Professional Licensing and Accreditations - Are they worth it?

You do mention at the end of your piece that you are discussing the USA  - it might be a good idea to make that clear from the beginning.

In the UK one can be accredited as a Charted Engineer but the proportion of practicing engineers who are Chartered is quite small. Over the last 20 years the process has become increasingly bureaucratic and although I am a member of the IET (one of the major accrediting organizations) I find myself becoming increasingly unhappy with its approach to engineering and qualifications.

I've been operating as an independent engineer for 15 years (and in electronics for more than 25 years before that)  and not once has Chartered-ness come up as an issue (or even been mentioned other than in casual conversation) - so I haven't put the time into leaping through the bureaucratic hoops.

Most of the engineers I've worked with have not been chartered and I've observed no correlation at all between competence and Chartered status.

MK

Hi Michael. Thanks for your comment. Although we used the US licensing model as an example, we're just as interested in hearing about the pros and cons of other kinds of professional accreditation, including becoming a chartered engineer.

I've amended the title to hopefully open up the discussion.

I agree.  From what I have seen, the PE is only really useful if you are engaged in a business in which it is required.

A friend of mine got his PE so that he could use Engineering as his business.  Here in Ohio, you must be a PE to claim that you provide engineering services.

In my thirty-five years of work, I have not needed a PE and have never been in an environment where it was an issue.

So worth is entirely relative to your career needs.

DAB

A PE is like an MBA.  You get one if you need one.  I've known engineers that go and get MBAs or a PE cert and expect to get more money or a better position and it doesn't happen. As a hiring manager, it doesn't make much difference to me what school you went to, or if you have extra certifications. You still have to show that you have the skill set required for the position.

SD wrote>>...As a hiring manager, it doesn't make much difference to me what school you went to, or if you have extra certifications. You still have to show that you have the skill set required for the position...

rUSCDADNYC>>Degrees and/or certifications may be often used as a short-cut for Managers/Companies to have a "Technical (subject-matter) Interview OR an abbreviated one. One could depend on Degrees/certifications to establish a Baseline of Technical Knowledge. Of course it is Situation-dependent (Context is Everything).Then there is the (American-Native-American) Indian Totem-Pole Theory: In a Medical/Hospital, your are Nobody unless you have an MD. In Business you are Nobody unless you have an MBA, In Law, you are Nobody unless you have your JD and admitted to a State Bar. Not so much in the Various Fields of Engineering. The fields are so-different from each other that a Broad Certification may only be good for "Show".And that is what it is "for Show". And for show means more eyeballs, and more eyeballs = more $$$. Sad but True. Personally, I did not do any of this, but did so in Law. BSEE, JD, NYS Bar, USPTO Bar. BTW this is an American 's perspective, as per my moniker. Could other Comment(ers) please reveal their physical locations

USCDADNYC (NY NY USA)

I have a PE license.  However for me it was merely a "feather in my cap".  I did it because I wanted to do it.  I was a successful engineer before I was a PE.  In my field of work, electrical engineering, I don't know of any employer that requires a PE outside of perhaps power generation and distribution.  Even there my understanding is that the state waives the PE requirement if you work for one of the large power companies. 

I think I've come across only two people who had a PE license. The first one was a professor of a robotics class I took. But from what I recollect, he had been a chief engineer in a number of small manufacturing plants in a independent role -- he did everything -- and he got the PE because of that. Although I'm sure it was not required. I also knew a guy who worked for the U.S Federal government and had something to do with the nuclear industry and I think it was one of the requirements.

But the question posed -- are they worth it? -- would perhaps be better phrased: Do Professional Licensing and/or Accreditations Have Any Substantive Value?

Being worth the time and hassle of getting the license is one thing, but getting one because it has some level of value in terms of job knowledge or skills and/or professional development is quite another to my mind. Since I don't have one, I can really answer my own question.

But I do recall knowing a new college graduate in Chemical engineering; he graduated from UCLA. When he was interviewing, nearly all the employers at process plants wanted the EIT certification. Clearly, they saw some value in this. I asked this new graduate about it. And the answer he gave me was along the lines that since too many new graduates don't come from the ranks (as a line worker in a chem plant) they don't know the work environment. In other words, they got book knowledge and not enough hands on experience. I guess Siemens Energy in Houston thought the EIT was a good check on what the new grads know. I'm sure I totally agree with this answer, though.

Hi John,

I'd originally become a member of our professional body here (IEE) mainly to be part of a community of engineers, but it was interesting, the process to do it showed me that the technical side is just a part of what engineers do. People are expected to show that they've been in positions of responsibility, and that they have evolved from academic studies and have had experience in topics like health and safety, ethics, decision-making, teaching others or helping the community/promoting engineering, and so on, most of that needs to be signed off by someone in the places they've worked. So the process to do it is quite interesting (and fun). The interview was a great way to learn to be able to express the (inevitably) technical stuff one has worked on to others.

Much like a degree or any certification, it doesn't mean that the individual is a better choice for a job however. It's not uncommon to see people leave school or drop out of university, have no certifications or professional body memberships and have successful businesses and be in a position of responsibility every day.

If someone non-technical is hiring an engineer maybe it is best considered like a brand, i.e. one hopes that they live up to the standards of the professional body, and won't mislead or endanger others, and it shows (like a portfolio) that the individual has some vocational experience. For instance when one hires a lawyer (or visits a dentist!) it is not uncommon to ask them how many years they have practiced in a firm, because the degree alone can be considered insufficient, yet the client/customer would have no expertise to be able to ask questions about dental state-of-the-art : )

As we know, a degree provides the tools (some maths, physics, but also how to study and work on projects as individuals or groups, how to research, and so on) to be able to learn diverse fields given sufficient time, but doesn't (alway) show how to specifically wire (say) a USB connection because tomorrow the USB connection may be obsolete. The tools provided by a degree can be obtained in other ways too of course, e.g. self-learning or working as a trainee under someone who understands the need to push the trainee to learn such things, or working in organizations where they have a training program (e.g. health, aviation, military orgs etc I guess).

As for pure self-learning, that used to be difficult, but maybe is a bit easier these days with online communities where you can interact to clarify things you're unsure of. I tried studying a subject (non-technical) purely through self-learning but was failing miserably until I actually interacted.

Also, companies have a duty to hire competent engineers so as not to endanger their other employees or customers. This is one way of partially showing that they have taken some care in their hiring I guess. Again perhaps this is more of benefit to non-technical people who need a way to assess if care is (was) taken.

Hi Shabaz. In the USA, one of the comparable Institutions is the IEEE (Institute of Electronic Electrical Engineers) What is IEE? I think you had mentioned your Physical Location was UK? AAR your use of: "...drop out of university..." would also indicate the UK. Sorry, I forget. AAR a great post. BTW what about Continuing Education for Professional Engineers. Something akin to MCLE (Mandatory Continuing Legal Education) for Lawyers in the United States. Really a Farce though. I can fulfill my MCLE via Watching Videos and just "clicking" my mouse to prove attendance

USCDADNYC (NY NY USA)

Hi Edward,

The IEE is now called the IET (it went through a name-change some years back), and is a UK organisation but has worldwide members. Here quite a lot of professions do not have continuing education requirements as I understand, so there is a risk of some people in some professions using outdated knowledge/methods : (

Many companies will have training courses/programs for their employees to keep them updated, (e.g. yearly ESD (electro-static discharge) awareness training/quiz), and this could also be useful for audits/compliance.