The engineering council have commissioned market research into addressing the vagueness problem but appear to have ignored the advice given.

The IET recognises all members (MIET, EngTech, IEng and CEng) as professional engineers, including those who aren't in the IET. The reason for this is simple.

The IET recognises that science, engineering and technology are rapidly advancing and that registered engineers aren't the only group who can be described as professional engineers. This has been stated in many documents prior to the IEE and IIE merger, including statement in the MIET section.

So what makes IEng and CEng different to non-registered professional engineers? To understand this one has to appreciate what the word engineer and engineering is?

Engineering is the application of pure scientific principles (Maths, Science) to practical problem solving. Or to put it another way, it is the art of scavenging knowledge to solve practical problems. That is to say, engineers take knowledge from the Mathematics, Physics etc to help come up with solutions to solve practical problems that otherwise hammers and chisel couldn't solve .

Chartered engineers can be described as the highest form of knowledge scavengers, because they in addition, take knowledge of Business and Management to help lead teams, market products and run companies.

Not all professional engineers adopt all of the knowledge in carrying out their work. Most use only technical skills and leave out the management and business skills. And so do not meet the requirements to qualify for CEng status. Unless they have academic qualifications above BSc. I.e PhD or Professorship.

To summarise, all involved in engineering to various degrees are professional engineers, because they use some of the knowledge to solve practical problems at various stages. In future, engineers will scavenge from other subjects in achieving solutions to solving practical problems.

Perhap future CEngs will need Political skills to enable them to actively influence the go-ahead of engineering projects, on the media. Appearence on Question Time perhaps, explaining why wind farming would be beneficial to the country's prosperity etc. Present CEngs lack this skill which is why they never appear on the media and thus not enjoy the kind of status other professions take for granted.

Edited: 23 April 2012 at 07:35 PM by mbirdi

The Engineering Council is not interested in promoting the Incorporated Engineer . The promotion compaign is just a white-wash.
If EC really wanted "IEng" to have a respected status should have withdrawn from Sydney Accord and stopped describing "IEng" as "Technologist" internationally.
Yes EC declares "IEng" as professional engineers in UK , but ignores the rest of the world .
Many people in the middle-east and also USA now does not consider British BSc holders as "engineers"
The EC has to first accept that it has failed in "International" recognition.
It is not too long that Europian Union will also not accept British first cycle degrees as "engineers" . Just look at the latest proposals to changes of directive 2005/36EC .
The EC should stop like acting as if "rest of the world" doesn't matter and really promote and protect British first cycle degree holders and "IEng registrants" .
We "IEng registrants" can't help feeling neglected and degraded by EC international policies. Seems "IEng" will be sold down the river eventually.
WITHDRAW INCORPORATED ENGINEER s FROM SYDNEY ACCORD.
After all perception prevails everything else.

I certainly agree with you that IEng should be withdrawn from the Sydney Accord. I think the main purpose was to create an extra revenue stream for the UK based PEI's in the hope that engineers from signatory countries would join UK institutions.
Similarly the International Engineering Technologist (IntET) professional award has had absolutely no take up, this should be withdrawn as well.

As some others have said here it appears despite 3 people I know who have applied for Ieng all have failed and been offered EngTech (I was the 4th person) None of us have degrees or have worked in a design department. Yet all of us got to the PRI stage on the merits of our support documents.

We are all EngTechs now and view it as a consolation prize as it was better to come away with something than nothing. But it does ask the question does having a degree make you a better engineer? I do not think so but IET blantantly thinks so. Maybe thats why the numbers are dropping?

Achieving IEng requires a balance of formal qualifications and further learning/competences. Having less formal qualifications means that more confirmation of underlying knowledge and understanding will be required.

Not having a degree doesn't exclude anyone from achieving IEng or CEng - this wasn't always the case, but it certainly is now! If anyone at the institution is taking this stance then they are going against stated policy.

Hope this helps!

-------------------------
David Parr BSc.CEng MIET
PRA

David

My advisor said to me it was very strange to get to an interview without having the right qualifications ie a degree. I applied for Ieng the supporting documents were of that level yet I was awarded the EngTech. I was told I had more of a "working engineering approach".

I would disagree with your advisor because, since 2009, it isn't strange at all! Nor should it be in my opinion, providing you can demonstate further learning - each case is treated individually. I don't know the details of your indvidual case of course, so cannot comment on your final sentence.



-------------------------
David Parr BSc.CEng MIET
PRA

Thats the problem I have with IET and from speaking to others as well there seems to be very little consistency. But I digress from the OP. When I told my company I was applying for Ieng they looked at me blankly and asked what it was why I would want to do it.

Unless you are in those "circles" the Engineering awards are not well known. Everyone knows Ceng but the other awards go unheard.

Waverider - Looks like the Degree is all important
Around 15 years ago I applied to IMechE for CEng and was turned down - I took advice and put right all they said was wrong - approx 5 years ago I applied to the IET (Best option for my job/requirements) - Just missed CEng on points - again took advice and did as was asked - last year applied again and lost by a mile - just been give the same advice as 5 years ago continue in job and reapply after 2/3 years.
Reason given at each interview
1st not Graduate level - not capable of Graduate level thesis
2nd - Not full HSE responsibility for whole site (Only full engineering responsibility) also time as Consultant in previous position - O&G maintenance - "no responsibility" - panels words)
Last time after advice - not enough responsibility. ALREADY TURNED DOWN BY IMechE
At the time full PSSR responsibility, budget c £1.2m capex c£800k Mods and change, authorisation level £25k - small department c15 men.

Given up this time (Maybe's try IMechE or SoE)

Find PRA advice is conflicting / poor and totally unbelievable

Tim Guy
MSc MBA HND(Engineering) DEM (Hons) IEng MIET

It is not good that the PRA's advice can vary so much and would seem to suggest some significant improvements are required in the guidance they are given. However that said applicants come from a wide range of backgrounds, and with a wide variety of qualifications and experience, and so in that respect the advice often fits the relevant persons circumstances rather than one size fits all.

Let's hope things can be improved. I am sure however that David Parr will soon be here to advise on the improvements being made. I cannot say that I agree with all his points, past or present, but at least he seems to be prepared to make the effort to give an opinion.

Regards.

Oh go on then, I'll bite!

PRAs are trained (and regularly retrained) in accordance with the requirements of the Engineering Council who insist that all such volunteers are kept up to date. This process is audited.

It is very important that we all conform to the same standards. The institution needs to be fair in its dealings with all members, and by that I mean the real definition of fairness, not any politically corrupted new definition (sorry!).

I am aware of Tim's case because I did advise him last year. I am obviously not going to go into any details in a public place, but everything I had visibility of was perfectly professional, and I gave my honest opinion of his case. I'm sorry Tim that you thought it poor and unbelievable, but based on your submission (which I have just re-read) I would honestly not have changed my advice to you.

Finally I repeat , the exemplifying qualification (Masters Degree in the case of CEng) is not mandatory, and all cases are assessed individually. I know of many who have been recently awarded CEng with HND (and less!).

-------------------------
David Parr BSc.CEng MIET
PRA

There are only 25 people from UK who has applied for "Technologist" title and all with immigration purposes. Does'nt this tell you something?

It is not difficult to understand why EC-UK still insists to compromise IEng internationally.
It seems main concern is to attract registrants from other countries.That means concern is in reality of finance.

But registration numbers are falling because no one likes to be described as "Technologist".
It is inevitable that a total collapse will follow. It will not be just the number of registrants that will diminish , all British first cycle degrees degraded internationally will also diminish into oblivion.
It is with this concern that I am sending my son to USA for his doctoral degree and not to UK (despite we are EU citizens).
EC-UK and IET are acting like KAMIKAZE.