Manifest: Engineering Beyond Disciplines

Transdisciplinary innovator

Innovation, when stripped of its complexity, becomes performance theatre. Too often, I have witnessed how truly disruptive thinking is marginalised—whether in academia, where discipline-specific silos dominate, or in industry, where short-term metrics eclipse long-term impact. As someone who lives and works across sectors, who prototyped technologies before they had a name, and who translates insights between architecture, AI, healthcare, and policy—I have grown impatient with systems that celebrate innovation only when it is comfortable, predictable, or easy to measure.

This is not a complaint. It is a stance. And this blog, Frustration Innovation, emerged from that stance: as a space to voice the dissonance between what innovation should be and what it is often reduced to. The text that follows is not a biography, nor a call to arms. It is a manifesto—a reflection of what drives my work, and why I choose to pursue engineering beyond disciplines.

I do not innovate within disciplinary boundaries—I innovate across them. My work lies at the intersection of engineering, innovation, and public value, where complex real-world challenges cannot be addressed through linear thinking or isolated expertise. I believe that wicked problems—those deeply entangled in socio-technical realities—require hybrid solutions, born of transdisciplinary collaboration and rooted in both scientific rigor and practical relevance.

As an engineering-oriented researcher and innovation leader, I embrace the ambiguity of complexity, not as a limitation, but as a fertile ground for creativity. I prototype with purpose, drawing on systems engineering, AI, and design science to build artefacts that make risks visible, support decision-making, and co-create public value. I move fluently across sectors—healthcare, agri-food, mobility—not by accident, but by design. Technological solutions must pivot, adapt, and recombine to remain meaningful in a fragmented world.

I am not committed to a single epistemology but to impact. My methodological stance is pragmatic and interventionist. I work with industry not as a testbed, but as a co-creator of knowledge. The lab is wherever change is needed. My mission is to orchestrate actors, align incentives, and enable transformation through engineered systems that serve more than efficiency—they serve society.