The professional Engineering licensure system has developed a qualification system that serves to define the engineer as an asset much in the same form as any financial instrument would format an asset.
Engineers need to understand how this design empowers them as a financial instrument otherwise, they can easily be sequestered in the domain of the “intangible”. In the mind-eye of Wall Street, the engineer acts as a proxy for the physical asset that is being capitalized.
The Engineering Asset:
In general, engineering licensure is a function of three components where each is represented in the parameters of the licensure process.
1. An accredited education represents the quantity of the asset being described, be it mechanical, electrical, civil engineer, etc.
2. Documented experience represents the quality of the asset as verified by a comparable existing asset.
3. Finally, the examination minimizes the variance in the quality and quantity of the engineering asset.
Since there is some flexibility in the parameters. For example, it is fairly easy to substitute a bit less experience for a bit more education. Similarly, it is possible to increase education and experience in lieu of an exam.
However, in each and every case, the asset is preserved as a function of quantity, quality, and variance. Otherwise, it ceases to be a stand-alone asset and requires a corporation to house it.
A great deal of engineering falls under the under the corporate exemption. This is neither right or wrong – it is simply another delivery mechanism for engineering services. There are many different delivery systems that perform essentially the same function such as venture capitalists, university affiliation, grant writing, oppression, and quite predictably, bank loans and insurance contracts.
As such, there is no limit of possible delivery systems as long as they fulfill the governing equation for Quality, quantity, and variance.