More job ranting
Had a productive day of networking thanks to CSU ECE's "Design your Future" day. Got to talk shop with companies I have a major interest in and more casually about "what is work like" with others lower on my jobs list. Came away with a few notes:
1) My assumption of "work 5+ years before getting MBA" is a good one. Both the time frame and the MBA path fit the long goals I have in mind.
2) My fear of the giant EE players (Intel, HP, etc) is unfounded. After personally being at IBM and feeling like it didn't matter how hard I worked, there was nowhere to go and hearing some stories of career stagnation at some of the giants, I wrote off the mega-sized companies as "not for me". I will need to start putting some of them into my job-hunt rotation. Definitely HP and Intel for power design.
3) A lot of companies on my "avoid" list are still there. Namely Ratheon. Moved Northrup onto my "maybe" pile though. Would have liked to talk with Woodward to get a better idea of where I should rank them.
4) It's good to be reminded that engineers working in the field are still human and engineering JOBS are not anything like engineering SCHOOL.
But, after talking so much with a lot of people who hold the hiring keys, I really want to get a rant out of my system.
I AM NOT MY GPA
I understand the magic formula... 3.0-3.5 GPA means you can hire someone with very little risk. You will know how they preform and can mold them into whatever you want... because most of those 3.0-3.5's are very similar people. And I know that a lower-than-3 GPA does not instantly close doors, but it feels very patronizing when I have to explain myself to every single person in the chain as to why I don't fit the mold.
Yes, my GPA is under 3. Yes, my grades have always been poor. But let's take a look a layer deeper than a F@#$ing number and see why I would add value to your organization.
-I have worked as a technician: Not only have I gone outside the university bubble and worked in a professional environment, I have taken the opportunity to WORK for a LIVING. This job did not satisfy my goals and I then took the INITIATIVE to complete my education. Also, as a tech, I have the mindset to look beyond "does it work now" onto "how will it work for the end-user".
-I am dedicated: My grades have always been poor. I was denied to four-year colleges (specifically CSU) 4 times. I do not lay down and "take it", I get it done! I did not roll over and go back to phone-tech when CSU said no... I took whatever the next step needed to be. This means I had to develop the appropriate study habits to succeed!
-I do not work well in an academic environment: The structure of academia does not motivate me. WORK goals do. Constant feedback and mentoring and teamwork instead of "sink or swim" is how I grow. Also, money motivates me... I like things, not grades. Also, the higher stakes of WORK where something has to work instead of partial credit really works for me.
-I have invested myself differently than my peers: Do you know why I don't list my technical GPA? It's because I have put a lot of effort into proving myself as a competent writer/speaker. My CSU credit is being bolstered by those grades. I have done tech documentation ON THE JOB. What do I keep hearing you want? "Communication skills over technical knowledge"... I LISTENED!
I know I will not be the greatest design engineer at your company. My goals are to instead provide you the talent to give your customer a better product. You can hire dozens of tech-savvy EE's who can design all day... who is going to put it together so you get a profit? ME!
I should really practice that speech and bring it into the next interview I have. Can't go any worse than some of the floundering I've had at my previous ones.
1) My assumption of "work 5+ years before getting MBA" is a good one. Both the time frame and the MBA path fit the long goals I have in mind.
2) My fear of the giant EE players (Intel, HP, etc) is unfounded. After personally being at IBM and feeling like it didn't matter how hard I worked, there was nowhere to go and hearing some stories of career stagnation at some of the giants, I wrote off the mega-sized companies as "not for me". I will need to start putting some of them into my job-hunt rotation. Definitely HP and Intel for power design.
3) A lot of companies on my "avoid" list are still there. Namely Ratheon. Moved Northrup onto my "maybe" pile though. Would have liked to talk with Woodward to get a better idea of where I should rank them.
4) It's good to be reminded that engineers working in the field are still human and engineering JOBS are not anything like engineering SCHOOL.
But, after talking so much with a lot of people who hold the hiring keys, I really want to get a rant out of my system.
I AM NOT MY GPA
I understand the magic formula... 3.0-3.5 GPA means you can hire someone with very little risk. You will know how they preform and can mold them into whatever you want... because most of those 3.0-3.5's are very similar people. And I know that a lower-than-3 GPA does not instantly close doors, but it feels very patronizing when I have to explain myself to every single person in the chain as to why I don't fit the mold.
Yes, my GPA is under 3. Yes, my grades have always been poor. But let's take a look a layer deeper than a F@#$ing number and see why I would add value to your organization.
-I have worked as a technician: Not only have I gone outside the university bubble and worked in a professional environment, I have taken the opportunity to WORK for a LIVING. This job did not satisfy my goals and I then took the INITIATIVE to complete my education. Also, as a tech, I have the mindset to look beyond "does it work now" onto "how will it work for the end-user".
-I am dedicated: My grades have always been poor. I was denied to four-year colleges (specifically CSU) 4 times. I do not lay down and "take it", I get it done! I did not roll over and go back to phone-tech when CSU said no... I took whatever the next step needed to be. This means I had to develop the appropriate study habits to succeed!
-I do not work well in an academic environment: The structure of academia does not motivate me. WORK goals do. Constant feedback and mentoring and teamwork instead of "sink or swim" is how I grow. Also, money motivates me... I like things, not grades. Also, the higher stakes of WORK where something has to work instead of partial credit really works for me.
-I have invested myself differently than my peers: Do you know why I don't list my technical GPA? It's because I have put a lot of effort into proving myself as a competent writer/speaker. My CSU credit is being bolstered by those grades. I have done tech documentation ON THE JOB. What do I keep hearing you want? "Communication skills over technical knowledge"... I LISTENED!
I know I will not be the greatest design engineer at your company. My goals are to instead provide you the talent to give your customer a better product. You can hire dozens of tech-savvy EE's who can design all day... who is going to put it together so you get a profit? ME!
I should really practice that speech and bring it into the next interview I have. Can't go any worse than some of the floundering I've had at my previous ones.