Career Advice 3

[ER92]

I’m looking to make a career change and wanted some input from other engineers with experience. Currently I’m in my 3rd year as a Structural EIT (I will be eligible for a license within 6 months) and I work for a small/midsize multi-disciplinary civil engineering firm, with about 10 PE’s/EIT’s in the structural department. There’s almost no competition for structural within a 100 mile radius so we engineer almost everything in the area, mostly residential and low rise commercial, with some industrial and mid-rise sprinkled in. While I’ve gained a lot of great experience in designing a variety of structures, I’ve been frustrated with management and the lack of standards, experience, and mentorship within the company. It seems that every decision is based on trying to grow the company as big and fast as possible, with little to no thought given to employee workloads or if we are qualified to design some of the jobs we take. I’ve often found myself out on an island with no guidance or oversight, scrambling for answers and getting stressed out to the point where it affects my physical and emotional heath, although as I’ve gained confidence and experience its become much less of a problem. A large majority of my knowledge has come from my own research: codes, textbooks, technical reports/research papers, threads on this website, and studying other firms plans. I strongly considered leaving a couple of years ago because I was scared and stressed out, and I wanted something easy. I’ve since realized that designing buildings with custom architecture is my passion and I have no interest in going into anything that’s going to be monotonous plug-and-chug design.

The other issue I have is that the area I work in basically has no code enforcement from a structural perspective, and most of the superintendents I deal with have little experience and basically no oversight or quality control of their framers. Contractors can usually skate by with little to no engineering oversight during construction and on the off chance we do get called out for inspections it’s usually a disaster, so I often feel like all my hard work is for nothing.

I do enjoy many aspects of my job including project variety, lack of micro-management and a generally manageable workload; I typically average 40-45 a week, however I’ve had a few stretches where I’ve worked 70 hrs a week with no weekends off for a 1-2 months at a time.

I’m pretty much open to moving anywhere, but I’m not sure on a couple of things: transitioning from a small business to a large corporation (I’ve only worked for small businesses, even prior to my engineering career), and moving to an area where seismic design is a concern (I currently have no experience in seismic design). From the job searching I’ve done, it seems like there are endless opportunities available due the construction industry peaking at the moment. I do not have a masters degree (many companies list this as a requirement) but I feel l can match up to my peers with experience and knowledge. I’m really just looking for something where I can learn from more experienced engineers while designing a variety of structures with proper diligence, and I’m not put in situations where I might have to compromise ethically. And maybe I’m being naive to think this exists. I don’t really know how common my situation that I described above is. When I graduated school I kind of had a false expectation of how the industry worked, where everything is micro-analyzed, triple-checked and designed perfectly, which obviously isn’t always the case.

I realize this is an extremely long post but this is a very important decision in my career that I don’t want to take lightly. I very much appreciate anyone who takes the time to read all of this and respond.

 

[KootK]

I've struggled with the same. Here's what I know/think having worked at companies of most every size in a few different regions:

- You may find that, at the big dog companies, the technical expertise is not any better than what you're used to. Moreover, many marquee firms organize themselves into smaller groups out of functional necessity and, even though you theoretically have access to hundreds of colleagues, you really only have access to 8-12 in a functional sense. Big firms often function like a bunch of smaller firms. They fight the silo effect but it's tough. "Great" firms are usually a product of great marketing and great project management more so than great technical engineering which is not to say that they're bad engineers by any stretch.

- Good mentorship from someone who really believes in your potential is everything, both from a training perspective and an opportunity perspective. I wouldn't say that your odds of getting that are any better at a marquee firm than a small one.

- Justified or not, it's been my experience that having spent some time with a marquee firm will increase your street value with other employers and open some doors. So will having spent time on institutional and high end commercial projects which is more common at the marquee firms.

- I think that location really is key. If I had to do it over, I'd do it in a high seismic environment with a hot construction industry. Firstly, hot markets make for rapid advancement. Secondly, high seismic adds to technical interest greatly in my opinion. Thirdly, some of the best structural engineering and construction QC happens in markets where the last earthquake is fresh in everybody's mind. California & NZ are prime examples. An you're right, now's a great time for this in the US. Get to the right geographical place ASAP before the kids and mortgage kick in. In contrast, I do like high end custom homes.

- If you've actually worked on some high end, custom architecture projects, then disregard what follows as you'll know your own mind. I've worked on a few of these and have found them to be some of the most unpleasant engineering adventures of my career. For me, these projects have been characterized by small profits and large frustrations. And if you don't like having to make technical compromises, these projects may really tax you. These Frank Gehry masterpieces get pretty intractable pretty fast. You end up basing everything on some super complex FEM model that nobody really has a good feel for. But, as you know, the show always goes on, whether you're comfortable with things or not. One of these projects that I worked on precipitated endless AISC awards. They came down like rain. Spiffy. That project had the most incomprehensible, irrational, steel framing plans I've ever seen. It shouldn't even have been a steel building truth be told. Those awards aren't about great engineering, they're about great marketing. I'll take a rectangular mid-rise over one of these museums that looks like a creature from a Michael Bay transformers movie any day of the week. Who knows though, maybe I just suck at this kind of work.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[KootK]

I think that MKA would be up near the top of my list were I in your position: Link. High seismic, cool projects, they seem to have a legitimate career path for technical folks, and they seem to excel at developing engineers into leaders.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[P205]

I'll share some of my experiences. I have 8 years experience (4 as EIT, 4 as P.Eng.). I used to work at a company that was considered the best in town (~40 people in size), and I got great mentorship. Unfortunately they didn't pay so well, and the job required lots of overtime to stay on top of things. What happened over time is that I realized, retrospectively, that mentorship was becoming hand-holding. My mentor was essentially my single source of information and I really didn't know how to fend for myself. Sounds silly now, but it was a slow progression. Then, two years ago I left and joined a 2 person firm in another city. This is when things became obvious that I would need to find the solutions and answers to problems on my own. I've since bought countless books, have turned to searching eng-tips a lot, and have built many more spreadsheets.

My point of telling you all of that is that for me, the change proved to be incredibly positive for my professional growth and development. I think changing cities/companies can expose holes that you you might not know you had, and if you seize the opportunity, allows for great leaps in professional progress. At least that was my experience.

As for the long hours, I've come to realize that it's what makes this a profession. I feel well compensated and so I don't mind. Maybe you'll end up feeling the same.

I do find the stress more manageable as the years pass. The pressures of juggling client expectations, deadlines, and contractor screw ups (or your own screw ups) never really go away.

On the seismic note, I agree with KootK, it makes things more interesting and people in those areas will be well versed in earthquake design and so should be able to teach you rather quickly/effectively.

 

[ER92]

Thanks for the replies.

Kootk - thanks for the recommendation, I’ll look into it. I have some experience with custom high end architecture and I definitely get what your saying. I’ve been on the same project for over a year with an architect that is somewhat new to the building industry (they previously specialized in industrial projects) and I’ve had the same frustrations. Also the construction and issues that come along with it seem never ending. I guess I really just don’t want to get stuck in boring, repetitive work, i.e. mid rise hotels and what not. I prefer structures with some uniqueness to them, especially ones where the structure is integrated with the architecture. My favorite part of the job is developing custom details where I have to piece everything together like a puzzle.

P205 - I kind of had the same experience. Things really didn’t start clicking until I realized my superiors didn’t have the answers I was looking for and started coming to them with proposed solutions instead of problems. When I just walk up with a random questions they usually would give me a non-answer just to get me to go away. Not sure I would’ve cut it 20 years ago before google, it’s amazing how much information is easily accessible nowadays.

I’m really up for any challenge just as long as I can work on a team of engineers that are equally invested in the project, and I’m curious as to whether I would get that at larger firm. And I know it depends on the size of the projects your working on. I typically work solo on the majority of my projects and it can be extremely frustrating at times when you’re not sure of what your doing. You’re just not going to get as good of input from someone that’s not invested in the project.

As for the seismic, I’m just a little nervous about it because it seems so much more complicated than wind design, and the stakes seem much higher. My schooling wasn’t exactly top of the line, and my knowledge of seismic is limited to what I learned studying for the P.E. exam and thumbing through technical reports looking for stuff I could translate to wind design. Did you start out doing seismic or did you have to make the transition?

 

[oldestguy]

From a real old guy. Your limited but valuable experience sounds like a highly varied bunch, but I'd be in no hurry. Take your time! For old engineers doing the hiring, at least me, the jumping from job to job, expecially early on leads to the question: Will it be worth my (our) time to go hrough the training needed and other steps to have them take off to another greener job EARLY ON? Down the road the reputation you create will follow where ever you go. Don't blow it now. We usually find it takes 5 years of experience before young engineers fully pay their own way.

 

[P205]

I took all the structural courses I could in university, but was not exposed to earthquake engineering/design. Sure, lots of theoretical stuff on dynamics, damping, natural frequency... but nothing that was applicable to design. I looked up masters courses at local universities upon graduating but there was nothing on the application of earthquake design, just more theoretical stuff aimed at research.

My first year out of school was in central Canada - i.e. no seismic. Then moved east and had to learn it. Luckily, this is one thing I learned from my mentor at the time. It is an ongoing process of refining my understanding of seismic design.

 

[MrHershey]

Knowing your priorities and preferences is the biggest thing, sounds like you're working on figuring it out.

I think the large portion of your knowledge coming from your own research is a positive, not a negative. Knowing how to seek out your own solutions and dig through codes and papers to understand something is great. That's an aspect of the job that a lot of people neglect and just want a 'mentor' to do their homework for them, as P205 mentions. That you didn't gives you a leg up on those types.

Since KootK mentioned them, MKA is a great firm that does really interesting, highly technical, and often high profile work. But since you mention liking having a manageable workload, I feel I should mention that my impressions from talking to and reading various sources is that MKA engineers put in a lot of hours, even after accounting for the fact that our field puts in above average hours. Beyond just my talking to people who know first or second-hand, it's brought up in nearly every single review by an engineer on Glassdoor: Link. It's not necessarily a negative. If you love your work, it's often not really work and you don't mind the hours. And if they're a good company, then those extra hours typically also come with extra pay. But since you mentioned workload, I thought it was worth bringing up.

Regarding seismic, it is a little bit of a different animal than wind. Given your ability to dig into technical resources, I wouldn't be too worried about it. Just recognize that you'll likely need to put in your own time to get up to speed and you may wish to consider doing it before you actually look at making a move. If that move you wish to make is to a high seismic area like the west coast, you may also want to consider taking (and passing) the 16 hour SE exam before you make the move. This is the expectation at many firms that do a lot of high seismic design and coming in to those firms with just the PE won't put you a ton higher than the EITs fresh out of college. Beyond showing you're competent, passing that exam also shows you're serious.

 

[DaveAtkins]

Comments from a structural engineer with 31 years of experience...

The nervousness/stress about getting things right is perfectly normal--it means you care about your work, and you care about the safety of the public.

You are at a great place in your career to make a move. You are not an inexperienced recent graduate, but you are not a highly expensive engineer, either.

I struggled with seismic design about 10 years ago, because I had never done it before. So...I read the ASCE 7 chapters on seismic design over and over again (on my own time) until they started to make sense. I also posted questions on this website. And hats off to JAE--one of his posts gave a step by step approach to seismic design, which was a great help to me.

I have worked for small, medium, and large firms. I now work for one of the largest engineering firms in the world, and it is the best job I have ever had. We have rigorous standards for how we manage projects, how we do our work, how we get our work reviewed, etc. And I get to connect with structural engineers all over the world. I get a nice variety of projects to work on, but that might be because I am the only structural engineer in my local office. In my opinion, it is better to work for larger firms than smaller firms.

DaveAtkins

 

[Guastavino]

I did my masters degree online while I worked. It is something an employer would consider "A" paying for and "B" as a way to meet that masters degree requirement. I worked at a mid-size firm and now work for myself. I think firm size doesn't matter as much as competent management. Working for yourself isn't an option for you yet, so I would focus more on your interviews than on the size of the company. Sometimes managers forget that interviews go both ways. You are also trying to gauge the company involved.

I would argue, at least in my area, that this is a employee's market right now. Most of the folks I know can't find good help and so they are just "stealing" from one company to the next. That gives you some leverage since you are flexible in moving.

Just remember that when you walk into an interview, come with questions and see how they react. Such as, do you have a mentorship program? Or, how do you work with younger engineers to develop them? What career development options do you offer?

 

[KootK]

Since KootK mentioned them, MKA...

Thanks for bringing this to my/our attention. I feel a little foolish now for not looking into that aspect of things. Interestingly, I know of a high profile, west coast Canadian firm that models themselves somewhat after MKA and they have similar issues.

I've got a bit more first hand knowledge of these guys: Link. Haven't worked there but interviewed a few times and have some onside contacts. My impression is that they're doing a lot of cool stuff too, if not quite so tall, and aren't killing their people.

This is kind of depressing actually. It seems like all the prominent structural firms are like this once I get my hands on some insider information. Pretty much everybody in Toronto, everybody in New York, everybody in Vancouver, and now MKA who I was truly hoping would be the unicorn exception. Might have to send DaveAtkins a resume if my solo adventure falls through.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[WARose]

First off, you indicate that you really haven't been mentored.....well not to worry: that has pretty much become a industry standard. (I graduated more than 20 years ago, and I wasn't mentored either. And I still became the "go to" guy on a number of technical issues at several places I've worked at.)

Secondly, I wouldn't worry too much about contractors not executing the work properly without your knowledge. You can't hold everybody's hand. Of course, if you are aware of something, you should alert the right folks (i.e. owner, code officials, higher ups in your organization, etc).....but at the end of the day, you've got to do the job in front of you.

One big piece of advice I have for you is: before you make a move.....become licensed first. From a salary standpoint, these companies just love to get a guy/gal just before they get that stamp and low-ball them on salary. (And you'll get no big raise once licensed.)

Another question you need to ask yourself is: are you really sure you want to make a change? Granted you have frustrations working where you are at.....but there is no perfect company anywhere. To start with, are your designers/drafters competent? If the answer to that is "yes", I'd think long and hard about leaving. Reason being: that is becoming a huge issue everywhere I've been. (It actually drove me into starting my own company.) The last place I worked at (before I went out on my own) was a huge EPC firm.......and just about every designer/drafter (not to mention estimator, scheduler, project manager, etc, etc) was incompetent beyond belief. This resulted in a handful of people doing all the work. (And lots of long hours.) So research where you go.....having friends that work there (to ask) is a big plus.

And I wouldn't worry that much about the MS degree. It's a good thing to have, but once you are registered (especially as a SE).....most companies don't care. I went back and got one, but in my case, I get a lot of unusual problems. (Dynamic loading, etc.)

My 2 cents.

 

[MrHershey]

This is kind of depressing actually. It seems like all the prominent structural firms are like this once I get my hands on some insider information. Pretty much everybody in Toronto, everybody in New York, everybody in Vancouver, and now MKA who I was truly hoping would be the unicorn exception.

Sadly fairly common in our industry. There was a series of articles in Structure Magazine last year that went over highlights from a SEAONC employment satisfaction survey. Most common reasons for engineers thinking about leaving the field: better work-life balance, more pay, less stress. Weirdly (or not), 'spend more time with family' was near the bottom. Over 80% of respondents said they were satisfied with their career choice. Only 60-65% said they were satisfied with work life balance. And for every hour worked over 40 hours per week, there was a corresponding 4% increase in likelihood that an engineer would seriously think about leaving the field. One of the recommendations was for employers to try to ditch the culture of long hours because it's driving talented people to other industries.

 

[TLHS]

Honestly, company doesn't seem to have a lot to do with people's experience and happiness. In my mind, 90% of having a good work environment is the co-workers and management in the group of people you actually interact with on a day to day basis. In a large company, that may be the people in your local office, or in your work group. In a small company, it might be the guy that owns the place and his two buddies.

You can have interesting problems doing twenty hour jobs or twenty thousand hour jobs, depending on what you're looking to do.

 

[cliff234]

There are pluses and minuses with everything. A disadvantage with a big firm is that you might get "pigeon-holed" into one specialty (modeling, BIM, steel design, concrete design, blast design, facades). With a smaller firm you will probably do everything. The variety of projects at a big firm might be more diverse. My suggestion is to seek a job at a mid-sized firm where you will do a broad range of things. But I think that where you are now has given you good experience - and I am particularly impressed that you have sought to learn on your own. (I was in the same position as you were 35 years ago.)