ph.d and employment in engineering 5

[TurbulentFluid]

While trying to figure out which direction I should take in my future career, a ph.d study has come up as an interesting alternative. I already have an equivalent of European MS degree (dipl.ing. in my country) and have a good opportunity for a ph.d. study in a field I'm interested in, plus work at the institute (at least for now). However I am not interested in an academic career on long-term basis. Is a ph.d. study a smart move? Could a ph.d. degree represent a kind of an obstacle when I apply for a "real" engineering job after a few years of studying + work at a college institute (I do industry-related projects at the institute, not teaching.

 

[Latexman]

TurbulentFluid,

One of the nich areas in fluids that is hot and in heavy demand right now is Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). It is math, computer, graphics, and fluids intensive and most folks are looking for Ph.D's, and maybe M.S.'s, but not B.S.'s to do it. I work for a large chemical company and they are looking for several people who have this skill at the moment. A quick look on Monster.com will show you this need spans more than just the chemical industry.

Good luck,
Latexman

 

[kchayfie]

I've worked with a few people with PhD's and pretty much all of them have been employed on the same terms as other graduates with lesser degrees. I don't know about their pay packets but I'm pretty sure they weren't paid significantly more - they were just a few years older than the other trainees. In fact, at least 2 of them were employed while they finished writing up their thesis, so it clearly wasn't that difficult for them to find work at the end of their studies...

 

[Ashereng]

I think soon (in 10 - 15 years) a ph.d. might become as common as a college degree is nowadays ...

You may want to look up just how many PhDs are granted each year in the US. I would think that you would be surprised.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[THEReifleman]

TFluid: I don't know if you're going through what I go through but every couple of years, I get a wild hair and want to do something to further my profession. 8 years after my BS I got my PE after being motivated by a classmate that got hers in 6 years. Now (12 years ABS-after BS) I'm getting my MS because for no other reason than my company pays for everything and sets up the distance learning environment (you gotta love company benefits!).
However, I can't imagine going after my PhD. Just not interested. BUT! I've always been impressed with people who get multiple engineering degrees. Gives you a chance to satisfy curiousity in an adjacent (or non-adjacent) field to your original training. AND it broadens your skill set for various positions. I've seen lots of internal company (and other companies) job postins asking for Mech. or Elec. engineering background. If I were the hiring manager, I'd take a close look at the applicant who possessed both skills.

 

[prost]

If anyone is interested, from the NSF website.
Engineering doctorates awarded in the US by year
1995 6008
1996 6309
1997 6115
1998 5924
1999 5330
2000 5321
2001 5505
2002 5076
2003 5278
2004 5776--versus 70,000 undergraduate engineering degrees

Certainly not at a fast enough rate to project that PhDs will be common by 2015. In fact, given two trends 1) this year's high school class is the largest ever, and is projected to start decreasing from this peak starting this year and 2) engineering doctorate programs springing up all over the world, especially in China, I would project that the engineering PhD spike in 2004 is temporary uptick, and those numbers will begin to head down very soon.

Based on release date of the 2004 data (Nov. 05), I am guessing it will be 4 months more before the 2005 numbers will be released.

 

[SomptingGuy]

A data point for the discussion...

I did a head count around my office today. I work in engineering software development for IC engines. Of the 18 in my office, 9 have PhD's (not me I hasten to add - I have experience instead).

 

[Ashereng]

Canada:

Population

1999 - 30,509,323

2000 - 30,790,834

2001 - 31,110,565

2002 - 31,413,990

2003 - 31,946,768

All Undergrad Degree:
1999 126,435
2000 128,570
2001 129,240
2002 134,040
2003 143,975

PhD Degree:
1999 3,965
2000 3,860
2001 3,710
2002 3,720
2003 3,860

Less than 3% of peope who graduated from a post secodary school have a PhD.

I don't have the statistics for how many people don't go to post secondary school, but I will guess about 60%? If so, then 1% of the population has a PhD.

I can't see that number reaching 50% within my lifetime.


"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[Ashereng]

Oh, numbers from Statistics Canada.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[btrueblood]

Ahem, speaking of rocket science...In the rocket engine and gas turbine engine world, the PhD's got to run the cool, leading-edge, research-y type projects. Occasionally, they would have a few of us MS types run around doing odd jobs for them. Yes, a PhD in CFD will take you a long way, the field is still too new and rough-edged to be anywhere near as "simple" as FEA (and most of the rocket engine shops want people with at least MS's to do aerospace FEA work too). Chemical, petroleum (prospecting and refining), aerospace, and even automotive (does your off-the-shelf CFD package model fuel cell membrane diffusion? Does it do it well?) all deal with reacting, turbulent, multi-phase flow fields. There ain't no pushbutton solutions to those problems.

 

[stanier]

I have seen PhDs promoted to positions of management because that's what the salary structure requires in a company. ie A PhD wants $X because he or she is smarter than the average bear and only senior managers, accountants, lawyers etc get $X+.

PhDs generally hate man management, signing time sheets, hiring and firing, budgets, going to meetings etc.

In the end it doesnt work out and the PhD heads off to academia and their comfort zone.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEust CP Eng

http://www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

 

[SomptingGuy]

PhDs generally hate man management, signing time sheets, hiring and firing, budgets, going to meetings etc

I overheard such an argument recently. One of our smartest PhDs yelling at our director (not a PhD) that he needed to be managed and that forcing him into management duties was something he wouldn't put up with for long. Fortunately he was listened to and now has the luxury of doing clever stuff whilst others clear up around him.

 

[TheRaptor]

SomptingGuy,

If Ph.D guys can yell at their bosses and get away with it, then I am gonna start my Ph.D. degree tomorrow itself.

Cheers.

 

[johnsmith2]

I know many PhD working at the bio-medical and nanotechnology industry. If you love to have a PhD, go ahead and don't regret.

 

[TurbulentFluid]

Ooof... first things first... I'm sorry to have been innacurate while expressing myself. When musing the signifficance of a ph.d. in near future, I of course projected it on the popullation in relevant areas, or, more accurately, in Engineering practice / schooling. Not people with Ph.ds in general popullation, it would be quite redicilous to even begin such a conversation or process the numbers given and extrapolate to the World (even if they do come from Statistics Canada). Just as a curiosity, in my country, highschool education becomes obligatory as from next month (I think, or maybe next schoolyear, but close enough - the law's been passed).

Anyway, back to the subject... I'm glad most people here think a ph.d. in CFD is worth it, since it's exactly what I'm considering, even if the aforementioned bio-medical and bio-mechanical industries are something I would certanly not mind working in, given the chance. However I am hoping to avoid both work in education and a managing position, since neither is why I went into Engineering. Though it's saddening to see such a bad attitute toward people with ph.d. education... Then again, knwoing some people with ph.ds, no wonder... :-(

To broaden this subject... Basically, I'd like to get into a ph.d. study to gain extra knowledge, not a paper I could boast with... Do you think this is a good idea, or is working experience maybe a better teacher?

 

[IRstuff]

You may look into doing both. Many companies offer tuition reimbursement, etc. Moreover, you're more likely to be able to set your thesis topic on something that's relevant to your work.

OTOH, you may also look into getting a more research oriented position at work. A PhD is about in-depth knowledge of ONE subject and the ability to drill down as required to get there, but often, what work requires is simply the ability to drill down enough.

If your goal is to "gain extra knowledge," then a PhD is neither required nor necessarily desirable. What you do need are assignments that escape your "comfort" zone and force you to learn new things.

TTFN

 

[GregLocock]

I reckon a 45 year old with a PhD is better placed than a 45 year old without one.

I reckon a 28 year old without a PhD is better placed than a 28 year old with one.

These are not contradictory statements.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[Maui]

I graduated with my Ph.D. in Materials Science in 1992. Through 2005 I worked as a metallurgist in a variety of industries including academic, nuclear, consulting, and specialty steel production. For a period of ten years within that time frame I worked at Crucible Materials Corporation as a Senior Metallurgist, and worked concurrently as an adjunct Assistant Professor in Engineering at Syracuse University.

The PhD can prove useful in industrial research jobs and tenure-track academic positions. If your goal is to obtain an industrial engineering position, my own experience suggests that the PhD will close more doors for you than it will open. You will hear the phrase, "You're overqualified" more often than not. The pay that you receive will not be substantially greater than the pay earned by someone with an MS degree in the same discipline. And you may unknowingly inspire a sense of jealousy in your less secure co-workers who do not have an advanced degree. If your goal is simply to work in an industrial engineering position that does not involve research, then obtaining the PhD will serve no useful purpose, and will likely make your job search and work life much more difficult. The MS degree will result in a greater career benefit to you for the effort required to earn it.

What I find that surprises many people about having a Ph.D. is that employers are reluctant to hire you unless they absolutely need someone with your particular skill set. There are several downsides that a potential employer sees in hiring a PhD when they could just as easily hire a BS or MS candidate. They fear that you will become bored and seek employment elsewhere as soon as a better job comes along. Then they will have to go through the hiring process all over again. Why should they put themselves through that when they can simply pay someone who is not overqualified less money to do the same job? And the lesser qualified candidate will probably be less likely to jump ship as quickly. There is a general perception that PhDs are over-educated individuals who lack practical hands-on experience and common skill sets. This perception has been clearly expressed in the responses that have been posted to the original question in this thread. For example,

There are probably only a handful of companies who employs professionals with a Ph.D. degree. In most cases, these weirdos serve as external consultants for the projects.

Ph.D can hurt if you act like it makes you that much better, and you deserve a lot in return.

I don't think it is bad to have it though. If you are not socially inept, then it should not hurt. If you worry that it will keep you from getting the interview, then leave it off. Bring it up at the interview after they see you are normal.

This perception is, at least in my particular case and those of my fellow PhDs, untrue.

Other factors also come into play when they do in fact need to hire a PhD. The applicant’s ethnicity presents an even more difficult problem for employers than usual because most Ph.D.'s that are currently employed in the United States are caucasian men. The federally mandated affirmative action guidelines that employers are required to adhere to stipulate that not only must each company hire a sufficiently diversified workforce, but the employees at each level in that company must also show evidence of this diversity. I myself have been denied the opportunity to interview at more than one company/academic institution because I am not a minority. A friend of mine who formerly worked for a major aluminum manufacturer told me precisely that when he explained to me why I would not be interviewed for the job that he originally encouraged me to apply for. If you look in the job postings for academic positions in the ASME publication Mechanical Engineering, for example, many of the ads contain a phrase at the end of the job posting that are similar to the following, “The University of ________ is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. Women and minorities are strongly encouraged to apply.” If you’re a white American male, that statement tells you that your ethnic background and gender are inconsistent with the job description, even though they have no bearing on your ability to do the work. If you plan on getting a research position in an academic setting, you may run into that problem. This is one of the reasons why many of the college professors that are currently employed in these academic institutions are foreign born. The odd part is that many of the foreign-born students who win fellowships to come here to study for their PhD (which you and I pay for with our tax dollars) are typically hired much more quickly by US companies than US citizens for the same reason, provided they have the paperwork to remain here. It's a good deal for them, and can leave a bad taste in the mouth of Americans like myself. Most people who have not been through this may find it difficult to comprehend. Our own system discourages Americans from earning a PhD. If you look at any engineering PhD program in the US, the vast majority of the students in that program are probably not Americans. It should not be this way, but I see no motivation for this to change anytime in the near future.

Maui

 

[IRstuff]

We'll have to disagree about the nuances of PhD programs. Americans, in general, are very distainful of PhDs and that's the main reason there are so few American PhDs.

Minorities, particularly new immigrants have extremely high opinions of people with PhDs, regardless of what subject it's in. My own father pushed me to get a PhD, simply because that's what he felt was a mark of success.

As discussed earlier, American culture holds the opposite; "Yankee ingenuity" and "street smarts" are regarded higher than higher learning is. Most Americans, using examples like Gates, Jobs, and Wozniak, think that success has everything to do with money and vision and little to do with education. Surveys bear this out:

Finally, an overwhelming number of respondents (84 percent) reported that “street smarts” is more important in business than an advanced degree.

from:

http://www.kornferry.com/Library/Process.asp?P=PR_Detail&CID=1191&LID=1

TTFN

 

[Maui]

Irstuff, from that survey I found this:

The Korn/Ferry International Executive Quiz is based on a global survey of executives registered within the firm’s online Executive Center, ekornferry.com. Respondents from 96 countries, representing a wide spectrum of industries and functional areas, participated in the most recent Executive Quiz between July and September 2005.

The survey you referred to was compiled from the responses of executives, not engineers, from 96 different countries, not just the United States.

When I was a grad student, I had a number of discussions with a variety of scientists and engineers in both academia and industry regarding the value of obtaining an M.S. versus a Ph.D. There were two general points of view that I found I could divide the responses into among these individuals. Without exception the academic group all believed that the Ph.D. was worth pursuing. I believe that this was the case because they each had one. The group of people outside of academia generally believed that getting the Ph.D. was not worthwhile. I think this was the case because none of them had one, and they couldn't see the point in spending all of that time and money in pursuing something that they didn't value. Not much of a surprise. If you extrapolate that (unscientific) result to the engineering community in the United States, in general you should find that the majority of the engineers that are out there would not believe that a Ph.D. is worth the time, effort, and expense because most of them don't have one. And some of the individuals who do have one may even share in that same opinion, although that wasn't my personal experience.

I believe that people pursue a career because they are drawn to it for whatever reason. It may be that they have an innate talent for it, such as Greg LeMond in cycling, or Bill Gates in the software business. Or they find that among the limited choices that are available to them, it represents the best choice for a promising career. That was certainly the case for me. A Ph.D. in science and engineering does not guarantee you anything. But it does provide evidence of your demonstrated ability to carry out a detailed scientific experiment or theoretical investigation that draws a definite conclusion of some sort. It takes a great deal of talent, effort, insight, and perserverence. And it takes time, which I believe is more valuable than money.

Maui

 

[GregLocock]

" A Ph.D. in science and engineering does not guarantee you anything. But it does provide evidence of your demonstrated ability to carry out a detailed scientific experiment or theoretical investigation that draws a definite conclusion of some sort."

Yes... You see I think the problem I have is that my industry doesn't sell experiments, it sells products. Unless those products get designed, on time, to function, and cost, then we don't have a viable industry any more.

I was just asked to read a report. The guy tested three cars and established the sensitivities of the cars to various inputs. He did a lot of maths. He came up with some conclusions and recommendations for modifications to the new design. He never once directly stated that the new design was already inherently less sensitive to these inputs, and therefore met target already. That would have spoiled his experiment...




Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.