Time to Reboot: Civil & Structural Engineering Practices in the Building Sector

Every building has a story, and often, the foundation of that story begins with a civil or structural engineer. These professionals are the unsung heroes behind the strength, safety, and durability of our homes, offices, malls, and bridges. However, in India, the narrative is not always as robust as the structures we rely on. Across towns and cities, it is common to hear about buildings developing cracks just a few years after construction. Walls seep, columns flake, roads wash away, and tragically, some structures even collapse. While the reasons may vary from project to project, many issues trace back to systemic challenges that civil and structural engineers in India frequently encounter—or inadvertently perpetuate. Let us peel back the layers of brick, concrete, and steel to uncover the underlying issues.

Imagine you are designing a building on paper, comfortably seated in an office that may be miles away from the actual site. You crunch numbers, run software simulations, and finalize the structural layout. However, what you may not realize—or may not be informed of—is that the ground at the site is marshy, the climate is humid year-round, the area is prone to landslides, and skilled masons and contractors are unavailable to handle the intricate design or the sophisticated materials you’ve chosen. This disconnect between what exists on paper and what is present on the ground represents one of the most significant challenges in the field. Designing without accurate and detailed site data, or disregarding it altogether, poses a serious issue in building design and construction practices. Engineers often rely on information provided by owners, EPC contractors, or architects/principal consultants, which may not always be complete, relevant, or reliable. Civil and structural engineers typically work behind the scenes and may not put forth sufficient effort to gather comprehensive site-specific data for various reasons. Frequently, they select a structural system based merely on incomplete information and assumptions. The outcome? A system that appears sound in theory but fails in practice. While there are mechanisms in place to address these factors, engineers must adhere to them. However, since many civil and structural engineers operate as subconsultants, these critical considerations are often overlooked.

Software tools have undeniably transformed the field of engineering. They aid in analyzing loads, designing intricate systems, and ensuring adherence to safety codes. However, there is a caveat—many professionals have become so reliant on these tools that they often overlook fundamental principles. While software excels at solving problems, it can only do so when provided with accurate inputs. Without a solid understanding of how buildings behave—how loads are transmitted and how materials respond over time—engineers risk misusing the software and generating flawed results. This situation is comparable to relying on a GPS without knowing basic directions; if the map is incorrect, you will inevitably become lost. Many newly graduated engineers are tech-savvy and proficient in using software, yet they often lack the necessary experience and foundational knowledge. This gap is a significant cause for concern. Additionally, the costs associated with software tools, licenses, and annual maintenance contracts (AMC) can be substantial. Consequently, some engineers resort to using pirated or outdated software that does not comply with the latest code provisions, ultimately resulting in unsafe and non-compliant designs. It is crucial for engineers to recognize that they are not merely mechanics or software operators; they are engineers. Software should serve as a tool to assist them in their professional work, particularly for complex computations.

Civil engineering does not work in isolation. It is deeply tied to architecture, electrical systems, plumbing, HVAC, and construction practices. Yet, many engineers particularly structural engineers stick strictly to their silos. They might not understand an architect’s intricate designs or how service ducts affect their design and details. This lack of coordination (as BIM is still not that prevalent in most projects) leads to drawings that clash, details that do not match, and contractors left scratching their heads. When teams on-site modify designs to “make things work,” they often end up compromising safety without even realizing it. Civil and structural engineers need to understand the basics of other disciplines to incorporate them into their designs and offer alternative solutions to architects and service engineers. They also need to consider if the design or details provided are construction friendly. What is the use of a design that is difficult, if not impossible, to implement? Cross-disciplinary knowledge is crucial for creating good designs and for an engineer to be successful in the profession. Unfortunately, our education system is largely oblivious to this need.

In the field of medicine, no surgeon undertakes a complex operation without consulting their peers. Similarly, in journalism, editors meticulously revise every piece of content. However, in Indian engineering firms, peer review is often considered a luxury rather than a standard practice. Very few organizations have established systems in place where one engineer’s design is critically evaluated by another before execution. Occasionally, external academic institutions are engaged to “vet” designs, but this process frequently serves more as a formality than as a means to enhance safety or quality. These institutions typically lack real-world project experience and do not delve into the practical nuances of engineering. Consequently, such reviews are often conducted merely to satisfy regulatory requirements rather than to provide meaningful value. Moreover, obtaining these reviews from designated academic institutions can be time-consuming and financially burdensome for project owners, yet government authorities insist on their necessity. Often, peer reviews devolve into fault-finding exercises that lead to delays. Nevertheless, there is a pressing need to cultivate a more constructive practice in this area. The IS -18299: 2023 standard from BIS can be instrumental in addressing these concerns.

There is a long-standing disconnect between engineers who design and those who build. Designers often never step foot on-site, missing the opportunity to see how their details work in practice. Meanwhile, site engineers, under pressure to finish quickly modify things without fully grasping the original intent. The consequences? Reinforcement details get tweaked, and columns and beams may shift. Accountability becomes blurred because the site changes never make it back to the original design team. Owners and contractors are also complicit in this. There is no harm in revising or altering designs and details in view of site situations, but approval of designers is must. As-built drawings must be prepared and kept for record. Unfortunately, this is not practiced, and as-built drawings are often missing for future reference.

India churns out thousands of civil engineering graduates every year. But how many are job-ready? The truth is, very few. Many colleges do not offer enough hands-on exposure, and the curriculum remains outdated. Most civil engineers simply lack basic domain knowledge. The situation for postgraduates is even worse. I recently chaired an interview panel to recruit civil engineers for a prestigious government body, and the panel was aghast at the quality of applicants. For many young engineers, survival becomes the priority—upskilling takes a back seat. The profession demands hard work but often does not reward it adequately, making it harder for serious talent to stay and grow. Even consultants receive very low fees for their work, which means they are also not in a position to pay well to their employed engineers. This reflects in the quality of services. Interestingly, there is an oversupply of engineers and a shortage of competent, employable engineers.

Standards and building codes are vital for ensuring safety. However, in India, these documents are becoming increasingly complex, with minimal support available for understanding them. Currently, there are no straightforward handbooks or explanatory commentaries. Engineers frequently struggle to interpret vague clauses and often rely on hearsay rather than thoroughly reading and comprehending the codes themselves. For young professionals, navigating this landscape feels like a maze without a guide. Even experienced engineers may overlook updates or misinterpret regulations, which can lead to significant errors in construction. While professional institutions offer refresher courses and capacity-building programs, these initiatives are insufficient to address the challenges at hand. While having robust codes is essential, ensuring compliance with these codes is far more critical for guaranteeing the safety of buildings.

For many building owners, hiring an engineer often prioritizes compliance over competence. They seek professionals who can stamp drawings, certify documents, and facilitate approvals. Unfortunately, qualities such as competence, experience, and integrity are frequently overlooked. The lowest bidder typically prevails in this environment. This relentless pursuit of inexpensive certifications fosters a perilous culture where engineers are perceived as mere rubber stamps rather than valued collaborators. When subpar designs or shortcuts are introduced, accountability is elusive—until a failure occurs. This issue is further aggravated by the oversupply of inadequately prepared engineers holding master's or PhD degrees, which have diminished in relevance within the current landscape.

Finally, we arrive at the core issue—ethics. The civil engineering profession in India lacks regulation. With land and development being state subjects, each authority and local body implements its own regulations, leading to a fragmented system devoid of competence-based registration or licensing. There is no governing body to oversee professional conduct or mandate continuous learning. In the absence of these essential checks and balances, shortcuts become prevalent, and ethical standards are often sidelined. While some firms and individuals maintain high standards, they frequently operate in isolation, working against a prevailing culture of compromise. Civil and structural engineers must prioritize foundational principles and embrace new computational tools, such as BIM and AI/ML, to enhance precision, efficiency, and future readiness. However, there is no substitute for a strong ethical framework.

India is swiftly shaping its future. To guarantee that our homes, schools, hospitals, and bridges endure the test of time, we must focus on their design & construction, not merely their aesthetics. Civil and structural engineers are not just professionals with calculators—they are the guardians of safety, the architects of progress, and the storytellers who weave narratives in steel and stone. It is imperative that we recognize their vital role and empower them to thrive by transforming the systems in which they operate.

MANOJ MITTAL-JULY 26,2025|NOIDA

© This blog post is the intellectual property of MANOJ MITTAL. Unauthorized use or reproduction is prohibited.