Re-application of CEng after being rejected

Hi KC,

I wanted to offer some encouragement, as I also faced rejection on my first application—you’re not alone!

After my first attempt, I proactively sought a new role within my company that strengthened my application, which helped me succeed in my second PRI. Like Andy mentioned, I chose Option 1 as it was the lower-risk path. While reapplying quickly is tempting, it’s crucial to provide stronger evidence and carefully consider the PRI feedback once you receive it from the IET.

My key advice: treat your second attempt as a fresh application. You’ll likely have new interviewers who will reassess all competencies, not just the ones you previously fell short on.

Don’t lose hope—I kept going after my first rejection and became a Chartered Engineer in January! Wishing you all the best.

Hi Rebecca,

Thank you for your encouragement as I have just been quite lost these few days. You tell me what to do with real example.

Unfortunately Option 1 is not the best fit as I can only get promoted in the Company when I become CEng.

Could you share you timeline of you first and second application? Thank you very much!

You’re welcome! I completely understand how you feel—I felt the same way at first, but creating an action plan helped me move forward.

Give yourself time to process the results, but don’t give up!

For option 1, a promotion isn’t always necessary. In my case, moving from senior to principal engineer also required CEng, so instead, I made a lateral move within my company to lead more complex safety-critical projects. This directly addressed the only competency gap highlighted in my first application.

Before planning your next steps, review your interview feedback carefully as your gap may require a different action plan rather than a promotion or lateral move.

As for timing, I waited exactly one year between my first PRI result and my second application. This allowed me to execute my action plan, transition to a new division, and re-apply with confidence knowing I bridged the gap. 

Hope this helps!

Rebecca Edojah said:

For option 1, a promotion isn’t always necessary.

Absolutely, it's only about gaining evidence of competences. I helped an applicant very recently who, following a rejection, had a discussion with myself (as PRA) and their line manager about the insufficient competences, and between us all we easily came up with some opportunities within their current role to take on some specific tasks to show those competences. Only a very few months later they passed successfully.

Any sensible line manager should welcome a member of staff who actually want to take on additional responsibilities in their current role! And, quite apart from achieving professional registration, it's also nicely positioning the candidate for future promotion.

Andy Millar said:

Only a very few months later they passed successfully

I speak about this with my line manager frequently - they submitted their application after I did and received confirmation of their success 3 months ago, whilst I am in the limbo of waiting for an answer that will arrive in <insert made-up number> of weeks.  I find this inconsistent approach, interesting...  How do you think the process would stand up if compared to the C competencies?

We both work in consultancies, so sometimes it is not as easy as claimed to find roles to build up your experience (you go where the work is).  But the point that crops up again and again in this forum is timelines.  I am absolutely certain that the applicant you helped was worthy, but what the original poster perhaps needs is firm guidance along the lines of "position yourself to gain experience of a competency, wait <insert absolutely firm, not made-up number> of weeks before re-submitting”.

I would say that applicant was very lucky as he was guided under an ideal PRA. However, you did provide confidence for my next submission! 

That is right. Sometimes i found not solid number of waiting time for resubmission. Quite confused

Lee Knight said:

"position yourself to gain experience of a competency, wait <insert absolutely firm, not made-up number> of weeks before re-submitting”.

Unfortunately as David and Rebecca have said, it's impossible to give such advice...it's only about having the evidence of the competences, and maybe one applicant was within a hair's breadth of having it and another was a long way off.

I know the example I'm about to give could raise all sorts of other questions, but it's very real: it is possible to fail an application by not showing evidence of the 'E' competences. Now many of these don't need "experience" of any particular duration, they just need "understanding". Let's say, for example, that a CEng applicant gave no good evidence of E3 "Understand the principles of sustainable development and apply them in their work", and when asked about it at interview also showed no understanding. (Maybe because they hadn't been advised on this by a PRA! We're trained to bludgeon the E competences into applicants.) This doesn't require them to spend x weeks working on a sustainable development project, it just needs them to reflect and understand how their current work relates to it. Pretty much they could potentially reapply immediately.

While on the other hand a CEng applicant who is not actually taking any innovative or complex decisions (in the eyes of the assessors) could need months or years (or indeed forever) to gain the experience to show evidence of the A and B competences.

So I do appreciate the frustration, I've been asked this question many times when helping failed candidates, but there can't be a firm number of weeks. It's got to be by understanding the specific competence(s) missed, and how far by, and then resubmitting when the applicant judges that they've now been met. As Gerard suggests, it's best to work through the reasons for rejection with a PRA who (if there aren't grounds for appeal) can hopefully help the candidate identify the specific additional experience they need and potential ways of achieving this. The candidate can then judge how long it's likely that they'll take to achieve this. 

(Incidentally by my statement "only a few months later" I was telescoping "only a few months after they were notified that they had failed, they were ready to submit again, and then after the assessment period they were successful". Sorry if that wasn't clear, the durations of the assessments themselves are a whole different discussion!)

Thanks,

Andy    

Lee Knight said:

"position yourself to gain experience of a competency, wait <insert absolutely firm, not made-up number> of weeks before re-submitting”.

Unfortunately as David and Rebecca have said, it's impossible to give such advice...it's only about having the evidence of the competences, and maybe one applicant was within a hair's breadth of having it and another was a long way off.

I know the example I'm about to give could raise all sorts of other questions, but it's very real: it is possible to fail an application by not showing evidence of the 'E' competences. Now many of these don't need "experience" of any particular duration, they just need "understanding". Let's say, for example, that a CEng applicant gave no good evidence of E3 "Understand the principles of sustainable development and apply them in their work", and when asked about it at interview also showed no understanding. (Maybe because they hadn't been advised on this by a PRA! We're trained to bludgeon the E competences into applicants.) This doesn't require them to spend x weeks working on a sustainable development project, it just needs them to reflect and understand how their current work relates to it. Pretty much they could potentially reapply immediately.

While on the other hand a CEng applicant who is not actually taking any innovative or complex decisions (in the eyes of the assessors) could need months or years (or indeed forever) to gain the experience to show evidence of the A and B competences.

So I do appreciate the frustration, I've been asked this question many times when helping failed candidates, but there can't be a firm number of weeks. It's got to be by understanding the specific competence(s) missed, and how far by, and then resubmitting when the applicant judges that they've now been met. As Gerard suggests, it's best to work through the reasons for rejection with a PRA who (if there aren't grounds for appeal) can hopefully help the candidate identify the specific additional experience they need and potential ways of achieving this. The candidate can then judge how long it's likely that they'll take to achieve this. 

(Incidentally by my statement "only a few months later" I was telescoping "only a few months after they were notified that they had failed, they were ready to submit again, and then after the assessment period they were successful". Sorry if that wasn't clear, the durations of the assessments themselves are a whole different discussion!)

Thanks,

Andy