Back in 1998 in response to Mr. Paul Woorhaar starting an excellent web site dedicated to stress engineers with 15+ years experience I wrote:

“I had to certify numerous calculations of fellow pipe stress analysts and in 17 years of my experience many times witnessed cases of misuse of computer software in engineering design. Quite often I had discussions with colleagues about this worrying trend and was delighted when I saw that someone on the other side of the globe has actually started a campaign on this topic…
In Australia, there is no organisation such as Stoomwezen, so we are even more exposed to the syndrome of "smooth talking colleagues", "least trouble equals good performance" and "managers who make profit their only objective". It has all indeed contributed to the decline in quality and safety of designs.
Not long ago however we did have a body called D.O.L. (Department of Labour) which had a mandate at least on paper, to perform verification of piping stress analysis. Unfortunately this function has been taken away from them and piping stress analysis has become a sole responsibility of clients and consequently engineering design and consulting firms. When this happened, many companies in order to protect themselves, developed comprehensive piping stress analysis procedures and guidelines. The so called third party verification of stress analysis work become mandatory and is occasionally subcontracted to outside companies but most of the time, for obvious cost reasons performed within the company by an engineer not directly involved on the project.
In spite of the fact that all this satisfies and probably exceeds the requirements of Australian code and ISO 9001, it still is not enough to guarantee that stress reports are complete or correct. In my opinion, no administrative measure will be able to guarantee this because as you pointed out, no person is the same and there are various approaches to solving similar problems. For the same reason, much is always going to be dependent on the experience, knowledge and other qualities of an individual stress analyst.
I believe that it is an excellent idea to form a database of graded experienced stress engineers…..”
This of cause was possible in Holland where stress calculations needed approval by notified body called Stoomwezen , but what about the rest of the world?
Seven years down the track when I read this, I could see that the decline in quality which Mr. Woorhar rightfully noticed back then, didn’t show any signs of stagnation, on the contrary it has become worse. It is especially bad in places without regulating authorities and where clients accept work from consulting firms which take no liability for what they do. In such places you can indeed expect to see anything. I have also noticed that the qualities of individual stress engineers mentioned above can make only minor difference if there are no procedures, systems and guidelines in place, either internally developed or externally imposed and there is no culture developed which is needed for this kind of work. By culture I mean that people willingly accept that regulations serve not to oppress them but to protect the quality of our work. Unless all this happens and with the old generation getting closer to retirement, unfortunately my opinion is that we will see the decline getting even worse.