineering family is full of sibling rivalries, arguments about legitimacy and at times disrespect towards others.  The IET as a strong player should be an influence for good?          

 
Nouman Abid Chuhan 91560531
Joined 11/10/2007 - 273 Posts
The webpages have their own design and environment whilst the online Engineering Communities (TPNs) have their own.  One should not compare the webpages with the TPNs.  Both cannot be the alternative to each other.  The existence of both is essential at the IET website.  

Again baseline is "Discipline-specific Content at the IET website in the form of dedicated webpages".
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Alasdair Anderson:

Why should they be on the main page? I hate web pages that are too cluttered because the designers have tried to put everything on them.

Why? Because member engagement should be first and foremost, not an afterthought.
 

 
Alasdair Anderson 11001195585
Joined 02/02/2017 - 952 Posts

John Sim

Both of which you should be able to find under 10s on the main page.   Not buried in sub-menu after sub-menu.
Why should they be on the main page? I hate web pages that are too cluttered because the designers have tried to put everything on them.
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Alasdair Anderson:

I think I am going to have to disagree here. I had a look on the new IET site and within about one minute had found both the TPNs and my local members group. 
Both of which you should be able to find under 10s on the main page.   Not buried in sub-menu after sub-menu.
 
Alasdair Anderson 11001195585
Joined 02/02/2017 - 952 Posts

John Sim:
I went looking for the TPNs on their site and you really have to work to find them.  .....   Even just have a quick look through their site and look for your local members section.  

I think I am going to have to disagree here. I had a look on the new IET site and within about one minute had found both the TPNs and my local members group. There are problems finding other things (and I have sent a message to the IET regarding this and received a same day response) but this doesn't seem to be one of them as far as I am concerned.
Alasdair
John Sim 11001209646
Joined 09/02/2019 - 70 Posts

Nouman Abid Chuhan:
There are two aspects of subject objective:

One is the content at the IET website.
Second is the TPNs.
 

The IET website is the member's window into the IET and what they do to support them.

I went looking for the TPNs on their site and you really have to work to find them.   The site is filled with stock images lifted from Shutterstock or similar, rather than images of engineering or engineers!

It highlights how the IET have become disconnected from their members.   Even just have a quick look through their site and look for your local members section.   There's so little to engagement between the IET and their members!
 

Log in

Want to post a reply? You'll need to log in