The Fear of Becoming Obsolete (FOBO) – Restoring engineering’s purpose with the polymath mindset

By Rob Vatter, Executive President at Quest Global

Something has been bothering me for a while. I have been asking myself: Are your engineers happy?  Is the field of engineering delivering the value it has to offer the world? We have brilliant people solving complex problems every day, yet many of humanity’s biggest challenges remain unsolved. Something is wrong with this picture, and it’s time to explore what it is and how we can address it.

I propose that there is a disconnect between engineering potential and real-world impact, driven by silo thinking and a lack of creativity facing the profession.

Are We Focused on the Right Problems?

The world is not short on crises that engineering can help solve. Consider the data: 2.3 billion people lack basic sanitation, over 80% of the world’s wastewater is dumped untreated and every year, 1.4 million people die from unsafe water. These are fundamentally engineering challenges.  We are solving problems, but are we focused on the most meaningful ones?  Are we relinquishing our engineers to siloed problems and not giving them the toughest challenges they thought they would address when pursuing this career?  The evidence suggests a troubling gap between our current experiences and our priorities. This gap, however, is not just about the problems we choose; it’s also about the people we entrust to solve them.

The Crisis Goes Beyond a Talent Shortage

The engineering talent shortage often gets the headlines, but the real problem runs deeper. We owe engineers the career they thought they were signing up for—one of impact and ingenuity. The numbers paint a stark picture of a profession in distress. One-third of engineers say their careers fell short of expectations, and about 25% plan to retire within the next five years.

Among young engineers, 40% are likely to leave the profession within six months. Perhaps most concerning of all, 50% say that if they had to choose a career all over again, it would not be engineering. The reason is not about money or work-life balance. It is about how the profession has become commoditised, stripping creativity and the ability to address the most audacious challenges from many roles. In short, we have created a creativity crisis. To understand the solution, we must first understand how we arrived here.

How Specialisation Led Us Astray

Over time, engineering has become hyper-specialised and, in many companies, compartmentalised. This structure forces many engineers to see only their piece of a bigger problem. It brings to mind the old story of the blind men describing an elephant. Each one touches a different part and thinks he understands the whole animal. One feels the trunk and says it is a snake. Another touches the leg and calls it a tree. A third grabs the tail and insists it is a rope. No one sees the complete elephant.

We have created the same dynamic in many engineering departments. Engineers are relegated to solving a slice of an issue, optimising subsystems while the bigger, systemic problems go unsolved. This fragmentation not only stifles creativity but also fuels a growing anxiety about the future of the profession itself.

The Fear of Becoming Obsolete (FOBO)

As if this internal crisis weren’t enough, an external force is adding to the pressure. The world seems convinced that AI will solve all our problems, and engineers worry their roles will be commoditised or automated away. This “Fear of Being Obsolete,” or FOBO, is widely discussed, but these discussions often miss the bigger picture.

AI absolutely has a role. It excels at pattern recognition in existing data, processing vast amounts of information to find trends humans might miss. But its power is limited. AI cannot determine which problems humanity should solve. It cannot break from conventional thinking or find entirely new patterns where none existed before. It can only more efficiently solve problems that have already been solved, which highlights why human ingenuity remains irreplaceable.

What AI Cannot Replace: The Human Advantage

Where AI analyses the past, humans imagine the future. We spot problems before they fully emerge. We decide which challenges deserve attention based on values and long-term thinking. Curiosity drives us to ask “what if,” ethics guide us to ask “should we,” and creativity defines our ability to forge new paths.

We discard old approaches when they stop working and invent new ones. It is this distinctly human capacity for creative, values-driven problem-solving that AI cannot replicate. The key, then, is not to fear technology but to harness our unique human abilities more effectively. History shows us a powerful model for doing just that.

The Solution: Reviving the Polymath Mindset

We know creativity matters, but how do we cultivate it? We can find inspiration by looking back at the people who changed everything. Leonardo da Vinci stands out as the ultimate polymath, combining art and science to engineer beautiful outcomes. His ability to see problems from multiple angles led to breakthroughs across painting, engineering, and anatomy.

Engineering has its own polymaths. James Watt improved the steam engine through his knowledge of both mechanical engineering and chemistry. The Wright brothers achieved flight because they mastered aerodynamics, materials science, and mechanical systems. These innovators succeeded because they thought across disciplines. This same mode of thinking is proving its value in the modern world.

Polymath Thinking in Practice Today

We can see this cross-disciplinary approach in action across industries. Kaizen manufacturing brings together workers from different specialties to solve production problems. The Mayo Clinic builds medical teams across disciplines for complex cases. Academic programs are also pioneering this approach, blending robotics, data science, and systems engineering to nurture polymath mindsets in the next generation.

These models work because they mix different experiences and perspectives. People collaborate on whole problems instead of isolated pieces. Teams share ownership rather than protect territories. Problems are addressed holistically, not in parts. Inspired by these examples, we decided to test this approach ourselves.

Lessons for the Industry

Organisations need to actively adopt the polymath approach to unlock the full potential of engineering. By building teams that combine expertise across disciplines like mechanical, software, silicon, and process engineering, professionals can work together to solve multidimensional problems.

It is equally important to cross-pollinate learnings, sharing insights from one industrial sector to another. This allows teams to bring fresh perspectives to every challenge, breaking down silos and unlocking the creative potential needed to solve our world’s most pressing issues. By embracing this mind-set, we can restore the promise of engineering and empower our brightest minds to build a better future.