In 1994, the Automotive Industry Action Group published QS-9000 and replaced three proprietary quality systems with one. Ford's Q-101, Chrysler's supplier manual, GM's Targets for Excellence, all collapsed into a single standard with five core tools: APQP, PPAP, FMEA, MSA, and SPC. PPAP alone defined eighteen standardized elements every supplier had to produce (AIAG, 1994). Before that year, your DFMEA belonged to a relationship. After it, your DFMEA belonged to a template. See Reason #51. That was the year your work became portable.
The market noticed. Global engineering research and development spending reached $1.53 trillion in 2024, with approximately 70 percent of engineering services delivery now performed in offshore locations (NASSCOM & Everest Group, 2025). India's engineering R&D sector grew from $20 billion in 2015 to roughly $134 billion in 2025 (Zinnov, 2015; NASSCOM, 2025). Bain & Company, surveying over 500 senior engineering executives, found that mechanical engineering was the original discipline outsourced and is now classified as a "legacy" operation that providers have "significantly optimized" (Bain, 2023). The consulting firms that study your field call it legacy. See Reason #21 and Reason #23. Meanwhile, U.S. engineering services employment grew at 2.8 percent annually over the same period (BLS, 2024). The work did not expand at home. It moved.
What moved was everything the templates made transferable. CAD drafting and legacy drawing conversion. BOM creation and maintenance. DFMEA and PFMEA documentation. Test report writing. Tolerance analysis with predefined stack-ups. Supplier quality packages. FEA runs with boundary conditions someone else defined. An entire industry of ISO-certified offshore providers exists to perform these tasks at 50 to 65 percent cost savings (NASSCOM & Everest Group, 2025). What stayed was whatever required your body in the room: the shaker test you had to witness, the supplier audit you had to walk, the fixture you had to fit on a floor only you had visited. See Reason #52. The division was never about skill. It was about whether the work could be written down. Economist Alan Blinder found "little or no correlation between an occupation's offshorability and the skill level of its workers" (Blinder, 2009). The correlation was with codification. If it fit a template, it fit a time zone.
Other engineering branches did not get hit the same way because their work resisted the same codification. Civil engineers stamp bridges and buildings under PE requirements that anchor the work to a jurisdiction. See Reason #58. You cannot offshore a structural seal. Electrical and computer engineers work in innovation cycles fast enough that the framework changes before anyone can templatize it. Chemical engineers run processes tied to specific plants, proprietary formulations, and safety constraints that do not survive a handoff to a team that has never smelled the reactor. Software developers get offshored too, but they get offshored as developers, building new products at scale, not as documentation processors filling in legacy templates. Mechanical engineering was the original discipline outsourced because it was the first one whose deliverables were fully standardized into auditable, portable artifacts. Bain's 2023 survey of engineering executives is explicit: ME is now classified as a "legacy" operation, while digital engineering, the territory of EE and CS, commands a dominant 62 percent of the global engineering services outsourcing market (Bain, 2023; FMI, 2025). The other disciplines got offshored to grow. You got offshored to optimize.
The academic literature identified the mechanism decades ago. Codification of tacit knowledge into standardized artifacts is the prerequisite for both outsourcing and automation (Balconi, 2002). Once a DFMEA lives in a structured template rather than in someone's judgment, it no longer needs to live in the same building as the product. The National Academy of Engineering said the quiet part plainly in 2008: "the same standardized tasks have increasingly been replaced by software tools that can perform them automatically" (NAE, 2008). Standardization did not just make the work movable. It made the work scriptable. See Reason #33 and Reason #65.
You survived your workload by standardizing it. You built the templates, wrote the procedures, and turned judgment calls into dropdown menus so the volume would not crush you. Every shortcut you created to stay afloat made the next person cheaper and the person after that optional. The sequence was not accidental. Standardization made it portable. Offshoring proved it was cheap. See Reason #68 for what comes next.
You paved the road. Someone else will drive on it.
References:
Automotive Industry Action Group. (1994). QS-9000 Quality System Requirements. AIAG.
Balconi, M. (2002). Tacitness, codification of technological knowledge and the organisation of industry. Research Policy, 31(3), 357-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00113-5
Bain & Company. (2023). The digital shift fuels outsourcing in engineering and R&D. https://www.bain.com/insights/the-digital-shift-fuels-outsourcing-engineering-r-and-d-report-2023/
Blinder, A. S. (2009). How many U.S. jobs might be offshorable? World Economics, 10(2), 41-78. https://www.princeton.edu/blinder/papers/07ceps142.pdf
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Employment for engineering services (NAICS 541330). Retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPUMN541330W200000000
Future Market Insights. (2025). Engineering services outsourcing market report. https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/engineering-services-outsourcing-market
NASSCOM & Everest Group. (2025). The global ER&D shift: Evolution of engineering services and India's competitive edge. https://nasscom.in/knowledge-center/publications/global-erd-shift-evolution-engineering-services-and-indias
National Academy of Engineering. (2008). The offshoring of engineering: Facts, unknowns, and potential implications. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12067
Zinnov. (2015). Global R&D services outsourcing market report. Via PR Newswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/global-rd-services-outsourcing-market-grew-by-87-in-2015-530816321.html
No comments:
Post a Comment