General > General Technical Chat
How do I get out of power?
pidcon:
Young engineers are always valuable, because they are coachable and adaptable.
sandalcandal:
--- Quote from: Gregg on September 25, 2020, 11:11:01 pm ---It can be boring if you really want to be on the cutting edge of electronics (but the paycheck will help overcome the boredom as you get older).
--- End quote ---
Excuse me? I don't know what sector you're in but have you seen what's going on with renewables, EVs and WBG semiconductors!
vk6zgo:
I was going to say "lose the election", but then I read further...
geggi1:
One way to widen your area of experience is to get a second trade. I did this by first getting a HV certificate of trade and then LV residential/agricultural/industrial installation certificate. And now after 25 yeas following the guidelines below i have become senior engineer HV&LV in a medium sized electrical installation company.
Get employment in small companies because a small company let you do more different jobs.
Dont stay to long in each of the smaller companies 2-3 years is usually plenty of time.
When you become more experienced go for the larger companies.
Always have an eye for opportunity to widen your knowlage.
Get a hobby that is close to what you want to do in the future. (Electronics, MCU, programming, ham radio, CAD drawing)
Dont be afraid of challenging jobs and always be prepared by reading up and researching information to do the job.
Find some technical areas to excel above the rest of the team, to become the goto guy.
Be a team player.
Cerebus:
--- Quote from: fourfathom on September 26, 2020, 03:46:15 am ---
--- Quote from: Cerebus on September 26, 2020, 03:21:56 am ---Y'all know I was just joshing, right?
--- End quote ---
You do it with a very straight face!
--- End quote ---
<- (pointing at flag) British, remember? To a Briton the best jokes are ones that can be told with a straight face, especially if we incidently insult the French but they think we're complimenting them. :)
--- Quote ---... In contrast, there were vastly more middle and upper-level management positions than there were upper-echelon engineering jobs. But that sort of makes sense, given the way large businesses operate. It's not some sinister management conspiracy, it just reflects the operational needs of the company.
--- End quote ---
I'm not suggesting conspiracy, merely the usual corporate incompetence. You get an engineer that's good enough that you want to promote. The only promotion opportunities you offer are (to a lesser or greater extent) managerial rather than engineering. There are several possible outcomes:
* The engineer doesn't want to be a manager, so you lose them to a competitor who has senior real engineering positions available (Failure)
* The engineer is prepared to be, or wants to be, a manager:
* You gain a good manager, but lose a good engineer to your own management (Partial success/Partial failure)
* You gain a lousy manager, and lose a good engineer to your own management (Failure)So crudely* you have a 66% chance of a complete failure, and 33% of partial failure/partial success, collected as totals that's 79% failure and 16% success.. None of the outcomes are purely favourable to you.
Make senior pure engineering rĂ´les available and the scenario now looks like this:
* The engineer doesn't want to be a manager, so you promote them to a senior real engineering position (Success)
* The engineer is prepared to be, or wants to be, a manager:
* You gain a good manager, but lose a good engineer to your own management (Partial success/Partial failure)
* You gain a lousy manager, and lose a good engineer to your own management (Failure)
But you can recover by promoting them sideways back to engineering (Success)
Now the tally is (33% +16% +16%) success = 66%, (16% + 16%) = 33% failure. (79% success, 16% failure if you can fix all your mis-promotions to management.)
Contrast the two, in the 'promotion to management only' case your success/failure rate is 16%/79%, in the other it is 66%/33% (or optimistically 79%/16%). Given that, it's pretty clear which strategy is better (if you can practically realise it).
*Crudely = simple assumptions about rates of success/failure (equal distribution to all cases) and the usual 'round percentages don't add up to 100%' caveat.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version