Is it viable for large engineering companies (design institutes) to implement a divisional structure reform? ? ?

Reform of engineering enterprises is an inevitable path for their development. Back in the day, my former company lost its employees to other firms because of uneven wage distribution, a system of equal pay for all, and the fact that the salaries of technical staff were even lower than the average salary of all employees. . And now, I hear that reforms have been carried out with a project responsibility system in place and project-based incentives, as a result of which everyone is very motivated. Hehe

Reform of the allocation model is necessary, as is a change in the project execution model； Such a major reform of the operational model can only be validated by its results.

Today’s chemical engineering design institutes don’t know much about construction, but all the installation-related drawings are provided by the project owner; they just stamp them and issue blueprints – it’s utterly chaotic.

I wonder what kind of “design institute” is involved upstairs; it’s really hard to believe that such a thing could happen. I’m extremely puzzled. . . . . . . . .

The divisional organizational structure is an improvement over the functional hierarchy. As companies grow in size and expand across different industries and regions, the divisional structure becomes the preferred option. However, it introduces an additional layer of management, resulting in more management levels and a greater number of managers, which in turn increases management costs; therefore, a thorough feasibility analysis is necessary.

I believe that reforming in line with the management practices of engineering companies is an inevitable trend for design institutes; both the market and other factors demand this. Therefore, it’s not enough to simply change the name – a thorough transformation is necessary, and some difficulties along the way are inevitable. Once this phase is overcome, the company’s development will surely reach a higher level

Reforming the management and operation model is an inevitable trend and also highly necessary. I have worked in both domestic design institutes and foreign engineering companies, and I have personally experienced the gap between domestic and foreign practices. Domestic designers are full of arrogance and pride, with no concept of competition at all. Under the traditional system, each designer is assigned several projects, yet the efficiency is low and the quality is poor, with work being done merely to meet basic requirements. For process packages, complete sets of equipment, and custom-made equipment, they simply attach their own institute’s markings to the manufacturer’s drawings without even taking a look at them. Chinese technicians are “cheap” and have low costs, which allows international engineering companies such as MWP and FLUOR to hire them at low prices in China to carry out work that is actually key. Rather than wasting our own advantages, it’s better to carry out reforms on our own. The pain is temporary, as many people’s interests have been affected; yet it is inevitable and positive for the development of Chinese engineering companies.

Reform is inevitable sooner or later~ Otherwise, those who are strong enough will leave, and it won’t be possible to keep them

:):):) Reform is inevitable, the situation is promising, distribution is fair, and development is gradual.

Adjustments are constant and everywhere; reforms may work or may not, time will tell. One should remain adaptable in the face of changing circumstances~~:lol