You are in a position of responsibility administering an institution of higher learning
with limited resources. You have been assigned to revise the engineering curriculum and
directed to increase the number of graduates. From the standpoint of professional
conduct, describe the necessary curriculum contents which must be included so as not to
compromise the engineering standards.
With the Economic Planning Unit aim of producing 200,000 engineers as a part of the
preparation to join the ranks of developed nations by 2020, it is essential to review the
engineering education curriculum content (EECC) so that the number tabled could be
possibly achieved. Towards becoming a developed nation, Malaysia shall have 60:40
skilled:unskilled workforce where at current state, only 20% is having a minimum of Diploma
and Bachelor in Engineering whilst the remaining 80% are those below SPM qualification.
Hence, without the revision on EECC, the Vision 2020 target of becoming a developed
country would just be a dream.
Engineering education is important to train good quality engineer who would be able to take
up challenging task and responsibility in carrying out the duty. The EECC offered must be
able to produce engineers who can think and be creator of technology for the benefit of
mankind and for the generation of wealth, where engineers are expected to be able to solve
complex problems (such as deriving from first principle) and not merely to maintain a system
or machine.
As the administer at an institution of higher learning (IHL), I shall take few factors into
account when revising EECC although with limited resources e.g. lecturers, facilities and
funds so as not to compromise the engineering standards. Engineering Accreditation Council
(EAC) Manual published in 2003 by EAC under Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM) shall
be the master guideline to refer to for either developing or revising EECC. This is to ensure
that engineering degree awarded by the IHL is recognized by BEM and The Institution of
Engineers Malaysia (IEM) for registration as Graduate Engineer under the Registration of
Engineers Act 1967 (Revised 2002).
An EAC requirement as stipulated in the EAC Manual that I would firstly consider in revising
the EECC is to clearly determine the kind of graduates that the IHL is producing. Hence, the
EECC that I revised shall churn out graduates who are interested in pursuing their career in
engineering after having gone through the engineering program. This is in line with EAC aim
of developing employment in engineering rather than merely having the increase in
engineering graduates without the interest in pursuing their career in engineering. To achieve
this, the EECC shall have the elements of integrated exposure to professional engineering
practices of which include management and professional ethics. Through this where the
importance of engineering career to the society is made known, students will have interest in
pursuing their career in engineering. Besides, a syllabus of exposing the students on the
functions and importance of IEM and BEM as well as Graduate Engineers and Professional
Engineers will be also embedded in the EECC of Engineering Management course. The
knowledge on the practices of Graduate Engineers and Professional Engineers would help to
increase the number of registered engineers with BEM where as per current state, only 80,000
have registered with BEM with many more are working engineers but have not registered,
especially those who are not from the traditional group of civil, mechanical and electrical
engineering. This revision of EECC is important as registration is legally binding for practice
of engineering in Malaysia.
Outcome based approach shall be also adopted to ensure that student would acquire
knowledge and skills. The first necessary EECC is engineering fundamental and knowledge.
The minimum credit hour for graduation is set to 120 hours where 80 hours shall be core
engineering course depending of discipline of major. For example, civil engineering courses
shall train student in four thrust areas of engineering fundamental and knowledge i.e. (1)
structures and materials; (2) geotechnic and transportation; (3) hydraulic and hydrology; and
(4) environmental via the use of computer in analysis, the design and development of
software and sub-routines in solving various civil engineering problems. This is important so
that they have solid foundation to get ready for studying, planning, analysing, designing,
constructing and maintaining infrastructure systems (e.g. roads and highways, airports, ports,
bridges, traffic management, water supply, water treatment and sewerage, water resources
management such as irrigation, drainage and the construction of dams), buildings (e.g.
housing projects, skyscrapers and mega-buildings), off-shore structures and other systems
utilised by mankind.
On the other hand, comprehensive laboratary curriculum shall be designed to compliment
theoretical study. This laboratory curriculum shall help student to develop competence in
executing experimental work where as in line with EAC manual, each group shall consist not
more than 5 students. Despite laboratory class, I also revise the EECC by including the
tutorial to complement conventional lecture which as per EAC manual, shall not exceed 30
students at any time. This is important because engineer shall know to apply theoretical
knowledge to realize the design and carry daily job. With the all-round knowledge to be
gained throughout the engineering education course, the number of potential students to
enroll in this course can be increased.
With limited resources, I would also revise the courses offered despite the current engineering
courses with are considered as the heart of every EECC. Even though mathematics courses
are not engineering courses in and of themselves, proficiency is very
important for those
who wish to be successful in engineering. In my revision of the EECC, a fair share of
mathematics classes will be at a higher priority where Algebra, Calculus, Trigonometry,
Differential Equations and coordinate geometry will be an integral part of the EECC. Besides,
for students with major in an area like biological or chemical engineering, Science courses are
the substantial component in the EECC which include Physics, Chemistry and Computer
Science. Even if the student’s concentration is in civil engineering, they will be expected to
cover at least the introductory areas of chemistry and physics. The computer sciences are
often tailored to the specific needs of the EECC, where the students will find that proficiency
in this area will be very helpful to the rest of their studies.
I believe that the limited time available to produce engineers must be optimally utilized and
the IHL life is not all about the paper qualification but rather that the environment provided
must be fully-exploited to provide the wholesome person. Students must also be encouraged
to involve in campus activities during their free time. For instance, most of the four-year
universities in the United States and Japan ensure that their graduates are well-rounded and
conversant in areas apart from their specialization by including diverse general studies classes
like English composition, Japanese literature, economics, anthropology, music appreciation,
theater and drama, sports science and political science. Therefore, I will revise the General
Subject by including these options in the first year and the final year courses.
Another important EECC is Industrial Training (IT) where as in line with the requirement of
the EAC, IT shall be conducted in Semester 7 in order to prepare students with the necessary
abilities, technical competency and key skills. By integrating this, my intention is that the
opportunity for the students to obtain employment is greater as IT would better prepare the
students for the industry as the students would have covered all the necessary knowledge by
then. The inclusion of IT as the necessary EECC will also allow them to articulate into the
workforce with ease as being inspired by the industry. However, it is noteworthy to also
highlight that the inclusion of IT in the EECC would not be able to provide the necessary skill
except to introduce students to the work environment since the exposure is merely between 2
months and 6 months. As such, through the revision of EECC that I undertake, the students
are expected to be more matured and committed to pursue their engineering programme. I am
also expecting that their performance in the subsequent year in the engineering education
programme would be more fulfilling with the desire to act or think as an engineer. Besides, as
potential students are aware that they are also being exposed to the real industry world rather
than theoretical study alone, their interest of pursuing and committing in engineering
education course will be increased and eventually will lead to the escalated number of
engineering graduates.
Despite IT, I will also include other component of industrial exposure to the students namely
industry visits, bring invited industry speakers, having academic staff with industrial
experience, courses on professional ethics and conduct, regular use of a logbook in which
experiences are recorded and an industry-based final year project. As for the final year
project, I revise the EECC by providing the opportunity for students to utilize appropriate
modern technology in their works with my intention to emphasize the need for engineers to
make use of computers and multimedia technology in their practice. This exposure as
stipulated in the EAC Manual shall be 2 months in accumulated duration, which is expected
to introduce students to the work culture, not to develop the skills. As for the academic staff, I
shall propose to the top management of the IHL to give opportunity to the academic staff to
undergo a-year practical training at the industry so that better industrial exposure could be
earned by the academic staff that could assist them in their teaching and learning process. By
knowing that their potential lecturers are those having hands-on experience in the industry
rather than teaching using mere theories they could easily obtained via textbooks, the
potential students will have more interest in pursuing their study in engineering education
course and hence increase the number of engineering graduates.
As in terms of softskill, I will include the assessment on communication skills, both oral and
written, throughout the EECC where students must be able to communicate effectively, not
only with other students during their studies or engineers when they are into their working
field, but also with other persons likely to be encountered throughout a developing career. I
will include the exercise of sketching, modern drawing office practice, computer aids, data
transmission and retrieval as well as individual and group presentation in front of the class or
any community e.g. presentation of the proposal to a group of engineers at JKR as a part of
their assessment criteria.
With all the revision and additional inclusion on the EECC as per EAC Manual which is not
compromising the engineering standards from the standpoint of professional conduct, the
above actions that I undertake as in the position of responsibility administering an IHL with
limited resources will be able to direct the engineering education course to the increased
number of graduates and eventually to the more successful completion of an accredited
engineering programme.
What are the differences between PFI and Privatisation which urged the government to
streamline the previous Privatisation Masterplan (PMP) 1990 to PFI?
Private Finance Inititiave (PFI) public infrastructure projects are introduced to make it
possible for government to cope with the public services provision whilst to maintain the
project control at the same time, leads to poor public accountability, reduction in competition
and development of monopolies, which was not able to be materialized via the previous
privatization under Privatisation Masterplan (PMP) 1990. Therefore, PFI is streamlined to
improve the implementation of the previous PMP, which was meant to deliver selected
economic infrastructure, and hence both are possessing dissimilar characteristics.
In terms of function, PFI, as a type of partnership between the government and the private
sector, transforms the largely non-traded public infrastructure that could not be privatised
due to political and financial reasons. In the non-publically-traded infrastructure, the
government owns at least a 50% stake in acquirers flagged with a ‘government’ status based
on economic evaluation. Governments also own at least a 50% stake in acquirer ‘parents’
where the actual acquirer can be either publically traded or have private ownership along with
a government majority stake ownership. Hence, this is where the PFI comes into place by
possibly delivering this non-traded infrastructure, which originally could only be provided
under government’s belt-tightening budget.
On the other hand, privatisation is the policy in reforming the state owned trading enterprise
by bringing in investment capital for the industry or company being privatized as well as
promoting wider share ownership, hence involves more shareholder interest rather than
member of the public at large. In comparison with PFI where an appointed concessionaire is
dedicated in providing the infrastructure, privatisation exposes the enterprise to market
competition and discipline and there by increasing efficiency and productivity, where the
increasing globalisation of the world economy have made competitiveness in international
trade an essential factor in a nation’s ability to create jobs, raise wages and generate wealth.
In privatization, the ownership of asses is transferred by the government to the privatized
company.
In terms of ownership of assest, in PFI, the government owns the asset through the market
mechanism whilst the asset is remained publicly funded. For instance, in Malaysia, the
government utilises the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to provide RM 20 billion loans
to kick-start the PFI (The Edge, 2006) despite the financial assistance by the private
entity itself. This is on the contrary with privatization where the ownership of the asset is
transferred to the privatised company which where. Prior to the transfer of asset ownership
to the government at the end of the concession period, the government does not
own the asset, yet the authority makes an annual payment to the private concessionaire who
provides the asset services, rather like a mortgage.
As the asset is owned by the government, in PFI, the government sets the regulatory
framework and the service requirement provided by the private concessionaire delivering
the public infrastructure project. This is dissimilar with privatization where the government is
only responsible for the general regulation of the infrastructure delivery. Moreover, i n
P F I , the government also reduces its work by focusing on the core professional supported
by the ancillary services by the private company as well as shares the risk and rewards with
the private company in the PFI procurement. On the contrary, in privatization, the privatized
company will solely deliver the infrastructure and services and hence, all the risk and reward
are transferred to the privatized company. Nevertheless, conferring the risk sharing, the
private sector in PFI will not share the risk with the government yet must genuinely assume
the risks. However, although the arguments on risk sharing are dissimilar based on the
practices by different countries, the risk allocation is contradicted to the privatisation
principles where the asset is wholly owned and operated by the private company, where
the private company forms shareholding which forced the government not to retain
accountability in the service delivery.
PFI does not involve the formation of government council in undertaking PFI, yet this
government-owned company is created in monitoring the private concessionaires carrying
out PFI projects. This is based on the experience of various countries where although a
government-owned company is established in implementing PFI namely Pembinaan PFI Sdn.
Bhd. and Pembinaan BLT Sdn. Bhd. of Malaysia’s government, yet under and together
with these government-established companies, there are numerous private concessionaires
being this government company’s partner in undertaking PFI projects. Hence, through the
formation of government-owned company, the government retains accountability in the
delivery of PFI project where on contrast, privatized company retains little public
accountability in privatization.
Moreover, the privatisation usually focuses on the economic infrastructure particularly the
utility and transportation as well as on government service whilst PFI is undertakes wider
infrastructure including both the economic and social infrastructure namely the utility,
transportation, education, health, office accommodation, housing, defence equipment, public
building etc.
How do the KPIs you established help to improve the current performance of PFI public
infrastructure project?
PFI is observed as streamlining the previous privatisation in providing value-for-money
infrastructure. Among the streamlining efforts is stipulating the standard regular evaluation of
privatised entities’ performance through key performance indicators (KPIs), that is branded in
my R&D project as KPIs for PFI, where the private concessionaires’ performance is
benchmarked against the government standard and consequently the payment is linked to
their performance. KPIs are expected to confront the privatised infrastructure project’s
problems of shoddy workmanship, unfinished and delayed projects as it will assess the
performance of the contractors undertaking the PFI projects
KPIs is urged to fulfil the PFI objectives enhance participation of the private sector by
monitoring the private sector‘s participation and performance, promoting shared
responsibility between public and private entities and improving the risk allocation whilst
maintain the public accountability. Through the evaluation of Malaysian current practice on
PFI, it is time to establish a computer simulation framework of performance assessment for
the public infrastructure provision internationally and locally, which significantly affect the
reward and penalty system linked to the project performance.
KPIs for PFI help to improve the current performance of PFI public infrastructure project by
allowing greater public participation in the formulation of those KPIs where KPIs assist in
making PFI more significant to public needs and requirement instead of beneficial mostly to
profit- driven private concessionaires. As the environmental concern and political
accountability are formulated and replicated in these KPIs, KPIs for PFI are developed into an
influential new structure of local PFI governance for public infrastructure projects.
KPIs for PFI reflect and quantify the intentional value drivers where based on the KPIs
definition, the intentional value drivers are the activities that are undertaken based on the
planned strategy to achieve the desired end product, where for this R&D project would be the
public infrastructure. By reflecting and quantifying the specific activities set by the
government as the regulator, the current performance of PFI project provision can be
improved as the private concessionaires are aware of the activities that they should perform
well while delivering the PFI project.
The value drivers in KPIs for PFI are defined not only by the private concessionaire and the
government, but also the public, where this is in the contrary with the ordinary KPIs, where
value drivers are outlined by the organisation executives only i.e. the government and private
company shareholders and stakeholders, thus do not address the needs and concerns of the
member of the public as the end users as well as taxpayers whom their money is used to
provide the PFI project. These value drivers establish the short and long term planned
direction of the public infrastructure that are explicit and transparent to the construction
industry and its clients or the end users. In addition, as the stakeholders are aware about the
selected KPIs and realise that they are being measured, full effort will be put in in achieving
the agreed objectives and eventually improving the current provision of PFI project.
KPIs for PFI can also help to improve the current performance of PFI public infrastructure
project as it flows throughout the project as well as all the stakeholder: government, private
concessionaire and public. KPIs for PFI assess the stakeholder’s performance from the
planning, designing, constructing, commissioning, operating to maintaining phases by the
top-level of the organisation namely the executives e.g. presidents, managers, directors etc as
well as by those at the above-level of the organisation for the case of government and private
organisations. This comprehensive all-in-one implementation of KPIs for PFI that take into
account the input from all stakeholder across wider construction project phases will lead to
the performance improvement of PFI infrastructure project in Malaysia.
KPIs for PFI also ease the assessment of performance hence will encourage the full
implementation of KPIs for PFI by a particular PFI project since the KPIs lists are easy to
understand by all parties so that an action course can be undertaken accordingly. “What are
the KPIs for PFI to quantify? How to quantify? What are the action constructively influence
those KPIs?” are among the questions raised to measure the parties’ comprehension. KPIs for
PFI also establish corporate standard measurements in standardising the definitions
commonly used in KPIs for the provision of public infrastructure besides overwhelming the
political obstacles related with the unregulated definition. The mutual understanding on the
standard measurement across stakeholders will lead to the improvement in the performance of
PFI project as all stakeholders are made known on the criteria of performance they will be
assessed on.
KPIs for PFI also are penetrated with incentives and penalties by the government with the socalled “a reward-penalty system” to motivate the private concessionaires to perform their
responsibilities effectively as inspired by the government in the Ninth Malaysian Plan. The
incentives are linked to KPIs for PFI after the KPIs are examined to evade restructuring of
KPIs for PFI and its incentives eventually. The KPIs for PFI also incorporate “a performancebased delivery system” to ensure the infrastructure delivered in line with the performance
standards set by the government. It also empowers users to take the appropriate action in
response to their KPIs for PFI-of- interest. Employee rewards and sanctions are also linked to
performance measured against KPIs for PFI towards the improvement of performance in PFI
projects as the stakeholders are aware that their poor performance will be penalized and affect
their chance of securing the subsequent projects by the government.