Why representation, storytelling, and creative risk matter just as much as code in today’s tech industry. 

In this exclusive interview, Mediaplanet sits down with Gazi to explore her unconventional path into software engineering, the power of digital storytelling, and how representation can reshape the future of tech. 

Your journey into software engineering has inspired many young people. What first sparked your interest in tech, and how did you navigate your early career path?

My gateway into tech was not because of some grand epiphany. It was actually Tumblr.  

As a pre-teen, I was obsessed with customizing my blog theme, experimenting with HTML and CSS without even knowing what they were. I just wanted my digital diary to look exactly how I envisioned in my head. That was my first realization that code is just another artistic medium. You type something into a text editor, and suddenly a completely new reality exists on the screen.  

The early career phase, though, was far less magical.  The job market really breaks your initial infatuation with tech. I did not have AI tools to debug my code or explain jargon instantly. I faced rejection after rejection from larger tech internships. I took unpaid roles simply to gain experience and build credibility.  

It was frustrating, but I knew experience would compound over time. Eventually, those early sacrifices led to paid opportunities. Gathering proof of ability mattered more than immediate compensation, and in hindsight, that bet paid off. 

You’ve built a large online community by making software engineering relatable. Why do you think digital creators play such an important role in shaping the next generation of engineers? 

The tech industry has a habit of guarding its gates with dense jargon and an air of sterility. Digital creators can act as translators.  

I try to take what feels opaque and make it land with real people. When I document my life, I want people to see that software engineering is not a soulless mechanism people choose for a paycheque. Coding is, and can be, a real extension of being human. To be human is to engineer – to pick up a rock and realize you can use it to make fire. 

There is currently a disconnect between how tech is perceived and how it is lived. When people see engineering intertwined with artistic projects, life transitions, and storytelling, it disrupts the stereotype of the traditional engineer. By making the medium relatable and fun, we invite a completely different kind of mind into the space. 

Ultimately, I hope to reach someone who would never have seen themselves in engineering. And maybe that person goes on to create something cool, especially something I couldn’t have built myself. 

Diversity in engineering continues to be a challenge, especially for women in tech. What has your experience been, and what do you think would genuinely move the needle? 

Navigating this space as a brown woman often feels like operating with a smaller margin for error. When you are consistently the minority in a room, a single mistake (or even just a bug in your code) can feel like it reflects on more than just you. 

There is also the online side. I have had people dismiss my tenure at Google as a “diversity hire,” which is ironic. My name reads traditionally male on paper. My resume contained no gender indicators. I went through the same interview process as everyone else.  

To genuinely move the needle, we need to expand what an engineer is allowed to look like. Not only through formal initiatives, but through visibility. When someone sees a person who feels familiar to them building things, it can rewire what feels within reach. 

Instead of treating diversity purely as a hiring problem, we should see it as a cultural design challenge. The question shouldn’t only be “How do we bring more women into engineering?” but also “How do we reshape the environment, so more types of minds want to stay?” 

If you could change one thing about how engineering is taught or perceived in Canada, what would it be?

I would reorient it around the “why” before ever touching the “how.” Right now, the structure can feel disjointed. You’re handed these blocks of discrete math, advanced calculus, and abstract theorems in isolation, without a clear sense of what they’re ultimately building toward. I spent years manipulating symbols on a page without really understanding what they were meant to weave together. It’s like being taught how to perfectly chop vegetables for four years without ever being allowed to taste the soup. That was more difficult for me as a visual learner. 

I didn’t truly grasp the nature of what I was learning until I stepped outside the lecture halls. It was through self-study and falling down online rabbit holes (like watching visual explanations of concepts like gradient descent from creators such as 3Blue1Brown) that the abstract suddenly became tangible.  

I think schools need to prioritize that holistic big-picture understanding from day one: showing students where concepts fit, why they matter, and how they connect to real systems. In a way that students can answer their own “why?” questionsand trace the reasoning until it feels trivial. 

How do you stay up to date with constant changes in programming languages, frameworks and tools? 

I do not try to memorize every framework or chase every new release. Technology moves too fast for that to be sustainable.  

Instead, I follow curiosity. I pick a problem I want to solve and intentionally choose a medium that makes me uncomfortable. If I usually build web applications, maybe I’ll try building an iOS app next.  

It’s about treating technology like a wardrobe. You can wear the same outfit every day, but you learn more when you mix, match, and experiment. By constantly shifting the context of my projects, learning happens organically as a byproduct of creation rather than a chore. 

Frameworks change, and languages evolve. The skill that compounds is learning how to learn. 

What has been the most surprising lesson you’ve learned while working in the tech industry? 

The illusion of autonomy.  

From the outside, big tech appears to be a playground of limitless innovation. On the inside, individual decision-making power can be quite small. Even leaders at the top operate within the constraints of revenue and user metrics.  

There is a paradox. You are given tools to run experiments at a massive scale, yet ideas that do not clearly map to engagement or monetization struggle to gain traction. 

Over time, I have come to appreciate constraints. Sometimes they can sharpen it. Working within real-world impact, real users, and real stakes forces you to think about what actually matters. 

For more information, visit https://www.gazijarin.com/.

The post Code, Culture, and Redefining Engineering appeared first on HiveInnovates.

Smarter procurement, stronger data, and streamlined approvals can unlock infrastructure growth while strengthening Canada’s global competitiveness.

In this exclusive interview, Mediaplanet sits down with John Gamble, President and CEO of the Association of Consulting Engineering Companies-Canada (ACEC) to discuss Canada’s engineering leadership, workforce challenges, infrastructure priorities, and the path forward for a globally competitive industry.  

Canada is often described as an engineering superpower. From your perspective, what gives Canada its strength, and what must we focus on to maintain that leadership?  

Canada’s engineering strength is deeply rooted in our history and geography. We are a relatively small population spread across a vast landmass with significant geological and climatic challenges. Building a cohesive nation required world class engineering, from transportation corridors to resource infrastructure.  

Historic nation-building projects like the Canadian Pacific Railway and the St. Lawrence Seaway illustrate how engineering is intertwined with Canada’s growth. Fast forward to today, and Canada continues to perform at a global level. Three of the world’s top ten largest engineering firms are headquartered here.  

Another major strength is the diversity of our industry. We have firms of varying sizes, ownership models, and specializations serving both domestic and international markets. That diversity enables us not only to meet Canada’s needs but also to maintain a strong global footprint.  

With one in three engineers over age 55 and talent shortages emerging, what steps are most important to attract and support the next generation?  

We need to do a better job telling engineering’s story.  

Engineering touches every part of daily life, from transportation and clean water to waste management. Yet the better we do our jobs, the more invisible we become. Young people do not always see the impact.  

There is a major opportunity here. Many young professionals today are motivated by purpose and societal impact more than traditional corporate career paths. Engineering offers exactly that. It shapes our social, economic, and environmental quality of life.  

The profession is also evolving rapidly. Disciplines that did not exist a generation ago now play central roles. From artificial intelligence integration to climate resilience, the scope of impact continues to expand.  

A powerful example illustrates this point. A British medical journal once asked medical practitioners to identify the greatest medical breakthrough of the last century. The top answer was sanitation. That is engineering. It demonstrates the profound societal impact of this profession.  

What role does immigration play in supporting Canada’s engineering workforce? 

Immigration is critical. 

Canada itself was built by immigrants, and that diversity strengthens our engineering capacity. Engineering sits at the intersection of science, technology, and societal needs. Diverse perspectives are essential to designing solutions that truly serve communities. 

International professionals bring new approaches, lived experiences, and problem solving frameworks. Many come from regions where infrastructure challenges are more visible, which deepens appreciation for engineering’s role in quality of life. 

Today, roughly 30 percent of practicing engineers in Canada are foreign trained. 

Where we must improve is leadership representation. We need clearer pathways for internationally trained engineers to reach executive and C suite roles. Diversity in leadership is just as important as diversity in delivery.

You have spoken about the importance of life cycle thinking in infrastructure. How would life cycle procurement improve project outcomes?

Too often, engineering is treated as a commodity. It is valued primarily on upfront labour cost rather than long-term societal or even economic impact.  

Engineered assets exist for decades. Engineers remain liable for those decisions long after project completion, while owners and users continue to benefit from the outcomes for decades.  

Consider bridges or hospitals. Design and construction may represent only 5 to 10 percent of total life cycle cost. Engineering design itself is often under 2 percent, sometimes less than half a percent.  

Yet procurement frequently focuses on minimizing upfront costs rather than optimizing performance over decades.  

The encouraging news is that we are beginning to see procurement models shift. More stakeholders now recognize engineering and design as investments to be leveraged, not costs to be minimized.   

How can thoughtful procurement strengthen engineering careers and workforce sustainability? 

Progressive procurement models, done properly, have the potential to  unlock innovation.  

When engineers are engaged collaboratively rather than simply executing predefined designs, they can develop more effective, resilient, and sustainable solutions.  

This environment encourages innovation, improves environmental and climate outcomes, enhances infrastructure performance, and strengthens career pathways.  

It also enables firms to offer more competitive compensation and invest in talent development.  

Life cycle planning and costing further improves supply chain forecasting, labour planning, and capital allocation. This benefits owners, contractors, and engineering firms alike.  

Looking ahead, how can industry and government work together to keep Canada globally competitive? 

There is growing alignment, which is encouraging.  

Government increasingly recognizes the importance of infrastructure, natural resources, and housing delivery to Canada’s future. However, project approvals remain slow.  

While environmental and community protections are essential and Canada’s standards are among the strongest in the world, we must streamline duplication and regulatory bottlenecks.  

Global competitiveness depends on speed as well as rigor.  

For example, global demand for critical minerals such as copper and lithium is rising rapidly. If Canada cannot approve and build projects in time, we risk missing major economic opportunities, even when we have the resources.  

The goal is not to lower standards. It is to improve clarity, coordination, and decision timelines so projects can proceed responsibly and efficiently.  

Are there any current or upcoming initiatives you would like to highlight? 

A major part of our work is ongoing engagement with policymakers and stakeholders.  

We recently met with the Canadian Infrastructure Council to support the National Infrastructure Assessment, which aims to provide long term visibility into Canada’s infrastructure needs.  

We are also collaborating with partners such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Canadian Construction Association to refresh the Canadian Infrastructure Report Card, with a new edition expected in 2026.  

These initiatives create the data and insights needed for better infrastructure planning and investment.  

Final thoughts? 

Infrastructure advocacy is one area where collaboration across political lines remains strong.  

All major parties recognize the importance of infrastructure investment. They may differ on delivery models or priorities, but the shared commitment is there.  

By improving data, strengthening collaboration, and maintaining open dialogue across government and industry, we can build infrastructure that supports Canadians for generations.  

For more information, visit https://acec.ca/.

The post Building Canada’s Engineering Future: Leadership, Talent, and Innovation appeared first on HiveInnovates.

Bernard Gaudreault

Director of Asset Management at Norda Stelo

One of Canada’s leading engineering firms is advancing an approach to infrastructure that’s grounded in asset durability, data-driven decisions, and long-term value.

It’s not just Canada’s population that’s aging rapidly — our infrastructure is, too. With only 55 per cent of core assets rated as being in “good” or “very good” condition as of Canada’s latest core public infrastructure survey and an estimated cost of around $300 billion to get the necessary infrastructure rehabilitated or replaced, the situation is dire.   

Wherever you live in Canada, examples of deteriorating infrastructure likely pop to mind — from the Calgary water main break to Toronto’s crumbling Gardiner Expressway. 

Building new isn’t the answer, though. Norda Stelo, a purpose-driven, cross-sector engineering and consulting firm with over 60 years of experience, champions a new approach to closing Canada’s infrastructure investment gap — one grounded in creating not just economic value, but also social and environmental value. 

Mediaplanet spoke with Bernard Gaudreault, Norda Stelo’s Director of Asset Management, and Sophie Boisvert, Norda Stelo’s Director of Asset Durability, to learn more. 

Mediaplanet: With Canada facing an urgent infrastructure maintenance challenge, why is proactive asset management critical right now?

Bernard Gaudreault: Assets are reaching a point where failures can disrupt services, and that’s a big risk for our society. The cost of failure can also be 5 to 15 times the cost of doing the work before it fails.  

Sophie Boisvert: So many items are urgent, so it’s important to prioritize well. We cannot build anew every time. We must extend the life of assets proactively through targeted maintenance and rehabilitation, and not wait until they’re at the end of life. Also, lifecycle analysis reveals that extending the lifespan of an asset has a significantly lower carbon footprint than building new. 

Mediaplanet: Norda Stelo describes itself as a purpose-driven organization with an impact business model, and you also describe your approach through the lens of asset durability. How does this impact business model shape the way you approach projects, and how do you define asset durability along with its supporting pillars? 

Bernard Gaudreault: There is value beyond just the economic; it can also include environmental and social benefits. We’re not just doing engineering projects for the sake of doing projects. We connect the technical work to the purpose of the asset and the service it delivers. 

Sophie Boisvert: Quantifying impacts across our projects made our engineers realize the extent of their work and gave them pride, purpose, and greater motivation. 

Asset durability refers to the capacity of an asset portfolio, like infrastructures, to consistently deliver the required level of service throughout its lifecycle. This is achieved while adhering to safety, compliance, resilience, and performance standards, and supporting sustainable development goals, without undermining the ability to fulfill future needs and objectives.  

Bernard Gaudreault: The first pillar is governance. Asset management is two words, and we focus more on the management part. You need good governance and structure, competencies, and capabilities in place, aligned with the asset’s purpose. 

Sophie Boisvert: The second pillar is asset integrity, or the asset’s state of health. This is measured using engineering expertise, for example with simulations, finite element analyses, fitness-for-service studies, and materials degradation assessments. The third pillar is leveraging data, innovation, and technology to enhance asset durability. We work with our clients to collect the right data and to get it well-organized, as this supports proactive decision-making.  

Mediaplanet: Tell us more about that proactive decision-making. How do data, digital tools, and predictive analytics help organizations make better decisions? 

Bernard Gaudreault: Data is central to decisions. Its quality and consistency are crucial, especially with AI, since poor data leads to biased outcomes. 

Sophie Boisvert: Data lets us assess risks in aging infrastructure and make smarter decision-making and investment planning. 

Bernard Gaudreault: When investment decisions are based on the right data, risk, service impact, lifecycle performance, and environmental concerns, the backlog of deferred needs becomes much more manageable. Limited financial and human resources can then be directed where they create the greatest value: extending the life of assets when appropriate, acting early to avoid major failures, and preventing unnecessary replacements. 

Canada’s estimated $300 billion infrastructure investment gap may seem daunting, but the real issue is whether this figure aligns with the country’s true priorities. 

Are all assets equally critical? Do deteriorating components always pose significant risks of service disruption? Are factors like climate exposure, safety, resilience, and societal impact being considered, or are decisions simply based on condition reports? 

Norda Stelo believes that the answer isn’t to spend more without focus, but to invest more wisely. By integrating governance, engineering integrity analysis, and reliable data, organizations can identify which needs are urgent, which are important, and which can be postponed strategically. 

Closing Canada’s infrastructure investment gap isn’t about building more; it’s about better management through disciplined prioritization, resilient design, and long-term value-based decisions. 

To learn more, visit norda.com/en/our-solutions/asset-management. 

The post Canada’s Aging Infrastructure Is Both a Challenge and an Opportunity appeared first on HiveInnovates.