How to attract good engineers 8

[agthompson]

My company has less than 90 employees, 15 of who are in engineers or engineering support. Products consist of both standard and custom machinery. Our HR person has been inquiring about what makes a company appealing to work for as an engineer and how best to attract good talent. My answer to the first one is lots of interesting problems to work on, the tools and resources to work on them, and reasonable compensation, e.g. pay, benefits and a family friendly work week. What answer would you give her?

 

[ajack1]

Whilst I agree with most of the above, pay, conditions, management, interesting work etc, I feel there is an X factor as well.

I am sure over the years we have all had a favourite bar, golf club, theatre or whatever. Was it the cheapest did it have the best facilities or was it the nearest, probably none of those, but it just felt right, is the workplace any different?

Of course what feels right to one may not to another, but certainly in the sector I work in I know how “happy” many people are at my competitors and where I would look for a job. However that is in England and a fairly specialised field so may not apply elsewhere.

I have still to meet the person who thinks their boss is perfect, doesn’t want more money, better equipment, less work but more challenging work or would not be happier in a larger office.

 

[FACS]

Unfortunately, your HR representative can't just make up an appealing work environment based on what you might think is attractive to good talent.

Your company culture and benefits are what they are; all you can really do is take a survey of the existing 15 engineers, and ask them about their likes, dislikes and desires. The truth is the only recruiting tool you have.

Attracting good talent needs to be leveled against the resource and the need. If you have a high caliber engineer that wants to lead the way in technological advances, that engineer might not be happy designing 1/4-20 screws....if you know what I mean.
Charlie


Charlie

http://www.facsco.com

 

[arto]

Look under "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs"
The closer your work environment is to the top, the closer you are to "engineering paradise"
[then a mega-corp buys you out :-( & ruins every thing]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

 

[IFRs]

Where is your company? Maybe I'd be interested!

 

[stanier]

Perhaps you should ask what shouldnt your company do in order to retain their engineering staff.

You should NOT:-

1) Treat engineers as a resource that can be tapped into when required but treat them as an integhral part of the team
2) Give them all the responsibility but no authority
3) Quibble about the purchase of books/standards/software/computers/subscriptions to learned societies and any other tools they can justify to do their job
4) Pay the chief engineer less than other executives
5) Give them the title "manager" in order to give them the pay they need to retain them rather than just acknowledging that an engineer is worth the money.
6) Dont allow them to buy into the company and share the wealth generated by their efforts or ingenuity
7) Take your brightest engineers and push them into management losing the ingenuity that creates wealth just because management is seen to be superior to engineering
8) Lastly allow managers to make contrary decisions in engineering matters, without consultation, ignoring the expert advice they have been given when they are not an engineer.

 

[HemiBuell]

Arto, the needs triangle is so important. I have it hanging up at my desk.

Star for you.

 

[plasgears]

The following should be attractive to graduate engineers:
- the engineering dept is managed by graduate engineers and not part of the sales dept; it reports to top mgt;
- the company is certified by ISO9000 or QS9000, but that is no absolute guarantee of good operations;
- the department has an active patent release system and reward system for patents assigned by the USPO;
- there are draftspersons as well as engineers, and the burden of producing drawings is not fully on the shoulders of graduate engineers;
- advanced engineering studies are supported by the company;
- engineering is a valued operation in the company as expressed by top management.

 

[JStephen]

plasgears, I don't necessarily disagree with your points, but would like to point out that some of those items would be pretty uncommon in certain sectors of industry.

 

[Ashereng]

plasgears,

Just to add to JStephen's comments. In my industry, points 2,3,and 5 are very rare.

ISO9000, QS9000, etc. are not valued - as you said, they are no guarantee of good operations.

Patents? Nope, they are the property of the employer as per employment contract.

Advanced studies? On your own time and dime.

 

[PVGuy]

In my opinion, a lot of what makes a good company is how the engineering department is managed. If the eng. dept. reports to some middle management who is not an engineer who then reports to the owner(s), there will be problems. In my company, we have a good balance of interests where each department reports directly to the owner. We end up having to go a few rounds every once in a while; but I believe it is better this way. If an engineering decision can be overridden by someone who does not understand what is in question, then I know I'm not interested.

On a side note, if your company can reduce the frequency of long useless meetings, they would get a flood of interested applicants.

 

[zekeman]

Don't reject an applicant becauuse he/she doesn,t have "10+ years of experience in "uvw" systems using an "xyz" program that you use in your company. A good engineer can pick it up in a matter of months or probably less. It is more important that you evaluate on the basis of strong disciplines and commitment. I see far too many ads that require very specific programs and too many years of specific experience which probably discourages the truly competent engineer from even applying. And my biggest peeve is that HR is doing the screening based on the above principles, thus rejecting applicants on the narrow grounds mentioned.
In a small engineering company, only engineers should be looking at the resumes, not HR unless they are good engineers themselves.
If I looked at a resume (and I have in many of the small engineering companies I have worked for) I would look at achievement, education, and commitment and would like to hear things that "I made the major contribution to the xyz problem" or published "abc paper" as the senior author etc.
not that " I directed xyz program" or "contributed" to uvw
program. Contributed?, in what way ? Directed, in what way?

 

[JStephen]

"I see far too many ads that require very specific programs and too many years of specific experience"

I don't know how common it is- but I understand that in some cases, you'll have a foreign engineer working under a visa, and it is up to employer to show there are no qualifying applicants from the US. Hence, the ultra-restrictive ad, which is not intended to attract applicants, but to prevent anyone from applying. The ads that come to mind also had sub-par wages, considering the expertise required.

I remember also reading where large corporations complained to Congress about the lack of qualified workers, but then apparently made zero effort to get anyone qualified- a strange attitude, in my mind.

 

[Barry1961]

Free beer.

Barry1961

 

[MikeHalloran]

Had that once.

When you mumbled "I could use a beer", the boss would bring you a cold one. Not cheap stuff, either. He threw great parties.

I still miss that job.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[zdas04]

I had a wonderful boss early in my career. He thought I was worth developing and said that his goals for managing me were (in this order):
1. Pay me enough that I never thought about money (because when I was thinking about my pay I wasn't thinking about his projects)
2. Delegate enough authority that I seldom had to ask permission.
3. Keep me informed of what the company was doing while not wasting my time in pointless meetings
4. Keep my work queue full of things that challenged me

That was the best three years of my life. Then the SOB up and died on me. His replacement was terrible, he took active steps to bring my salary into line with "my peers", moved me to a smaller office, made sure that I didn't miss any more weekly staff meetings. It sure made me appreciate my old boss.

I think anyone with the sense to pound sand would work their tail off for an organization that believed in the four points above. I did a post appraisal on those three years and my salary differential "above the norm" was less than 0.01% of the contribution of my work (in net present value at the company's hurdle rate). The next two years weren't as pretty.

David

 

[MikeHalloran]

Bad bosses _never_ die on you.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[bradpa77]

Everyone already stated some of my most important issues.

Here's one I don't think anyone covered.

Paid overtime - we have it here. It is one of the BIGGEST reasons I wouldn't want to leave. I never get asked to do overtime and if I do, it's paid for. They are less likely to ask you to work overtime because it costs the company more money. It ensures that its only used when completely necessary. I hear so many horror stories of engineers who work extended shifts on a daily basis and don't get paid a penny extra for it.

 

[MikeHalloran]

I've never gotten actual pay for voluntary overtime, but at one job I greatly enjoyed, the GM's wife would personally deliver a small honorarium each week. It was just enough to cover dinner at McDonald's, but her really big smile and hearty "Thank You!" greatly enhanced its value.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[stanier]

How many companyies ask you to put the regulation 7.5 or 8 hours ofr the day on a timesheet and then expect you to work 10-12 hours? If you work the hours then put them on the time sheet. The day you want compassionate leave for a sick kid is the day they dock you for the time. With the time sheet evidence you can argue for payment. On top of that if you are unfairly dismissed you can claim all the back pay.

 

[gtsim]

There are some nice points and wish lists mentioned above. However, as I see the problem is that the technical world is becoming increasingly political and not surprisingly, I have seen a significant decline in manufacturing in my part of the world.