<p>Do u think engineers are paid less as compared to their knowledge and their skill and the amount of hardwork they do, to become one</p>
<p>Definatly, the manager who will maange the engineering teams, will easily make double what any of the engineers make, and sometimes even that much more than the engineering managers themselves. Engineers tend to be timid and not stand up for themselves. Business people aren’t like that, thus they get paid more.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Double? That’s a nice job. An engineering manager usually makes about 20% more than the engineers she manages. And an engineering manager usually has an engineering degree.</p>
<p>What you’re probably referencing is the difference between life-long engineers, and those engineers that leave practice to move through management, consulting, or other non-technical areas. Frequently, the difference between these groups is the level of risk aversion (hence the “timid” perception of life-long engineers).</p>
<p>What I was trying to reference there is as follows. lets say you have a team of 30 engineers, it is highly likely that they will be managed by a engineering manager than once was a engineer or is some type of systems engineer. That engineer or systems engineer will make more than the 30 standard guys. Though that systems engineer will also have a manager who is most likely a MBA. Some of these managers have really simple jobs and its just to manager the one systems engineer. Other manager multiples. Those managers will easily make 2x+ what the standard engineers make, for drastically less work. I am referring to systems engineers are project engineers or engineers that are project managers.</p>
<p>I tend to side with G.P. on this. </p>
<p>One thing that is being overlooked is that (depending on the field), managers are expected to bring projects/work into the company and/or they’re the ones managing the finances of the project. Engineers are usually only responsible for the technical aspect of the project. It is up to the project manager to make the project financially feasible. That’s what engineering companies are all about really… making money. Nobody cares how smart you are or how hard you work if you can’t bring in the green.</p>
<p>But that person didn’t make it to that level in a company because he has an MBA - that person demonstrated some skill set, such as project management, employee coordination, communication, etc. That person likely had to work very hard early in his career, and take many risks to get to that level. </p>
<p>Also, being a manager isn’t easy just because you’re not solving a partial differential equation, in fact I’d argue the opposite. Most “general” engineering programs can be solved by recognizing the problem, then flipping to the right page in some textbook. There’s usually a clearly delineated right/wrong answer (it works, it doesn’t work), and jobs are fairly secure. </p>
<p>In upper management, most problems don’t have a right or wrong delineation, and they’re often more fluid and take considerable subjective judgment. You can make the absolutely right decision, and things can still go completely wrong. Positions are much riskier, jobs are less secure, and promotion involves some level of luck. In addition, you don’t have first-hand knowledge of most circumstances - you getting reports from groups all over the organization and try to compile them into a picture. Plus, you have to deal with incorrect reports, sabotage, etc. </p>
<p>It might look easy to someone with no experience, but it’s not. It’s much harder. That’s why managers are paid more. If a manager and an engineer were paid the exact same amount, no one would ever want to be a manager.</p>
<p>“But that person didn’t make it to that level in a company because he has an MBA - that person demonstrated some skill set, such as project management, employee coordination, communication, etc.”</p>
<p>In a well run company, maybe. More likely he played golf with the right people and knew whose a** to kiss.</p>
<p>actually ive seen way more people get MBA’s and move directly into middle managment than do the whole ladder system.</p>
<p>OP:
Engineers are typically paid more early on than many other majors so in answer to your question, I think they tend to get paid a salary commensurate with their effort and skills. Beyond the starting salary, like other jobs it’s up to the individuals to be recognized for promotions within engineering, into lead positions, into management positions, into other corporate positions.</p>
<p>Engineer vs management - I don’t think most managers are making double what the engineers are. Consider that the engineers are making 90K-110K that’d mean the managers are making 180K-220K which is not typical as a first level manager. One usually has to be higher up the management chain to make that kind of money - i.e. not the young MBA guy who likely wouldn’t be managing engineers anyway. These engineering managers can also move up the ranks of management to eventually earn that kind of dough and they often don’t need an MBA to do so.</p>
<p>
Why would a systems engineer have a manager who’s most likely an MBA? I haven’t seen this. Also, in most places it’d be very unusual to have a manager with only one person under them - especially if it’s a manager that doesn’t also do the development work. It doesn’t make any sense although maybe there are some bloated companies that allow this. </p>
<p>And being a manager usually isn’t a slacker job. They typically work more hours, have a lot more responsibility and are held accountable for the direction and results of the entire group they manage, and for engineering managers, often have their sleeves rolled up working alongside with the rest of the engineers (they usually still consider themselves an engineer even after they enter management).</p>
<p>Frank Here…</p>
<p>I’ve got to call this like I see it. One of the more successful alumni out of IE at Purdue went on to make billions, he quotes “there is no shortage of smart people and good ideas, there is a very real shortage of good managers.” Venture into your physics department and take a look around you, smart people everywhere would be my bet - however, I would run and hide before I let most of them run anything I’ve got. There is a reason that companies look for extracurricular activities, leadership roles, and leadership potential - they need those qualities. Everyone who graduates from an engineering program has learned a good deal of technical skills, but most come far sort of having the sought after “leadership qualities”. It’s just a fact of life; in any industry, in any sport, on any battlefield - the leader will always be the one at the top. Not everybody has these qualities, and they are much harder to learn than calculus. Do I think that managers always deserve to get paid more than an engineer, no; there are bad managers just like there are bad engineers. Some would argue that a bad manager has a shorter shelf life than a bad engineer, so maybe it all works out in the long run… Needless to say, someday when I’m running my company(s) I will look for the same qualities - I will get the 4.0 kid to crunch the numbers for me - but I’ll take the 3.0 kid with communication skills and a rounded lifestyle to make a manager.</p>
<p>Perhaps I didn’t answer your question directly, however, the end result is that I think engineers get paid very well - 100+ isn’t chump change… If you are an engineer that can do more than crunch numbers, go for the management position, I know many people who will take your spot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First thing I thought when I saw this thread; why didn’t they just pm him then?</p>
<p>OP:</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>As stated above engineers start making very good salaries that are on par with the education they worked their butt off for. Perhaps that is the problem, or at least part of it. Engineers get treated well enough to start that they stop trying and garner a sense of entitlement. </p>
<p>Another issue I have that concerns engineering pay is the career path for an engineer. Many companies don’t have one. They’ll have engineer I, II, III, Sr., Super Sr, or some other BS that means we pay you 5% more than they teir before you but your responsibilities haven’t changed and we just want to keep you doing the technical leg work. That’s fine and dandy if you want to do the leg work, but the options should be made clearer to young engineers; either get out of engineering or be happy with the pay.</p>
<p>There seems to be two trajectories for an engineer who wants to earn more, at least in my field; Project Manager or Operations Manager and years of service or MBA. For either of these options to work you’ll need to know more than what you learned in engineering shool and more than what you can learn in any school. Soft skills, people skills, and how to tackle “human” problems (people not cooperating) will be your bread and butter. Lets face it, you’re not going to get paid more merely because you know how to design and work a spreadsheet or repair the most expensive machine in the building that goes “bing”.</p>
<p>Anyway, advice for young engineers; get a mentor, join toastmasters, learn as much as you can within your field, and learn what you can outside of engineering and outside of any technical scope.</p>
<p>As a junior in high school, I’d have to say that this is one of the most informing threads I have read around here, about management and whatnot. Thank You.</p>