You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion
Can IET Offer back charted mechanical/electrical/manufacturing engineering?
Former Community Member
I remember IEE time, the Institute offered its member Chartered Electrical Engineer, I think this is good since The IET is a multi-disciplines organization, people outside don't know our specialist. If IET can offer Chartered Electrical/ Electronics/ Manufacturing/ Mechanical Engineer titles would be good for us to let people know our discipline. Now either people still think of us as Electrical Engineer or nothing, don't know us. I met people who are engineers who either assume I am Electrical Engineer or don't know my discipline. I always need to explain. I have experience in a job interview asking me that you are not an Electrical Engineer why you join IET, not I Mech E? If we can have a Chartered XXXX Engineer then no need to explain.
Personally I disagree with this, some people stay as single discipline engineers, but many don't. My CEng dates back to IEE but the one thing I have never been is an electrical engineer (I was an electronics engineer when I became chartered). I've managed mechanical engineering, software engineering, even dabbled slightly in civils, nowadays I've no idea what I'd put in the middle of "Chartered xxx Engineer"!
The point to me is that CEng - and IEng and EngTech - are awarded on, and are a mark of, your professional approach to engineering. They are not a mark that you have expertise in any particular field, your CV shows that and it will change over your career, but that you go about your work in a professional way - including (hopefully) being honest about not working in fields in which you are not competent.
So I'd suggest taking it the other way - instead of saying "CEng MIET" just say "CEng". Which institute awarded it shouldn't matter.
Incidentally, I was one of those who at the time campaigned against the change of name from the IEE to the IET. But I've now changed my mind, I think this was the right thing to do, the idea of labelling institutions (and hence their members) as single discipline engineers for the purposes of professional registration is pretty unhelpful. I'm now a member or fellow of four institutions - the IET basically just for my CEng, and the other for specialist technical information. And my membership of the others could change if my career takes another lurch in another direction. I think that's a pretty good model for the next generation of engineers.
Personally I disagree with this, some people stay as single discipline engineers, but many don't. My CEng dates back to IEE but the one thing I have never been is an electrical engineer (I was an electronics engineer when I became chartered). I've managed mechanical engineering, software engineering, even dabbled slightly in civils, nowadays I've no idea what I'd put in the middle of "Chartered xxx Engineer"!
The point to me is that CEng - and IEng and EngTech - are awarded on, and are a mark of, your professional approach to engineering. They are not a mark that you have expertise in any particular field, your CV shows that and it will change over your career, but that you go about your work in a professional way - including (hopefully) being honest about not working in fields in which you are not competent.
So I'd suggest taking it the other way - instead of saying "CEng MIET" just say "CEng". Which institute awarded it shouldn't matter.
Incidentally, I was one of those who at the time campaigned against the change of name from the IEE to the IET. But I've now changed my mind, I think this was the right thing to do, the idea of labelling institutions (and hence their members) as single discipline engineers for the purposes of professional registration is pretty unhelpful. I'm now a member or fellow of four institutions - the IET basically just for my CEng, and the other for specialist technical information. And my membership of the others could change if my career takes another lurch in another direction. I think that's a pretty good model for the next generation of engineers.
