As what the other posters have commented, systems engineering has different meanings depending on the industry. The definition I am familiar with is that a systems engineer is the lead/head engineer, who manages all the sub engineering specialties in a project. You will typically see this type of engineer job at large corporate companies. Another classification for systems is project engineer, which is a term typically used in the construction industry and the responsibly is the same. In my experience, this type of systems/project engineer holds any technical engineering degree, me, ee, ce, chem etc.
The biggest issue that I have with systems/project engineering is that companies hire them straight out of college. In my experience, you can’t hold this position without relevant experience in other sub specialties in a projects life cycle. I stated before that you are the lead engineer and you have to understand all the sub specialties in your project team. Therefore you are responsible to figure out how the rubber meets the road. You are manage the technical side of the engineering, while the project manager, if there is one, manages the overall budget and schedule. You might be thinking why do you need someone to manage the technical side of the engineering? Well in a large company with many sub engineering specialties, you will need someone with technical knowledge to keep things going. Think of yourself as Frank Underwood in House of Cards as the Whip. This is why you need to understand all the other sub engineering specialties in a company. Without experience, how are you going to tell if you designer designed something to code or maybe your analysis person is totally BSing you. There is a gross tendency for engineers to over analyze things, which is what we’re supposed to do, but you need someone that can see the big picture, make the calculated decision, or call shenanigans.
I work as a project engineer in oil &gas pipe industry. Therefore, I have to deal with pipe designers, pressure control, hydraulic, instrumentation, and contract engineers for piping projects.
But most systems engineers (or any recent grad from any type of engineering ) are not coming out of undergraduate programs and getting plum leadership jobs off the bat. It’s like anything else- they are starting as analysts, systems integration people, and moving up with experience. If HR is sending a Systems graduate with no experience right out of college to interview for a major project management type of job, they may not be screening things properly (including identifying a systems engineer to begin with) or the employer is not the right fit to begin with. Systems engineers can be hired by places like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed, Boeing , Ford, etc. but there is a learning curve and dues to be paid with any recent hire. Many systems people also end up in early career at consulting firms like Deloitte and Accenture. But they are not starting off immediately being the lead in anything with clients. That takes time in any career.
And I would guess that it has been a long time since he has actually worked as an engineer. There are people with engineering degrees in politics and in politically-related jobs, but they all moved into some kind of management role long before hitting that point.
I am not sure what that means. Politics basically involves three types of people - the ones who make political decisions, the ones who try to influence political decisions, and the ones who are influenced by political decisions. Sometimes individuals can be more than one type, but regardless all but a handful engineers are going to be in that last group… which is a bad place to be if you like politics.
My experience mirrors zer0c123’s. I don’t know how you get the experience necessary to be a good technical lead without knowing one of the disciplines involved. It’s good to talk about gaining experience, but gaining experience in what? Being an ME? An EE? An AE? No. With enough CS background, data structures, algorithms, etc. and some software internships, you might get a software job with a systems engineering degree, but applied math with a CS minor would be an easier sell, I think.
Didn’t recommend it to my own; won’t recommend it to someone else’s kids. If they’re determined to do it, that’s a different thing, and best wishes. If they’re asking about it, they deserve some balance to flashy websites: IMO it’ll be more work for less reward than a traditional engineering major.
Well, you clearly think systems is bogus and that’s okay. Most systems people are going to be working on coordinating things, optimization, etc. , not trying to take the “technical” lead, especially right out of school, and many do work with computers and in consulting. I have already said the OP is now not interested in systems and that is okay too. She should keep her options open and explore ALL her options. Now is the time to do that. Systems is not for everyone but kids are being recruited by top employers with no problem so something must be right about it. Some of this reminds me of the Big Bang Theory where everybody is always putting down what other people are doing. Systems probably seems too soft for some of you hard core engineers and that’s okay too. And my husband is an engineer and CMU grad. He had no problem with either direction our sons have taken-systems and information engineering with one, industrial and systems for the other. They were both top students and could have probably done well in any engineering discipline. But they are both social , personable and systems and its broad focus and flexibility worked best for them. They are both doing very well and are happy in the directions their careers are going and that is what counts for anyone in the long run.
Systems engineering is basically technical management. Getting an undergraduate degree in this area seems foolish to me since, typically, any “normal” engineer can become a “systems engineer”. In other words, you don’t need a degree in systems engineering to become a systems engineer.
Whether or not you think a bachelor’s in systems is “foolish,” and that basically any engineer can do the things that systems engineers can do, the bottom line is that kids are pursuing it and they are getting jobs. Here’s another “flashy” website, this one from the University of Pennsylvania. I like the part from “A Student’s Perspective” in particular. http://www.ese.upenn.edu/prospective-students/undergraduates/sse.php
It’s actually great that other engineering fields can use the body of knowledge from systems. Nothing wrong with thinking like a systems engineer even if that is not your main area. Good luck to the OP in finding a school that you like and have fun exploring all the great possibilities out there in terms of what to study.
Some of the disdain for systems engineering on this thread really has been interesting to see. I hope there is not this level of negativity to any systems engineers you may know in real life. Some of the thinking has evolved over time as to whether or not you had to have a degree in something else and then go on to systems at the graduate level. The International Council on Systems Engineering says that it is still the preferred path but that “Many undergraduate students since the 1960’s have proven that an undergraduate degree in systems engineering is a valuable passport to a rewarding career in engineering or business within both industry and government. Students in this latter case typically are more mature in their life experiences, social interactions, and interest in thinking of the “big picture” than are most students that enter college in traditional engineering programs.”
These undergraduate programs are here to stay and at UVa at least, it is a very popular option , is competitive to enter, and is the most heavily recruited. I just think that although an undergraduate systems engineering degree is not the right choice for most students, it could be for some. Simple questions from an OP about systems quickly devolved into knocking the discipline. Just some balance of my own to add to the discussion.
I don’t think anyone here is saying that systems engineers aren’t valuable or needed. They are in fact very important in any design process. At the end of the day, somebody needs to coordinate all of the ideas/work from the individual disciplines and produce something useful.
I think the real discussion here has to do with whether or not systems engineering should be studied at the undergraduate or graduate level. I think it’s better suited at the graduate level, but that’s just me…
Yes, and as my above quote from INCOSE and the link shows, there are pros and cons in the thinking about that. Some kids have shown they are prepared for it and interested in it at the undergraduate level. For those kids, studying at the undergraduate level can be a viable option.
“I don’t think anyone here is saying that systems engineers aren’t valuable or needed.” Well, How about this quote early on- “the degree is almost a paper pusher, nothing to do with engineering.” Those kinds of comments, in my opinion, are uncalled for and bring nothing positive to the discussion.
A lot of the disdain for systems engineering comes from the fact that many engineers originally get into engineering because of their interest in the nuts and bolts (or physics) of how things work and how to make them better. In that sense, taking a step back and working on the bigger picture and how the little pictures fit together instead of on the little picture(s) directly is sort of antithetical to the motivations of a lot of engineers. This is exactly why I have precisely zero interest in systems engineering and, in my admittedly limited experience with it, have found it to be particularly awful… for me.
That said, the discipline is clearly very useful since they are being hired in droves by a lot of companies. After all, they bridge the gaps between all the little pictures with the goal of saving some money by improving that higher-level integration. For people who are interested in that sort of thing, it’s undoubtedly a great field. If that is the interest, the important thing to realize is that there are systems engineering programs that are within other, more traditional programs, so don’t overlook them. One of the better-known examples that comes to my mind is the Aerospace Systems Design Laboratory at Georgia Tech. A lot of times you find such programs integrated into the industrial engineering programs as well.
The advantage of doing an undergraduate degree in a more traditional engineering field rather than systems engineering specifically is that you can gain a working knowledge of the tools required for one or more of those small pictures. This has advantages when trying to work with those in the context of the bigger picture.
Yes, and as I said earlier, Industrial is a very common combination with Systems. Like Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech is Industrial and Systems. I am glad to see this discussion get back to a more positive and helpful tone. Thank you , fractalmstr and boneh3ad, for your posts.
The fact that industrial and systems engineers are being hired in droves right out of undergrad is all you need to know about the value of that undergrad degree. The market is speaking. Furthermore, the fact that so many of those students are hired into consulting shows the demand for that skill set in the marketplace. These consulting firms have clients who need (and are paying dearly for) those skills.
I think the main reason some of us are suggesting a traditional engineering program (instead of SE) for undergrad has to do with the fact that your options will be more limited should you decide later on that Systems Engineering isn’t what you want to do anymore.
Put simply:
BS Mechanical Engineer: Can work both in the weeds AND on systems engineering related tasks
BS Systems Engineer: Can only do systems engineering
Again, there is nothing at all wrong with systems engineering if that’s your passion, but it may behoove you to have a traditional degree under your belt before deciding to follow a higher level career path.
Generally speaking, it’s easier to go from low -> high than it is to go from high -> low.
As Chardo says, many Industrial and Systems engineers go into consulting these days. They have very broad and flexible skills and quantitative abilities. That will translate well to other things if necessary so I’m not losing sleep over it . Most of the consulting firms seem to be looking at the systems aspect of things more than the industrial side of things. Industrial, systems , people have to take the same initial courses that any engineer does. Some engineers seem to want to look down on it as if it is not real engineering (and that seems to have been going on for some time- so some things never change) . My kids are 3rd generation engineers (civil and mechanical before them), could have done anything they pleased as both had very high GPA’s in college, excellent math and science aptitude, etc. . But, they are social, athletic, with very good people skills-good candidates for something like systems and consulting. They had no interest in working in a lab , for instance. I totally get it that systems is not for everyone, but neither is chemical , civil, mechanical, etc. the right fit for everyone.
I can’t speak to systems engineering in consulting firms, because I’ve never worked for a company that used them - the only consultants we contracted were dedicated specialists in narrow fields, with advanced degrees and/or decades of experience. I can’t imagine who is hiring fresh-out-of-school engineers as consultants in ANY field, to be honest!
At my current employer, we have systems engineering groups in each of our major departments, but the engineers in those groups followed the classic path by getting an undergrad degree in a “product” discipline like EE, ME, or Aerospace, and then following it with formal or informal training in systems engineering. They all have some experience prior to joining the department - the common path is to start working on the smallest parts or subassemblies, moving to higher assemblies (and gaining more systems training) as you gain experience. The top guys in these departments are some of our most senior engineers, and to the best of my knowledge only a few of them even have systems engineering masters degrees, and none have it as an undergraduate.
We do hire a few systems engineering undergrads, I was surprised to find. We have a few departments that either deal with manufacturing or provide broad systems engineering support to the whole company across product lines, and among the IE and OR guys in those groups we also have some BSSE’s. I actually started in one of those groups, but everyone I knew personally had degrees in ME, EE, OR, Math, or IE. I left that group quickly in part because these departments are the least respected and least compensated engineering groups in the company - it is hard to advance out of them, and the company felt that the product departments were more important to the bottom line. Indeed, I think that the reason I was started there was because so many new hires were bolting from the group that they tried to start as many as they could in those departments just so they could convince a few to stay. On the bright side, the work itself was painfully easy (caveat - as the new guy I was getting the easiest work!) and extremely laid back. My successor (a new hire in OR) loved the atmosphere and is still there.
Again, they are not starting out right out of college as consultants that are leading teams or leading much of anything. They are starting out in their careers just like anybody else right out of college. My systems kid is making very big bucks, with stock options, perks. You can’t “imagine” this but it is happening. Great offers, top companies continuing to recruit you even after your initial job offer. Technical, quantitative skills, great social skills on top of that is very appealing to consulting firms. That is no secret.
DrGoogle, It is surprising that your daughter’s friend would be considered a "consultant " from day one. That is not the normal progression- you might go from something like systems integration analyst, business technology analyst. etc. initially but you are not taking the lead initially. You may be on a "consultant " path but no company should be calling you a “consultant” from the day one. That term is thrown around too freely. And some friends, family members probably are told that the kid, friend is a “consultant” from the day one because it Is easier to say that and probably sounds better!