Have Faith in the IET

The IET has conducted thousands of registration assessments in recent years, mostly resulting in a successful outcome. There is a formal appeals process, which is taken very seriously and it has often decided to re-run interviews with a successful recommendation on the second occasion. The number of appeals relative to the number of assessments is very small.  

 

The interview is probably the most important factor for an IEng or CEng application, because it is the only face-to-face opportunity. However as many will testify, there is a thorough process of review before a Professional Review Interview is arranged. This pre-interview aspect is especially important for those without fully accredited qualifications and/or qualifications in a different discipline to their current area of practice. If interviewers are asked to probe a particular competence area, then a residual doubt exists after initial scrutiny, which it is hoped can be resolved successfully. Interviewer's recommendations are reviewed by a final panel before a decision is taken.

 

I understand why Hubert is frustrated and disappointed. As he describes it, the wrong recommendation may have been made by the interviewers. However they are not able to engage in public debate via the forums to offer their side of the story. From his description, it appears that the Interview would have been successful had it been for IEng, but he has been judged slightly short in one or more of the crucial  CEng A&B competences. This suggests that he is a perfectly good engineer, but in the interpretation of the interviewers, a little over reliant on “standard solutions”, rather than using deeper analysis to  “innovate” or resolve more “complex” technical challenges, which is how CEng is described in UK-SPEC.

 

As with any interview process, only those present will have a legitimate perspective on what went on. I am sure that many readers have been involved in a job selection interview or other similar situation where they felt that an interviewer disliked them, or discovered that “the motions were being gone through” to justify selecting an existing favourite. In a Professional Review Interview everyone can be successful, but in practice some will not be, because is it an assessment.

 

As I see it, these forums are an opportunity for members to discuss issues of common interest, not a vehicle to pursue personal grievances. In this situation there is a confidential appeals process.

 

From a personal perspective it disappoints me to see someone who is clearly a perfectly capable engineer feeling “a failure”, especially when it seems that quite a fine margin separated him from achieving CEng, in which case he may have been positing of his pride. There are ways in which we could reduce this “knife-edge” effect. For example, in another thread I suggested that perhaps if “Registered Engineer” (or similar) was introduced, then a monitored pathway could be put in place for those seeking a transition to CEng. Some Professional Institutions have been promoting IEng as a "stepping-stone" for this purpose, but as comment in these forums will testify, their approach seemed primarily intended to position CEng as "elite or exclusive", offended experienced IEng registrants and seems to have had very limited success in attracting “up & coming” Engineers.   

 

I'm sorry Hubert that you feel your interview was poorly conducted. It is obvious to me that you are a competent professional engineer, but unfortunately you weren’t recommended for CEng on this occasion. Not everyone passes every assessment in life at the first attempt. Seek support and advice which will be willingly given by IET members. You could pursue an appeal and/or continue you development and seek another assessment in due course.  I hope that a promised work promotion or some other consequence hasn’t been placed on gaining CEng now.

 

It is the right of members to criticise The IET, which has strengths and weaknesses, including the ambitious scope of Engineering that it seeks to embrace, building upon its pre-eminence in electrically related disciplines. However this needs to be rational and well-argued, not just emotive. The relative merits of different frames of reference when designing pipework is a perfectly reasonable discussion, I don’t have sufficient expertise to comment usefully, but your point seems reasonable.  The personality element of criticising someone else for being “too academic” achieves little, although “academic versus practical” is a common theme in much of the professional engineering institution world.

The IET has conducted thousands of registration assessments in recent years, mostly resulting in a successful outcome. There is a formal appeals process, which is taken very seriously and it has often decided to re-run interviews with a successful recommendation on the second occasion. The number of appeals relative to the number of assessments is very small.  

 

The interview is probably the most important factor for an IEng or CEng application, because it is the only face-to-face opportunity. However as many will testify, there is a thorough process of review before a Professional Review Interview is arranged. This pre-interview aspect is especially important for those without fully accredited qualifications and/or qualifications in a different discipline to their current area of practice. If interviewers are asked to probe a particular competence area, then a residual doubt exists after initial scrutiny, which it is hoped can be resolved successfully. Interviewer's recommendations are reviewed by a final panel before a decision is taken.

 

I understand why Hubert is frustrated and disappointed. As he describes it, the wrong recommendation may have been made by the interviewers. However they are not able to engage in public debate via the forums to offer their side of the story. From his description, it appears that the Interview would have been successful had it been for IEng, but he has been judged slightly short in one or more of the crucial  CEng A&B competences. This suggests that he is a perfectly good engineer, but in the interpretation of the interviewers, a little over reliant on “standard solutions”, rather than using deeper analysis to  “innovate” or resolve more “complex” technical challenges, which is how CEng is described in UK-SPEC.

 

As with any interview process, only those present will have a legitimate perspective on what went on. I am sure that many readers have been involved in a job selection interview or other similar situation where they felt that an interviewer disliked them, or discovered that “the motions were being gone through” to justify selecting an existing favourite. In a Professional Review Interview everyone can be successful, but in practice some will not be, because is it an assessment.

 

As I see it, these forums are an opportunity for members to discuss issues of common interest, not a vehicle to pursue personal grievances. In this situation there is a confidential appeals process.

 

From a personal perspective it disappoints me to see someone who is clearly a perfectly capable engineer feeling “a failure”, especially when it seems that quite a fine margin separated him from achieving CEng, in which case he may have been positing of his pride. There are ways in which we could reduce this “knife-edge” effect. For example, in another thread I suggested that perhaps if “Registered Engineer” (or similar) was introduced, then a monitored pathway could be put in place for those seeking a transition to CEng. Some Professional Institutions have been promoting IEng as a "stepping-stone" for this purpose, but as comment in these forums will testify, their approach seemed primarily intended to position CEng as "elite or exclusive", offended experienced IEng registrants and seems to have had very limited success in attracting “up & coming” Engineers.   

 

I'm sorry Hubert that you feel your interview was poorly conducted. It is obvious to me that you are a competent professional engineer, but unfortunately you weren’t recommended for CEng on this occasion. Not everyone passes every assessment in life at the first attempt. Seek support and advice which will be willingly given by IET members. You could pursue an appeal and/or continue you development and seek another assessment in due course.  I hope that a promised work promotion or some other consequence hasn’t been placed on gaining CEng now.

 

It is the right of members to criticise The IET, which has strengths and weaknesses, including the ambitious scope of Engineering that it seeks to embrace, building upon its pre-eminence in electrically related disciplines. However this needs to be rational and well-argued, not just emotive. The relative merits of different frames of reference when designing pipework is a perfectly reasonable discussion, I don’t have sufficient expertise to comment usefully, but your point seems reasonable.  The personality element of criticising someone else for being “too academic” achieves little, although “academic versus practical” is a common theme in much of the professional engineering institution world.