The Value of Participating in Standards Setting: For Your Company

By participating in the standards-setting process, you represent your company and establish it as a leader in seeking global solutions that promote industry growth.

02/05/2013


I've outlined the process by which standards are set and described the value of participating in that process for the CSE’s personal and career growth in my last two blogs. Today I’d like to make a few points about the value of the CSE’s participation to the CSE’s employer.

When the CSE proposes to expand his/her involvement in the standards setting process, an employer may well ask, what’s in it for them? What value will the company receive in return? The company you work for knows there will be substantial hard and soft costs. There will be hard dollars spent on travel and, more importantly, the man-hours you spend in this pursuit. The question is fair and the answer is straightforward.

First, there is no return on investment in the traditional, quantitative sense. But the range of benefits is real and far-reaching.

By participating in the standards-setting process, you represent your company and establish it as a leader in seeking global solutions that promote industry growth. Your company, as a result, is seen as a contributor to both IEEE standards and the overall technologies being developed as a result. Your company’s brand may be affiliated with solutions in cyber security or in transformer technology or substation design.

The networking that benefits you as a CSE obviously benefits your company as well in the form of business development, joint ventures and joint development opportunities. Visibility can be heightened if your company decides to contribute to sponsoring the working-group activities or the committee activities at official meetings and conventions.

Another aspect is that by having you work on the standards-setting process, your company has a hand in actually influencing the outcome. A utility or a vendor or any participant for that matter can espouse their views and opinions on what a standard should include, down to the specific details. It makes a lot of sense to have a seat at the table. As you may recall from my blog explaining the standards-setting process, as a standard is developed and put to a ballot, every question and comment that results must be addressed. The consensus-building is thorough and deep, affording all players an opportunity to participate.

Thus your company also benefits from a forward view of what standards and technologies are being developed. Participation by a company's representatives means that the company is aware of potential standards developments and what will be required of products and services in the future. That’s a virtual guarantee that your company won’t be caught off-guard by fundamental shifts in standards and resulting technology.

Here’s where the personal and career-oriented value of participation for the individual dovetails with the interests of their employer. When a company sends a representative to participate in standards development meetings and activities, they'll typically get back a better employee. The company gets a more capable engineer in return – that’s a direct benefit. The involvement with the process’s consensus-building, team-building, cooperation and collaboration polishes professionalism.

The company gets a more well-rounded engineer, who has a broader view of the technology issues, but also has become far more familiar with the concept of building a team, even leading a team. If the person aspires to the chair of a working group, they develop invaluable leadership skills, communication skills, the ability to articulate one’s position and persuade others, both in writing and the spoken word.

The foregoing is true whether the participant is early in his/her career or a seasoned executive. The value derived may depend on a company’s specific objectives. It's not uncommon, for instance, for a large company to have 20 to 30 people participating in IEEE Power and Energy Society standards at any point in time. So there’s a stratification based on what the company is looking to accomplish – it could be networking and business development, it could be influencing a standard. Influencing standards would require sending someone in the pertinent area of expertise. So participation in substation design and transformer standards typically would require two different people.

Finally, when a utility or company sends someone to participate in standards setting, there are a host of advantages in terms of exposure to a variety of best practices and peer-to-peer knowledge sharing.

As you can tell, these advantages are self-evident and intuitive, even if they can’t be crunched in a formal ROI analysis. So if the accounting department says, "We want the cost-benefit ratio and payback period for your attendance at the summer-power meeting next month," that's like saying, “Don’t go.” But, like everything else in life, the aspirant needs to promote the concepts that we're talking about here within their company. Many companies recognize the value and integrate the costs into their cost of doing business, dedicating multiple participants. Other companies sometimes don’t see the value. But you can be sure the competition will be there.


Sam Sciacca is an active senior member in the IEEE and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) in the area of utility automation. He has more than 25 years of experience in the domestic and international electrical utility industries. Sciacca serves as the chair of two IEEE working groups that focus on cyber security for electric utilities: the Substations Working Group C1 (P1686) and the Power System Relay Committee Working Group H13 (PC37.240). Sciacca also is president of SCS Consulting.



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Leaders Under 40 program features outstanding young people who are making a difference in manufacturing. View the 2013 Leaders here.
The new control room: It's got all the bells and whistles - and alarms, too; Remote maintenance; Specifying VFDs
2014 forecast issue: To serve and to manufacture - Veterans will bring skill and discipline to the plant floor if we can find a way to get them there.
2013 Top Plant: Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Bring focus to PLC programming: 5 things to avoid in putting your system together; Managing the DCS upgrade; PLM upgrade: a step-by-step approach
Balancing the bagging triangle; PID tuning improves process efficiency; Standardizing control room HMIs
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.