Baby Boomer
retirements could trigger A&D engineering crisis
By Joseph C. Anselmo
Aviation Week & Space Technology
February 5, 2007
Aerospace companies aren't attracting nearly enough engineers to
replace the wave of baby boomers nearing retirement. The gap could
have a profound impact on the future of the industry--and the
nation.Dire warnings of an
aerospace brain drain have been issued for so many years that it's
easy to tune them out. Four years ago, a presidential commission
predicted a "devastating loss of skill, experience and intellectual
capital." Across the U.S., CEOs say the industry is not attracting
nearly enough young engineers to replace the baby boomers that will
start retiring in large numbers in the next few years. This magazine
sounded the alarm in 1999, then 2000 and again in 2003.
Yet the aerospace and defense (A&D) industry has managed to keep up
with recent surges in demand from the military and commercial
sectors, in part by becoming more productive. In 1990 about 1.1
million U.S. aerospace workers were needed to generate approximately
$200 billion in sales, adjusting for inflation. Last year, just
624,000 workers produced $184 billion in sales. In high-profile
programs, finding talent is not an issue. Larry Lawson, the general
manager of Lockheed Martin's F-22 program, says he has no problem
signing top-flight talent out of universities.
Problem solved? Hardly. The alarming truth is that the A&D industry
is not attracting nearly enough skilled workers, particularly
engineers, to replace those getting ready to retire. The looming
shortfall, underscored in two workforce studies undertaken for
Aviation Week & Space Technology by Bain & Co. and Deloitte
Consulting, threatens to sap the industry's vitality and could make
it harder for the U.S. military to maintain its enviable
technological edge over the long run.
The long shadow of an aging workforce is cast across the entire
industry, from military scientists to commercial pilots to
maintenance, repair and overhaul technicians. But the danger is most
acute in engineering. "Engineering is the core of what makes
companies successful, and it is by far the function that is most
constrained by supply," says Michael Goldberg, lead partner in
Bain's A&D practice.
By next year, an estimated one-in-four U.S. aerospace workers will
be eligible to retire; nearly one-in-three civilian scientific and
technical workers in the Defense Dept. have already reached that
milestone (see p. 48). And the full impact of the graying workforce
hasn't hit yet. In 2011, an 18-year-long wave of baby boomers will
start collecting Social Security and Medicare benefits. Another
problem: massive layoffs during the consolidations of the 1990s that
left the defense industry with a shortage of middle-aged talent.
This means the tasks of many retirees could fall to younger,
less-experienced workers. "We need to go out and basically generate
a new workforce of knowledge workers to replace those experienced
people who are going out the door," says Clay Jones, president/CEO
of Rockwell Collins.
Finding those workers will be a daunting challenge. U.S. students
show an alarmingly low interest in science and math. And for those
that do go into engineering, aerospace doesn't have the cachet it
did during the Cold War and Apollo program. Today's engineering
graduates rank A&D low--if not dead last--on their list of
industries providing desirable employment, far behind high tech and
professional services (AW&ST Jan. 15, p. 72). Just 7% of students at
15 top engineering schools interviewed for the Bain study expect to
pursue a career in A&D.
"It was not even in my consciousness as an engineering graduate in
1968 that I had an opportunity to make a lot of money," says Lester
L. Lyles, a retired four-star U.S. Air Force general who is now a
technology consultant. "The young people today have so much more
available to them and so many other opportunities to make money
quickly. Silicon Valley sort of galvanized that. I don't think the
interest in coming up to be a pure engineer is there anymore."
The implications for the nation's future are huge. In 2005, U.S.
universities awarded 70,000 bachelor's degrees in engineering and
41,000 master's and Ph.D.s, according to the Education Dept. While
most of the bachelor's degrees went to Americans, just over half of
the advanced degrees were earned by citizens of other countries. A
growing number of those graduates are taking their brainpower back
home. Meanwhile, the number of engineers being minted overseas is
soaring. Some oft-cited estimates say China is turning out 600,000
engineers a year and India 350,000. While critics have challenged
those estimates as inflated, there is no question of the trend.
Raytheon Chairman/CEO William H. Swanson uses a more conservative
estimate of 400,000 Chinese graduates. "Cut it in half, it's still a
huge number," he says.
China's new military engineering abilities were on display last
month when it successfully tested an anti-satellite weapon (AW&ST
Jan. 22, p. 24). "Is it going to take the Chinese scaring the hell
out of somebody by putting their own observable satellites over the
U.S. or creating their own missile defense system?" asks Jim
Schwendinger, the lead partner in Deloitte Consulting's A&D
practice. "I don't know, but it seems to me that we're more passive
than we should be. These guys are on a much steeper trajectory than
most North Americans or Europeans grasp."
Of course, the swelling ranks of overseas engineers also presents an
opportunity for aerospace companies: a new source of labor,
especially on the commercial side of the business. Today, only 5% of
Rockwell Collins' engineering workforce is outside of the U.S. Jones
says that will have to change. "If we can't find them here we've got
to fish where the fish are," he says. "We're going to China, to
India, to Eastern Europe, where they have very talented people that
can fill some of these gaps."
But that option is largely unavailable to military contractors, who
are severely limited from reaching overseas by government
restrictions on technology transfer and security clearance
requirements. As a result, Bain's study forecasts a potential
shortfall of tens of thousands of U.S. defense engineers over the
next few years, based on several dozen interviews with A&D
headhunters, universities, labor counselors, industry associations
and consultants.
If current trends hold, the industry will be able to replace only
about half of the 57,000-68,000 military engineers that are expected
to retire by 2010. And that doesn't take into account the additional
engineers that will be needed to accommodate even modest growth in
U.S. military spending. The bottom line: a potential shortfall of
41,000-87,000 defense engineers by 2010. "The concern is there is an
imminent talent gap," says Lori Flees, a Bain partner who focuses on
human capital issues. "It could hit pretty quickly. It definitely
will hit in the next five years."
Such a shortfall would intensify competition for engineering talent.
"I'm recruiting from Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and General
Dynamics and they're recruiting from us, because the source from
outside is not that big," says Daniel J. Murphy, chairman/CEO of
Alliant Techsystems. Indeed, Bain's interviews with 10 headhunters
found A&D to be extremely insular, with very few engineers moving in
or out of the industry.
To be sure, almost every major aerospace company is taking steps in
both recruitment and retention to address the workforce challenge.
"It's the Number One focus at Lockheed Martin and in the entire
industry," says Lockheed Martin CFO Christopher E. Kubasik.
Companies are bolstering recruitment campaigns in colleges.
Internally, they're pairing veterans with younger workers to help
them learn skills and on-the-job experience more quickly.
Diversity programs help cast a wider net for talent. Raytheon is
courting gays and lesbians, a notable move in the conservative
defense industry, and became the first aerospace company to win a
100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign, a leading gay rights
organization. Such efforts are paying off. In a recent Business Week
ranking of best places to work in all industries, Lockheed Martin
placed second and Raytheon seventh.
On the education front, companies are establishing mentoring and
internship programs for college and high school students. The
industry is providing financial support for initiatives aimed at
getting younger students interested in science and math. Aerospace
companies in Tulsa, Okla., recently banded together to help create
new pre-engineering courses for teens in public and private schools
(see p. 50). "It's not the universities that create the problem,
it's K-12," says Jones. "That's the problem we've got to work."
Congress is also acting on the recommendations of a high-profile
presidential commission on the future of aerospace--albeit four
years after they were issued. On Dec. 20, 2006, President Bush
signed a bill aimed at revitalizing the engineering and research
talent pool that underpins the industry. The legislation, introduced
by Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.), a physicist, establishes an
11-member task force to draft a strategic blueprint for increasing
the number of students who choose science, engineering and other
aerospace-related careers. The task force will be managed by the
Dept. of Labor and will partner with industry, labor, academia and
state governments to coordinate aerospace-related career education
and training. "The president's focused on this, the whole country's
focused on it, so I think it's getting the right attention," says
Kubasik. "The industry should be okay."
Yet despite many individual signs of progress, some industry
veterans don't see the kind of urgency that would bring companies
together to attack the problem on a more cohesive basis. "Almost
every aerospace corporation has some form of program trying to
regenerate interest in science, technology, engineering and math,"
says Lyles. "But I still think you need something to bring all those
different initiatives together a little bit better and share some of
the lessons learned from one company to another."
Deloitte Consulting's study, based on interviews with 40 senior
aerospace executives, found that even when workforce issues are a
priority at the top that doesn't always flow down into middle
management. "Some of the most meaningful jobs I've ever done with
clients came after they've had a cataclysmic event, such as losing a
'must win' contract," says Schwendinger. "Too many times management
didn't confront their real problems and deal with wholesale
transformation until they lost something they never dreamed they
would lose. I just worry that that perspective may apply to talent
management."
Bain & Co.'s Goldberg believes that focusing on supply alone won't
be enough to bridge the shortfall between retirees and the supply of
new engineers. He says companies need to make "strategic portfolio
investments" based on engineering being a constrained resource.
At the workplace level, A&D contractors should try to reduce demand
on engineers by offloading non-critical tasks, giving them new
hardware and software tools to increase productivity "Hiring someone
in a support function to handle less-technical tasks is much cheaper
than hiring another engineer," he says. "It also has the double
benefit of making the engineer's job much more appealing, which
helps with retention and increases engineering design capacity at
the same time."
Pratt & Whitney is one of the companies in the forefront of looking
for alternative sources of engineering talent. Five years ago, the
company began outsourcing basic design work to Infotech, an
engineering services company based in India, to free up its U.S.
engineers to work on defense projects. Today, Infotech is taking on
more complex engineering tasks and serves as a flexible outlet for
Pratt's work.
Even those who, so far, have been insulated from the problem see
challenging times ahead. "We're going to lose a lot of experience,"
says Lockheed Martin's Lawson. "There may be some fuzz on exactly
when it will happen--people may stay longer than we think they
will--but the numbers are the numbers."
But Lawson also believes the industry is doing a much better job of
retaining experienced technical workers. "The dot.com period was
really challenging," he recalls. "We were really having a hard time
hanging onto our engineers. We don't have that kind of attrition
today."
Rockwell Collins' Jones also sees a silver lining in the workforce
challenge. The company hires about 2,000 people a year, and most of
them are recent college graduates or in that age range. He says they
tend to be savvy and much more comfortable with software and other
new tools than the retirees they replace. "They're very eager to
experiment," he says. "So while we're losing experience, we're
gaining some innovation and entrepreneurial spirit."
(Archives)
|