OT: PhD in Electronic Engineering

[Joerg]

Hi,


Haha! Yes, advices b-d seem quite sensible!

IF b = US
THEN e = lawyer
ELSE e = husband of rich woman or get plum bureaucrat job in Brussels

 

[Bob Eld]

Hi everyone,

Just wondering if the experienced engineers in the "real world" could
help me out a little with this:

I'm about to finish my BEng in Electronic Engineering (UK degree), and
last week an academic from my university offered me a fully funded
(tuition fees + living expenses) PhD in analog IC design. Great, I
thought, a free PhD, working with a bunch of great people, in an area
that interest me, at one of the top universities in the country.

BUT:
I am not really aiming for a career in academia, or full-on research,
for that matter. In fact, I have always been more of a hands-on guy,
doing electronics as a hobby for quite a while now. For after uni, I was
hoping to land a job as an electronics design engineer (hence posting
here), because I think I might enjoy actually making stuff that sees use
in the real world.

Now, I have doubts if a PhD will do me any good for that kind of career
goal. First, I'm not sure whether employers for "normal" electronics R&D
jobs even want PhDs - I'm assuming a bachelor's or master's degree with
work experience would be more appreciated. Then, there is also this
smell of a highly specialized theoretician that a PhD carries (hence why
I haven't considered doing one so far). Although I'm wondering if my
electronics hobby could show that I am actually someone who knows about
"real world" electronics. Though I might just have illusions about how
electronic engineering actually is "out there"...

An alternative would be to spend another year on a taught MSc
(coursework on MSc level, but no strong research component), to just get
a more specialized education, without the ivory tower appeal of a PhD.

I also have this job with a 2-man shop lined up where I could work for
one year pretty much doing electronics design on my own, just to get a
nice portfolio to show off when applying for a "real" company afterwards.

It's probably just worth mentioning that I don't really intend to settle
down in the UK, so it would be interesting how this issue is viewed
somewhere else.

So, my questions to the seasoned engineers:
PhD for electronics: even bother?
If yes, to what extent does doing practical work on the side help?
Or would you rather recommend just getting a "quick" MSc?
Or not bother with further education at all, and just dive straight into
the real word?
Any other suggestions?

I am looking forward to your comments!

Cheers,

Robert

Get the PhD given the opportunity you describe and assuming you can afford
it. You'll never regret it. It will be invaluable for your career path
especially as you gain experience and work beyond being just another grunt
engineer. It will open doors and give you clout and prestige in your
profession. That is especially true if you move on into management or
company ownership. It will assist in areas you don't even think about today
such as raising capital to start a business or fund a project. You can't be
too educated. When a doctor speaks, people listen. Get the degree and use it
wisely.

 

[JosephKK]

Don't be a dickhead - Do the PhD. The only people who will say you don't
need a PhD are people who don't have one. You will probably never get
another opportunity and you will certainly never get a better
opportunity. A PhD will open a vast range of doors that an undergrad
degree won't and many doors a Master's won't. If for a particular reason
it might be a hindrance than you can leave it out of the resume, but
those cases will be rare and will also becoming rarer.

50 year ago a certificate was a "good" qualification and you could get a
job almost anywhere, 30 years ago a diploma was "good" but it's not now,
in another 10 - 20 years an undergrad degree will not be as any where
near as valuable as it once was. The world-wide emphasis in business now
is to employ qualifications to ensure compliance to regulations. That
won't change unless all the worlds lawyers, politicians, bureaucrats and
lawsuits disappear. If you don't have the paper you won't get through
the door, regardless of how skilled you are. The practical experience is
invaluable to you - but note well the order in which things happen - If
you don't have the paper you won't get through the door, regardless of
how skilled you are.

That is not entirely true. As little as 20 years ago i was asked to be a
non-degreed supervisor of degreed engineers. I was stupid and did not
take it. I had been bad mouthing local non-degreed engineers supervising
degreed engineers for (what i thought were) good reasons.

Nowdays in that same workplace there are no non-degreed engineers, but
some techs that completed the BS degree and are now engineers.

I doubt such could happen any more, HR would prevent it.

About that time i counseled a good friend to go for the MS, it made him a
much better engineer and opened many doors for him. As part of that i
helped him learn an electronic CAD tool. He has forgiven me for
requiring that he personally develop such expertise, he has found out
(the hard way) just how valuable it is.

Similarly i had PHD engineering professors that were no good and what
little they did know was 30 years out of date.

There is already moves afoot to make the MS the minimum degree, if we
engineers (who impact society at least as much as Doctors and Lawyers)
want the same professional respect, we must needs demand at least an MS
as the first working level degree. It is coming, prepare accordingly.

Yeah, a bit of drift there.

 

[JosephKK]

One other thing to consider is that over the last couple decades, EE
careers have morphed into serial job hunting exercises on a per-
project basis.
Companies just don't seem too interested in tenured EE's anymore.
It used to be an EE (of any stripe) was your ticket to a long,
rewarding career. Not anymore.

Now, (with rare exception) you can expect to be shuffled back and
forth between companies as their economic well-being flows with the
tide, and as their product life cycles play out in the market. --
which life cycles can be exceedingly short these days!! Cell phones
(and almost anything telecom-related) are good examples. Ditto if
you're into software. Maybe 5x ditto?

A Ph.D. wouldn't hurt of course, particularly if you can somehow
manage to start any kind of "part time" gig to at least chip away at
the experience curve.
In many fields, employers will often value experience over academia,
with the exception of certain job functions (many relating to product
liability, for example, where a Ph.D. pulls additional weight before a
judge.)
Another "benefit" of a Ph.D. status is that it will likely shut you
out of low-paying, low-advancement opportunities you probably wouldn't
want in the first place.
An insurance policy of sorts, to keep you from accepting dead-end
jobs.

In any event, the better letters to put behind your name would be
P.E., not simply Ph.D.
I feel that would open up many more doors, and financial rewards for
you.

-mpm

Aye, there is an actual legal difference in the testimony of a P.E.
versus all other comers.

 

[JosephKK]

They tried to. The charge was to be 'Destruction of Government
Property' since I did the work outside of a military 'Service Depot'.
The TV station had been waiting over three years for the people from the
(only) AFRTS Service Depot in Sacramento, CA. to show up and do their
job. The charges were never formalized. They ended up 'going away'
when the USARL Commanding General heard about it. For one thing, he was
happy that someone was willing to do repairs, and the other was that
most people couldn't find the work I did.




They kept telling me that I wasn't very 'GI'. I would just laugh and
tell them, "I'm 'US' dammit. You drafted me, so learn to live with it!
Now leave me alone, so I can do my job."


GI = Enlisted
US = Draftee

I was rejected from enlistment for five separate medical 4F ratings,
but that didn't stop them from drafting me for my electronics skills.

Typical Guv'ment triple standards. In '71 i chose navy as the least
dishonest way to go, i came back from boot camp to a letter from the
local draft board, telling me to report. I replied, sorry i am already
in the navy.

 

[Adrian C]

Hi everyone,

Just wondering if the experienced engineers in the "real world" could
help me out a little with this:

I'm about to finish my BEng in Electronic Engineering (UK degree), and
last week an academic from my university offered me a fully funded
(tuition fees + living expenses) PhD in analog IC design. Great, I
thought, a free PhD, working with a bunch of great people, in an area
that interest me, at one of the top universities in the country.

You _have_ to do it. The real world with your current degree in the UK
market is not that disimilar to that for everyone else - and the
competition for some jobs is horrendous.

And you want to get out. You need points to enter some countries. A PhD
will certainly help to do that. BTW learn a foreign language.

Twenty years ago I got the same degree, flunked the last year and came
out in third division. After working in research for a few years as a
technician, became a self taught computer programmer. Now fed up of
working for idiots, I'm heading for survival selling off things on eBay
and probably end up running a coffee shop. My degree now means zilch,
and at 43 I'm now too old to make investing in doing further IT
qualifications worthwhile given the current UK employment situation.

Wish you the best. Go for it!

 

[Joerg]

Aye, there is an actual legal difference in the testimony of a P.E.
versus all other comers.

But why is it that I've heard of so many PEs looking for a job, some
rather desperately? Seem it's mostly utilities who hire them, because
they have to for certain jobs. Civil engineering PEs all seem to have a
job, electrical not so much.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

You _have_ to do it. The real world with your current degree in the UK
market is not that disimilar to that for everyone else - and the
competition for some jobs is horrendous.

And you want to get out. You need points to enter some countries. A PhD
will certainly help to do that. BTW learn a foreign language.

German or Mandarin

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

But why is it that I've heard of so many PEs looking for a job, some
rather desperately? Seem it's mostly utilities who hire them, because
they have to for certain jobs. Civil engineering PEs all seem to have a
job, electrical not so much.

With a P.E. (P.Eng in Canada) a license is granted by a professional
organization wot can discipline the practicioner if we are found to
violate the written code of ethics or are incompetent. The actual
practice of professional engineering (according to some reasonable
definitions and with some given exclusions) may be limited to members
of the organization. Much as with other professions such as medicine
and law.

It's obviously not a substitute for knowledge and experience, and
isn't all that required outside of certain industries (aerospace,
utilities etc.). Generally if a mistake can result in personal injury
or death it's more likely to be required. The requirements in Ontario
are to have met confirmed education (at least a 4-year degree, IIRC)
and experience requirements (some years working under a licensed
engineer) and to pass a written exam covering both law and ethics.
If you don't have skills that are in demand, it won't make a lick of
difference, IMO.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany, P.Eng PMP

 

[Joerg]

With a P.E. (P.Eng in Canada) a license is granted by a professional
organization wot can discipline the practicioner if we are found to
violate the written code of ethics or are incompetent. The actual
practice of professional engineering (according to some reasonable
definitions and with some given exclusions) may be limited to members
of the organization. Much as with other professions such as medicine
and law.

IIRC in the US some states require that registered guys carry PL
insurance. Which you can't get if you do med projects. That alone turns
it what the Romans used to call ad absurdum.

It's obviously not a substitute for knowledge and experience, and
isn't all that required outside of certain industries (aerospace,
utilities etc.). Generally if a mistake can result in personal injury
or death it's more likely to be required. ...

So, then, why are pretty much none of the automotive engineers licensed?
And aerospace, and medical, and ...

... The requirements in Ontario
are to have met confirmed education (at least a 4-year degree, IIRC)
and experience requirements (some years working under a licensed
engineer) and to pass a written exam covering both law and ethics.
If you don't have skills that are in demand, it won't make a lick of
difference, IMO.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany, P.Eng PMP

Over here in the US the requirements to even be able to sit for the test
are rather onerous, so most people just don't care. Employers sure
don't, except utilities and such. In Europe most countries don't even
have all that license legalese, except to some extent England.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

So, then, why are pretty much none of the automotive engineers licensed?
And aerospace, and medical, and ...

Most aerospace guys *are*. Anything structural especially.. Don't
know about medical-- they seem to be more interested in how deep the
insurance pockets are than qualifications in my limited experience.

I don't think there is a culture in automotive that puts liability on
the heads of the engineers. In civil and much of mechanical there
certainly is.

Over here in the US the requirements to even be able to sit for the test
are rather onerous, so most people just don't care.

Looks like at least some states have a technical content to the exam,
which seems pretty redundant unless they feel they don't have a way of
knowing if the degrees are any good.

Employers sure
don't, except utilities and such. In Europe most countries don't even
have all that license legalese, except to some extent England.

To be completely compliant you'd probably have to maintain licenses in
every jurisdiction in which you have customers, which is pretty
impractical, but in general I think the self-regulating body approach
is the correct one for a profession. These days they're even extending
their tentacles to technicians, which I think is going too far- more
of a money grab, but then companies like Microsoft started it with
their "certification" money-making activities.

 

[Joerg]

Most aerospace guys *are*. Anything structural especially.. ...

EEs there typically aren't. I doubt that the MEs are but next time I can
ask. The typical scenario in many companies that need to stamp stuff is
that they have one PE on staff, and the others aren't.

Also, in med, aero and similar markets just about any design must go
through a myriad of agency tests so the chances for a screw-up are
rather slim.

... Don't
know about medical-- they seem to be more interested in how deep the
insurance pockets are than qualifications in my limited experience.

In the whole 24 years I've never met a PE in medical devices. It would
have been on their business cards.

I don't think there is a culture in automotive that puts liability on
the heads of the engineers. In civil and much of mechanical there
certainly is.


Looks like at least some states have a technical content to the exam,
which seems pretty redundant unless they feel they don't have a way of
knowing if the degrees are any good.

But first you must have had a FE test, often come from an ABET-compliant
university (which can in essence be construed as age discrimination),
and have worked 4 years under a PE. Before being allowed the PE exam. If
your main industry (like mine) does not have any PE's that's sort of
impossible. Oh well ...

To be completely compliant you'd probably have to maintain licenses in
every jurisdiction in which you have customers, which is pretty
impractical, but in general I think the self-regulating body approach
is the correct one for a profession. These days they're even extending
their tentacles to technicians, which I think is going too far- more
of a money grab, but then companies like Microsoft started it with
their "certification" money-making activities.

I prefer not to increase the regulatory burden on a profession. Unless
there is hardcore cause, and with engineers that is not the case.
Otherwise no-license places like Europe would have gone up in a fireball
already and they haven't. Why on earth should some bureaucrats decide
who is an engineer and not a university? That never made sense to me,
never will.

 

[[email protected]]

Most aerospace guys *are*. Anything structural especially.. Don't
know about medical-- they seem to be more interested in how deep the
insurance pockets are than qualifications in my limited experience.

I don't think there is a culture in automotive that puts liability on
the heads of the engineers. In civil and much of mechanical there
certainly is.


Looks like at least some states have a technical content to the exam,
which seems pretty redundant unless they feel they don't have a way of
knowing if the degrees are any good.

When I graduated the EIT (Engineer in Training) part of the PE exam was
certainly technical but nothing to do with an EE. Most of the topics we
didn't even study, as an EE. Didn't bother and certainly haven't missed it.

To be completely compliant you'd probably have to maintain licenses in
every jurisdiction in which you have customers, which is pretty
impractical, but in general I think the self-regulating body approach
is the correct one for a profession. These days they're even extending
their tentacles to technicians, which I think is going too far- more
of a money grab, but then companies like Microsoft started it with
their "certification" money-making activities.

You can bet politicians won't leave a source of revenue lay fallow after
someone like M$ shows there is money to be made *without* the force of law.

 

[[email protected]]

Spehro Pefhany wrote:


In the whole 24 years I've never met a PE in medical devices. It would
have been on their business cards.

"PE in medical devices"? PEs here aren't "in" anything, one of the reasons
the whole concept of the PE is silly.

<snip>

 

[[email protected]]

That is not entirely true. As little as 20 years ago i was asked to be a
non-degreed supervisor of degreed engineers. I was stupid and did not
take it. I had been bad mouthing local non-degreed engineers supervising
degreed engineers for (what i thought were) good reasons.

Nowdays in that same workplace there are no non-degreed engineers, but
some techs that completed the BS degree and are now engineers.

I doubt such could happen any more, HR would prevent it.

About that time i counseled a good friend to go for the MS, it made him a
much better engineer and opened many doors for him. As part of that i
helped him learn an electronic CAD tool. He has forgiven me for
requiring that he personally develop such expertise, he has found out
(the hard way) just how valuable it is.

Similarly i had PHD engineering professors that were no good and what
little they did know was 30 years out of date.

There is already moves afoot to make the MS the minimum degree, if we
engineers (who impact society at least as much as Doctors and Lawyers)
want the same professional respect, we must needs demand at least an MS
as the first working level degree. It is coming, prepare accordingly.

I imagine some would like to see these "moves afoot" come to be. It would
simply cheapen the BSEE degree.

Yeah, a bit of drift there.

How about that AGW?

 

[Joerg]

"PE in medical devices"? ...

I meant working in the medical device industry. Heck, even at testing
labs I haven't met any.

... PEs here aren't "in" anything, one of the reasons
the whole concept of the PE is silly.

I never understood the sense of it. When IEEE wanted to push PE I told
them I'd cancel my membership if they did. Just imagine, a trade
organization being in favor of bringing _more_ bureaucratic burdens on
their own membership. How sick is that? Well, they stopped, so I am
still a member

 

[[email protected]]

I meant working in the medical device industry. Heck, even at testing
labs I haven't met any.

Ah, I misunderstood. Sorry.

I never understood the sense of it. When IEEE wanted to push PE I told
them I'd cancel my membership if they did. Just imagine, a trade
organization being in favor of bringing _more_ bureaucratic burdens on
their own membership. How sick is that? Well, they stopped, so I am
still a member

I never joined IEEE because they're run by academics and corporate executives.
Hardly two groups who have the same economic goals of the working engineer.

 

[Joerg]

[email protected] wrote:

[...]

I never understood the sense of it. When IEEE wanted to push PE I told
them I'd cancel my membership if they did. Just imagine, a trade
organization being in favor of bringing _more_ bureaucratic burdens on
their own membership. How sick is that? Well, they stopped, so I am
still a member

I never joined IEEE because they're run by academics and corporate executives.
Hardly two groups who have the same economic goals of the working engineer.

It's become a bit better, but only a little. I am a member because it
looks good for a self-employed person, mainly since that indicates that
you are bound by their code of ethics. Plus IEEE gave me just about the
shortest and easiest to remember email address one can have because I
signed up early for their alias service. Other than that I don't see
much value right now.

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:

[...]

... PEs here aren't "in" anything, one of the reasons
the whole concept of the PE is silly.

I never understood the sense of it. When IEEE wanted to push PE I told
them I'd cancel my membership if they did. Just imagine, a trade
organization being in favor of bringing _more_ bureaucratic burdens on
their own membership. How sick is that? Well, they stopped, so I am
still a member

I never joined IEEE because they're run by academics and corporate executives.
Hardly two groups who have the same economic goals of the working engineer.

It's become a bit better, but only a little. I am a member because it
looks good for a self-employed person, mainly since that indicates that
you are bound by their code of ethics. Plus IEEE gave me just about the
shortest and easiest to remember email address one can have because I
signed up early for their alias service. Other than that I don't see
much value right now.

Mine isn't short enough? ;-)

 

[Joerg]

[email protected] wrote: [...]

... PEs here aren't "in" anything, one of the reasons
the whole concept of the PE is silly.

I never understood the sense of it. When IEEE wanted to push PE I told
them I'd cancel my membership if they did. Just imagine, a trade
organization being in favor of bringing _more_ bureaucratic burdens on
their own membership. How sick is that? Well, they stopped, so I am
still a member
I never joined IEEE because they're run by academics and corporate executives.
Hardly two groups who have the same economic goals of the working engineer.

It's become a bit better, but only a little. I am a member because it
looks good for a self-employed person, mainly since that indicates that
you are bound by their code of ethics. Plus IEEE gave me just about the
shortest and easiest to remember email address one can have because I
signed up early for their alias service. Other than that I don't see
much value right now.

Mine isn't short enough? ;-)

Mine is longer

Only by one letter though, and has the easier to remember .org domain.