Written on: July 1, 2026 by Robb Ellis
One of the most valuable lessons I’ve learned about training technicians didn’t happen in a boiler room. It happened years earlier in a patrol car.
Before entering this industry, I spent years in law enforcement and served as a Field Training Officer. One of the responsibilities is helping new officers transition from the police academy into the real world. You quickly learn that no two people learn the same way, and no amount of classroom instruction can prepare someone for every situation they will encounter in the field.
The goal wasn’t to teach someone every answer. It was to teach them how to think.
In law enforcement, the consequences of getting something wrong can be significant. Decisions often have to be made quickly and under pressure. In the trades, the stakes are different. A mistake may result in a callback, equipment damage, lost efficiency or an unhappy customer rather than a life-or-death situation.
However, the process of developing people is remarkably similar. In both professions, no amount of classroom instruction can prepare someone for every situation they will encounter. Eventually, they have to learn how to assess conditions, identify what matters, filter out distractions and make sound decisions based on what they’re seeing in front of them. That’s why the best trainers don’t simply provide answers. They teach a way of thinking.
That lesson followed me into the plumbing and heating industry. When I first entered the trade, I knew I had a lot to learn. I wasn’t the smartest person in the room, and I certainly wasn’t the most experienced. What I did have was a willingness to ask questions. I surrounded myself with people who knew more than I did and tried to understand not only what worked, but why it worked.
One of those people was Joe Fickett from our local supply house, Weber Supply. Long before “system thinking” became a phrase we used regularly, Joe was teaching it through the way he approached every project. He could design and lay out heating systems ranging from the simplest residential application to some very complex commercial installations, but what stood out wasn’t how much product information he knew—it was how he thought.
Joe never started with the boiler, the pump or the control. He started with the system. He wanted to understand what the building was trying to accomplish, how heat was being distributed, how the controls would interact with the mechanical equipment and how each component affected the others. Problems were approached the same way. Rather than immediately focusing on a failed part or a fault code, he would step back and look at the entire sequence of operation. He taught me that equipment rarely operates in isolation and that understanding the relationships between the components is often more important than understanding any single component by itself.
Looking back, that was one of the most valuable lessons I could have learned. Joe wasn’t teaching me how to memorize answers. He was teaching me how to think through a system. The equipment has changed dramatically since then, but that approach remains just as relevant today as it was then.
Beyond Product Knowledge
Over time, I noticed something interesting. The people everyone called when a system wasn’t behaving weren’t necessarily the people who had attended the most factory classes or could navigate every control menu without opening a manual. They were the people who understood how the entire system worked together. They understood flow, combustion, heat transfer and controls. Most importantly, they understood how all of those pieces interacted.
The indoor comfort industry is evolving rapidly. Equipment is more efficient, more connected and more intelligent than anything we saw even a decade ago. Condensing boilers continuously adjust firing rates. Heat pumps communicate through sophisticated control strategies. Wireless sensors create self-healing networks throughout buildings. Remote monitoring allows us to see operating conditions that once required a site visit.
These advancements are making systems better, but they can also create a trap. As equipment becomes smarter, it becomes easier to focus on what the control is telling us and harder to understand what the system itself is doing.
A Lesson from the Field
A recent project reminded me exactly why that distinction matters. A large commercial building had four boilers serving the facility. The site had been struggling with intermittent flame failure and ignition-related lockouts. The complaints had been going on for months. Ignition components had been replaced. Wiring had been checked. Various parts had been swapped. Every time someone thought they had fixed the problem, it would eventually come back.
What made the situation particularly frustrating was that the failures only occurred at night. During the day, when technicians were on site and occupants were in the building, everything appeared normal. Once the building became unoccupied, the lockouts would begin.
When we stepped back and started looking at the timing rather than the fault code, a different picture began to emerge. Why only at night? What changed when the building became unoccupied?
Those questions shifted the conversation away from the equipment and toward the system. As we dug deeper into the operating sequence, we discovered that the building automation system was shutting down building circulation during unoccupied hours while leaving the boilers enabled. The system temperature sensor remained active, and the boilers continued trying to satisfy the temperature target at that sensor.
The problem was that there was no meaningful flow across it. The boilers were effectively chasing a target they could never properly satisfy. They would fire, quickly reach temperature, shut off, cool slightly and then immediately fire again. They repeated this process over and over throughout the night.
As the cycling became more frequent, the boilers would begin an ignition sequence only to satisfy the outlet sensor almost immediately because there was little or no system flow. The control interpreted these interrupted firing cycles as ignition-related failures, directing attention toward the burners when the real problem existed elsewhere in the system.
At one point, the building owner had become so frustrated that replacing the boilers was being seriously discussed. The equipment was being blamed, but the equipment wasn’t causing the problem. To test the theory, we relocated the system sensor to a location that maintained flow during the overnight operating mode. The nuisance lockouts disappeared.
Nothing inside the boilers had changed. No ignition components were replaced. No control boards were swapped. By correcting the operating conditions that were causing the excessive cycling, the lockouts ceased. The solution came from understanding the system. Boilers don’t heat buildings. Systems heat buildings.
Why System Thinking Matters
Product knowledge is important. Factory training is important. Understanding controls is important. None of those things, however, can replace system thinking.
For years, our industry has often measured expertise by product knowledge. Can you commission this boiler? Can you navigate this control? Can you configure this piece of equipment? Those skills matter, but they are only part of the equation. The technicians who consistently solve difficult problems usually start with a different question: “What is this system trying to do?”
That question changes everything. Equipment is only one component of a larger process involving the heat source, the distribution system, the controls, the load and ultimately the expectations of the people occupying the building.
Technology has changed dramatically, but the fundamentals haven’t. Understanding how a system moves heat remains just as important today as it was thirty years ago. As our industry moves toward hybrid heating systems, integrated controls, wireless networks and connected equipment, technicians will need to become comfortable operating in both the mechanical and digital worlds. They will need to understand flame signal and wireless communication, combustion analysis and network connectivity, flow rates and data points, air-fuel ratios and software updates. This isn’t replacing traditional trade knowledge; it’s expanding it.
The Future Technician
The strongest technicians of the future will be the ones who can bridge the gap between mechanical systems and modern technology while remaining grounded in the fundamentals. One of the greatest lessons I learned early in my career was that expertise isn’t about knowing everything, it’s about continually building understanding. The technicians I respect most are still learning. They still ask questions, challenge assumptions and investigate why a system behaves the way it does.
The difference is that they have developed a framework for thinking. They don’t simply memorize answers; they understand principles that continue to work even when technology changes. Equipment will evolve. Control platforms will change. Communication protocols will come and go. The laws of combustion, heat transfer and fluid movement remain the same.
As our industry continues to evolve, the demand for skilled technicians will only increase. The opportunity is tremendous, but success will require more than learning the next product release or the newest control platform. It will require technicians who can think critically, understand systems and adapt as technology changes. The future technician is not just an installer, service technician or controls specialist; the future technician is a system thinker. ICM
Robb Ellis is a Technical Trainer with FIA, Inc., working with contractors, technicians, engineers and wholesalers throughout New England. Drawing on his experience in both law enforcement and the plumbing and heating industry, he focuses on helping technicians develop the system-level thinking needed to troubleshoot, diagnose and optimize modern comfort systems.
