ASEM Blog

Upcoming events

Recent public forum updates

  • There are no forum topics to display.
  • 15 Dec 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    Notice anything lately? As in the quiet? Eh, probably not. That's OK.

    You see, I haven't posted a blog in a while (nor has anyone else in ASEM). Further, it seems as if no one has noticed. That tells me that we're likely very busy or otherwise distracted. Simply put, if I haven't got something to share, I certainly don't think it's worth tearing you away from your activities.

    In the meanwhile I'll be working with Gana Natarajan to improve our communications stream. It's important to communicate, and it's also important to communicate well. With Gana at the helm, I'm excited to see the changes that come our way in the future.

    Enjoy December, don't work too hard, and be sure to let us know if there's a topic that we can explore with you. Your feedback goes a log way towards building better communication. ~ Trish

  • 24 Nov 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    Author: Geert Letens, ASEM President

    Our International Annual Conference in Indy was all about driving change, as it should be. The world is changing fast, and yet, more change is coming. According to Thomas Frey, Google’s top rated futurist speaker, humanity will change more in the next 20 years than in all of human history. There are tremendous challenges ahead of us: sustainability and climate change, the energy crisis, population explosion and changing societal demographics, and finding resources to feed 9 billion people. This is not just a burning platform – it rather looks like a burning ocean. More than ever, engineers will be needed to make a difference: failure is not an option. The good news is that they will be able to do what they are really good at: providing out of the box solutions for complex problems with stringent conditions.

    But to deal with tomorrow’s challenges, engineers will have to change, too. While over the next 20 years, two billion jobs may disappear, most of them are forecasted to come back in different forms in different industries, with over 50% structured as freelance projects rather than full-time jobs (Thomas Frey, 2013). This implies the rise of a whole new development industry, allowing people to switch professions with less than 6 months of training and apprenticeship. Our society needs to be ready to support engineers to deal with these shifts throughout their career, providing them with the instruments and credibility (or, the knowledge and certifications, respectively) to be successful. While we do so, we will lay the foundation to accelerate the future.

    This future will be without any doubt international: future measures of relevance will be determined on a global scale. The signs of international collaboration are already clearly visible in our society. Almost 40% of authors in the Engineering Management Journal are international. At the conference in Indianapolis, five continents were represented, coming from 23 countries. In May, we signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Division of Engineering Management of the Chinese Academy of Engineering at the 9th Engineering Management Forum in Guangzhou. Currently we are very close to welcoming our first international sections of ASEM in Brazil and Pakistan. As your first truly international president, I look forward to further growing our international presence, and reaching out to other societies to co-organize engineering management events around the world.

    All this requires us to continue to refine our products and services and to focus on value delivery for all of our customer groups: academics and students, as well as practitioners in industry. Ideas are not lacking – on the contrary! That is why I want to take this opportunity to reach out to you. If you too acknowledge that the world is changing, and believe that engineers and engineering managers will be essential to make a difference, then consider joining our team. Of course I understand there still may be questions about ‘how’ and ‘what’, but if already we share the same ‘why’, I am sure we will be able to find the right way for you to contribute to a society that wants to accelerate the future of engineers around the world.
    Image credit: https://www.pexels.com/search/crowd/

    Let’s get connected!
    Geert Letens, PhD PEM
    ASEM President
    geertletens@yahoo.com

  • 10 Nov 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    I was cruising the Internet yesterday and noticed a number of articles with an interesting theme. The titles of the posts were essentially 'Hire the Right People and Let Them Do Their Thing,' or some similar variant. It seemed odd to me that someone would have to point this out. After all, isn't the key to building a good team rooted in hiring people that are better than you at the tasks you need completed?

    Rather than dwell on why someone needs to read these articles, though, I instead thought about the managers I've had where that message was either not received or ignored. What I came up with is by no means scientific or even statistically significant. Rather, it's more of my 'slice of life' perspective; your mileage may well be very different (and, I hope, for the better!).

    The Boss - The classic 'Command and Control' manager, where "it's my way or the highway." I don't perform well in this setting. Most people I know don't flourish here, either. This sort of know-it-all manager is focused only on maintaining their spot at the top of the food chain. Productivity, innovation and engagement be damned, he (or she) is the big cheese and you had best recognize them as such. Teams under such individuals languish and the members likely find themselves as candidates for job cuts, given their undervalued contributions and poor performance. This manager would do better with a fleet of automatons, since they'll squander and squash any talent that comes their way.

    The Micromanager - This person is practically a step-sibling to The Boss. While they might have experienced a brief glimmer in recognizing your talent, they sure aren't going to let you run off the leash to use it. Does your manager hound you for updates at multiple intervals during the day? Do they hover over you and behind you when they work? Do they need to have every detail of every task you intend to perform? Then you have found yourself under the microscope, unable to move or even consider a different approach to your work. It makes me wonder if these are the same managers that cannot seem to accomplish anything, because they find themselves too busy managing the details to perform their own work? When I find myself working for one of these people, I ask myself if someone in a past role really screwed up and caused the rest of us to be punished as a result?

    The Absent Manager - While this initially sounds like a wonderful situation, this approach can lead to confusion and wasted productivity. The Absent Manager is never around to provide direction or communicate expectations. The team has no way of knowing what to do, unless one of them happens to be an accomplished mind reader. Deadlines are missed and high priority items are set aside in the void. Whatever the manager is expecting to accomplish, it's not happening here. The team is hired for talent, but left to fend for themselves. This 'lack of management' can lead team members to the chopping block, as they are unable to deliver or manage their work in a timely fashion.

    The Absent-Minded Manager - I see this person as a mash-up between The Micromanager and The Absent Manager. They either aren't around, because they're spinning off in dozens of directions, or they're asking about the same details for the umpteenth time because they've forgotten or misplaced their notes. As a result, team members have to channel their talents toward managing this manager, to keep them on track and the project a-float. Time is wasted in re-work and lost priorities because the manager cannot be bothered to follow the plan (or establish one). As a result, everyone on the team has to become a mini-manager (for better or worse), which risks the emergence of any type described above. While this may showcase the strength of the team, too often it ends up being a train wreck of poor chemistry and delivery.

    I'll wager there are even more management types that fail to appreciate their team members. I dare not think on it too much longer, lest I come off as a pessimist (I prefer to think of myself as a realist, to be honest). But I am curious to know what I missed, or if there's another type of manager that we should all try to avoid. Post your thoughts here and let's continue the conversation.
    Image credit: https://www.pexels.com/photo/working-in-a-group-6224/


    Tricia Simo Kush is a certified Professional Engineering Manager with a background in Information Technology and a goal to take her career to a higher level through Engineering Management. She graduated from the MEM program at St. Cloud State University in 2010. To her, Engineering Management is a fascinating mix of technology and business, people and process. She is constantly seeing the ways that Engineering Management spans industries and helps everyone to become effective leaders. Follow her on Twitter (@TSimoKush) or check out her profile on LinkedIn.

  • 03 Nov 2015 7:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    You've caught me; another blog about things that I have recently read.

    The first is a note from Mike Cohn, who founded Mountain Goat Software. I don't, nor have I ever worked for Mike or his company. To be honest, I cannot recall how I first heard about him, but I've followed his blogs for years. He is a straight-shooter and calls 'em like he sees 'em. Most recently, he offered the following thoughts about estimation:

    "I ask a team to estimate a product backlog item only when having the estimate will lead to actionably different behavior. So, for example, I might ask a team for an estimate on a user story so that I can decide if I want that story soon or perhaps not at all. Or I might ask for an estimate so I can make a commitment to a client or partner.

    But I don’t ask a team to estimate just so I can later yell at them if they’re wrong. I don’t ask a team to estimate just so they feel pressure to meet that estimate."
    (Yes, I know he's using some software lingo, but we all understand requirements, functionality and 'wish lists.' That's what he's talking about.)

    I took a moment and thought about this. Granted, I'm frequently asked to estimate effort. We are all asked to provide estimates. But are these estimates used properly or, as Mike suggests, do they come back to bite you?

    Maybe the article struck too close to home? On a recent project, I was hounded for a count of test cases. I have no problem telling anyone how many cases I've created, but if you aren't going to review them - and the requirements - the numbers don't mean anything. 'More' does not always equal 'good' (or 'better') in these situations.

    In fact, it reminds me of the so-called 'good old days' of software where developers were paid by the line of code. Really. Have you ever heard of 'code bloat?' I assure you that many developers from that era have. Simply put, you cannot judge anything by the number of components. In other words, if 'some' is good, 'more' is not automatically better.

    In his note, Mike goes on to add:
    "Why not estimate everything?

    Estimating can add a lot of value. It can lead to better decisions. For example, I’ll make a better 2016 budget with the estimates I’ve asked for than if I don’t get them. Right now, that’s important to me. But, if an estimate will not lead to an actionably different decision, time spent estimating is wasted."

    He's right. You can spend a lot of time on tasks - estimating, metrics, even solutioning - that never come to fruition. His point is valid; if it means better decisions, it's not wasted time. And I would argue that sometimes we don't see better decisions coming from our efforts, and that can cause some frustration and even distrust.

    As managers, we're often asking our teams to perform such activities. Sometimes we have to do them ourselves. Is the 'Why?' so hard to follow, or even question? Most of us can handle a situation once we have the appropriate information.

    As Mike says, we can make better decisions. Working smarter, not harder, is the name of the game. So it's worthwhile to ask yourselves 'Why?' before requesting or performing the activity. If it leads to understanding and appreciating the goal, then it's time well spent. If you don't have a suitable answer, then you can determine that it's a wasted effort... and then the other questions start to form.

    Because I cannot leave well enough alone, I also checked in with Johanna Rothman's site. I've referenced her work here before. She had a related but different topic recently, on 'resource efficiency.' Here is what she uncovered in a recent meeting with a client that was concerned about expertise and productivity:

    "I want everyone fully utilized--how else will I know if people are productive?"
    (This is a hot topic for me, particularly as a consultant. A freeway at full capacity, for example, means that no one is moving. Do managers really want that?!)

    Johanna makes an important point in her note. "Measuring utilization is measuring effort. Your customers don't buy your efforts. They buy your products/features/releases. They buy the results of your efforts."

    So estimation, measurement, expertise, utilization don't matter to your customer; make the best product and sell them what they asked for. Granted, pricing and delivery factor into the equation, but the message is clear. The buyer wants your best output, and you have to figure out how to deliver that.

    Johanna concludes with this (a point that I agree with 100%):
    "Use management to set the context and create an environment in which people can solve most of their problems. Measure the projects or features you finish, not the ones you start."

    Your take-away is your own, and I suspect there are a few nodding heads in Reader Land. I tossed a lot of thoughts your way that made sense to me, but maybe not to you? Post your questions and thoughts below and let's see if we can get to a good place with estimates and measuring results. I look forward to the conversation!
    Image credit: https://loribonfitto.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/raking-leaves.jpg

    Tricia Simo Kush is a certified Professional Engineering Manager with a background in Information Technology and a goal to take her career to a higher level through Engineering Management. She graduated from the MEM program at St. Cloud State University in 2010. To her, Engineering Management is a fascinating mix of technology and business, people and process. She is constantly seeing the ways that Engineering Management spans industries and helps everyone to become effective leaders. Follow her on Twitter (@TSimoKush) or check out her profile on LinkedIn.

  • 27 Oct 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)
    by Donald Kennedy, P.Eng.


    I recall a quote that plays on an old saying “The more things change the less they stay the same.”  The first session I ever attended at an ASEM conference was about how people have been managing activities from long before 1990.  Somehow the pyramids were built using teams of specialized labor.  Wikipedia lists Mir Abdul Karim and Mukkarimat Khan as the cost management leads on the building of the Taj Mahal and they performed their jobs 500 years before the benefit of web based ERP accounting systems.  Those of you who attend my presentations at ASEM annual conferences know I am not convinced our present state of management practice is anywhere near optimal and that we can learn from things that worked in the past.


    In 1983, I lived in a house heated by a gravity furnace.  The flame had two settings, small (the pilot) and large (the main burner).  No fan and no sensors other than the thermostat.  Today that 70 year old furnace still works and has never been serviced, since there is almost nothing to wear out.

    In my current residence, the 2010 model furnace is unreliable due to intentional engineering decisions.   It has a safety feature that shuts the fuel off if there is no flame.  Good idea, but the flame sensor is temperamental and cannot tell it is in the middle of a hot flame when a thin film of oxide is present.  I cannot see any buildup, but a quick wipe with steel wool gets it working again.  If I am away when the sensor quits, the house may freeze - because the engineers could not think of a better way to tell if something is extremely hot other than this finicky sensor. 

    Secondly, my furnace shuts the burners off if it believes the flue is plugged.  This is a good feature, except that it can be triggered by many different scenarios.  When triggered, the furnace shuts down and will attempt to restart when the thermostat signals low temperature.  The plugged-flue sensor needs a neutral pressure to reset as would normally happen if the flue was not plugged.  As part of another system, there is a small fan that creates negative pressure while the burners are on to prevent combustion gas escaping into the house.  If the plugged-flue sensor shuts the burners off and the furnace tries to restart before the small fan stops spinning because of inertia, the combination keeps the fuel shut off and the flue fan starts and keeps running until it is manually rebooted by cutting the power.  Again it makes it difficult to leave the house in winter for more than a day for fear of requiring a manual reboot. 

    The motives behind the improved furnace design are admirable such as safety and energy efficiency, but the unintended consequences of an unreliable system introduce more safety and efficiency concerns.  Design engineers are often not good at establishing the bases for their designs, or rather it is typically not their job to do so.  The requirements are set by the stakeholders.  These stakeholders can benefit from people knowledgeable in EM fundamentals and who believe in the value of systems that work fine.  In operations management courses EM’s are taught case studies where one company may succeed and grow by building upon systems that work and others are run into bankruptcy by the unintended consequences of changes based on good intentions without a solid history of success.
    Image credit: http://www.nachi.org/gravity-furnace-inspection.htm

    Dr. Kennedy spent most of his career on heavy industrial projects in the fields of oil & gas, pipelines, electrical power generation and mining.  He has also lectured at universities on financial and project management. He has written two books and dozens of articles on the practical application of management theories, with special interest in how our own misperceptions often lead us down paths of fantasy.  

  • 14 Oct 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    Last week was, as usual for the annual conference, a whirlwind. It's a good kind of busy, to be sure. Meeting new people, catching up with colleagues that you haven't seen since the last conference and hearing all of the presentations can quickly add up to a full program.


    The 2015 IAC was, in my opinion, a success. The city of Indianapolis is a terrific site and The Alexander is a premier location. The host committee and ASEM staff did a great job of seeing to every detail. A tremendous amount of work goes into these events and it seems so seamless to many of us in attendance.

    The conference also serves as a turning point for many in ASEM leadership positions. Service terms are often one year in length and the conference signals when there are changes in these roles. I'd like to thank Gene Dixon for his work and energy that he brought as the President of ASEM. His humor and good nature often disguised how much work was taking place. Geert Letens, the new ASEM President, has quite the act to follow.

    Another new yet familiar face in the leadership is Ganapathy "Gana" Natarajan, who is the new Communications Director. He has held this position before and is already acquainting himself with the new website format. Brian Smith is the outgoing Communications Director and will be missed. I enjoyed working with him. Brian's attention to detail and friendly demeanor helped the committee to deliver so many effective communications, such as the eNews, webinars and practice periodicals.

    With these changes - and others that I've not mentioned - there is much to look forward to in the weeks and months ahead. What would you like to see from ASEM? What can we do or improve to better serve your expectations? Now is an excellent time to voice your suggestions or become involved in making change happen.

  • 06 Oct 2015 5:14 PM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)
    Just as many of President Dixon's posts begin, I too am sitting in a hotel and reflecting. We've had an exciting few days at ASEM.org, as you can see. The new website is bright and modern, with a consistent and professional flow. I'll admit that I haven't learned to use all of the new site functionality, but I can speak to many of the highlights. Of course, the new blog is a favorite of mine. I also look forward to using the forums to help facilitate communication with all ASEM members and committees. What you might not see is the improved data quality, the real hero of the transition. The good folks at the ASEM World Headquarters were the workhorses in this project, and it's my hope that the new tools help each of them with their tasks.

    With the initial conversion complete, you can expect to see additional changes roll out over the next weeks and months. Content will be expanded and updated, and some additional functionality will be developed. If you see something that needs to change, or maybe identify something that's mising, be sure to post in the forums and let us know. Each of us has a role in making ASEM a world-class professional association.

    That's just the begining. The 2015 IAC kicks off tomorrow with Board Meetings and industry tours for conference attendees. I look forward to seeing you - meeting you, if I haven't already - in Indianapolis. Travel safely!

    Tricia Simo Kush is a certified Professional Engineering Manager with a background in Information Technology and a goal to take her career to a higher level through Engineering Management. She graduated from the MEM program at St. Cloud State University in 2010. To her, Engineering Management is a fascinating mix of technology and business, people and process. She is constantly seeing the ways that Engineering Management spans industries and helps everyone to become effective leaders. Follow her on Twitter (@TSimoKush) or check out her profile on LinkedIn.
  • 29 Sep 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    Author: Frederick "Ken" Sexe

    Seth Godin wrote an eloquent blog titled Tires, coffee, and people in which he reminds us that we as consumers tend to skimp on the wrong things in an effort to make things better. For instance, we seek to buy better cars without understanding the benefit that the right tires have on performance. We seek out newer and better coffee machines while ignoring the fact that the right coffee bean is arguably more important.

    We as a society also view people the same way. Take two companies of exactly the same size with exactly the same capital resources. What makes the organizations operate differently? It is the people that allow an organization to use the resources towards a company’s goals.

    It has been my experience that organizational management looks at people first when trying to solve problems. If a division is losing money it is usually the people that are the first to be scrutinized. When a problem occurs we are first to point our finger at “who is to blame”. This is not to say that people are never the problem but that there are typically much better ways to address a lagging organization than by viewing all problems as “people problems”. A Wall Street Journal study once studied a ten-year period of layoffs and found that not one organization was better off in the long-term. Yet Wall Street as an entity still has a tendency to reward organizations that lay off people first. It is no wonder that organizations favor layoffs when the entity responsible for measuring their performance rewards that behavior.


    Yet systems do not operate that way. Problems within a system tend to be caused in places other than where the problem can be seen. A loss in sales can be caused by factors in which the sales team has no control over. I have personally seen how strategies such as reducing spares affect the ability to build products on time (or repair them in a timely manner). Most managers also have no fundamental concept of variation and how to both identify it and address the causes.

    Image credit: https://images.unsplash.com/

    Frederick (Ken) Sexe is a lifelong learner currently wrapping up his PhD in Engineering Management and Organizational Psychology at Northcentral University. His hobbies include challenging prevailing patterns of thinking that discourage new ideas while developing new ways to do things. He is currently employed as a Senior Systems Engineer at Raytheon where he is taking a career break from management to pursue his educational goals and focus on his family.

  • 22 Sep 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)

    Author: Gene Dixon, ASEM President

    Pres. Release
    September 2015

    The final Pres. Release for my term of office. Somewhat bittersweet. The relief on the impact on my schedule being President is welcome. The constant awareness of leading this organization has been energizing. The fact that it is time to move over and make room for someone new is exciting. For me. For the Society. Geert Letens, the first, truly international president will be stepping in. I look forward to what he will do as President. He really understands growth, value and retention.

    What if the term of office was longer, is a question I am sometimes asked. To a person, each of the members of the Executive Committee—Past-president, President, President-elect, Secretary, Treasurer and our Executive Directors—recognize that the term of office for President is really 4 years, and only one of those is with the official title. It truly is four years. Not much happens as President that is focused on one person. It is the Executive Committee that leads the ASEM. Each step in the leadership progression, from Secretary to President-elect is a process of preparing and supporting the President for her/his term of office. Once elected to Secretary, the process of being President begins. Once you've served with the title of President of ASEM, the following year continues with the work of making the President efficient and effective (thanks, Beth). And, to continue the work of promoting growth, value and retention. You continue to work as Past-president because growth, value, and retention are really the fundamental principles of ASEM as a member society. I think the rotation system works, and works well.

    In EM, I think we call that either participative leadership, mentoring, training, or even a systems approach. In part or in whole, each is applicable. We try to practice EM in ASEM.

    So, congratulations to Geert our 2016 President. And congratulations to Frances Alston, the 2016 ASEM Secretary. Frances won a very close election—the margin was ~2%.

    And thank you to all our candidates. Stepping out for election takes a bit of courage. Being willing to serve takes passion for the ASEM. Serving as an elected officer takes a will to work. Thank you again all of our director leaders, elected and appointed, for your desire to move ASEM forward.

    And thank you. Each member. Each contributor. Each sponsor. Each author. Each IAC registrant. When you were asked, you responded. Effectively. Efficiently. And thank you also to those who support your involvement in ASEM. Each of you have supported the growth, value and retention that is ASEM.

    And a special thanks to all those who called or emailed in response to questions I've asked in past issues of Pres. Release. It is rewarding to know you read these. And, for what it is worth, I had a student who found one of the Pres. Release in blog form and read it. Thanks Trish, et al., for making that forum available.

    You know management and leadership is not always lily pure in execution. If I've strayed from lily pure execution, I'm sorry. Engineering management/leadership is a process of smoothing bumps, jumping crevices and backing up and going around when you've hit a roadblock or done something stupid (is it okay to use that term?) and stretching yourself and those you manage or lead. It is a process of collaborating. No doubt I've not always done the right thing; not every 't' has been properly crossed. Not every 'i' has been properly dotted every time. I've always believed I've had the right motives.

    Gene
    2016 ASEM Past-president

  • 15 Sep 2015 8:00 AM | Tricia Simo Kush (Administrator)
    Change is a scary prospect for some folks. It signals uncertainty, the unknown, maybe a shift in the comfort level or even a complete displacement of everything familiar. Is that negative or positive? I suppose that matters on the person undergoing the change. People generally view weddings and births as happy events, and both are filled with change and expectation. I know folks who have lost their jobs and it turned out to be the best thing that ever happened for them. Everything in life presents an opportunity to learn, and change can provide a very big lesson.

    How we handle change can be a defining characteristic. To paraphrase Darwin, "Evolve or die." Change is a powerful motivator and can become critical for survival. In spite of our fears and misgivings, change becomes a significant catalyst in determining who we are as leaders, managers or even plain old humans. The people that roll with the changes or even embrace the opportunity to shift directions are often viewed more favorably and lead more effectively.

    I read a post on the Lean Enterprise Institute about how change is as much about the messenger as the message, and I think that's an important point to raise. Similarly (and I'll have to dig this one up), I read an article that suggests we're more against or in favor of changes based on who is driving the shift. That's a powerful consideration, particularly when we view ourselves as change agents and leaders. How far will you and your suggestions go if your message fails upon delivery?

    As a consultant, I'm accustomed to being viewed as the Bringer of Change (or Chaos, depending on your view). Consultants generally are not hired when everything is going well. That's not to suggest that we only come in when there's trouble, though that is a common perception. Good or bad, the main reason that consultants are contacted is because something needs to be transformed. And that, Gentle Readers, can be a frightening prospect for many. When the truth is told, though, I can be just as averse to change as anyone else. I like being able to plan and anticipate results. Surprises are not always welcome. We are, after all, creatures of habit (good and bad).

    But no one has ever innovated anything without a heaping dose of something different. Fluidity makes for interesting outcomes. Being dynamic means being open to other possibilities, sometimes with great success and reward. Granted, it's not guaranteed, but I haven't seen much evidence of someone being wildly successful without some evolution in the process. As painful as it may be, change is inevitable. Some may say that it is the only constant. Whether you love it or loathe it, it is typically a force that we have to contend with. While it may be more than we can effectively influence, it's how we adapt and adjust that dictates the result. Being stubborn is akin to becoming brittle, and everything in that state has a breaking point. Flexibility and diversity assures a stronger species and often a more resilient person.

    How do you face change? How do you deliver the message in the face of uncertainty or fear? Can you overcome your own aversion and successfully bring about a positive outcome? What are the tools or approaches that help you do that? We can all benefit from an exchange of ideas, so share them here or in our other social media locations. As leaders in engineering managers, we can all benefit from learning to be an effective messenger.

    Image credit: http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/popular-images.php

    Tricia Simo Kush is a certified Professional Engineering Manager with a background in Information Technology and a goal to take her career to a higher level through Engineering Management. She graduated from the MEM program at St. Cloud State University in 2010. To her, Engineering Management is a fascinating mix of technology and business, people and process. She is constantly seeing the ways that Engineering Management spans industries and helps everyone to become effective leaders. Follow her on Twitter (@TSimoKush) or check out her profile on LinkedIn.


Proud Corporate Members of ASEM Include


Lawrence Livermore

National Lab


Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software