A View from the Top

08/01/2005


The times, they are a-changin' and in this year's CSE Giants survey, we made it a goal to figure out what consulting engineers are doing about it.

Specifically, we asked firms what sorts of "additional" services they're pondering or have already put to use to stay competitive. We also asked about internal business practices, including employee benefits and recruiting new talent. The answers won't shock you, but may provide some insight as to why these firms remain leaders in the engineering world.

A new role

As downsizing, outsourcing, consolidation and a more "one-stop-shopping" approach to life become prevalent, even consulting engineers are finding they must reinvent themselves and perform duties that take them well beyond their traditional M/E/P roles.

On the subject of new offerings, commissioning topped the chart. In fact, nearly half of this year's survey respondents listed it as a service they already provide, plan to provide or for which they receive regular requests.

Robert Derector and Assocs., New York, is one Giant that has long been aware of the benefits of providing commissioning. That said, firm principal Martin S. Konikoff, P.E., notes the bulk of their work is concentrated in mission-critical facilities and the service, in general, is still a relatively new offering for many firms. The biggest challenge in going down this path, in his opinion, is that a number of customers look for commissioning to be performed by a third party. "We have been successful in negating this approach by reasoning that our intimate knowledge of the project, acquired through our involvement in the design and construction phases, is an added value. Consequently, we can be more effective than any third-party agent," he says.

Of course, a solid resume doesn't hurt either, according to Mary Ann Swiderski with Orlando-based TLC Engineering for Architecture. "Our success in 'selling' these services depends in large measure on TLC's prior relationship with the client and the credibility we have established with them in terms of technical expertise, past project experience, accountability, service and knowledge of the market."

Johnstown, Pa.-based H.F. Lenz Company, noted they've had success in this field by focusing their expertise. In doing so they've been particularly successful in landing projects gunning for LEED accreditation.

The success these companies are realizing is spurring others to get in the game. Take Hayes, Seay Mattern & Mattern, Inc., in Roanoke, Va. In its 50-plus year history, it never provided commissioning services with in-house staff, subcontracting these services to other firms. But requests from several clients are making HSMM reconsider its policy.

Still, a huge hurdle remains in convincing clients it's worth the up-front cost—and it is, according to Greg Cann with Wick Fisher White Engineers, Philadelphia. "Building systems run more efficiently, work longer without problems, and [the owner ultimately] saves money over the life of the building and systems," he maintains.

But be wary of doing too good of a selling job. Page Southerland Page, Houston, for example, has found that many of its clients now want this service more often—but don't want to pay for it.

Stacy Cunningham with Dynamix Engineering, Ltd., Columbus, Ohio, thinks education is the key to future success. "As owners become more aware of the importance of commissioning, they are starting to use this service to ensure that their buildings open without any problems."

That's preaching to the choir, according to William J. Gieseler, P.E., vice president, marketing, with W.H. Linder & Assocs., Inc., Metairie, La. "It is not difficult to sell these services, as the owners want them," he explains. "What is difficult is getting the owner to grasp why these services stretch the limits of our professional liability and create circumstances where expectations are much higher than the ability to legally and credibly perform," said Gieseler.

Commissioning isn't the only new area that consulting engineers are delving into. In an effort to increase their value to customers—and put the engineer in the spotlight—many firms are taking steps toward offering master planning services.

Master plans

"Architects continue to select engineers based upon price, so we are trying to do more direct work for owners, without going through the architect," says Lance Benham, CEO and president of The Benham Companies, LLC, Oklahoma City.

OWP/P Engineering, Chicago (No. 95), which provides master planning for a number of markets, says the greatest opportunities lie in building types where the owner occupies the building, such as college campuses, medical complexes, pharmaceutical facilities and mission-critical facilities.

In some cases, success with master planning has opened up new avenues. Thomas A. Bathgate, P.E., president of PWI Engineering, Philadelphia, notes that his firm's master planning services have allowed it to push capital renewal and energy management programs.

Insuring benefits

Turning the focus toward internal operations and efficiencies, this year's survey shed a lot of light on the business of engineering itself. A top priority is providing healthcare benefits. With ever-increasing premiums, firms are having to approach this problem from different angles. Some are absorbing the rise in costs themselves or passing it along in the form of higher deductibles and increased co-pays. Firms have been forced to examine their provider's plan and decide if it still meets their needs at a reasonable cost. Derector Assocs. has stayed the path. "We constantly re-evaluate costs associated with our health-care coverage. However, we understand that we have a responsibility to our staff in that we must not control the cost by sacrificing the coverage," says Konikoff.

But the age of the single health-care provider for the lifetime of a company is long past. It's not so much a loss of loyalty as an attempt to provide the best coverage at the best cost for employees. A number of respondents indicated that they have been forced to change providers to reduce their health-care insurance costs.

The good news is that benefits can be proffered beyond insurance—some with little to no extra cost. HarleyEllis, for example, offers travel insurance, additional medical insurance options, a flexible spending account debit card, and employee discount programs with hotels, amusement parks and the like. Muscatine, Iowa-based Stanley Consultants has added a matching contribution to its 401K program.

Another option is flextime. "Several years ago we recognized the complexities and importance of work and family life. So we offered flex hours so that people could adjust their life style while still maintaining commitments to project deadlines, etc.," reports Sandy Parsley, director of human resources with Minneapolis-based Hammel, Green and Abrahamson.

At the same time, flextime brings its own baggage. "We eliminated flextime because it was being abused," notes Benham. "We were missing project deadlines and people weren't in the office to receive client calls ... It simply became a mess."

I want YOU, to be an engineer

Of course, new blood must be added for firms to remain competitive today, but recruiting engineering talent remains a major challenge. In fact, some 63% of the Giants survey respondents stated it's their greatest challenge. Many noted the market is tightening and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find new talent as enrollment in college engineering programs is decreasing.

Fanning/Howey Assocs., has been turning to the web and utilizing contract help when needed. "But to find young talent, we prefer to locate recent or current college students or graduates and provide an internship opportunity," psays Daniel R. Mader, the firm's CEO and president.

Troy, Mich.-based Peter Basso Assocs. has shaped a strategy beyond the college level by providing co-op opportunities at the high school level.

But recruitment difficulty is not limited to new talent. "Recruiting engineers experienced in the building design field continues to be difficult at the six to 10 year experience level," says Carl E. Cholewa of Clark-Nexsen, Norfolk, Va. "Beyond 10 years they want more management and less production responsibilities."

Derector has an unorthodox solution to this problem. Several years ago it embarked upon a program to accelerate the learning curve of recent graduates. According to Konikoff, they were well aware that most graduates are not trained for the consulting engineering community, so the firm created its own training program consisting of class time, supervised field surveys and project site visits and mentored design work. "The program can only be considered moderately successful; many of the participants leave after a few years," says Konikoff. "However, these young engineers, within six months, can often out-produce those with 10 years experience. Furthermore, the ones who remain with the firm are beginning to grow into management positions."

Overseas opportunities?

With a dearth of home-grown engineers available, some Giants are starting to focus beyond U.S. borders. Foreign talent, certainly, has already impacted the U.S. university pool, according to Patrick Schaffner, vice president and director of global staffing with Parsons Brinckerhoff, New York. "The overseas component of the U.S. [university] student body is growing, particularly for those with advanced degrees," he says.

The problem with targeting these students, or other engineers from across the globe, he says, is the issuance of employment visas. There's a greatly increased cost and there simply have been very few granted since 2003.

HSMM has encountered similar difficulties, but has found the effort worthwhile. "We are driven by the perspective that it is truly good business to be as diverse as possible. It is all about finding the best talent in today's increasingly competitive and diverse society," says Michelle T. Miles, HSMM's chief development officer.

Of course, having offices overseas helps skirt visa issues. In fact, for most international firms it's often necessary to recruit overseas engineers. Still, many respondents indicated they are hesitant to go this route from a genuine lack of wanting to import jobs to the U.S.

While opinions among the Giants may differ, they have all found their own way to roll with the punches of the 21st Century construction market and stay on top of the industry.

2005 Giants Report

Ranking

Company

Type of Firm

Total Revenue (millions $U.S.)

2004 M/E Design Revenue

2005 M/E Design Revenue

*2004 ranking; — Did not participate in 2004

1

URS Corporation , San Francisco

dc

3381.00

494.23 (1)*

569.98

2

Burns & McDonnell , Kansas City, Mo.

ae

495.00

186.20 (2)

195.65

3

Lockwood Greene , Spartanburg, S.C.

ae

386.50

137.16 (3)

128.16

4

Parsons Brinckerhoff , New York

ae

1389.00

98.81 (4)

107.33

5

R. W. Beck, Inc. , Seattle

ce

85.35

57.18 (8)

85.35

6

Syska Hennessy Group, Inc. , New York

ae

76.30

77.75 (6)

79.10

7

Carter & Burgess, Inc. , Fort Worth, Texas

ae

376.33

77.75 (5)

78.60

8

Power Engineers, Inc. , Hailey, Idaho

ce

89.00

57.13 (9)

76.56

9

Stanley Consultants, Inc. , Muscatine, Iowa

dc

112.41

37.64 (14)

60.06

10

Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , Madison, Wis.

ce

54.40

47.40 (10)

49.20

11

Leo A Daly , Omaha

ae

178.20

41.04 (12)

46.33

12

Paulus, Sokolowski and Sartor, LLC , Warren, N.J.

ae

73.30

73.20 (7)

45.45

13

The Benham Companies, LLC , Oklahoma City

ae

123.70

35.34 (15)

44.90

14

R.G. Vanderweil Engineers , Boston

ce

42.41

41.30 (11)

42.41

15

Cosentini Associates , New York

ae

47.00

40.00 (13)

42.30

16

HDR , Omaha

ae

110.83

16.38 (41)

38.79

17

Flack + Kurtz , New York

ce

40.00

30.36 (19)

36.40

18

TLC Engineering for Architecture , Orlando, Fla.

ce

39.60

29.92 (19)

35.64

19

Middough Consulting Inc. , Cleveland

ae

41.50

34.45

20

Smith Seckman Reid, Inc. , Nashville

ce

40.92

32.34 (16)

32.74

21

Wink Incorporated , New Orleans

ae

41.30

27.53 (22)

32.21

22

EYP Mission Critical Facilities, Inc. , New York

ae

39.00

18.75 (33)

31.20

23

Schirmer Engineering , Deerfield, Ill.

ce

31.40

30.90

24

SSOE, Inc. , Toledo, Ohio

ae

56.00

29.70 (20)

30.80

25

STV Group, Inc. , Douglassville, Pa.

ae

197.69

28.15 (21)

29.18

26

Cannon Design , Grand Island, N.Y.

ae

90.80

20.84 (31)

29.06

27

Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. , Chicago

ce

31.80

27.00 (24)

29.00

28

SmithGroup , Detroit

ae

115.60

30.22 (18)

28.90

29

Sebesta Blomberg & Assocs. , Roseville, Minn.

ce

29.10

26.71 (26)

28.03

30

Henderson Engineers, Inc. , Lenexa, Ks.

ce

29.40

23.79 (29)

26.97

31

Stantec Inc. , Edmonton, Alberta

ae

398.38

26.84

32

Environmental Systems Design, Inc. , Chicago

ce

26.30

27.00 (23)

24.99

33

Kling , Philadelphia

ae

74.00

23.80

34

EwingCole , Philadelphia

ae

47.00

15.71 (44)

23.40

35

KJWW Engineering , Rock Island, Ill.

ce

25.87

17.17 (39)

23.29

36

Clark, Richardson & Biskup Engineers , Kansas City, Mo.

ce

39.50

26.75 (25)

22.52

37

A. Epstein and Sons International, Inc. , Chicago

ae

107.00

15.75 (43)

19.80

38

The Austin Company , Cleveland

dc

299.00

26.23 (27)

18.86

39

Teng & Associates, Inc. , Chicago

ae

81.30

13.31 (53)

17.48

40

Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern , Roanoke, Va.

ae

65.12

13.52 (52)

16.93

41

Barge Waggoner Sumner and Cannon, Inc. , Nashville

ae

50.80

17.31 (38)

16.26

42

Robert Derector Associates , New York

ce

17.60

14.03 (49)

15.84

43

Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering P.C . , Albany, N.Y.

ae

43.90

17.97 (35)

15.37

44

Michaud Cooley Erickson , Minneapolis

ce

15.30

14.00 (50)

15.30

45

Ellerbe Becket , Minneapolis

ae

70.00

5.78 (95)

15.30

46

GHT Limited , Arlington, Va.

ce

15.00

11.70 (60)

15.00

47

SEi Companies , Boston

ce

18.14

14.04

48

Ross & Baruzzini, Inc. , Webster Groves, Mo.

ae

15.44

14.77 (48)

13.89

49

Burt Hill Kosar Rittelmann Assocs. , Butler, Pa.

ae

44.65

13.86

50

H.F. Lenz Company , Johnstown, Pa.

ce

17.82

13.54 (51)

13.80

51

M/E Engineering, P.C. , Rochester, N.Y.

ce

13.56

11.57 (61)

13.56

52

Newcomb & Boyd , Atlanta

ae

18.20

18.51 (34)

13.10

53

Peter Basso Associates, Inc. , Troy, Mich.

ce

12.86

12.46 (57)

12.86

54

W.H. Linder & Associates, Inc. , Metairie, La.

ce

18.50

15.00 (47)

12.60

55

Wick Fisher White Engineers , Philadelphia

ce

12.60

15.84 (42)

12.60

56

Durrant Architects and Engineers , Dubuque, Iowa

ae

38.00

7.54 (80)

12.54

57

Interface Engineering, Inc. , Portland, Ore.

ce

12.50

12.00 (59)

12.50

58

Lilker Associates , New York

ce

12.50

9.80 (70)

12.50

59

Hammel, Green and Abrahamson , Minneapolis

ae

64.00

12.60 (56)

12.43

60

Bridgers & Paxton , Albuquerque

ce

12.87

10.37 (67)

12.13

61

Page Southerland Page LLP , Houston

ae

39.95

9.30 (74)

11.99

62

Mazzetti & Associates , San Francisco

ce

13.20

12.42 (58)

11.95

63

KTA Group, Inc. , Herndon, Va.

ce

12.47

10.83 (64)

11.84

64

The RMH Group, Inc. , Lakewood, Colo.

ce

12.88

9.40 (73)

11.34

65

HarleyEllis , Southfield, Mich.

ae

59.50

15.50 (45)

11.19

66

James Posey Associates, Inc. , Baltimore

ae

11.00

11.10 (63)

11.00

67

Richard D. Kimball Company, Inc. , Andover, Mass.

ce

16.42

10.63 (65)

10.92

68

Heapy Engineering LLC , Dayton, Ohio

ce

12.90

12.60 (55)

10.84

69

RobsonWoese, Inc. , Syracuse, N.Y.

ce

15.00

10.20 (68)

10.84

70

RTKL Associates Inc. , Baltimore

ae

120.00

9.60 (72)

10.80

71

MKK Consulting , Greenwood Village, Colo.

ce

9.60

11.50 (62)

9.60

72

GHAFARI , Dearborn, Mich.

ae

28.90

-

9.54

73

Morris, Johnson & Assocs , Eatontown, N.J.

ce

9.46

8.81 (77)

9.46

74

Albert Kahn Associates, Inc. , Detroit

ae

30.50

8.52 (79)

9.12

75

P2S Engineering, Inc. , Long Beach, Calif.

ce

9.82

7.36 (84)

9.03

76

Lizardos Engineering Associates, P.C. , Mineola, N.Y.

ce

8.80

7.00 (85)

8.80

77

Clark-Nexsen , Norfolk, Va.

ae

29.28

9.14 (76)

8.78

78

Optimation Technology, Inc. , Rush, N.Y.

ae

9.88

5.80 (94)

8.56

79

Jordan & Skala Engineers, Inc. , Norcross, Ga.

ce

8.86

6.73 (86)

8.42

80

Spectrum Engineers , Salt Lake City

ce

8.70

7.50 (81)

8.27

81

LSW Engineers Inc . Arizona, Phoenix

ce

7.80

-

7.80

82

Wiley & Wilson, Inc. , Lynchburg, Va.

ae

14.07

6.55 (90)

7.74

83

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum , St. Louis

ae

220.00

10.00 (69)

7.70

84

ThermalTech Engineering , Cincinnati, Ohio

ce

9.50

-

7.69

85

Kamm Consulting , Deerfield Beach, Fl.

ce

7.79

6.69 (88)

7.66

86

Van Zelm Heywood & Shadford, Inc. , West Hartford, Conn.

ce

8.20

-

7.62

87

DiClemente Siegel Design Inc. , Southfield, Mich.

ae

8.39

7.47 (82)

7.55

88

Symmes Maini & McKee Associates , Cambridge, Mass.

ae

21.03

9.14 (75)

6.96

89

Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc. , Celina, Ohio

ae

41.61

8.72 (78)

6.86

90

William Tao & Associates, Inc. , St. Louis

ce

7.23

6.44 (91)

6.77

91

Concord Engineering Group , Voorhees, N.J.

ce

7.00

-

6.65

92

Allen & Shariff Corporation , Columbia, Md.

ce

11.61

-

6.58

93

Arnold & O'Sheridan, Inc. , Madison, Wisc.

ae

11.30

4.43 (99)

6.44

94

Dynamix Engineering Ltd. , Columbus, Ohio

ce

6.18

-

6.18

95

OWP/P Engineering , Chicago

ce

5.97

-

5.97

96

Bala Consulting Engineers , King of Prussia, Pa.

ce

7.17

6.72 (87)

5.60

97

FreemanWhite, Inc. , Charlotte, N.C.

ae

27.80

-

5.60

98

PWI Engineering , Philadelphia

ce

5.60

9.70 (71)

5.60

99

EMC Engineers, Inc. , Lakewood, Colo.

ce

6.80

-

5.50

100

O'Dea, Lynch, Abbattista Consulting Engineers , Hawthorne, N.Y.

ce

5.40

5.40 (97)

5.40


2005 Giants Rankings Index

A. Epstein and Sons International, Inc

37

Affiliated Engineers, Inc.

10

Albert Kahn Associates, Inc.

74

Allen & Shariff Corporation

92

Arnold & O'Sheridan, Inc.

93

Austin Company, The

38

Bala Consulting Engineers, Inc.

96

Barge Waggoner Sumner and Cannon, Inc.

41

Benham Companies, LLC, The

13

Bridgers & Paxton Consulting Engineers, Inc.

60

Burns & McDonnell

2

Burt Hill

49

Cannon Design

26

Carter & Burgess, Inc

7

Clark, Richardson & Biskup Consulting Engineers, Inc.

36

Clark-Nexsen Architecture & Engineering

77

Concord Engineering Group

91

Cosentini Associates

15

DiClemente Siegel Design Inc.

87

Durrant Architects and Engineers

56

Dynamix Engineering Ltd.

94

Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering P.C.

43

Ellerbe Becket

45

EMC Engineers, Inc.

99

Environmental Systems Design, Inc.

32

EwingCole

34

EYP Mission Critical Facilities, Inc.

22

Fanning/Howey Associates, Inc.

89

Flack + Kurtz

17

FreemanWhite, Inc.

98

GHAFARI

72

GHT Limited

46

H.F. Lenz Company

50

Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc.

59

HarleyEllis

65

Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc.

40

HDR

16

Heapy Engineering LLC

68

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum

83

Henderson Engineers, Inc.

30

Interface Engineering, Inc.

57

James Posey Associates, Inc.

66

Jordan & Skala Engineers, Inc.

79

Kamm Consulting

85

KJWW Engineering Consultants, PC

35

Kling

33

KTA Group, Inc.

63

Leo A Daly

11

Lilker Associates

58

Lizardos Engineering Associates, P.C.

76

Lockwood Greene

3

LSW Engineers Arizona, Inc.

81

M/E Engineering, P.C.

51

Mazzetti & Associates

62

Michaud Cooley Erickson

44

Middough Consulting Inc.

19

MKK Consulting Engineers, Inc.

71

Morris, Johnson & Associates, Inc.

73

Newcomb & Boyd

52

O'Dea, Lynch, Abbattista Consulting Engineers

100

Optimation Technology, Inc.

78

OWP/P Engineering

95

P2S Engineering, Inc.

75

Page Southerland Page LLP

61

Parsons Brinckerhoff

4

Paulus, Sokolowski and Sartor, LLC

12

Peter Basso Associates, Inc.

53

Power Engineers, Inc.

8

PWI Engineering

97

R. W. Beck, Inc.

5

R.G. Vanderweil Engineers

14

Richard D. Kimball Company, Inc.

67

RMH Group, Inc. , The

64

Robert Derector Associates

42

RobsonWoese, Inc.

69

Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.

27

Ross & Baruzzini, Inc.

48

RTKL Associates Inc.

70

Schirmer Engineering

23

Sebesta Blomberg & Associates, Inc.

29

SEi Companies

47

Smith Seckman Reid, Inc.

20

SmithGroup

28

Spectrum Engineers

80

SSOE, Inc.

24

Stanley Consultants, Inc.

9

Stantec Inc.

31

STV Group, Inc.

25

Symmes Maini & McKee Associates

88

Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.

6

Teng & Associates, Inc.

39

ThermalTech Engineering

84

TLC Engineering for Architecture

18

URS Corporation

1

van Zelm Heywood & Shadford, Inc.

86

W.H. Linder & Associates, Inc.

54

Wick Fisher White Engineers

55

Wiley & Wilson, Inc.

82

William Tao & Associates, Inc.

90

Wink Incorporated

21



5 Business Challenges

Recruiting Design Talent

Finding New Business

Getting Paid By Clients

Funding Benefit Plans

Professional Liability

5 Hot Global Markets

Europe

Central America

China

Southeast Asia

Canada



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 Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
The true cost of lubrication: Three keys to consider when evaluating oils; Plant Engineering Lubrication Guide; 11 ways to protect bearing assets; Is lubrication part of your KPIs?
Contract maintenance: 5 ways to keep things humming while keeping an eye on costs; Pneumatic systems; Energy monitoring; The sixth 'S' is safety
Transport your data: Supply chain information critical to operational excellence; High-voltage faults; Portable cooling; Safety automation isn't automatic
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.

Maintaining low data center PUE; Using eco mode in UPS systems; Commissioning electrical and power systems; Exploring dc power distribution alternatives
Synchronizing industrial Ethernet networks; Selecting protocol conversion gateways; Integrating HMIs with PLCs and PACs
Why manufacturers need to see energy in a different light: Current approaches to energy management yield quick savings, but leave plant managers searching for ways of improving on those early gains.

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.