Will your company re-imburse "certifications" such as Project Mgmt or Six Sigma or Lean? Many do not, but hire to some extent based on such certifications. No easy answers. My opinion is that engineers should save 10% of their salary to apply toward future-proofing education in their current field or a new technology that is replacing that which they have mastered, and really do the work it takes to stay valuable.
See, here's the thing. My compoany does have their mandatory training, but like most mandated requirements, it's not usually what the engineers need. Company mandated courses are more generic, some mostly geared to "covering their corporate hind ends." Things like intellectual property, trade secrets, international regs on arms trade, that sort of thing, on a periodic basis.
Necessary stuff, I suppose, but what is most important for engineers is to have instilled in them, back during undergraduate years, that it is their own responsibility to keep themselves educated and up to date. These days, that has become a lot easier to do than it was 40 years ago. This can be a combination of company subsidized courses, at the formal end of the spectrum, to individual engineers digging up reference material and putting in some serious study time.
My company encourages this. I put much more importance on this type of training than I do the company-generic mandated stuff.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.