Best engineering jobs?

<p>Lets say you just graduated with some sort of engineering degree and want to get into the industry, preferably into a management position as quickly as possible. What are considered the best companies/programs that will help you achieve this goal? Google? GE? Boeing?</p>

<p>The easiest answer is to just go into investment banking or management consulting. Of course those aren't really "engineering" jobs. Nevertheless, many people with engineering degrees, particularly from the top schools (i.e. MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, etc.) will take such jobs in lieu of taking a "real" engineering job.</p>

<p>Another way to go is to obviously join a tech start-up, or even found one yourself. By doing so, you can become a manager starting from day 1. Of course, joining a startup is a high-risk, high-reward play.</p>

<p>sakky, you honestly push banking too much -.-</p>

<p>sakky has a point in how boring engineering jobs tend to be, since (according to him) you end up simply maintaining structures or similar mundane work. the companies with more enjoyable jobs would be larger ones like Google and Boeing, and those are harder to get into. so what i pull out of this is 1) go into what sakky says, or 2) get into research (maybe this is why Google and related firms are more interesting...?). research is where all the new things come from and where government (ie stable) work exists, and investment banking etc is where the money is.</p>

<p>I don't have the eyesight for it, but I just read an article in the latest Air and Space magazine about a guy who graduated from the Air Force Test Pilot School. He flew over forty aircraft, including a Goodyear blimp, before he even became an official test pilot. It's not wandering the office, making sure the technical engineers are hard at work while drinking your coffee and pulling down more cash, but I think it would be the best engineering job.</p>

<p>Or be Burt Rutan. That'd be a sweet gig too.</p>

<p>LMAO.. sakky f**king cracks me up. The following words appear in 98% of his posts:</p>

<p>investment banking
consulting
top schools
MIT
Stanford
Berkeley</p>

<p>you forgot Wharton......and money</p>

<p>lol sakky..</p>

<p>
[quote]
sakky, you honestly push banking too much -.-

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
sakky has a point in how boring engineering jobs tend to be, since (according to him) you end up simply maintaining structures or similar mundane work.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hey, it's not me that's "pushing" it, and it's not just 'according to me'. I am not the one telling the top engineering students from the top schools (i.e. MIT, Stanford, etc.) to go off to consulting or banking. They're making that decision all by themselves. </p>

<p>Consider this quote from Time Magazine:</p>

<p>"Even at M.I.T., the U.S.'s premier engineering school, the traditional career path has lost its appeal for some students. Says junior Nicholas Pearce, a chemical-engineering major from Chicago: "It's marketed as--I don't want to say dead end but sort of 'O.K., here's your role, here's your lab, here's what you're going to be working on.' Even if it's a really cool product, you're locked into it." Like Gao, Pearce is leaning toward consulting. "If you're an M.I.T. grad and you're going to get paid $50,000 to work in a cubicle all day--as opposed to $60,000 in a team setting, plus a bonus, plus this, plus that--it seems like a no-brainer.""</p>

<p><a href="http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1156575,00.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1156575,00.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Now, did I convince Nicholas Pearce to say that? Of course not. I don't even know who Nicholas Pearce is. He decided all by himself to say what he said. I didn't push anybody to do or say anything. He was the one who concluded that engineering work is boring and that other jobs pay better and provide better opportunities. He did that all by himself. </p>

<p>Consider this statement from MIT regarding the EECS program, which is the largest and arguably most famous of all of MIT's programs.</p>

<p>"Recently, a quarter or more of students form or join start-ups or small companies, a quarter go on for PhDs, medical or law school, around a quarter go into investment banking and other financial or management consulting, and the rest get jobs in large and medium-sized technology companies. Our current top companies include: Oracle, Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Goldman Sachs."</p>

<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2010/ch...s/course6.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2010/ch...s/course6.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>So think about that. 25% of MIT's EECS students go off to consulting or banking. And of the top 5 employers of MIT EECS students, one (Goldman Sachs) is an investment bank. Is this because I pushed them to do this? I don't think so. Again, they chose that all by themselves.</p>

<p>Don't shoot the messenger. I am just telling you what the situation is. I didn't create the situation. </p>

<p>
[quote]
LMAO.. sakky f**king cracks me up. The following words appear in 98% of his posts:</p>

<p>investment banking
consulting
top schools
MIT
Stanford
Berkeley

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you don't like my posts, feel free to not read them. Nobody has a gun to your head.</p>

<p>dude i LOVE your posts. but i burst out in laughter everytime i read them coz they're ALL about ibanking, consulting and ivy league schools.</p>

<p>From a (former) engineer - go with the company that is desparate for help. Work 60+ hour weeks on the hot-button, near-crisis program. Offer to travel. Offer to work different shifts. Offer to live wherever they want. Make your boss look great. Succeed at achieving the schedule and success criteria the bosses set, and if you're in the right place at the right time, with the right boss, they'll promote you. If you go into a slow, stagnant industry, you won't have as many opportunities.</p>

<p>
[quote]
dude i LOVE your posts. but i burst out in laughter everytime i read them coz they're ALL about ibanking, consulting and ivy league schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Like I said, I'm just following the cue. The undeniable truth of the matter is that a lot of engineering students, especially at the top engineering programs (i.e. MIT, Stanford, etc.) want to become consultants and bankers. That's not my fault. I didn't tell them to want that. They decided that all by themselves. </p>

<p>The OP's question was * "Lets say you just graduated with some sort of engineering degree and want to get into the industry, preferably into a management position as quickly as possible. What are considered the best companies/programs that will help you achieve this goal" *. To that, the answer almost certainly is a consulting firm or a bank. Like it or not, they are in fact considered the best companies/programs that wil help somebody achieve the OP's goal to enter management as quickly as possible. </p>

<p>Look, I can't help it that that's the answer. It IS the answer to that question, whether we like it or not. Personally, I don't really like it. I think engineering firms should provide better career opportunities. But until and unless they do, the best way for somebody with an engineering degree to get into management will continue to be the path of consulting or banking, like it or not. Look at what Nicholas Pearce said in the Time Magazine article. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Work 60+ hour weeks on the hot-button, near-crisis program. Offer to travel. Offer to work different shifts. Offer to live wherever they want. Make your boss look great. Succeed at achieving the schedule and success criteria the bosses set, and if you're in the right place at the right time, with the right boss, they'll promote you.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And that comment (which I agree with) only serves to reinforce my point further. Seriously, think about it. If you're going to be working 60 hours a week and offering to travel and live wherever the company wants anyway, you might as well just join a consulting firm. After all, if you're going to be working like a dog anyway, you might as well earn a consultant's salary & bonus, build your network, and get that easier track to management. The major advantage of engineering over consulting is supposed to be that you will work fewer hours, but if you're going to be working long hours anyway...</p>

<p>I'm just trying to figure out what industry the OP wants to go into...</p>

<p>I think over the next 5 years we are going to see a huge shift in the number of engineering grads from "top schools" who go into consulting/finance as the baby boomers really start retiring and America's shortage of engineering talent really shows up. The demand for fresh-out-of-school American engineers will go through the roof. Same with opportunities for promotion and upward mobility in a lot of engineering companies (since the managers will tend to be even older than the technical positions). Engineers will have quite a bit more incentive to actually become engineers.</p>

<p>And sakky, joining a company that's come to some tough times will generally be many times easier than joining a MC firm, at least as far as I know. Yet the opportunities could be similar, the work could be more interesting, you likely wouldn't travel near as much or be required to work 60 hours a week, etc.</p>

<p>In structural engineering (for buildings), it is relatively easy and relatively cheap to start your own firm after 5-7 years of experience. This is about how long it takes to get potential clients to take you seriously. That would be a quick path to management.</p>

<p>haha it's true that everytime I read sakky's post, I see "MIT"</p>

<p>nothing wrong with that MIT is a great school.</p>

<p>I'm a structural engineer, is it really that easy to start your own firm? Assuming that you were a hardworking licensed engineer. Is it competitive competing with other firms? Do you know anyone who has done this? Thanks.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think over the next 5 years we are going to see a huge shift in the number of engineering grads from "top schools" who go into consulting/finance as the baby boomers really start retiring and America's shortage of engineering talent really shows up. The demand for fresh-out-of-school American engineers will go through the roof. Same with opportunities for promotion and upward mobility in a lot of engineering companies (since the managers will tend to be even older than the technical positions). Engineers will have quite a bit more incentive to actually become engineers

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I certainly hope so. But as it stands today, frankly, there aren't that many strong incentives for the top engineering students to actually become engineers, as opposed to doing something else. Sad but true. </p>

<p>Some of you may remember ariesathena, a former poster here, and a former chemical engineer who worked for a while and then went to law school. She's written numerous posts about how she'll be making more money as a new lawyer than engineers with decades of experience at her old company were making. Furthermore, she gets 'social prestige' perks, in that even a lot of her old engineering colleagues said that they were happy she was making a transition to a 'better' and more glamorous career and how they wished they could do the same. For whatever reason, engineering is not considered a particularly desirable career, relative to something like law. Again, sad but true. I wish it wasn't true, but it is true.</p>

<p>Now, don't get me wrong. I still happen to think that engineering is still a great choice for the vast majority of people out there, as the fact is, the vast majority of people end up with mediocre careers. For example, if you barely graduated from a no-name school, getting that $40-50k engineering starting salary is a very sweet deal. The average engineer makes more as a starting salary than the average American salary (and that mostly includes Americans who have many years of experience in their job). The problem is that engineering companies don't seem to want to bid up for the very best engineering students, hence, many of them decide to do other things. It's like a quasi-Communist system of pay, where the mediocre workers get a great deal, but the best workers don't get a good deal (relative to what they could get elsewhere). </p>

<p>
[quote]
haha it's true that everytime I read sakky's post, I see "MIT"</p>

<p>nothing wrong with that MIT is a great school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I simply use MIT as an example because nobody disputes its engineering strength. </p>

<p>But I could just as easily use a school like Stanford. Many Stanford engineering students will also never work as engineers, opting instead for other careers. </p>

<p>
[quote]
ve actually known sakky as an anti-berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would hardly say I'm "anti"-anything. I have supposed Berkeley numerous times, particularly its graduate programs. </p>

<p>I simply happen to think that pointing out problems with a particular school does not make you anti-that school. That is, unless, you believe that nobody should ever point out problems.</p>

<p>well said sakky. hmm consulting... i wanna do it now =)</p>

<p>Eh if I wanted to be a consultant, I wouldn't take engineering.</p>

<p>I'd rather design and make stuff than give people suggestions.</p>

<p>Well, Industrial Engineering is good for Consulting...but i mean there s no point in majoring in chemical engineering if you want to consult.</p>