 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
  Do engineers get enough respect?Ted loved being an engineer. He liked the challenge, the process of solving problems, the satisfaction of solving puzzles that few others could unravel. So when his 16-year-old daughter asked him, "Dad, is engineering a good job?'" he was thrilled at the prospect of Deirdre's following his career. And yet when push came to shove Ted hesitated. Even he was surprised at his answer: "Yes, honey, but . . ." "But." A curious dichotomy showed up in the replies to the EE Times' "1999 Worldwide Salary & Opinion Survey" by engineers and their bosses to questions about their careers. Some 83 percent of engineers and 95 percent of managers agreed that they like their jobs. But asked later whether they feel adequately rewarded beyond compensation for "on-the-job efforts," a hefty 47 percent replied, "No." Nearly 50 percent of engineers grumbled vs. 36 percent of managers, indicating an undercurrent of dissatisfaction in an otherwise satisfied profession. Here's an example of that divided loyalty from a respondent who perceives a lack of appreciation for work performed. "I love engineering. But I've never found the better engineers doing as well as the incompetents." (Figure) Salary may play a role-more than one-third of those replying think they're not on par with others at the same level. But the fact that 49 percent of staff-level engineers believe they aren't getting payback for their job efforts could indicate something deeper: a lack of respect for their accomplishments. Only 25 percent "strongly agree" that their company "respects engineers." Getting back to the fictional Ted, he recalled the day his boss, Hal, called him into his cubicle, the only one on the floor. Ted's company had a so-called open bench policy for its engineers-no offices. You walked in, checked in with a manager and found out where your team assignment was that day. The boss was a former coworker, promoted after obtaining his MBA and recommending a new product line that ultimately failed. That didn't seem to matter. Ted squirmed. The MBA leaned forward. "That power supply you came up with the other day?" Ted nodded-16 weeks to redesign the bugger for a bigger, more power-hungry application. "Sorry, Ted, but we're farming that out. A design house in Texas says it'll save 33 percent over your design, mostly from reducing the redundancy and backup features." "Hal!" Ted was practically shouting over the glass walls of the cubicle. "That redundancy is needed!" "Budget, Ted. Budget," replied Hal. (Figure) Scenes like that are not unusual. In fact, experts have suggested that corporations show more appreciation for a job well done by taking one or several inexpensive steps: issue a plaque; take the team out to lunch; have a corporate-level boss single out a top performer for public praise. Frustrations notwithstanding, engineers love the profession. More than a third "strongly agree" with the statement "I am satisfied with my career." And like Ted, three-quarters of the staff-level people would recommend engineering as a career for their children, along with 84 percent of managers. That's a ringing endorsement for the profession, if not always for the corporate environment. For the first time, we asked all readers to rate how strongly they agreed with a series of statements about their careers, their companies and their relationship to management. On the whole, American engineers and managers in the electronics industry are happy with their situation. The 1,100 Japanese respondents were more critical. Here are the percentages of respondents who "strongly agreed" or "somewhat agreed" with the following statements. The responses from Americans are listed first.
One gets the impression that most American engineers work at open, market-driven companies where the technology, the people and the tools are up to date. Engineers and managers in the military-aerospace industry appear more critical of their employers' currency in technology and equipment than those in communications or computers. That finding reflects the fact that the prime customer of the defense companies, the United States government, is generally conservative in incorporating new technology. Even though the Defense Department sometimes leads the way in technology, it takes years to bring that technology to fruition. On the other hand, the Japanese engineers who replied criticize the market focus of their companies, and fewer than half would recommend their career to their children. Such dissatisfaction has been consistent over the years; less consistent is the fact that 62 percent declare themselves satisfied with their careers. While the engineers from Hong Kong, Singapore, China and Korea were not asked the same questions, there are several sharp divergences from the U.S. sample.
(Figure) One quirk in the data: U.S. respondents in the smallest companies complain more often about their companies' currency in technology and equipment. The bigger the company, the more resources it has with which to arm its engineers with the latest tools and technology. It's possible that most of those critics don't work at startups, whose mission is to advance the state of technology. A sign of health in the industry is the finding that eight out of 10 U.S. respondents have few qualms about disagreeing with their boss. Engineering workplaces need give-and-take to settle debates and arrive at an appropriate technological resolution. Interestingly, communications industry engineers and managers agree decisively-eight out of 10-that "decisions are made by only a few top managers." Among computer engineers, by contrast, only six out of 10 agreed. Apparently, the communications field has more top-down decision making. In the Valley of the Dow Susan sighed upon reading The Wall Street Journal. "XYZ Design vows faster device will be ready by 3Q." As marketing manager, Susan knew full well what that meant: the new product line, featuring exotic but untested technology, would have to wait-it was too far down the road for Wall Street. (Figure) She recalled the CEO's words in the meeting last week. "We need to show them something now." Everyone in the room knew who "they" were: young hotshots from Wall Street. Susan tuned in CNBC on the TV set. "XYZ," said the anchor, "up 2 points." Susan smiled ruefully, thinking, "A promising technology cast aside for a quick fix, but at least I've made another grand today from my options." Susan is fictional, but her experience underlines the fact that the electronics industry has been transformed by the rising influence of the stock market, both on the people and their companies. Survey respondents detect a difference in the way their companies approach product development, management decisions and economics these days. "We are driven by quarter-to-quarter earnings results and stock market analysts," says a New England hardware manager. 'More pressure' "My company has lagged in the market," admits a Phoenix production manager. "Intense pressure to meet/beat quarterly expectations. Less sympathy and more pressure on each business to meet profit expectations." The initial public offering (IPO) has altered the industry landscape. Here the stock market has been a help, not a hindrance. "We are a startup," says the group leader of a Northeastern computer company. "We sell stock to get money. It changed how we do business. We actually have money to do business rather than speculating at a kitchen table." Another engineer noticed that "the company is changing management in preparation for IPO." Regulations and the need to publicly report earnings require new expertise. The market has affected jobs as well. "Decisions are based on stockholder issues rather than employee issues," according to a Midwest senior engineer. "My company laid off engineers despite the fact we are already understaffed to appease Wall Street." (Figure) A software engineer agrees: "[My] company has [undergone] unnecessary downsizing to impress Wall Street, with less regard to the long-term profitability of the strategy." The stock market's influence ranges all the way down to product development. A group leader tells us, "The company tends to focus on 'visible' products that affect stock prices. Less visible (but more profitable) products take a backseat." Corporate focus has sharpened, engineers believe. "Our mother company has sold off some long-term profitable companies [to] keep current high-profit companies because of stock issues." Not everyone buys into the idea that Wall Street's influence has been negative. A Pennsylvania software engineer thinks the market has "made the company more competitive." On the other hand, he adds, his employer is now "more prone to reduce work force [because] the short-term dollar is what counts." One reader hasn't seen any appreciable difference. "It's had no effect, strange as it may seem. Companies are watching their money more than ever." "High stock price allows my company to depress salary raises without losing people," according to a Massachusetts senior engineer. In other words, the company has clamped some "golden handcuffs" on its senior people by offering stock options and other forms of incentives that depend on length of service and continuity. Though each corporation's stock and options package is different, most plans allow employees to buy corporate stock at a set price after they have spent a fixed amount of time at the company. In some plans for corporate managers, there are performance goals that must be met. Millionaires are created daily in Silicon Valley through options. They've been able to buy their company's stock at, say, $20 and sell it for $40, $80 or $100 per share. The days of options as strictly a management perk are long over. Some 44 percent of the 503 responding design and development engineers and managers own a piece of their company through stock options. And while half the managers hold options, so do 41 percent of the staff-level people-though supervisors do hold an advantage over staffers in the worth of those options. Managers estimate their options' worth at about $61,000 on average, while the staffers figure their holdings at about $32,400. Managers estimate they already own about $58,000 in stock outright today, while staffers have about $27,000 worth. So while those replying gripe about bulls running through the corporate china shop, they contradict themselves to some extent by expressing a desire to ride those bulls. From a menu of benefits, stock options topped them all, selected by two-thirds of the experienced respondents to that question. They said they would rather have the chance to pick up more stock than be offered a year-end bonus (60 percent), get an educational subsidy for their family (29 percent), use in-house gyms and day care (19 percent) or even be granted a housing allowance (15 percent). Three-quarters of the college student respondents to our Web-based survey also favor stock options over any other perk. In good health The arguments are reminiscent of the ones voiced when engineering corporations shifted to market-driven product development in the 1980s and early 1990s. Engineers complained about short-term focus, the emphasis on profits and the bottom-line mentality of management. And in the 1990s, respondents were bitter about the relentless pruning of the work force. But corporations' financial health has never been better and engineering employment remains strong. National unemployment is hovering around 4.3 percent, with engineers faring even better at 1 percent to 2 percent. Shortage: real or engineered? For the seventh time that week, John scanned the classifieds in search of a future. Java programmers, Web editors, tons of networking gurus. But nothing for a hardware engineer. Wait a minute. John focused his 52-year-old eyes on the fine print. What was this? "Hardware engineer, one to two years' experience. $35,000." (Figure) So does that unemployment figure, suggesting that there aren't too many real Johns around, constitute a shortage? After two years of splitting almost evenly down the middle, respondents, by a margin of 54 percent to 46 percent, have edged closer to the conclusion that a shortage does exist. Others think the shortage is a manufactured issue designed to flood the market with underpaid engineers. "Yes there's a shortage of experienced engineers who will work for a new-grad pay. There is no shortage for a balance of skill and pay," writes one skeptic. This isn't a purely intellectual debate. Legislation has been proposed to raise the immigration level for professionals to 200,000 a year, up from the more than 110,000 limit laid down only a year ago. Proponents argue there aren't enough engineers to go around; opponents maintain cheaper labor from overseas undermines the engineering profession and that the only shortage that exists is of engineers willing to work 60 hours a week for $40,000. Until 1994 survey respondents pooh-poohed any suggestion of a shortage; in 1995 a few more noticed problems in filling positions; by 1997 the votes were split down the middle. This year some two-thirds of the managers-who, after all, do the hiring-say there is a shortage with 4 out of 10 saying they experienced delays in their 1998 projects due to a lack of talent. Whom do they need? "In Austin, Texas, everybody." "ASIC designers, networking experts." "Good hands-on design types, with theory, common sense and understanding of manufacturing," declares a Long Island systems engineer. "Don't design it if you can't MAKE it and sell at a competitive price." (Figure) "Non-computer science" electrical engineers of most kinds: circuit designers, systems analysts, electronic technicians of all kinds," according to a California senior engineer. "Smart people," another reader replies. "We can hire engineers, but they're dead weight." Several respondents blamed corporate policy, not a shortage. The company, they claim, has deliberately kept staffing shorthanded in a quest to save money. Importation of foreign engineers, especially with the newest proposal before Congress to raise the ceiling, appears to be an Issue That Won't Go Away. With a Presidential election looming in 2000, you can be sure the two major parties will be loading up for an all-out battle on the H1-B visa issue. Interestingly, Japanese respondents are squarely in the shortage camp and have been for years. Some 87 percent believe there aren't enough engineers in their country, with 63 percent blaming a dearth of engineering talent for delays in their projects this year. Just 11 percent have seen their companies hire more new talent, while 43 percent report fewer new hires. Only 11 percent saw layoffs this year. Mixing work and family Feng was feeling a bit woozy. All day long, he had been peering at the screen and now that night had fallen, he was seeing double. Nine hours, on top of the 11 the night before and many nights before that. Too much, his wife said. "Come home." Feng wanted to, but the boss had set a deadline, a much too tight deadline, to get the work done, and there was no way it would happen without some near all-nighters. But beside him, George was closing his desk for the night. Feng asked, "You leaving?" George smiled. "Sure am. It's quittin' time and I'm outta here." Feng started, "The boss . . . " George stopped at the cubicle door long enough to lean back. "She's home, Feng. Along with our two little even more demanding bosses." Today, there are more Georges than Fengs. In career concerns among respondents, only sal-aries outrank "work/life balance," which beats out such perennial front runners as job security and technical obsolescence. While work/life is a concern, 73 percent nevertheless say they have achieved balance-not that it's easy. "It takes a lot of work to ensure that a balance is struck," says a Northeast systems engineer. "I have to determine on a case-by-case basis what's more important." "This [balance] has happened only in the past five years," another engineer adds. "Prior to that I was very much overcommitted to work." (Figure) Among the 20 percent who are groaning under the strain is this burnout candidate: "There is no personal life. Work requires top billing to keep customers happy." His list of priorities: "Customer/company/God/country." Managers express a bit less satisfaction with the work/life equation than engineers (67 percent vs. 75 percent), but that's not unexpected. Few go into a supervisory position with a 9-to-5 mentality. Respondents in the computer industry score lower than people in other industry segments (66 percent vs. 75 percent in military/aerospace). The defense sector is unique in paying many of its engineers overtime, a practice that forestalls the grumbling about hanging around for another two hours. There's little differentiation by age on the work/life issue. Employers recognize that a different type of employee is surfacing, one who doesn't define him or herself by the job. "I could land a job that paid better," a design engineer admits, "but at greater sacrifice than I am willing to give." In EE Times' "College Recruitment" special report this year, the Web-based poll of 439 engineering students confirms that even the most ambitious value their personal time. Some 44 percent are "very concerned" about achieving work/life balance, more than those who are "very concerned" about salaries. Women, especially, seek an appropriate mix, with 58 percent ranking it as a top issue. Work/life concerns are particularly acute in Japan. Engineers there are renowned for their long hours on the job. One-quarter of the readers of Nikkei Electronics Japan clock 55 or more hours a week vs. 47 in the United States. Still, a bit more than half of the Japanese believe they've achieved an appropriate balance. That's fewer than the 73 percent of American engineers who feel that way, but not as few as the popular image of Japan's workplace as an all-consuming life force would suggest. Similarly, 71 percent of the Asian respondents are satisfied with the balance. Still, some of the Americans toil mightily. "Will go months with mandated 58 hours a week," said one survey respondent. "No extra compensation." "Part of the better, faster, cheaper approach is to hire fewer engineers, which puts more of the workload on the engineers who do the work," a Colorado engineer writes. A California principal engineer acknowledges that his employer "is still understaffed, but [I] have been able to keep some balance. This has not always been true." (Figure) The balance is completely skewed for at least one respondent. "I have no leisure time and take a vacation only once every seven years." He's unusual. Most take two weeks or more for vacation each year, though one trend that has popped up is the request by some employers for weekend work, allegedly due to an extreme project deadline. But for 8 out of 10 American respondents weekends are free time; once in a while, say 14 percent, the company may ask for a Saturday. In Japan, it's different. Half of the 1,100 respondents from Japan report working "a few weekends" while 10 percent do so "most of the time." Employers have adopted all types of techniques to help employees mix family and work time. Some corporations offer concierges, auto repair pickup and other services. "I work from home," said the president of a small design firm. "I get all my extra hours from not commuting." "My company has extracurricular activities during and outside of work hours," a test engineer writes. "Massages in-house, juggling class, movies, etc." Juggling class? Ah, those Californians. (Figure) Ranking career issues In the mid-1990s, during the height of corporate downsizing, job security was the most worrisome issue for engineers. With the rebound since, job concerns have taken a back seat. Here are the top issues, as defined by the 503 American engineers and managers who replied:
Some sharp differences show up when these ratings are broken down by age. The older engineers and managers are far more concerned about pensions and age bias than the under-35 group. Older engineers, perhaps remembering the days when Japan threatened to take over the electronics industry worldwide, are also much more wary of foreign competition than the Gen-X crowd. Salaries also come out on top in the Japanese survey. However, understandably in view of the recession they have had for the past two years, the Japanese are far more concerned about foreign competition (46 percent) and, significantly, jobs. No longer is Japan the home of lifetime employment. Today, 75 percent of the Japanese are concerned about job security. So what do engineers want to be when they grow up? That depends on how far along they are in their careers. Asked "What are your highest career aspirations," some one-third of staff-level engineers who responded see only as far as senior engineer. Managers-presumably past that position already-have bigger fish in mind. Chief technical officer would be nice, according to 37 percent of the managers. Another one-quarter of them see the presidency or chief executive officer's post as achievable, and 23 percent covet the day they can call themselves "entrepreneur." The independent streak also manifests itself when 15 percent of the staffers and 12 percent of the managers see their highest career peak as consultants. And then there is the respondent who writes, "I hope to run my own private school." The 439 engineering students in the Web-based survey pretty well divided equally when asked for their highest aspirations: 27 percent see themselves as a CEO or president; 24 percent seek a chief technical officer's post; 21 percent want to go out on their own, and 20 percent think senior engineer is high enough. The remainder want to be consultants. On average, the experienced engineers have changed employers only 2.3 times in a 13-year career, about par with previous survey respondents, and some 25 percent have never switched jobs. As expected, most of those are in their 20s and early 30s. But an impressive 22 percent of the 35-to-49-year-olds and 12 percent of those over 50 are still with their first and only employer. Respondents in larger companies are twice as likely to stay loyal than engineers in the small ones, not surprising in view of the mortality rate of new companies in Silicon Valley. Fewer than 9 percent of the responding engineers started new jobs in the last year. As expected, those under 35 were most active; 13 percent found new, or even first, jobs. The number shrinks to 9 percent for the 35-to-49 group and a handful in the over-50 group. There was no difference between managers and staffers. Communications active Most active were the engineers in communications, with more than 18 percent making a switch. About 40 percent of the new job holders accepted a signing bonus, many topping $5,000. Signing bonuses are an earmark of the tight late-1990s job market, as employers fight over a relatively small number of candidates. Altogether, 23 percent of the total sample said they have accepted such bonuses in the past. So the practice isn't new. About 47 percent of the American respondents said they'd be willing to accept a job overseas; Europe was the most popular destination, with the United Kingdom and Germany leading the way. About a third of those willing to go overseas for a job would head for Asia. When responding engineers and managers do want a new job, how do they look for one? About 37 percent said they scanned job sites on the Internet in the last year. It's fast, it's international in scope and it provides more information than a three-line classified ad. The younger engineers are more likely to surf the Net than the 50-somethings. More than half the engineering students visited job sites this year. The experienced and soon-to-be graduate engineers all picked the same top five sites, but in different order. The veterans' favorite stopping places were:
That mix changes a bit when it comes to the college crowd. They picked IEEE, Monster Board, HotJobs, CareerMosaic and EE Times. Return to 1999 Salary & Opinion Survey
|
| ||||||||||||||||
