PhD in Structural Engineering 3

[labeattie]

Hi All,

I am a recent MS (non-thesis) graduate in civil/structural engineering. My masters classes were very structurally specialized and that is where my interests lie. I am currently working as an EIT at a smaller firm, but will likely have to move in 4 yrs when my spouse completes her education. I think there is a good chance that I would like to pursue a PhD in structural engineering at a fairly prestigious university (no specific one chosen) after that move, but I am concerned about limiting my job opportunities. My primary motivation for undertaking the degree is interest in the subject material. I found myself very interested in structural mechanics and the math, theory, and computer procedures behind different kinds of structural analysis, and would like to learn more in the area. My professors all mostly thought it would be a great idea for me to get my PhD, but I'm not sure that academia is my end goal. At the bridge engineering firm for which I interned throughout school, there were two PhD's high up in the structural staff, but I know that is not necessarily typical. I would like to retain the flexibility of working mostly anywhere that is a fairly large city in the US, as my location options will most likely be limited to where my spouse can work as well. The money lost in the years of study is unappealing to me, but obviously not a deal-breaker. As far a jobs I would be interested in after graduating go, bridge engineering, building engineering, and more computer-based jobs such as working for a software company are all possibilities. With these goals and concerns, do you guys think the PhD is a good idea, or will it be too difficult to find a good-paying job in the US region of my choosing? Also note that I expect to have a PE and probably not an SE license at the time in question.

-labeattie

 

[SLTA]

I've worked at some pretty prestigious firms and there were only two PhDs, and everybody knew not to ask them for practical help. Unless you're heading for academia, then a PhD won't help much in structural. Why do you need to go for a PhD to keep studying what you're interested in? Seems like a lot of money and time if you don't have a specific use for it as an end goal.

Good luck!

Please remember: we're not all guys!

 

[labeattie]

SLTA,

Thanks for your response. I'm not really sure how I would continue to study what I am interested in without going to school. Textbooks or other technical literature alone lacks any interaction, direction, or collaboration offered by a school course. And there is no opportunity to apply the material, whereas in the graduate degree I would hopefully apply newly learned material to my research. If you are suggesting it would be good to take courses without a degree as an end goal, I think that is a possibility for me, but it just seems like I would want to go ahead and get a degree if I'm putting the coursework effort in already.

Thanks again! I appreciate the input.

 

[oldestguy]

Agree that no PhD is of use usually in the general group 0f consulting structural engineering companies. Teaching yes. However, a few very sophisticated companies may require that, but they are few in number. If you want to retire at say age 55 and live comfortably, then you need to be an owner or partner. Chances of getting there are much better with a run-of-the-mill company. However, you need plenty of internal push and have no problem with lots of hours and you need to be able to "get the work".
This statement from you makes me wonder if you have that in you.

"The money lost in the years of study is unappealing to me"

 

[JAE]

Work at your job (and future job) with your MS under your belt.

On the quiet - pursue your PhD to add to your learning and fill your personal need/passion.

Keep your PhD quiet.

Enjoy a great career in engineering and only use your PhD credentials if you need to - which probably you won't need to.


Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[labeattie]

oldestguy: I'm confused as to what you mean. When you say "However, you need plenty of internal push and have no problem with lots of hours and you need to be able to 'get the work'", is this in reference to getting a PhD, or making partner at a run-of-the-mill company without one? Also, what does "get the work" mean? My statement about the lost money pursuing a PhD was made in order to address a common response to the question of whether to get one. I was trying to convey that I'm aware I will be losing money working on a PhD instead of in industry, and understand that is a serious downside, but not a deal-breaker. But I am also not sure how being concerned about the money is relevant to the push required to make partner at a company, but I definitely appreciate your advice.

JAE: Thank you for the input, and your suggestion is real possibility for me. I'm just surprised and a bit discouraged to see so many engineers who believe that a PhD will not increase earning potential. The cons make sense, but my old professors seemed to think the PhD would be a bigger asset in industry than this community appears to. I probably do have enough passion for the subject to pursue my studies without a future financial reward, but I had certainly hoped I wouldn't have to. I still have a few years to make a decision, but I really appreciate this input early on.

-labeattie

 

[GregLocock]

"The cons make sense, but my old professors seemed to think the PhD would be a bigger asset in industry than this community appears to." You should be able to find a survey of earnings vs highest degree in engineering in your locale. At least in Australia the trend is for PhDs to be behind regular BSc s for most of their life, in terms of pay. At the age of 50 or so (from memory) the PhDs pick up. On any realistic RoI a PhD is a poor investment, but that's not why you do one. As to the professors, um, yes, that is what academics think like.

This is an interesting approach, if you can read across from usability to engineering (I'm not sure you can)

http://www.measuringusability.com/usability-phd.php

The curve at the bottom makes the point.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[hokie66]

My experience varies from most of the above. In small firms, sure, it is not worth discussing. But in the very large firms, PhD's are highly valued, and at least in my experience, are also practical. When I encountered a really complicated issue, it was good to be able to run it by "the Doctors". Like anything else, it depends on the people involved.

 

[oldestguy]

What does "getting the work" mean? Once you in a company that does structural engineering, where do the jobs come from? They may just walk in the door after you have been in business a long time and have steady clients. Where I came from the owner's or a business development department "gets the work" by pounding the pavement so to speak, letting potential clients know your capabilities, submitting proposals, etc. Sitting in an office doesn't do it. A wide variety of activities also are needed, such as membership and attendance in engineering society boards of directors, civic organizations and the like. The list is very long. For a good reason, in almost any organization, it is the sales force that gets paid well, because they "get the work".

 

[GregLocock]

Well yes, but highly valued at an instant in time doesn't necessarily mean it is a sensible financial decision summed over the years. Up until quite recently in Oz starting pay for engineers with a BEng was higher than the starting pay for engineers with a PhD - and having worked with a few of the latter I'm not all that surprised (that being said it is a tricky one to analyse due to the enormous influence of mining).

eg table 11

http://www.graduatecareers.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Graduate-Salaries-2011-secured.pdf

$86k for a masters, $71k for a fud. Ouchy.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[oldestguy]

One more point; for the PhD yes, but I was referring to becoming a partner or owner. A grunt doing the routine of structural engineering may benefit from that ability, but it is mandatory in order to advancing to partner or owner. Setting such a goal early can't hurt. I'm of the opinion a PhD is not necessary to achieve it (from those owners that I know or have known).

 

[JAE]

I'm an owner and have been involved in hiring structural engineers for a long while.
I would be hesitant to hire a PhD for consulting engineering due to their generally high specialization.

Also - the PhD in engineering per se doesn't add to the ability to be a good marketing/rainmaker for a firm - or a business manager for that matter.
In fact - a former partner who was a PhD actually brought in work that was always so esoteric that no money was ever made.



Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[racookpe1978]

A PhD on a resume list of the company's people can sometimes help getting government jobs for the company, but very, very few other companies require it.

A PhD helps "justify" your visa application to go work overseas in a foreign, but it cannot be the only thing listed.

Your "attitude" in your answers seems to be the key - You "want" the readers here to justify a decision that you (in your mind ?) may have already wanted to make. And, the collective experience of the practicing engineers here - few us academic! - will probably not give you the answer you want.

Sorry about that.

 

[KENAT]

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding but you say initially:

My primary motivation for undertaking the degree is interest in the subject material.

However then you say:

I'm not really sure how I would continue to study what I am interested in without going to school. Textbooks or other technical literature alone lacks any interaction, direction, or collaboration offered by a school course. And there is no opportunity to apply the material...

This second quote makes it sound like you aren't much of a self starter/self motivated or whatever term you prefer, which I'd think would be a required prerequisite for a typical research PhD.

If you want to learn for learning's sake/for your own interest & edification then maybe you should re consider learning on your own time, picking and choosing courses/subjects of particular interest, MOOC's, participation here on Eng-Tips for your interaction etc.

I'm not a structural guy, nor smart enough to seriously consider getting a PhD of my own so take with a pinch of salt. However, I do work in a company/industry where there are a lot of PhD's (maybe more than Bachelors or Masters in hardware development Engineering) and while some of them are very smart I'm not sure they're generally smarter/more useful than a lot of the Bachelors & Masters. Plus every time I see one our our new PhD's working on a sheet metal box or similar I can't help but wonder if they're a little over qualified - up until a couple of years ago we had designers & interns doing most of that work!

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[JedClampett]

I've got a couple of observations, which unfortunately, somewhat contradict each other.
First of all, there seems to be a relentless push to make the masters degree an entry point for Structural Engineers. There's talk of making it a requirement for licensure. So if that's the case, a PhD might be a useful differentiator.
But right now, in 2014, I think you'll be severely limiting your options. The company I work for, for instance, does a lot of challenging designs. But our perception is that a PhD would feel unfulfilled doing concrete boxes over and over again. It might either affect their attitude or make them make complicate routine tasks.
There are plenty of jobs out there for PhD's, but there likely in bigger companies and in bigger cities.
As far as your professors advice, don't forget they have a symbiotic relationship with doctoral candidates. The professors provide advanced degrees and you provide cheap labor for their research.

 

[steellion]

If I were hiring, I would take someone with 4 years additional work experience over someone that spent 4 years working on a Ph.D any day. You typically get a broad range of practical experience on the job, and a very narrow specialized study in a doctorate program.

 

[labeattie]

Thank you everyone for the responses.

So it seems to me that if I really want to get a PhD, that I should go for it. My limited experience with PhDs was most similar to hokie66's. But from what most of you think, I should expect to make about the same amount of money as I did before starting the degree, and should expect to work at a very large firm, or alternatively go into academia. I wanted to hear a more general industry view on the doctorate and I definitely think that is what I'm getting from you all, so thank you.

GregLocock: Thanks for the article, I thought that was a very good read. I know I probably contradicted this at some point, but I guess I knew that a PhD is usually not a good RoI. I just didn't want to get the degree and then come out make less money than I was before I started, or worse, not be able to find a job.

oldestguy: Thank you for the clarification. I understand what you were getting at now. I know a lot of us new engineers tend to forget about the business side of the business or neglect interpersonal skills. I will plan on working at those skills and keep "getting the work" in mind.

KENAT: I didn't think much about companies being afraid PhD's would feel unfilled doing normal design work, so I think that is an interesting perspective. Thanks. Also, I will be following my studies on my own regardless, but I'm sure I can't do that with the speed or comprehension that I would in school. My personal opinion is that there's a lot to be said for having an instructor and peers to learn from. I got a lot more out of undergrad and my MS than I would've reading the textbooks on my own. But learning on your own is much cheaper than undertaking a graduate program. I'll have to keep these points in consideration.

Thanks!
-labeattie

 

[Maui]

Labeattie, you should read my replies in this discussion:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=156572

Maui

 

[labeattie]

Maui: Thank you for the link. That was an informative thread I had not yet seen. Your personal experience is enlightening, as it provides perspective from someone who did get a PhD. Thanks. And it is interesting to see how little has changed on this topic in 8 years, with the exception that, now, few are surprised when a minority or foreign-born job applicant edges out a "less diverse" one.

 

[oldestguy]

At your place of employment ask any NSPE Member (or if you are one), for a loan of the August/September "PE magazine". Go to Page 28 and read the article "Everyone's Business". This is a great one for where you now stand. In short, everyone in the company has a hand in developing business. In line with my recommendation of planning for management, I see some recommend getting MBA as more valuable than a PhD.