I have been an IET (IEE) member for quite a few years. I joined when I felt that I had reached the required level of competence/responsibility. The process at this time was fairly simple, the main problem was finding sponsors and seconders.

As I was working for a major electric wire and cable manufacturer at the time this was a little surprising but I think it highlights one of the main problems:

IET membership is not actually relevant to most industries.

I am not aware of anything I actually need to be MIET CEng to do. I have to have my radiation safety qualifications otherwise my employer is not allowed to operate the facilities. This requires me to have a science or engineering degree. Others will need specific (usually safety) qualifications to carry out various tasks but MIET is not a requirement.

In other lands there are specific ‘Professional Engineer’ requirements but these don’t seems to apply in Europe.

How could I persuade a bright young engineer to take the time to apply for IET when she/he is building up their career, dealing with buying houses, starting families, etc. What is the relevance?

I have been professionally registered and an IET (IEE) member for more than 30 years. I fully support the concept of proof of competence, continuing professional development etc. I do not think the IET presents itself well and makes it difficult to encourage others to join. I remain a member at the moment, however I am 65 next month and will probably not renew my membership after that. I have the hope that I can have more influence from inside than from outside but that is probably just wishful thinking.

Louise Chapman said:

Being on the Engineering Council’s register also backs up that credibility and professionalism. Standing out in the industry opens up more opportunity for progression either within your organisation or in a new role elsewhere.

Louise Chapman said:

Becoming professionally registered is really a personal choice. It may not always be required in your role, however is is a personal achievement to be proud of. I hope this help to encourage your engineers to think about becoming professionally registered in the future.

I'd better start by saying that I'm a PRA, and was an IET mentor for very many years. But further than that, my day job is as an Independent Safety Assessor, which involves me checking organisations for the competence of their staff, and part of the evidence its most definitely useful to see is evidence of Professional Registration.

BUT.

I would have to agree with the points made here that professional registration is simply not recognised across the majority of the engineering industry. I don't know if it's still the case, but certainly many years ago it could even be seen as a hindrance in a number of industries and organisations - a mark of someone who was more interested in getting letters after their names and "pen pushing" than doing actual engineering. My take on this is slightly different to some of the comments made here, I think this is an extreme shame for engineering as a profession. (As will become clear I disagree with that view, at least as it's assessed today, but I understand totally where it came from.) I honestly see the process of working towards professional registration as one that achieves raising standards in the profession - having spent very many years recruiting and manging engineers and technicians at all levels imaginable I find the standards in UKSpec to mark exactly the professional approach I would want to see in those staff. Whether in the very "institute friendly" industry I work in now or in the very "institute sceptic" industry I worked in for the first part of my career.

I think we have a challenge, and we need to recognise as an industry that we have a challenge. So I think we do need to be honest that the letters "CEng" or "IEng" or "EngTech" might not in themselves help your career (as others have said, it so much depends on which industry, and which branch of that industry, you work in). But going through the application process, and therefore being forced to think about what it means to be a well rounded engineer or technician who will actually add value to a business and be a pleasure to work with, really will help your career. And if individual engineers and technicians can see that then when they in turn become managers then they are more likely to look for it in the their staff.   

Thanks,

Andy

I joined the IEE in 1994!

I was them involved with various Branch committees for a long time before minor things like having a family. My CEng is primarily based on the back of that experience more than technical responsibility in my job role.

However, these days I'm more involved with INCOSE UK (or IfSE as it will be), which has more suitable publications and events for Systems Engineers like me.

But why keep my membership and CEng?

I have found that my CEng has got my CV a second glance or filtered up the pack (although I could transfer my CEng). I put a lot of work into my CEng, so dropping it feels very wrong. A lot of companies won't pay you extra for a CEng, but the actual engineering managers know what it is and many do value it.

I wouldn't mind achieving FIET at some point which is definitely influencing me to stay.

Ultimately, although I work in Systems Engineering, its microcontrollers and related technology that actually perk my interest the most. So I am still an electronics person at heart.

Can I ask how many working experiences(after School) when you applied the CENG in MIET ? 

Hello 

Hi Matthew,

There is no fixed period, but I'd guess that typically it takes engineers about 5 years' after graduation to meet the competences? But some do it quicker (particularly if they've worked through their education). And for some it will take longer to get to the appropriate level, maybe 10 years.

Thanks,

Andy

With 26 years of dedicated experience in my field since completing my education with a Level 4/5 HNC, I have continuously honed my expertise. Despite the financial commitment of securing a loan to cover annual fees of £3,000 and the unforeseen circumstance that led to my withdrawal from the final year of my course, I have remained actively engaged in both hands-on work and office responsibilities. My role encompasses a broad spectrum of activities including enquiries, estimating, costing, invoicing, design, installation, and certification of intricate systems.
In my progressive career journey, I have ascended to the position of Director at the company where my professional path began, now overseeing a team of 10 employees. My commitment to professional development was marked by attaining MIET status in 2015. Last year, I pursued the IEng qualification, not out of necessity, but to formalize my status as an Engineer. After a rigorous 22-week preparation, I presented and engaged in the interview process. Despite the setback of receiving a request for additional evidence of competencies E1 and E5, and the subsequent need to restart the application process, I remain steadfast in my pursuit of excellence.
Reflecting on the journey, I acknowledge the challenges faced due to financial constraints during my younger years, which precluded the opportunity for university education. Nevertheless, my professional experiences have shaped a comprehensive skill set that continues to drive the success of my company and my personal growth within the industry.

Hi Andy. I am reaching out to seek your perspective on a matter concerning the IEng qualification process. Specifically, I am curious about the rationale behind the requirement for candidates who do not achieve the necessary benchmarks in certain competencies, for example E1 and E5 in my situation to undergo the full application procedure. Would it not be more efficient to permit the submission of supplementary evidence pertaining solely to the competencies that were found lacking? Such a targeted reassessment method could not only expedite the process but also promote more focused enhancement of the applicant’s professional engineering skills. For context, I was unsuccessful in meeting the standards for 2 out of the 17 competencies.

Additionally, on a personal note, I am intrigued to know which musical instruments you play. Having read your other post, I am eager to learn more. 

Hi,

AMK said:

who do not achieve the necessary benchmarks in certain competencies, for example E1 and E5 in my situation to undergo the full application procedure.

Yes, it's a bit of a pain that these are mandatory "fails". What ideally should happen is that this is identified at pre-interview assessment, and further documentary evidence is requested then, or if that fails that it's requested at interview. I think the point is that because multiple opportunities should be given, as much has been done as can be done and if it still fails then it is a reassessment. This is why, as a PRA, I always make as certain as as I can that my applicants firstly have the E competences coming through as clearly as we can in their application, and that they also have clear examples to give as interview - the IET try to make sure in PRA training that we're aware of the criticality of these. And the E competences are actually pretty easy if you know what to look for, they are mostly about "I am aware of..." rather than "I can demonstrate..." 

AMK said:

I am intrigued to know which musical instruments you play

Oh gosh...there's a saga. Originally classical piano, and then other keyboards (synthesizers and accordion), then (because I found that if you turn up to a jam with a keyboard people expect you to clever things) switched mainly to bass guitar, then learned classical guitar, then wrecked my shoulder partly through too much guitar practice and partly through poor DSE practice (competence E2!) and had to stop playing for a few years, then home constructed mini-basses (U-basses), then tenor guitar, Irish bouzouki, and Tenor Mandola (basically anything bigger than a mandolin which has 4 or 8 strings), then a couple of years ago melodeon, and as of last Christmas chromatic button accordion. In public I mainly play electric bass and Irish bouzouki, but I'm starting to occasionally dare to play the squeezeboxes in public. I'd like to get back to occasionally playing the synths in public if someone would let me - sadly in the world I play in even just having the amplifier on the bass gets the occasional comment!

Wow, genuinely impressed with your the array of instruments you’ve mastered! You must have a real passion for music, that’s some versatility as a musician.As for me, I’ve been a devoted guitarist for 37 years, and although these days I’m strumming on a modest £10 charity shop acoustic, the love for the instrument hasn’t waned. Keep on rocking ! and squeezing those boxes!

Wow, genuinely impressed with your the array of instruments you’ve mastered! You must have a real passion for music, that’s some versatility as a musician.As for me, I’ve been a devoted guitarist for 37 years, and although these days I’m strumming on a modest £10 charity shop acoustic, the love for the instrument hasn’t waned. Keep on rocking ! and squeezing those boxes!