DSEI 2021 – what role should the defence industry play in academia?

This article originally appeared in the October '21 magazine issue of Electronic Specifier Design – see ES's Magazine Archives for more featured publications.

The recruitment process for engineers in military operations is becoming increasingly fraught with difficulties. Many of these pitfalls are rooted in a lack of engagement from young children in terms of STEM subjects, while others arise in the later stages of education. DSEI 2021, hosted by Dave Tait, the head of training, education, skills, recruiting and retention for the Ministry of Defence, invited his panellists to offer their perspectives on the reasons behind, and solutions to, the stunted growth of military engineers.

The panel collectively agreed that a synthesis of industry and academia is now of paramount importance. Military establishments have long since been held as traditional institutions, and as such, are often resistant to change. The modernisation of the military’s recruitment measures and collaboration with academia therefore marks a proactive and pragmatic shift in conventional attitudes. Such a move away from rigid career structures sees students finding themselves less restricted to specialist roles, and this invites a culture of interdisciplinarity.

In this ever-evolving world of technology, clearly the delineation of specialist tracks is no longer a practical means to create a new generation of problem solvers. Tait argued that blurring the lines between the various skills required will create greater flexibility – thus widening the pipeline and delivering a larger, and in turn, more diverse, pool of potential candidates. This article shares three of the panellists’ perspectives surrounding military engineer recruitment, and the role that academia should play in industry.

Ms Lynette Ryals OBE, pro-vice chancellor of Cranfield University and chief executive of Milton Keynes University (MK:U), summarised the approach from her universities as “attractive, affordable and accessible”. In 2017, Cranfield, a post-graduate research university that specialises in STEM subjects, partnered with MK:U, an undergraduate university (planned to open in 2023) that also focuses on STEM.

Ryals expanded on the new approach that MK:U will be taking, placing a stronger emphasis on degrees that have their fees paid for by employers’ apprenticeship levy. This benefits the student in obvious ways (such as not racking up thousands of pounds worth of debt!), but also through MK:U’s push towards ‘problem-based learning’ in which companies from industry are invited to help build the course syllabuses around the challenges the military face today.

Ryals also noted that they will be using ‘authentic assessment’ to replace traditional exams with more accurate measures of ability (such as presentations). The new methods are thought to better prepare students for industry, alongside a fresh impetus on the development of soft skills in education. Ryals said that MK:U is building a “single source of professional, commercial and interpersonal skills training that genuinely equips the engineers of the future”.

Professor Mini C. Saaj, Professor and Global Chair in Robotic Engineering, University of Lincoln, shared a similar line of thought about the ways in which universities can create more transferable skillsets for students. Academic projects should be industry-driven and expansive: the curriculum needs to facilitate what she referred to as an “osmosis” across different engineering disciplinaries.

Saaj also noted, however, that the crisis of engineer recruitment stems not only from the delivery of degree programmes, but it is also down to a lower level of outreach to younger schoolchildren. Engineering as a career is often misconceived through overly convoluted job descriptions, and instead younger generations need to be exposed to the exciting opportunities that it can offer in order to widen the pipeline at the university level.

Saaj explained the final level at which she believes that industry and academia can merge to produce the best outcome: focus on those already employed by the defence enterprise. Specifically, she talked of opportunities for placement exchanges in which academic staff undertake hands-on work, and defence workers can pursue research.

Saaj’s emphasis on the significance of outreach towards younger development is echoed by Group Captain Mark Butterworth, deputy head, Combat Air Strategy Team. Having discussed one of his current projects, which is set to be realised in the mid-2030s, Butterworth explained that the pool of potential engineering apprentices for this time period are currently in Key Stage 1 – and are therefore as young as five and six years old.

Naturally, the curriculum needs to be scrutinised and adapted for it to translate to children of such an impressionable age. As Butterworth asked: “How do we harness that natural inquisitiveness and that natural disruptiveness and turn it into a career?” He later offered stories of his own daughter, who is in Year 2, but has been hugely exposed to technology in a way that previous generations were not. As such, he went on to say that digital utilisation needs to be more heavily incorporated into both education and training opportunities.

Butterworth also noted that the more senior roles for the next decade will likely be filled by the recent apprentices and graduates of today. Therefore, training for current employees needs to be constantly refreshed and up to date. Consider the immense potential that technology has to innovate training opportunities: virtual reality, for instance, helps trainees and students to carry out procedures that they have rarely, if ever, turned their hand to before. Plus, not only can virtual simulations pave the way for training – and thus retention – it can also, as Saaj suggested, be incorporated into lower levels of education to attract talent.

It was clear from DSEI 2021 that the conversation surrounding engineer recruitment is clearly at the forefront of the defence industry’s agenda. Between them, the panellists shared similar notions of how to rouse interest in military engineering from different stages of development, each offering their own niche spin depending on their background. It is apparent that initiatives are in place, and still being developed, to further the surge of younger people wanting to pursue engineering, particularly in the defence industry