Over the years, I’ve come to believe that a machine shouldn’t be measured by its performance alone.

Looking back on my career, the biggest change hasn’t been my technical skills. It’s the way I think about machines.

Early in my career, I believed that a better machine was simply a more capable one.

Higher speed. Higher precision. More features. Larger safety margins.

If a machine could do more, I assumed it was a better design.

Experience gradually changed that belief.

After equipment was delivered, I often spoke with customers to understand how it was actually being used. Those conversations taught me something no design review ever could.

Some carefully designed features were rarely used. Some performance targets that required significant engineering effort made little difference in daily operation. Yet every additional feature added complexity, cost, development time, and potential failure points.

That made me ask a different question:

Are we designing for performance, or are we designing for value?

Today, I start projects differently.

I don’t begin with specifications. I begin with the application.

Where will this machine be used? Who will operate it? What job does it need to accomplish? What problems are people actually trying to solve?

I’ve learned that the value of a machine is not defined by its specifications. It’s defined by how well it helps people accomplish their work.

In many cases, reliability matters more than peak performance. Ease of use matters more than additional features. A simple design that consistently performs its job often creates more value than a complex one that rarely uses its full capability.

I also see the engineer’s role differently today.

Earlier in my career, I thought being a good engineer meant delivering exactly what the customer requested. Today, I believe it starts with understanding why the request exists.

Customers know their business. Engineers understand technology. The best solutions emerge when those two perspectives come together.

Sometimes that means asking more questions. Sometimes it means proposing a simpler solution—not because the original idea was wrong, but because there may be a better way to achieve the same goal.

If someone asked me today what makes a good machine, my answer would be very different from the one I would have given twenty years ago.

When I was younger, I wanted to build more capable machines. Today, I care much more about whether a machine genuinely helps people do their work.

To me, that’s what engineering is really about.

A machine shouldn’t be measured by performance alone. It should be measured by the value it creates for the people who depend on it.