Hey,  I promised myself to be brief,  but needs must.........


Good analogy Simon.  And to take the analogy a step further,  would junior doctors really prefer not to be recognised as doctors? Would they really feel that the designation of doctor,  albeit junior doctor,  wasn't viable for a professional doctor? 

Peter Miller‍ says "I'm not sure if there is another professional qualification in the realm of the arts, manufactures or commerce that has so little benefit compared to effort required to achieve it. " but maybe the real truth may be that there is no other realm of arts,  manufacture or commerce that behaves so preciously about denying differing levels of advancement in the profession whilst still operating at a level well beyond that of technician and demonstrating the qualities of integrity,  commitment and overall professionalism required by either class of registration. 


if there's a feel that there is little benefit compared to effort lets not look to the specification as the cause but to the unrealistic and ignorant demands of employers and clients (and engineers themselves) that it should be C.Eng or nothing to be considered a professional engineer. I've said it many times before,  we need to focus on educating organisations to the merit and benefit of Incorporated Engineers.


As somebody who regularly approves the appointment of engineers to roles,  both in my client organisation and in contractors,  i would suggest that 70% or more of roles don't require C.Eng, indeed it is an over- qualification, but I'd have far more confidence in an I.Eng than someone with no professional registration. In the latter case,  I have to put much more effort into vetting the appointment,  interviewing the candidate,  etc. In an ideal world,  I'd love to make I.Eng a requirement for such roles if only those who meet the requirements of I. Eng would embrace the qualification and register rather than claiming it has no value.  It's a self- fulfilling prophecy - deny its value and so fail to apply for it and that means I can't make it a selection criterion. 


Embrace it, accept it's a solid professional registration in its own right, and get yourself registered without treating it as a sign of inferiority,  I can then make it a selection criterion which not only makes my job easier,  but enhances its value. 


incidentally,  because of that 70%+ factor,  there may be many engineers who are able to sustain a highly worthwhile career and continue to deliver massive value without ever progressing to C.Eng. Returning to Simon's analogy,  does every doctor necessarily progress to senior consultant? Do those that don't offer or receive no value?


I like what I hear of the 4th edition so far.  It provides greater clarity,  honesty and less self- deception whilst offering a clear platform for tiered registration appropriate to the shape of the profession and of engineering requirements. We just have to stop hanging on to a C.Eng or nothing mindset.


So do employers and clients, and for that,  we (including or especially the institute) have to educate them. The chicken and egg is that we'll never do that unless engineers themselves start believing in it and seeking registration at their most appropriate level, and stop feeling inferior about it.

Hey,  I promised myself to be brief,  but needs must.........


Good analogy Simon.  And to take the analogy a step further,  would junior doctors really prefer not to be recognised as doctors? Would they really feel that the designation of doctor,  albeit junior doctor,  wasn't viable for a professional doctor? 

Peter Miller‍ says "I'm not sure if there is another professional qualification in the realm of the arts, manufactures or commerce that has so little benefit compared to effort required to achieve it. " but maybe the real truth may be that there is no other realm of arts,  manufacture or commerce that behaves so preciously about denying differing levels of advancement in the profession whilst still operating at a level well beyond that of technician and demonstrating the qualities of integrity,  commitment and overall professionalism required by either class of registration. 


if there's a feel that there is little benefit compared to effort lets not look to the specification as the cause but to the unrealistic and ignorant demands of employers and clients (and engineers themselves) that it should be C.Eng or nothing to be considered a professional engineer. I've said it many times before,  we need to focus on educating organisations to the merit and benefit of Incorporated Engineers.


As somebody who regularly approves the appointment of engineers to roles,  both in my client organisation and in contractors,  i would suggest that 70% or more of roles don't require C.Eng, indeed it is an over- qualification, but I'd have far more confidence in an I.Eng than someone with no professional registration. In the latter case,  I have to put much more effort into vetting the appointment,  interviewing the candidate,  etc. In an ideal world,  I'd love to make I.Eng a requirement for such roles if only those who meet the requirements of I. Eng would embrace the qualification and register rather than claiming it has no value.  It's a self- fulfilling prophecy - deny its value and so fail to apply for it and that means I can't make it a selection criterion. 


Embrace it, accept it's a solid professional registration in its own right, and get yourself registered without treating it as a sign of inferiority,  I can then make it a selection criterion which not only makes my job easier,  but enhances its value. 


incidentally,  because of that 70%+ factor,  there may be many engineers who are able to sustain a highly worthwhile career and continue to deliver massive value without ever progressing to C.Eng. Returning to Simon's analogy,  does every doctor necessarily progress to senior consultant? Do those that don't offer or receive no value?


I like what I hear of the 4th edition so far.  It provides greater clarity,  honesty and less self- deception whilst offering a clear platform for tiered registration appropriate to the shape of the profession and of engineering requirements. We just have to stop hanging on to a C.Eng or nothing mindset.


So do employers and clients, and for that,  we (including or especially the institute) have to educate them. The chicken and egg is that we'll never do that unless engineers themselves start believing in it and seeking registration at their most appropriate level, and stop feeling inferior about it.