Motivation and the role of empathy in engineering work

ABSTRACT

Societal perceptions of engineering as a discipline now depict engineering as a profession that enables social, economic, and environmental problems to be addressed on a global scale. This expanded view of engineering has had myriad impacts on priorities for engineering education and practice. One such impact has been to foreground discussions about the role that empathy may play in engineering practice. This manuscript discusses the evolution of the concept of empathy in the engineering field, and the relevance of empathy to various generic engineering attributes, including leadership, problem-solving, and design thinking. The manuscript then discusses the idea that motivation plays a central role in improving and increasing empathy in engineering work.

KEYWORDS:

• Engineering practice
• engineering education
• empathy in engineering
• role of motivation

1. The evolving concept of empathy in engineering education

Empathy plays an important role in the successful completion of many day-to-day tasks in both personal and work contexts. The first known formal conceptualisation of empathy has been attributed to the German philosopher Robert Vischer (Vischer 1873). The original term used by Vischer was the German word ‘Einfühlung’, which, in literal translation, means ‘feeling into’. Later, Einfühlung evolved into a term that was used to refer to understanding the ‘mental states of other people’ (Srivastava and Das 2016). In the current literature, empathy is commonly conceptualised as the ability to share in and vicariously understand others’ experiences (Decety and Cowell 2014). Empathy is seen to play a key role in interpersonal relationships, including providing care and support for the wellbeing of others, and facilitating collaboration in team environments (Decety and Cowell 2014).

In this critical review, the evolution of the concept of empathy in the engineering field, and the relevance of empathy to various generic engineering attributes (including leadership, problem-solving, and design thinking) are discussed. Existing studies on how empathy can be incorporated in engineering education, as well as the critical role of motivation in the success of such efforts, are then discussed. The manuscript concludes with a brief description of work that is underway by the authors to explore how the concept of empathy can be embedded more effectively in engineering education, by focusing upon the factors that will motivate an individual to adopt an empathic approach to practice. It is hoped that by explicating these goals, further research into the motivational aspects of empathy can be stimulated also in other contexts.

2. Empathy as a construct

Historically, two distinct perspectives on the concept of empathy have emerged: (a) the first focuses upon individuals’ ability to understand the thoughts and feelings of another person, and (b) the second focuses upon individuals’ emotional reactions to the thoughts and feelings of others (Srivastava and Das 2016). These perspectives, therefore, reflect emphases either on the cognitive and the affective components of empathy respectively. In alignment with these perspectives, in both psychology and philosophy, empathy is commonly divided into these two forms.

Cognitive empathy refers to recognising and understanding the emotions of another individual (Ratka 2018), and typically involves putting oneself in the position of that individual to understand how and what they think, as well as the reasons for their perspectives. Affective empathy, in contrast, refers to the emotional reactions or feelings that arise within an individual in response to the emotions of another (Maibom 2017). Most of the research on empathy in work environments has focused upon the cognitive elements of empathy. The current manuscript also focuses on the cognitive perspective of empathy, although many of the propositions presented will also apply to the affective elements of empathy.

In recent decades, the concept of empathy has functioned as a driver for various lines of discovery, inspiring the conduct of innovative research into addressing global social issues (Nelson, Goodchild, and Wright 2002). Concurrently, the perceived responsibilities of engineers in society have expanded, which has called upon engineers to be more cognisant of the social and ethical implications of their work. It is now necessary for engineers to incorporate ethical reasoning (which is driven by empathic thinking) actively into complex engineering solutions that clearly address the social values and challenges of the communities they serve in the modern world.

3. Empathic engineering education

Empathy can be described as an enabling attribute for learning and skill development. Empathy helps learners to understand different perspectives, collaborate with others, and communicate effectively. In addition, in constructivist learning theories, learners are encouraged and motivated to take an active role in constructing their own knowledge, rather than being passive recipients of knowledge (Afroogh et al. 2021). This perspective calls attention to the important role that motivation will play in the development of empathic reasoning and behaviours, since it can enhance learners’ engagement, curiosity, and self-regulation, which are essential for empathic learning.

Empathy is a motivated phenomenon, in which one makes a choice to experience or avoid processing and understanding other people’s emotions (Zaki 2014). One example of how motivation can affect empathic thinking was provided in a study conducted by the Pennsylvania State University (Motivation and the Limits of Empathy 2023). In this study, the relationship between motivation and empathy was explored in the context of a large crisis (e.g. a natural disaster). Results indicated that people tended to demonstrate less empathy for multiple victims over a single victim of a large crisis, when helping would incur a financial cost. Other research has also suggested a potential link between motivations such as desire to avoid emotional exhaustion, and the level of empathy demonstrated by individuals (Motivation and the Limits of Empathy 2023).

The construct of motivation in the literature is somewhat contentious, but it is generally seen as the level of drive and direction an individual exhibits to engage in given actions (Reeve 2018). A distinction is often made between intrinsic motivation, defined by Deci and Ryan (1980) as a drive to act that exists in the absence of any apparent external contingency, and extrinsic motivation, which is a drive to act based on external forces or factors (e.g. anticipated rewards or punishments) (Deci and Ryan 1980). In general, enduring behaviour change has been found to be related positively to intrinsic, rather than extrinsic, motivation (Schunk 2014). As a result, initiatives to increase students’ engagement with given tasks generally focus on increasing intrinsic motivation levels (Schunk 2014).

Felaza et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional study of medical students in years 1–5 to explore the relationship between empathy and the ‘types’ of motivation that students had for entering the profession. The motivation ‘types’ for entering the profession represented combinations of internally created motives such as interest in the field (i.e. intrinsic motivation), and external motives such as pressure from family or status (i.e. controlled motivation). The combinations studied were (i) High Intrinsic High Controlled (HIHC); (ii) High Intrinsic Low Controlled (HILC); (iii) Low Intrinsic High Controlled (LIHC); and (iv) Low Intrinsic Low Controlled (LILC). Results indicated that students with High Intrinsic High Controlled motivation types exhibited higher empathy scores than did those with other motivation types. Furthermore, lower empathy scores were reported from motivation profiles with low intrinsic and low controlled motivation. These results provide empirical support for the notion that motivation and empathy are inherently entwined.

To ensure that engineers of the future adopt an empathic approach to practice, it will not be sufficient to provide courses on how this can be done – engineers must also be intrinsically motivated to learn about and adopt this approach in their practices. Therefore, it will be important in future to explore what motivates the use of empathic approaches in engineers. The value of intrinsic motivation in prompting more empathic approaches to work has been established in reviews of existing research (Oh and Roh 2022). However, how this form of motivation can be fostered in engineers may begin with engineering education. A small body of recent research has suggested that the promotion of intrinsic motivation in learning programmes may be linked to improved student learning attitudes, problem-solving abilities, and even empathetic abilities (Kim and Kim 2022; Parra-González et al. 2021). At this stage, however, in the area of engineering education, there is little evidence on how this particular type of motivation, and particularly with respect to empathy, can be enhanced in undergraduate classes.

The motivational framework of Expectancy Value Theory (EVT), developed by Eccles and associates (e.g. Eccles and Wigfield 2002) provides a basis for analysing the reasons why individuals are more or less motivated to adopt certain approaches or actions. EVT postulates that individuals’ overall motivation to engage in given actions or tasks (e.g. the level of effort they should invest) will vary with their perceptions of the likelihood they will succeed in their efforts (expectancy of success), and also with the value they place on the anticipated outcomes of these efforts (subjective task values) (Patrick et al. 2004).

Even when education programmes that are designed to enhance undergraduate engineers’ ability to adopt an empathic approach become more widespread, these efforts alone are unlikely to be sufficient to ensure that engineering graduates of the future will apply these learnings ultimately in their practices. Such an outcome will rely both on the graduates’ skills and their motivation to learn about, and adopt, an empathic approach in their professional lives. To determine how this can be facilitated through both pre- and in-service education programmes, we need then to understand the specific reasons why different engineers have varying levels of motivation to adopt empathic work approaches. Armed with this knowledge, it will then be possible for universities to identify mechanisms by which students, our practising engineers of tomorrow, can best be encouraged to adopt an empathic approach to their work.

4. The behavioural outcomes of empathy

Whilst there has been considerable discussion about the cognitive and affective components of empathy in the literature, less attention has yet been paid to the behavioural consequences of empathy – that is, the actions that are prompted by an individual’s cognitive and affective empathy. Definitions of the term empathy do not in any way prescribe particular actions that will be taken on the basis of an empathic understanding. These may vary based on the objectives of the stakeholders or the situation concerned.

Empathic actions (i.e. actions taken on the basis of understanding the emotions of another person) are typically depicted as prosocial responses to the plight of others (Kozakevich, Shamay-Tsoory, and Hertz 2021). This empathic behavioural response has been conceptualised in some previous works as care (e.g. Strobel et al. 2013). Understanding another person’s emotional state can also, however, facilitate behaviours and actions that do not reflect a prosocial intention. For example, understanding the emotional state of another person can be used to manipulate or undermine him or her in a competition, negotiation or conflict (Cuff et al. 2016). This underscores the importance of understanding the links between empathic understanding and ethics, and how these are likely to interact to drive subsequent behaviours.

While empathic understandings or feelings do not in themselves prescribe given actions or behaviours, they provide a critical foundation for eventual ethical actions. The nature of the actions taken by the individual in response to these understandings will depend heavily on the goals of the individual at the time. In this sense, the ability to empathise with others is a necessary, but not sufficient, tool for individuals in deciding upon the actions individuals may take in response to the thoughts and feelings of others. The actual decisions made will also depend upon the individual’s situational motivations, or what their desired outcomes are from the situation.

Based on the above arguments, motivation will play a key role in the process by which empathic understandings are applied to engineering work in two critical respects. First, motivation is necessary for an individual to adopt an empathic approach to interacting with others in the first instance. Second, motivation will determine the actions that will be taken on the basis of such understandings and feelings (e.g. prosocial, manipulative, or egocentric). The remainder of this manuscript focuses on prosocial forms of empathic action, that is, actions that not only reflect a clear understanding of the thoughts and feelings of others, but that are directed towards having a positive impact on others, and align with generally agreed frameworks on ethical conduct.

5. Relevance of empathic responding in engineering

Engineers have a responsibility not only to create innovative solutions to complex engineering problems, but also to protect the health, safety, and welfare of society at large in this process (Mitcham 2009; Strobel et al. 2013; Walther, Sochacka, and Miller 2019). To meet these responsibilities, engineers must develop a deep understanding of the perspectives and the needs of the society they serve, which in turn relies on high-level generic skills such as leadership, collaboration, and understanding (e.g. of stakeholders’ needs). All such skills are linked inextricably to an individual’s capacity to engage in empathy when interacting with others (Ratka 2018).

Taking an empathic approach (i.e. one that is grounded in a clear understanding of the emotions of others, combined with a prosocial orientation) may thus play a critical role in determining how impactful various generic engineering attributes and competencies (e.g. leadership skills, problem solving and teamwork) are in practice. This section considers potential links between empathy and various generic engineering attributes (i.e. non-technical attributes that are transferable across contexts and subdisciplines) (Chapman and O’Neill 2011), focusing upon how empathy can enable and facilitate the application of these critical attributes in engineering work.

5.1. Ethical professional practice

The work of engineers is heavily regulated and governed by both written and unwritten codes of professional conduct. For engineers to act consistently in compliance with these codes, however, it is necessary for them both to understand difficult social and engineering challenges, and also, to be motivated to learn and take actions based on these understandings. With the challenges that societies face in the modern world, it is often not enough for engineers to apply ethical reflection in their daily work. Ideal engineering solutions today need also to consider impacts on the broader contexts in which the solutions will be applied. This can require considerations related to the environment (e.g. carbon emissions), local communities, diversity, and public perceptions. These must, in turn, be considered alongside other factors related to cost, schedules, and technical excellence. This requires a very different approach to the ones taken in traditional problem-solving engineering (Wilson and Mukhopadhyaya 2022). To comply with the complex ethical conduct requirements imposed upon engineering work today, modern engineers need to have both the skills and the motivation to take an empathic approach to solving problems of importance to the communities that they serve.

5.2. Empathic leadership

Leadership is a core generic attribute in most professions and is essential for most professional engineers. Tzouramani (2017) describes ‘Empathic Leadership’ as a skill that stems from understanding our connections with one another in society and the belief that we have survived because of our ability to empathise with others and respond accordingly. Empathy is likely to play a critical role in effective leadership in the following ways.

5.2.1. Emotional trust

To be an effective leader, it is vital that leaders create a sense of trust in their teams. For example, research has shown that the key to empathic leadership is understanding the needs of the customer or the needs of the team, by building ‘emotional trust’ first (Moore 2009). By recognising concerns and acknowledging perspectives, and building emotional trust, an empathic leader will be able to relate to, support and influence their team more effectively. Leaders who take this approach are likely to have more influence and support from their team in making their decisions, as the team will trust the leader and will reciprocate by considering the leader’s needs and concerns.

5.2.2. Effective talent utilisation and retention

The ability to appreciate and utilise others’ talents and recognise the value in others’ perspectives when solving problems are true traits of empathic leadership (Tzouramani 2017). Leaders can respond empathically by taking the time and effort to understand the perspectives, needs and challenges of a team before taking any actions. Issah (2018) goes on to say that empathy is an important skill that leaders need in order to understand and retain talent. Leaders who are empathic are more likely to invest their time in understanding others’ perspectives before providing support or direction (Issah and Zimmerman 2016). In return, team members feel valued and understood. Empathic thinking will thus enable effective leadership styles, that will be conducive to longer-term retention of diverse members.

5.3. Problem-solving

Problem solving lies at the heart of engineering work, and a significant part of problem solving involves defining the problem and understanding the needs of end users of given solutions. This aligns with findings that problem-solving skills and empathy are significantly related (Imece and Cansever 2019). Some of the mechanisms by which empathic understanding can affect problem solving efficacy in engineering work are as follows.

5.3.1. Communication

When new graduates are faced with real world problems, they often face difficulties in applying problem solving skills, because good problem solving is a highly complex and multifaceted process (Price et al. 2021). Effective communication, which relies heavily upon having sound empathic thinking skills, is a critical element of problem solving for engineers at all points in their careers (Imece and Cansever 2019). When engineers have both the ability to think empathically and also possess sound communication skills, they will be able to engage, share with, and appreciate the perspectives of clients and end users more effectively. This is critical for the development of successful engineering solutions.

5.3.2. Problem framing

Empathy can act as a tool to facilitate problem solving, particularly at the point of problem framing. In a study by Walther et al. (2019) on whether undergraduate engineering students understood the concept of empathy within the engineering field, the importance of empathy was often recognised as a means to understand problem contexts. In particular, empathy was seen by many respondents as a ‘tool’ to view problems from diverse perspectives. Framing a problem effectively, taking into consideration not only what end users or stakeholders require from a solution, but why they have these specific needs, can facilitate the development of successful, feasible and even unconventional solutions to complex engineering problems.

5.3.3. Wicked problems

The nature of the problems that engineers must address has changed rapidly in line with new social, political, economic, and humanitarian issues that the developing world has faced in recent years. Society has looked to engineers to solve many of these problems, and/or to consider such challenges in their engineering designs. Almost half a century ago, Rittel and Webber (1973) described two types of problems that engineers faced: ‘tame’ and ‘wicked’ problems. Traditionally, the problems that engineers are taught to address are ‘tame’ problems (i.e. problems that are easily defined and that have a definitive solution). Conversely, what Rittel and Webber referred to as ‘wicked’ problems were social systems problems that are not only complex and interconnected, but relatively ill-defined.

Solving ‘wicked’ problems relies heavily upon having a sound understanding of human behaviour (Wilson and Mukhopadhyaya 2022) and emerging social issues such as climate change, poverty, and global pandemics. To solve the latter type of problem, it is generally also necessary to understand the views of multiple stakeholders with conflicting value positions. This will, in turn, rely heavily upon the skills and motivation of the engineer to empathise with, and act in response to, the views and feelings of other stakeholders.

5.4. Collaboration and teamwork

Collaboration and teamwork are key attributes in any field of engineering, and indeed in most professions. Encouraging an efficient and progressive team environment at work requires not only technical knowledge but also, well established emotional intelligence, including attributes such as self and social awareness and empathy (Luca and Tarricone 2001).

Team-based work that includes individuals with diverse sets of skills and thinking styles will generally produce the best results in an engineering team. Empathy may foster the application of these attributes in various ways to make them more successful and impactful. In this sense, empathic thinking and empathic approaches to interaction can act as positive enablers for teamwork and collaboration attributes to flourish.

5.4.1. Building rapport

Responding with an empathic approach within a team can assist to build positive rapport amongst team members. Additionally, speaking up, sharing mindsets, and supporting team members on a personal and emotional level is increasingly encouraged and celebrated. As employees spend a considerable part of their lives in their work environments, there is incentive to ensure that employees have access to emotional support and mentally healthy environments that are supportive of all team members. Empathy is a key attribute in creating such work environments. Understanding, reflecting upon, and relating to colleagues’ feelings is essential in establishing the kinds of inclusive environments that are needed for teams to succeed.

5.4.2. Conflict resolution

Empathy is not only beneficial for creating positive work environments, but is also crucial for effective conflict resolution in teams (Luca and Tarricone 2001). Interpersonal conflicts within teams can impact team morale, collaborative problem solving and overall performance. Having the ability to address conflicts is thus critical for maintaining a well-functioning team (Luca and Tarricone 2001). In these situations, having the ability to understand and empathise with others, as well as taking prosocial actions based on these understandings, is essential for successfully addressing team conflicts, and can turn adversarial situations or relationships into collaborative partnerships (Luca and Tarricone 2001).

5.5. Design thinking

As the nature and complexity of the issues that challenge society expand, so too must the creativity and feasibility of solutions developed to address these issues. To meet this challenge, innovative engineering solutions must be based on problem solving that is clearly focused on meeting end user needs, that is, encouraging engineers to be design thinkers. Blizzard (2013) defines design thinkers broadly as individuals who are invested in tackling society’s economic, environmental, and social challenges. The characteristics that distinguish design thinkers include empathy, amongst other attributes (Brown 2008).

Design thinking is defined as a process that enables problem-solving through empathy with users. More specifically, the distinguishing attributes of design thinking include creativity, design empathy, and integrative thinking. The five stages of design thinking outlined by Ahmad et al. (2017) are Empathise, Define, Ideate, Prototype and Test. In Ahmad et al’.s model, these provide the basic building blocks of the design thinking process. In their empirical study of engineering students’ motivations and learning strategies, Ahmad et al. evaluated whether a design thinking approach would improve students’ learning motivation levels. Results indicated that introducing a design thinking approach in various courses increased students’ learning motivation, as well as their performance, and that design thinking could be effectively utilised to improve student learning (Ahmad et al. 2017).

5.5.1. Creativity

Although not always associated with engineering, creativity is an attribute that is becoming increasingly critical for modern engineers. As the social issues faced by the world today evolve, so too must the approaches taken by engineers to problem solving. Galloway (2004) noted that many engineering graduates lack the abilities and skills needed to develop creative engineering solutions. Thus, it is important that students not only learn the technical skills they must have to perform future engineering roles, but that they also learn how to develop creative and innovative problem solutions (Galloway 2004). Given that these solutions will rely upon viewing problems in new ways, as well as recognising the needs of multiple stakeholders and any potential barriers to implementing the solutions, empathy may play also a vital role in driving creativity and innovation in future engineering workforces.

5.5.2. Design empathy

The concept of design empathy, that is, understanding the emotions and needs of end users and basing designs on these understandings, has gained considerable traction in the field of engineering recently (Salminen, Hamari, and Ravaja 2021). This concept may be particularly valuable when designs are required to enhance end users’ experiences (e.g. making an existing product more user-friendly) (Salminen, Hamari, and Ravaja 2021). In these situations, effective solutions will require the engineer to put him or herself in the position of the end user, and consider the viability of alternative solutions from multiple perspectives. Empathic approaches are thus critical for developing engineering solutions that take into account, concurrently, end users, global challenges, and implementation challenges.

5.5.3. Integrative thinking

Recent successes in engineering specialisations such as ‘solar engineering’ illustrate the extent to which engineering technologies have been applied to address real social issues, in this case, climate change (Irvine et al. 2016). In addressing such issues, creativity alone is never sufficient – the ultimate success of any proposed solution to these issues will depend equally on the feasibility of that solution. The success that solar geoengineering research has enjoyed is attributable not only to the creative approaches that have been taken to developing solar technologies, but also, to the holistic perspective that has been taken in such designs, including considerations about the feasibility of alternative solutions (Irvine et al. 2016). Empathic perspective taking plays a key role in these more holistic perspectives, because empathy necessarily drives the engineer towards developing designs that are optimally applicable and adaptable for end users.

6. Previous research on improving empathy in engineering education

As the field of engineering moves towards applying more holistic approaches to address rapidly evolving social issues, it is likely that engineers of tomorrow will need to adopt an empathic approach to succeed in their work. Although literature around the topic of empathy in engineering remains scarce, the concept is not new. In particular, Strobel and associates (e.g. Hess et al. 2017b) have now generated a significant body of research into the concept of empathy in engineering, drawing upon the existing literature, academic staff employed in engineering faculties, and also, the perspectives of practicing engineers.

One such study (Strobel et al. 2013) focused upon engineers’ perspectives on empathy as it applied to engineering practice, including how empathy and care were seen to be related to engineering practice by engineering faculty members and practicing engineers. Small group interviews were used as the primary method of data collection. Results indicated that practising engineers believed that the adoption of a more holistic approach to engineering education, with a focus on empathy, could reform societal perceptions of engineering as a discipline, as well as increasing its positive impact on a global basis. This, in turn, would attract students of varied interests and skills to the field. Thematic analyses also, however, highlighted the fact that the importance of empathy and care was rarely recognised explicitly by academic or professional engineers.

Promising work has also been done more recently to identify the potential benefits of incorporating the concept of empathy and related notions, such as perspective-taking, in engineering education courses. Hess et al. (2017a) conducted a study with students enrolled in an engineering ethics course, in which they aimed to identify aspects of the course that contributed to changes in students’ perspective-taking tendencies, and also, to explore the nature of these changes. Results indicated that ‘sharing diverse perspectives’ was an effective approach during peer interactions (Hess et al., 2017a). While studies of this kind have appeared in the literature, in relative terms, the use of empathic perspective taking as an educative tool in engineering has lagged significantly behind its use in other areas, such as medicine and psychology. In light of this, the potential benefits of incorporating perspective taking into engineering curriculum development have yet to be fully realised. There are several frameworks that have currently been introduced in engineering education, that includes empathy as a teachable competency (e.g. Kouprie and Sleeswijk Visser 2009; Walther, Miller, and Sochacka 2017).

One recent framework which focuses upon integrating empathy into engineering education was posed by Afroogh et al. (2021). This framework focuses upon the question of how the concept of empathy can be incorporated into engineering education courses through the application of specific types of analytic tools (subjective, systems, and critical analysis) and particular learning approaches. These are as follows:

1. Situated Learning, which places significance on the relationship with community through participation. Situated learning encourages engineering students to engage with communities their engineering solutions will be created for (Afroogh et al. 2021). In this community-based learning approach, students are encouraged to work in the situation for which they are doing engineering design for in order to experience empathic engineering (Afroogh et al. 2021).

2. Transformative learning, in which the learners’ values, beliefs, and frames of reference are changed through different phases of critical thinking (Afroogh et al. 2021). This form of learning is greatly focus on becoming. Similarly, Clinical engineering in this framework not only includes real-world engineering work and collaboration with stakeholders but also reflection of how the learner’s efforts are impactful. This in turn facilitates the development of both cognitive and affective empathy skills (Afroogh et al. 2021).

3. Design based learning and constructionist theory, which emphasise the need to design instructional experiences that encourage students to approach learning not as acquisition of knowledge or skills, but as the collective, collaborative, and individual construction of knowledge.

Afroogh et al’.s (2021) framework captures multiple learning models that can be applied to different learning groups and combinations of models that could be effective in creating a holistic curriculum for empathic engineering.

An alternative perspective was offered by Shannon et al. (2019), proposing a multi-cycle model of empathy in engineering which identifies self-awareness as the first step to empathy. This model combines previously introduced frameworks, cycle of inquiry and the empathy cycle. The Cycle of Inquiry, adapted to student learning and reflection, has three phases in this model (Shannon, Jones, and Mina 2019):

1. ‘Identification’: This is the phase in which students understand the course topic and how their learning practices are applicable (Prabhu Gaunkar et al, 2018).

2. ‘Reflection’: This is the phase in which student will have initial solutions and learn through making mistakes (Prabhu Gaunkar et al, 2018).

3. ‘Personalisation’: This is the phase in which students will think in more depth solutions as well as their beliefs, which enables them to make connections and question their beliefs (Prabhu Gaunkar et al, 2018).

The Empathy Cycle adopted in this model, originally proposed by Barrett-Lennard (1981) comprises four key steps:

1. Empathetic Attention (active listening)

2. Empathetic Resonance (shared emotional state)

3. Expressed Empathy (expresses their resonance), and

4. Received Empathy (confirmation of shared emotional state)

Shannon et al. (2019)‘s study explores how engineering students improve their cycles of empathy (Shannon, Jones, and Mina 2019). Student self-reflections at the end of the teaching period, from three courses are collected and analysed. The courses had an overarching goal of not “teaching” in the traditional sense, but to facilitate students’ learning through games, discussions and more opportunities to reflect. The data from student reflections revealed five themes associated with empathy; Self-Awareness, How I Learn, Exploration, Appreciation, and Community. Additionally, the study concluded that student’s appreciated courses that help them form communities through group discussions, courses that enable an understanding of their learning habits through reflection (Shannon, Jones, and Mina 2019).

The study presents interesting links between self-awareness and its relevance in the empathy cycle. However, further research is required to provide a framework for how specifically empathy can be identified and included in engineering programmes to progress away from traditional curriculum and teaching methods.

Additionally, there is opportunity for framework to be applicable to industry practitioners. The goal of adopting such a framework in engineering education would be to prepare students for their professional lives in industry. It is, therefore, imperative that such frameworks also be shaped by the views and experiences of industry experts and practitioners.

With an established empathy education framework, the next steps in the empathic engineering research will be to embed empathic learning into practice and develop a better understanding of how we can translate learnings from empathic education to engineering work. Behavioural aspects of empathy, or the empathic response, will be critical in this respect. The behavioural aspects of empathy will rely heavily upon on the individual’s attitudes (Buckman, Tulsky, and Rodin 2011) or motivations to take an empathic approach.

In order to fully embed empathic thinking and put empathic learning into coursework and application, a level of student autonomy must be afforded. A curriculum developed or enhanced with an understanding of why different engineers are more or less motivated to adopt empathic approaches, is more likely to see any learnings translated into practice. An understanding of the motivational factors that drive empathic approaches to practice would therefore provide valuable input to the current progress that has been made in the field. This approach may see engineering graduates better equipped to implement the concept successfully and sustainably. Depending on the motivational factors, different groups may require the concept to be introduced differently.

7. Future research

As the primary and pressing issues in society have shifted, engineering as a field has had to evolve. Priorities in the field have shifted along with the needs of society at large, leading to an increased emphasis on pressing issues that concern the world, such as climate change, sustainability, and global pandemics. Empathy is likely to be a critical attribute for engineers who must work in this context, not only in its own right, but as an enabler for other attributes that are necessary in the engineering profession. Some key attributes for the engineering profession, such as leadership, teamwork, and good problem-solving skills, will be further enhanced by adopting an empathic approach.

To ensure successful integration of empathic thinking in engineering, there should be a greater emphasis on the concept of empathy within educational curricula, particularly on forms of empathy that are most applicable to engineering practice. As the desirable skills of engineers are shifting, engineering education must also evolve to keep up with the progress in the field. However, for engineers of the future adopt an empathic approach to practice, engineering curricula will not be sufficient – practicing engineers must also be intrinsically motivated to learn about and adopt this approach in their practices.

Applying Eccle’s EVT framework would enable the identification of specific reasons why engineers across different disciplines and at various stages are more or less intrinsically and extrinsically motivated to engage in empathic approaches to practice. For example, despite the growing body of literature on the importance of empathy in effective engineering work, evidence suggests that less experienced engineers may not fully recognise this importance (Hess et al. 2017b). Applying the EVT framework, such engineers may be less motivated intrinsically to engage in empathy because they assign it a low utility value. Armed with such knowledge, future empathy in engineering education courses could be better equipped to ensure that the utility of taking an empathic approach is emphasised to students. This is an example of how research into motivational factors can drive how empathy is embedded into engineering practice.

Research currently underway by the authors is directed towards addressing this broad goal. One of the studies that is currently being conducted focuses upon exploring the role of empathy in engineering practice in the views of multiple stakeholders, through a detailed study of the lived experiences and observations of practicing engineers within Australian industries and universities. A narrative inquiry approach is being adopted in this study, which aims to capture how individuals understand this phenomenon in their everyday lives, through ‘stories’ of experiences or observations (Savin-Baden and Niekerk 2007). A second study underway by the authors is exploring how the concept of empathy is understood by engineers with different levels of experience. This study draws upon phenomenographic methods to explore variations in the conceptions that individuals have of the construct of empathy, within the engineering field. The data for this study will comprise responses from a large sample of engineers from a variety of disciplines, industries, and levels of experience.

A third, large-scale study by the authors is exploring the correlation between a variety of demographic factors and motivation to use empathic thinking. This study draws upon an online survey to explore engineers’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to use empathy in their practices, and whether the reasons for this motivation (based on the EVT model), vary with: (i) level of experience in the field; (ii) engineering discipline; (iii) industry; and (iv) gender. It is hoped that understanding the motivational factors within each subgroup explored in this study will create more insight on the subgroups of engineers who are likely to be more or less motivated to use empathic thinking.

The research underway will assist in capturing an important step in the process of embedding the use of empathic thinking in the engineering field. Determining the main reasons why engineers are more or less motivated to use an empathic approach will be the foundation to drive this concept in the field.

The concept of empathy in the engineering field is evolving. A steady growth in empirical studies into how empathy can be incorporated in engineering education has been seen over the past two decades. Empathy may be an important foundational ability in various other generic engineering attributes (including leadership, problem-solving, and design thinking). However, encouraging future generations of engineers to apply a more empathic approach to their work will rely heavily on being able to increase their intrinsic motivation to do so. In order to achieve this, further research into different aspects of motivation and how these relate to empathy is needed. Work underway by the authors will explore how the concept of empathy can be embedded more effectively in engineering education, by focusing upon the factors that motivate individuals to adopt an empathic approach to practice.

Based on the arguments put within this manuscript, a cultural change will be needed to fully embed empathic thinking into application within the field of engineering, and thus to gain the most from the concept in practice. A level of autonomy will be required to put empathic learning into action. Therefore, it is important to explore the motivational factors that drive this shift in thinking, and more specifically, the reasons why different engineers are more or less motivated to adopt empathic approaches. Further research into this area will make a significant contribution to ensuring empathy is embedded sustainably into engineering practice. Embedding empathy into engineering should not only produce the short-term benefits seen in previous studies, but also, would be a significant step towards redefining the ideologies that drive engineering as a profession.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ravishi De Zoysa

Ravishi De Zoysa is a doctoral research candidate with the University of Western Australia. Her research interests are in engineering education curriculum, engineering practice in industry, and educational psychology. She holds a Master of Professional Engineering (Electrical and Electronic) from the University of Western Australia. She is also a practicing engineering professional, within the Mining sector in Australia, for over 5 years.

Sally Male

Sally Male is the Director of the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, and Professor of Engineering and Technology Education, in the Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology at the University of Melbourne. She previously held the Chair in Engineering Education at The University of Western Australia where she is now an Adjunct Professor. Sally holds a Bachelor of Engineering (Hons) (Electrical Engineering) and PhD on competencies required by graduating engineers. Sally’s research interests are in higher education curriculum development, employability, work integrated learning, and gender inclusion. Sally is a Fellow of Engineers Australia, and Editor-in-Chief of the Australasian Journal of Engineering Education.

Elaine Chapman

Elaine Chapman Associate Professor Elaine Chapman has an undergraduate degree and a PhD in psychology. She has taught in the areas of child and educational psychology, assessment, quantitative research design, and statistics. She is passionate about child and educational psychology, and in particular, about enhancing the lives of children and youth in the affective domain. She has supervised many Doctoral and Master’s students who have joined her group to pursue research in this area.