Still Fixing Your Team's Drawings? How Engineering Leaders Stop Heroic Engineering and Get Their Time Back

Engineering leaders can stop redrawing their team's sheets by sending the fix back with a clear comment and a check, and stepping in only when risk or timing demands it. In this episode, Mike Groel of MES explained why taking the file feels fast but costs more over time, and offered a working rule for when to coach and when to intervene.

Why does taking the file back feel right but cost so much?

Taking the file feels faster because you see the answer, but it leaves the designer without the lesson, so the same mistake can come back. Mike admitted he catches himself doing this often.

He described the pull plainly: you grab the drawing, you feel in control, and it feels good. But a leader who wants to grow into a team lead, partner or division head has to learn to teach others and expand their leverage.

The example on the show was a fictional parking lot grading plan. Runoff heads toward a building door with an ADA ramp. The lead changes the grades, and the designer never checks the flow path, so the problem returns on the next sheet.

What does heroic engineering actually cost?

It costs the project budget, your capacity and your team's growth. Mike and his business coach call this habit heroic engineering. We covered four costs.

Unplanned rework eats into a fixed fee. A certified engineer's time carries a higher labor cost than support staff time, so the budget gets used up faster.

Client decisions wait while you redraw. Corrections also queue behind one person, which means you finish fewer projects.

Mike also pointed to the career side. The easy, familiar task feels good, but your growth comes from the deeper work that only you can do. He recommended Cal Newport's books on that point.

The slide advice was to compare the full review cycle, including the next revision, not just the single fix.

How should a lead respond to a bad sheet?

Choose among four responses based on risk, experience and review time. Two of them work well for building a team.

The first is to take over and finish the correction yourself. The second is a vague note that leaves the diagnosis open. Neither one teaches much.

The third is an actionable comment that defines the check. The fourth is to coach together and let the designer make the change. In either case, the lead reviews the result.

Mike also suggested a simple question when a junior hands in work quickly: is this the best work you could do? It prompts a second look before you ever review it.

When should the lead step in instead?

Step in when there is urgent risk or the issue needs expert judgment. Otherwise, let the designer revise when the basis is clear and there is time to review.

When the designer revises, return the fix along with the check, then verify the revision. When the lead intervenes, resolve the issue and explain why, followed by required review and follow-up.

Mike told us to weigh the situation and the sensitivity. Can this wait a day? Would a delay make the client miss a critical submittal, such as a planning and zoning or city council meeting?

Trickle-down effects matter too. Raising a building can change cover on a water pipe, shift a storm inlet, create a conflict with sanitary sewer, and update the background for the erosion control plan. Walk the designer through those.

What makes a comment useful?

A useful redline names the issue, its impact and what to return. Vague notes leave the designer guessing.

Compare two grading comments. "Fix the drainage" states no impact and no return. "Flow reaches the east door" names ponding at the entrance and asks for revised grades and the flow path.

The fire-lane example works the same way. The truck path crosses the inside curb, so emergency access is unresolved. The comment asks the designer to confirm the vehicle, revise the geometry and return a swept path.

Mike noted that a designer may shift curves without moving the fire lane striping, and may not realize the sheet will be rejected. The designer shows the check, and the lead verifies it.

What should be in place before the next assignment?

Set up three things before the work starts: a clear standard, time to revise and review, and feedback that explains the decision.

Mike said his team is refining how a proposal reaches staff, with examples and the exact scope, so the rules for the work are clear. The schedule is then worked backwards from the due date.

His challenge for the week was to pick one drawing, name the problem and the check you need back, assign the fix, set a return time and review the result.

When the team is full, the lead's habit of fixing a designer's drawings is one sign you need more capacity. MES supports site civil, water and wastewater design while your lead sets direction and reviews the work.

Watch the full episode

The full episode is on YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/f_capZEzzxg?feature=share

Frequently asked questions

What is heroic engineering?

It is the habit of a senior engineer taking over a team member's drawing to finish it personally. It feels quick, but it uses the fixed fee, queues work behind one person and skips the lesson.

What makes a good redline comment?

It names the issue, its impact and what the designer should return. For example, flow reaches the east door, causing ponding at the entrance, so return revised grades and the flow path.

When should a lead fix the drawing instead of the designer?

When there is urgent risk or the issue needs expert judgment. Resolve it, explain why, and follow up with required review.

I'm a project manager at a small civil firm in Texas and I keep redrawing my junior designer's grading sheets late at night. How do I stop without letting quality slip?

Pick one drawing this week. Name the problem and the check you need back, assign the fix, set a return time and review the result. Give the designer a clear standard and time to revise.

I lead a design team and a client deadline is close, so I'm tempted to take over a sheet with a fire lane error. When is that the right call?

If waiting could cause a missed critical submittal or the issue needs expert judgment, step in, resolve it and explain why. If there is time, send a comment asking for the vehicle, revised geometry and swept path.

How do I know if my team needs more design capacity instead of better feedback?

If you are pulled back into CAD even after giving clear comments and review time, capacity may be the issue. The show suggested outside support for site civil, water and wastewater design in that case.

Related Resources

• Why Speed Is a Design Constraint: How Modern Engineering Firms Deliver Infrastructure Faster
• McKinney’s 2026 Engineering Design Manual: Utility Changes Developers Need to Catch Before Plan Submittal
• Building AI Infrastructure for an Engineering Firm: The Complete Data Architecture

Is your team's overflow pulling you back into CAD?

MES supports engineering firms with site civil, water and wastewater design so your lead can set direction and review the work. Talk with us about overflow support.

We specialize in:

• Engineering firm overflow support
• Site civil design for land development
• Water engineering
• Wastewater engineering
• Construction administration

Modern Engineering Solutions, McKinney, Texas. Contact: (214) 833-6748 or mod-eng.com