Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 92 replies
  • Subscribers 11 subscribers
  • Views 9851 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Value in IEng Registration

Allan Rowan
Afternoon all, just sitting behind a laptop screen pondering and found myself plotting course for my career progression and seemingly unlikely professional registration for CEng.


My current employer has encouraged that I achieve CEng registration (easier said than done) and any promotion to the next grade would be subject to attaining CEng. I'm wary of submitting my application for CEng due to not having an adequate level of education (I have a Bachelors degree only)  and at my age there's little chance of me returning to university for further study. I'm employed as a senior engineer and acting principal engineer within a project I'm currently commissioned. I appreciate that working at a principal engineer level does not necessarily provide the evidence required to prove that my understanding and knowledge is at a MEng level.


Rewind a few years, I was reasonably proud of successful registration and to achieve IEng, however, to date I'm of the opinion that it has done little else other than measurement / benchmark of my competence and identify area's in which I need to strengthen. My employer (at the time of registration) did not professionally recognise IEng registration and from my own observations nor do other employers (that I've noticed). A cursory glance of job listings on LinkedIn, shall normally state a requirement for applicants to hold CEng registration or working towards CEng with no mention of IEng. There's an immense pressure to achieve Chartership and with failure to do so could be possibly observed as I'm either inadequate or not quite cutting the grade by a prospective or current employer.


Is there any value to the IEng registration other than a personal achievement and worth maintaining? I imagine the nervousness and apprehension about navigating the CEng route and the fear of failure that I'm not unique in this respect and other's may have a similar story? Not sure what I would wish to hear, but knowing of others that succeeded with a similar background and level of education would provide some encouragement.


Regards,

Allan. 

Parents
  • 0
    Jim,

    It seems that in terms of “putting something back”, you are getting excellent value and The IET is getting excellent, if not maximum value from you.

    Before I retired, my understanding was that an IET senior representative was pressing hard for the ludicrous and insulting restriction on the contribution of IEng registrants within Engineering Council regulations to be removed.  I fought that as hard as I could at the time.

    The ignorant, arrogant and restrictive assumption adopted by Engineering Council, was that “progressive” meant that the judgement of a CEng, on any matter was superior to that of another type of registrant. As the “highest most developed form” it was deemed that becoming CEng subsumed and superseded the other categories.

    This was a very good example of “groupthink”, something that is bound to occur when you lack plurality of experience and a sense of entitlement prevails.  A good CEng with real world experience (like the contributing CEngs here), would automatically seek the opinion of those at “the sharp end” as an important part of the evidence that they need to weigh.  The overriding priority of an engineer in industry would also be the avoidance of harm.     

     
    Unfortunately, by the time I got wind of this and the error was recognised, it was too late and the die was cast.

    We have discussed the issue here and Alasdair addressed the issue well.   

    “I just wish the powers that be would sort out this nonsense concerning CEng/IEng.”
    I agree, it is a negative distraction. I have probably “wasted” thousands of words on it. Perhaps “the powers that be” hope that the rumblings of "a few malcontents and underachievers" will just gradually die off?

    I don’t continue this argument for any personal advantage and have never sought CEng (although I have helped hundreds of others to do so) . The issue is actually at the heart of the mission of Engineering Council and by extension the registration element of IET activities.

    Our duty as I see it is to nurture, recognise and equally respect engineering and technology experts. Private clubs can restrict membership as they see fit within the law, but for a public regulatory body to condone and even actively foster the negative treatment of most of those that it is supposed to serve, should be unacceptable. 


    "The Chartered Engineer's Council" would be a more accurate representation of the current situation. If that name was adopted, then I would be willing to help, since I think that CEng has to be the overriding priority, especially as that is what the market signals.  However, to feel welcome attitudes would have to change/modernise. There has been a very "closed shop" mentality.


    One of the most disappointing calls that I took at the IET, was from a recently retired IEng. His friend and former colleague invited him to a "Retired Engineer's Luncheon Club". He was "black-balled" and made to feel very uncomfortable by others when it came out that he was IEng.     


                 


Reply
  • 0
    Jim,

    It seems that in terms of “putting something back”, you are getting excellent value and The IET is getting excellent, if not maximum value from you.

    Before I retired, my understanding was that an IET senior representative was pressing hard for the ludicrous and insulting restriction on the contribution of IEng registrants within Engineering Council regulations to be removed.  I fought that as hard as I could at the time.

    The ignorant, arrogant and restrictive assumption adopted by Engineering Council, was that “progressive” meant that the judgement of a CEng, on any matter was superior to that of another type of registrant. As the “highest most developed form” it was deemed that becoming CEng subsumed and superseded the other categories.

    This was a very good example of “groupthink”, something that is bound to occur when you lack plurality of experience and a sense of entitlement prevails.  A good CEng with real world experience (like the contributing CEngs here), would automatically seek the opinion of those at “the sharp end” as an important part of the evidence that they need to weigh.  The overriding priority of an engineer in industry would also be the avoidance of harm.     

     
    Unfortunately, by the time I got wind of this and the error was recognised, it was too late and the die was cast.

    We have discussed the issue here and Alasdair addressed the issue well.   

    “I just wish the powers that be would sort out this nonsense concerning CEng/IEng.”
    I agree, it is a negative distraction. I have probably “wasted” thousands of words on it. Perhaps “the powers that be” hope that the rumblings of "a few malcontents and underachievers" will just gradually die off?

    I don’t continue this argument for any personal advantage and have never sought CEng (although I have helped hundreds of others to do so) . The issue is actually at the heart of the mission of Engineering Council and by extension the registration element of IET activities.

    Our duty as I see it is to nurture, recognise and equally respect engineering and technology experts. Private clubs can restrict membership as they see fit within the law, but for a public regulatory body to condone and even actively foster the negative treatment of most of those that it is supposed to serve, should be unacceptable. 


    "The Chartered Engineer's Council" would be a more accurate representation of the current situation. If that name was adopted, then I would be willing to help, since I think that CEng has to be the overriding priority, especially as that is what the market signals.  However, to feel welcome attitudes would have to change/modernise. There has been a very "closed shop" mentality.


    One of the most disappointing calls that I took at the IET, was from a recently retired IEng. His friend and former colleague invited him to a "Retired Engineer's Luncheon Club". He was "black-balled" and made to feel very uncomfortable by others when it came out that he was IEng.     


                 


Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines