One wonders how much this list is JUST a reflection of the combination of multinational brand advertizing and negative PR, such as the impact on the Apple brand of tales of alleged working conditions in China.
One thing is for sure. These are all very large companies. In general smaller companies are often considered better and more humane places to work. But of course the hundreds of small well-regarded companies in individual countries and known to a few don't compete in the table against the multinationals.
Multinational companies are typically well established and tightly organized. In addition, it is well funded. It is not a surprise to me that Google are among the top in most countries since innovative and fun place to work have always been a part of the Google culture.
I wonder how much of the results reflect the culture of a country. I am always glad to see how much young engineers appreciate and the companies of their own country. Japan has top 10 employers falling into Japanese corporations.
I am really interested in learning the changes among all these countries in the next few years.
Thanks Junko for the information.
What caught my eyes was the U.S. engineering students picking Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as its number 13 preference. That's pretty cool. But over all, energy companies seem to be doing well.
Of course, another interesting thing, for me, was that each country's index reflected which companies are most attractive to local engineering students, revealing the popularity of local companies on the local level.
The attractiveness of local companies does not surprise me. Several of my daughter's good friends are currently engineering students, and my observation is that they are very bright and not as naive as many assume. They understand that certain engineering jobs will never be outsourced and will always have citizenship requirements. Perhaps this is the reason we see defense contractors and even the US Air Force on the list for the US students.
Good to see a mix of software technology and general engineering companies in the list. I feel that the students outlook is now more broader than the ones from the 90s.
Google is a fun place to work. I would be surprised if people really know what working at Google entails as it appears they are influenced by its pervasive ubiquitousness.
Generally smaller companies give more reign to younger engineers which help them develop faster as compared to their big10 peers.
Is there a R&D center of Apple In.c in china?
I think there is only sales department in china or some members doing factory quality things in shanghai or shenzhen.
EPA is a government department in china.It's a good choice for graduating students studying environment project in colleage or university.
"smaller corps are more stingy, less stable..."
That's funny. I work for a fortune 500 company and I would agree they are more stable due to a global presence, but less stingy...not hardly. We cut travel, office supplies, and SG&A like none other to try to keep a global shareholder base happy. Smaller companies can still throw Catalina Winemixers, while employees at larger companies often trade perks for stability. Kudos to Google though, they will have to start hazing just to thin out the herd of people trying to get in their door. The pressure to perform on senior postions there (knowing there are millions of grads wanting their jobs) must be huge.
Let's go back 40 years. I was in College using a slide rule, then the hand held calculators came out. Texas Instruments and HP were the big names in calculators back then. These corporate names were on every calculator and in the hands of every Engineering student. What advertising! As a result, I had a very successful career at TI. It's no wonder that Google, Microsoft and Apple are near the top of the list this year. Engineering students only know what is fed them...and that's where advertising of big corporate names comes in.
When I was a wee little tadpole fresh out of school, I wanted to go straight for the big name companies of the day, partly out of naive principles to be part of something "larger" than myself. I've since learned some bitter lessons that large companies are like massive ships that are sometimes steered by a drunken captain straight into a lighthouse, and no one on board has any control over their fate. I've worked at both large and small companies, and as far as job quality and satisfaction go, small has beaten big every single time.
All I can think of when seeing these lists is how few companies I even knew of when leaving school. I ended up at a large one as well, but was drawn more by the "big enough to send people to interview on campus" more than the "oh, I think I want to work for _________, inc."
Great article (loved the individual country lists!) It is fascinating how German engineering students want to work for German companies. Is this a "recruiting" thing -or- a cultural thing or what?
Also am a little dumbfounded by the USA list. NASA #1? Really? No budget...no manned space flight and no real prospects for the future...at least as of now. Also, finding the Air Force on the US list is interesting. Lots of government / defense contractors on this list. This seams to be a sea change in thought...but I haven't seen lists of years past to compare. None of the engineering students I have talked to here in the US say NASA, et. al. They say Google, Apple, IBM, Microsoft so I must be talking to the wrong students :)
NASA is hardly in the cellar. The Manned Spaceflight is only a part of what NASA does. Fortunately engineers are not a sell-out to the media and realize many of the science/exploratory missions are really cool stuff. We only need to look at the MSL Mars Curiosity - someone even went a far as making a rap video - check it out on Youtube.
The sheep go to the large multinationals. The wolves go to startups. If you do insist on going to a multinational then at least ensure that you go to a small team developing new products otherwise you will learn to be a cog in the machine and learn little of value outside a large organisation.
In fact, all large companies consist of many small companies. The trick is to apply for the group that does what you're passionate about.
And too, after a few years, if the grad is on the ball, he will pretty much mold his own job. That's what happens when one's talents become recognized, and when management is doing their job right.
Well, when I was a young engineering grad, I started out at a small company, but I was not satisfied. Why? Because it seemed obvious that the small size was also a big limitation. I suppose if the small company did precisely the kind of work the grad likes, perhaps it's a different matter.
Fortunately, I soon got an offer from one of the very top companies on your US list, and it's been super ever since.
I though what was most interesting is that US grads want to go to (what I consider to be) the really cool stuff, like space. I'm curious why that doesn't translate more to other grads. After all, the space program is multinational.
Air Force? Really!!!? I was an engineer for the Air Force for 15 years and I can say without a doubt that the Air Force has no clue how to employ, engage, manage or utilize engineering talent. Maybe the engineers surveyed were commenting about being a cleared defense contractor for the Air Force.
The results of this survey is a reflection of its international nature first. To a lesser degree it is also a reflection of the diverse backgrounds of the engineering schools these kids are coming from.
I am willing to bet that if you only survey the very best in the World, say those who are graduating in engineering from Caltech, MIT, Stanford, and Berkeley, the results will show a much larger preference for startup companies!
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.