Incorporated Engineer (IEng) UK vs Engineering Technologist (ET) Pakistan

The constant and never ending comparisons between academic qualifications (HNC BEng, and MEng); and registrations awards (IEng, and MEng); suggests that the IET, EC, engineers, and industry (or HR to be precise) treat all engineers as having the same level of intelligence, or IQ. 


It is perfectly possible for an BEng IEng member to be capable of educating themself by reading text books and technical manuals; and elevatating their knowledge to Masters level or even higher, in a matter of days. On the other hand, a CEng with masters degree may need to attend courses to help them understand new knowledge. And of course, it can be the other way round. It's really down to the individual's intelligence.


So this concept, or belief, that an BEng IEng is always below an MEng CEng fails to considers the IQ level of the individual BEng IEng holder compared to the individual MEng CEng holder.


We're now in a world where engineers have to face with newer computer systems; an array od operating systems, and programming languages. And there's more of it, that requires employing more engineers with technology skills; and of course the WWW provides a limitless access to knowledge and networking. Dealing with all the continuing varied and changing knowledgw, and handling the added responsibilities are far more important to the reputation of the individual engineer, and employer, than just engineering titles.


The obsession with being called an engineer, as opposed to an engineering technologists, is rather antiquated and out of touch with the times. We're much more engineer and technologists and plain engineers.


We really need to modernise our identity to fit the responsibilities in front of us in this new world.


Sorry about the rambling. I am less talented than others in communicating my thoughts in a fluid manner than others in these forums.

The constant and never ending comparisons between academic qualifications (HNC BEng, and MEng); and registrations awards (IEng, and MEng); suggests that the IET, EC, engineers, and industry (or HR to be precise) treat all engineers as having the same level of intelligence, or IQ. 


It is perfectly possible for an BEng IEng member to be capable of educating themself by reading text books and technical manuals; and elevatating their knowledge to Masters level or even higher, in a matter of days. On the other hand, a CEng with masters degree may need to attend courses to help them understand new knowledge. And of course, it can be the other way round. It's really down to the individual's intelligence.


So this concept, or belief, that an BEng IEng is always below an MEng CEng fails to considers the IQ level of the individual BEng IEng holder compared to the individual MEng CEng holder.


We're now in a world where engineers have to face with newer computer systems; an array od operating systems, and programming languages. And there's more of it, that requires employing more engineers with technology skills; and of course the WWW provides a limitless access to knowledge and networking. Dealing with all the continuing varied and changing knowledgw, and handling the added responsibilities are far more important to the reputation of the individual engineer, and employer, than just engineering titles.


The obsession with being called an engineer, as opposed to an engineering technologists, is rather antiquated and out of touch with the times. We're much more engineer and technologists and plain engineers.


We really need to modernise our identity to fit the responsibilities in front of us in this new world.


Sorry about the rambling. I am less talented than others in communicating my thoughts in a fluid manner than others in these forums.