What's like to work at renowned firms (SOM, TT, Arup, etc.) vs work at smaller ones? 2

[MonsieurR2]

Hello people,

I'm currently a SE graduate with lots of questions about the profession, and I was hoping you could share your experiences working at big renowned firms vs working in smaller ones. How do they compare in terms of workflow, environment, culture, etc.? Where do you learn more? Which one do you prefer?

Cheers.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

JAE -

Layoffs:
Good point about the layoffs. That is not something I was thinking about, but is an important consideration. I was thinking from the perspective of a new grad engineer who is (presumably) less likely to get laid off in the early years.
The thinking being "why would they hire him/ her if the company was going to lay a bunch of people off in 6 months". Also, the new grad should be making a lower salary and ergo be less likely to get laid off.

However, if you're talking long term career planning, then layoffs with large firms are a big deal.

Menial work:
It kind of depends on your definition of menial work. I was really thinking of CAD and general office work.
The repetitive work that I've seen people do with large engineering firms is "develop your engineering skills in one small aspect of a job" (like anchor bolts or spread footings or something) and do ONLY that work for months at a time. Bleech! for an experienced engineer. But, still not that bad for a new grad.

Personal Opinion:
My tendency is to think that working at a large firm can be beneficial in the first years of your career. But, that the beneficial aspects decrease significantly over time. Know when you have begun to "plateau" at the job. Then take the knowledge and skills that they have given you and move on.

 

[dik]

"In a big firm I expect you'd have more training and "boon-doddles" as these expenses are easier to "hide", less for a small firm."

Most large firms there is little or no professional development... you're pretty much on your own. The shareholders don't want to spend any of their profits... comes right off the top; if they can save a buck, then the their profits are directly increased by a buck + the cost of any processing and paperwork... See my comment above re: purchase of current code...

Dik

 

[JAE]

JoshPlum - In our firm (30 people) our engineers do all the CAD or BIM/Revit work and we use no drafting - this integrates the design with the drawings very well and we don't consider it "menial" at all.

Doing cad drawings from another's redlines or sketches - yes - probably menial.



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

 

[WARose]

As far as stability goes: a young engineer is considered expendable at (either) a small or large firm. That's just the plain fact of it. That is, unless we are talking a case where they are intentionally cleaning house at a large firm to get younger (i.e. cheaper) people in there.

No place is safe. The closest you can get to it is being the only stamp (for a particular discipline) at a small outfit.

 

[JedClampett]

I worked at a large firm (2000+ employees) and have transitioned to a smaller one (350 employees when I started, damn near 1000 now).
dik is right about training and other "perks". They stunk at the big firm. Every hour you weren't billable was a disaster. I remember having to wear another engineer's name badge at the one AISC Seminar I went to, so I could attend some of the sessions. And as far as getting codes, I didn't have the same experience as bridgebuster. You had to buy all your own codes. They might have a library copy or two, but that was it. They would tell you, "we pay you and you can buy any supplies or codes you need" They would limit the number of scissors and three hole punches they gave out at the department head level. "If you need a scissors, borrow it from the guy next to you!"
Oh yeah, every copy, phone call and print order had to have a project number. And I do mean a single Xerox. I'm surprised the toilet paper wasn't monitored.

 

[TLHS]

I don't think the big company/small company divide is as big as people pretend it is. 90% of whether something is a good job depends on the people you have to rely on and interact with. You'll have small companies where the owner is a dictator, and large companies where your manager and other team members are wonderful to work with and help you grow. You'll also have the exact opposite thing.

In a big company, an office in one city is likely run completely differently than an office in a different city, depending on who's in charge locally. The money all ends up in one place, but an engineering office can only be standardized to a certain extent.

The problem is, identifying the good small company, or good large company office only really happens by getting inside information from people you know. So, starting out, just try for things that look good. You could end up in the small five person office with the owner that cares, or a large company that has a formalized training system. That'd be great. You could also end up in the chaotic small office with no checking procedures, bottom of the barrel copy and paste engineering and no teaching skills, or the big company that has you design anchor bolts with a spreadsheet for four years.

Try to get a feel for the people when you interview, but don't be afraid to leave a job that isn't helping you grow. To a certain extent, the only way to figure out what's a good fit is to try.

 

[bridgebuster]

This has been an interesting discussion; we have a lot of similar views. I started with a DOT and since then have worked the worked the full spectrum - small to extra large (current employer). I'm at the tail end of my career; looking back the small & medium companies were by the fast (except for a small DBE that I spent a year at.) If I were to rate my employers, the current one is near the bottom. For me there's two reasons, TLHS hit on one of them:


I think the local management where I'm at leaves much to be desired. Too many reasons to go into but they're all out for themselves. The other reason is that with a large/extra large firm, I've lost the sense of connection. I admit it's partly me. This phase of my life is winding down so I'm indifferent to the company and all the rah-rah BS. I don't know or care how many offices and employees we have; I don't know what the stock is selling at or what our revenue is; I know the company has done some signature projects but I probably can't name three.

when I was with smaller firms I knew what was going on and there were work sharing opportunities. In the behemoth, all they care about is 40 billable hours. I'm sure my supervisor knows what projects each individual in the group is working on - because he signs the time sheets - but I would bet he's clueless about what any of us are doing specifically. A typical day is come in, go to his office, shut the door and only leave for coffee, lunch, the call of nature, and going home.

The company tells young people they have three potential tracks: management, operations, and technical. The trouble is there's no clear cut path; they make it sound like all you need to do is pick one and you're on your way.

 

[CBSE]

CAD - Is it really menial?

CAD is a very important part of engineering...in fact, I would say it is truly part of the art of engineering. If you can't draw it by hand or in CAD, then you may be out of touch with how things are actually constructed. My company operates on both the engineering and construction side. I can certainly tell the difference between a novice using a drafter and someone actually spending the time to do the drafting themselves. All of my engineers do their own drafting...and in my opinion, that makes them better engineers.

 

[canwesteng]

How does being able to use CAD relate to constructibility in any way at all? I agree that it's an important part of the engineering proccess, but if you think you know how things are built based on having done a lot of drafting work you are in for a real surprise on a construction site.

 

[NorthCivil]

I find the act of having to be engaged in the drafting of your designs, and the time spent sitting there drafting, provokes thought and ideas to tweak your designs as you draw them out.

I've worked at an outfit where engineers arent even allowed CAD on our computers, and instead we go back and forth with draftsmen. Often, under pressure of a deadline, and the file has gone back and forth 8 times, taking a month in the process, and you get something that is somewhat close to what you want, but not exactly, and you are so fed up with things, eventually you just say "**** it, that works, send it out"

 

[XR250]

I agree. I do all of my own drafting (I am a sole proprietor) This gets me intimately involved in the project very quickly. As a bonus, I typically engineer it while I am drafting which saves alot of time.

 

[CBSE]

@canwesteng:

As a person that used to swing a hammer, hang drywall, and do trim work...I can truly say that I see the benefit of being able to draw something by hand or in CAD. If you don't know how to draw it, then you surely aren't going to know how to build it. Site visits and discussions with contractors are invaluable to a young engineers profession. It puts their eye's on a project and helps them understand what it is they are drawing and figure out better ways to draw things for contractors. Being able to use CAD enables you to control your drawings in a much more intimate manner. It also allows you to better understand the difficulties that may arise from a construct-ability standpoint.

***I'M DONE HI-JACKING THIS TREAD ON DRAFTING*** SORRY OP

@mapostu: The best advice I could give you is to apply to a firms of various sizes. The job market is crazy hot right now, and quite frankly, you are in a time where you can easily pick and choose where you want to work if your interview/resume support it. Try to interview at small, medium, and large firms so that you can see the difference. Spend time with the younger engineers to better understand the company and what the work environment is like. Not saying older engineers will give a bad opinion, but the EIT's that have been there for a few years have a pretty good grasp on what you will be doing.

 

[KootK]

I was looking for something else today and stumbled upon this neat looking book series: Detail Engineering. Basically case studies by four of the big dog architectural engineering firms. I wouldn't suggest that the books would give you an accurate impression of office life at one of these shops. However, I would assume that cool projects would be a big part of the draw for one of these firms and these books seem to be good anthologies of what A-list projects at one would be like.

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.