<p>do u think this combination still has potential for the future ??</p>
<p>Of course. The industry looks for those who can manage engineers besides business majors. It looks pretty good, I'd say.</p>
<p>phpguru</p>
<p>100% agree.....I don't think there will be a reduction in demand for the technical-manager combo in your lifetime. If anything, I think the demand may rise. And its not only industry......other sectors, including government & services can benfit from the eng w/ an MBA combo.</p>
<p>It is still, in my opinion, the best combination, both now and in the forseeable future.</p>
<p>PhD vs MS/MBA? What about that? I suppose it ultimately depends on future goals: academia vs industry.</p>
<p>phpguru</p>
<p>yeah industry for me im doin compE now so then after MBA ill try to work in managment position in tech</p>
<p>Golden Combo :)</p>
<p>The ability to demonstrate excellence in engineering as well as in managing other people will take you very far in your career.</p>
<p>A strategy I highly recommend is once you've got your BS in engineering, then find a company to work for that will pay for your MBA. You'd find this perk much more common about 20 years ago, but it's still worth asking about.
Some aerospace companies now let you attend any grad school you want but only subsidize you up to the local state school tuition rate.</p>
<p>I would suggest at least MS in engineering, BS in engineering does not really mean anything: now there are WAY too much BS engineering ppl out there, with only BS in engr you definately cannot compete with those elite import engineers from Asia.</p>
<pre><code> In addition, This Engineering/Busi strategy only works if you have a rock solid knowledge in your specific engineering field, thats the only thing and most important thing that makes you different from other business major, BS is simply not enough to build you such a engineering background.
</code></pre>
<p>EE_Sannin, I concur !</p>
<p>I personally would not put off working as an engineer till I had an MS. You can make a much more informed decision about what your graduate focus should be after you've developed some ring experience and know the job market and your goals better. Anyway the point is to have your employer subsidize your graduate work as much as possible, whether it's an MS or MBA. </p>
<p>Actually, I wouldn't get an MS in engineering unless I knew I wanted to strictly stay on the technical path and didn't want management. After 25 years in the field I find it's really your track record as a technical manager that gets you promoted, not the advanced degree. But a BSEE/MBA combo for example, gets a lot of technical respect in aerospace--nobody lumps him/her in with a BA/MBA beancounter. And that combo certainly opens doors (or at least gives you more options) in upper management, marketing & sales that pure engineering degrees or pure business degrees can't.</p>
<p>When a company pays for an MS Engineering degree or an MBA, doesn't that mean that you are limited to programs that you cann attend part-time?</p>
<p>Yes, generally one is limited to part-time or evening programs if you are working and your employer is paying. Some companies offer sabbaticals, or allow you to cut back your working hours while in school, so ask. But flexible hours seem to be the norm at large companies like Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, Northrop so actually it's much much easier now to accomodate a school schedule than it was 20 years ago when I went. </p>
<p>It's not of course like the traditional daytime MBA program. You find the students taking the night classes are older, working in the field, and from a wider variety of backgrounds, such as math, computer programming, engineering, than the daytime students. Quite a few have some interesting job or are already managers and contribute some stimulating classroom discussions. But it will take a bit longer too--3 years rather than the typical 2.</p>
<p>Sorry to bump an old thread...but are you guys referring to something like Dartmouth's MEM/MBA program? I plan on either attending Cornell or University of Washington for a computer engineering (I'll be a senior in HS next year) BS, maybe an MS in 5 years. After that, I was thinking full-time grad school, and it seemed like Dartmouth's MEM/MBA program would be ideal. </p>
<p>I guess almost everyone who spends 7-8 years in school to get a PhD ends up teaching or researching rather than working in the industry? What would the pay be for being a researcher/professor at a top-flight engineering program (probably like $250,000 or something wouldn't it?)?</p>
<p>I am sorry, it is extremely rare that Engi. PhDs get paid 250,000 dollars a year...If you really need that salary, then you should look into business. good luck. :)</p>
<p>Engineering PhD's often start out pretty high (90-100k per year is not uncommon) but top off very quickly. Hardly any pure engineers make more than 150k. It's the managers that make the big bucks.</p>
<p>In big tech companies (your Intels and the like) there are often parallel tracks of pay scales for advancement for engineers. One track is for management--you go from being an engineer to a senior engineer to a group manager to a project manager, all the way up to VP of engineering. The other track is for science/engineering--you go from being an engineer to a senior engineer to a principal engineer, all the way up to CTO. </p>
<p>In both tracks each level up has more responsibility and pay, but the two tracks require very different skill sets: the would-be VPs of engineering need to be outstanding managers, while the would-be CTOs need to be brilliant scientists/engineers. (There is a fair bit of jumping between tracks, too.)</p>
<p>Since y'll are trying to debate whether the merits of the technical or management track, why not split the difference? You can consider entering a dual program, getting both a Master's of Science and an MBA at the same time. Several top schools, most notably MIT, Northwestern, and Michigan offer such programs.</p>
<p>I talk about that at length here.</p>