Why scientists don't read and engineers don't write

It is difficult to say that reading is the only superior way of acquiring information. It is well known that a great body of information is getting around by a mechanism called gossip or chat. Unlike Scientists, engineers when they face a technical problem or a decision-making situation, first turn to intra-personal reserve supplies of information like one’s own knowledge, personal files and colleagues. If still unable to solve the problem and if not willing to abandon it, they look for information from formal sources like books, reports and journals.

So the primary source of engineering information is largely what the engineer keeps in his head or possibly knows where to find. Hence interpersonal communication is the ‘life blood’ of practicing engineers. Since the effects of knowledge and experience are largely involuntary and subconscious, it is difficult to estimate the nature, size and value of such intra-personal source of information. Tapping such ‘tacit knowledge’ is the aim of Knowledge Management (KM).

Engineers drawing most (63%) of their information from in-house sources is attributed to (i) the nature of work - most engineers are concerned with ‘making things work’; (ii) the psychological traits that predispose an engineer to solve problems by himself or with the help of colleagues rather than by finding answer in the literature;  (iii) use of relatively old basic science inputs  for  technological innovation, and (iv)  the kind of training and habituation (or lack of it?) of engineers to use formal information system.

There are other reasons as well. An engineer normally works under the conditions of uncertainty and/or anxiety and hence would naturally turn to his colleagues to compare the results and get a tailor-made solution synthesised to support his findings.

Colleagues also offer reassurance, assistance in locating published material, and fill the gap between supply and demand for information.

It is interesting to note that engineers do not always turn to information sources which reward them most. They try to minimise loss than maximise gain, exhibiting a sort of conservative approach of doing ‘better things’ than ‘best things’.

Their prototype model becomes progressively more ‘frozen’ and decisions irrevocable as the project progresses.  They spend 90-95% of project time in prototype phase compared to limited time (5-10%) spent on systems-definition phase.

Some have refuted the general finding (or belief!) that engineers read less than other professionals. It is said that the complex relationship between engineers and their sources of information is still not well understood and findings were often interpreted out of context. The limited use of journals by engineers is attributable to the fact that engineers do not encourage the continuous integration of new ideas within existing practice till they are time-tested for their reliability.

There is some inter-linking and interdependence in use of formal and informal sources of information so that each stimulates the use of the other depending on situation and thus act as mutually supportive, dependent and complimentary sources of information.
Engineers prefer formal sources of information when they have to (i) minimise risk, (ii) pass on decisions to higher ups, (iii) check authenticity of information  from informal sources of information, (iv) fill gaps  in information available from informal sources and (v) overcome difficulty in putting information from informal sources into action.