mechanical-management engineer. considerations

[dexx]

Hello, everyone.

I am a student of the first year of management engineering and I am seriously thinking of moving to mechanics. the choice is very difficult as I like the training (tosta and complete) that offers mechanical engineering but I prefer the professional figure (dynamic and versatile) of the management. or at least this is the idea that I've been looking for information around the web (I probably haven't fully understood what a mechanical engineer and a management really do).
I have noticed that after graduation specialist in mechanics (curriculum design and production) it is not difficult to obtain also the degree in management, are only a few exams (study to the federic ii) and at the moment it is an idea that I like.
But I would like an opinion from those who already know the world of work and in particular the peculiarities that companies seek in these two professional figures. probably 90% of you (but maybe even 100% :biggrin: ) will consider mad and immature the idea that a student at the first year wants to make such a journey, so look at this "particular" required as a point of reflection on how, really, the figure of a mechanical engineer with managerial skills (or vice versa, depends on the points of view) can be useful, demanded and productive for a company.

in other words: After such a path (almost long unfortunately) would I be more "interesting" for companies?

thanks in advance:redface:

 

[Giacomo Lepore]

It's hard to answer.
I have several friends who have studied management engineering in napoli. I can say without fear of denial that these friends of mine today have no engineering mentality. do not approach problems in a methodical way, they have even serious technical deficiencies and have a very little technical reasoning.

some work, others do not. but this is a matter of predisposition and personal luck. I don't know how appealing today is a mechanical engineer and how much a management. but management engineering courses in napoli in 2006 were strongly lacking, some almost ridiculous.

I hope I don't offend or offend anyone. I have tried, as far as possible, to speak of facts known personally and limited in time and space.

in particular what do you mean by "dynamic and versatile" professional figure? I feel like I'm talking about these colleagues, like, "We are managerial, we know a little bit of everything so we can be versatile," but in fact they have not studied anything in depth enough to have a real utility in the world of work.

 

[dexx]

I agree with you, it's exactly the perspective you're talking about that they've made me think about my choice to sign up for management engineering. objectively, the training offered by this degree course should be improved and several examinations seem to be put there to fill the manifesto of studies (especially speaking of science of constructions at the master's, with no examination to which science is propedeutic, ergo becomes useless if not for the "forma mentes". then applied technical and mechanical physics, same speech, no really formative examination that exploits the knowledge of thermodynamics or applied mechanics).

from the point of view of the mathematical modeling ability and the methodical approach to problem solving the assumptions seem to be there (research operational i and ii, dynamic systems, identification and excellent control) but your indirect experience seems to prove the opposite. business management skills, in short, something is there (never marketing but it is normal, we are in engineering).

I enrolled in engineering because I want to be an engineer (although, probably, not knowing how a real engineer works), for this I want to deepen and understand if my choice (invitely supported by zero experience, I was just a high school teacher) was wrong or if I can "invent" something, professionally speaking.

Ultimately, the problem is that management is a professional figure that moves away from being an engineer and, in theory, goes to cure other business aspects, with a training that, always in theory, would like to give him the ability to understand the whole production system (and here I connect to your question about dynamicity and versatility) but which in practice does not give him any competence in managing problems other than those proper to management.

I'm still a freshman so my considerations are very "at sensations", if I said baggianate don't worry about "insulting", I'm here to better understand how the world of work works and how important the training offered by the university is. . .

 

[Giacomo Lepore]

from the point of view of the mathematical modeling ability and the methodical approach to problem solving the assumptions seem to be there (research operational i and ii, dynamic systems, identification and excellent control) but your indirect experience seems to prove the opposite. business management skills, in short, something is there (never marketing but it is normal, we are in engineering).

Unfortunately here is also wrong. operational research, without a minimum of construct around it becomes an appendix of mathematical analysis. if by "business management" means plants i and ii, we are distant light years. missing all the part of communication that in engineering you do not do, and you can not think of forming a manager by explaining how to play with numbers.

science then, I did the exam with management. for the truth I was mechanical old order, their management new order, so the difference was abyssal, but I remember a girl who made a mistake that I would have been kicked in dark places until the department, instead the words of the professor were: "I'm sorry, this mistake is bad. She played the praise." and put 30.

 

[dexx]

Unfortunately here is also wrong. operational research, without a minimum of construct around it becomes an appendix of mathematical analysis. if by "business management" means plants i and ii, we are distant light years. missing all the part of communication that in engineering you do not do, and you can not think of forming a manager by explaining how to play with numbers.

science then, I did the exam with management. for the truth I was mechanical old order, their management new order, so the difference was abyssal, but I remember a girl who made a mistake that I would have been kicked in dark places until the department, instead the words of the professor were: "I'm sorry, this mistake is bad. She played the praise." and put 30.

by management I meant more than anything that is done to economics, but in fact looking at the program of mechanical plants this examination seems to be fundamental for the management of the production process.

regarding operational research I can not answer you, as I said I am still inexperienced and take for good what you say. What then, what exactly do you mean by "minimum construct around"?

Finally, for the science exam... I believe it is an episode even if it seems reasonable that the various difficulty between the two degree courses (mostly with different sorting).

My industrial technical design teacher told me that a mechanical engineer can, well or badly, comply with the same tasks that the management refers to. I don't know how far it is, it should be explained by the management engineer

 

[gil]

I don’t understand the management address.
What the hell is that for? practically, you are not an engineer, who has specific skills in a field such as building, mechanics, electronics etc. at the end in the labor market you are equated to a graduate in economics.
Okay, it's cool because everyone calls you Dr. Ing. But on average you enter the job market a few years later, which is very bad.

Obviously this does not want to diminish the high preparation reached at the end of the course; the many who have found a good job, are proof that comunuqe are appreciated.

 

[dexx]

I don’t understand the management address.
What the hell is that for? practically, you are not an engineer, who has specific skills in a field such as building, mechanics, electronics etc. at the end in the labor market you are equated to a graduate in economics.
Okay, it's cool because everyone calls you Dr. Ing. But on average you enter the job market a few years later, which is very bad.

Obviously this does not want to diminish the high preparation reached at the end of the course; the many who have found a good job, are proof that comunuqe are appreciated.

also on wikipedia emphasizes the difference in training between a graduate in management engineering and one in economics. If it doesn't make any difference to companies, I don't know

 

[gil]

Okay, nice fuffe, and then here's how things go.

entrepreneur: What can you do?
Graduate: I have learned techniques of management and control of the enterprise ....
entrepreneur: Look, man, I'm the one planning to control, because the company and mine. Now how can you help me?
graduate: I have a solid education, scientific mathematics and...
Entrepreneur: Are you a mechanical engineer who designs me a motor?
graduate: not really but...
Entrepreneur: Are you an electronic engineer who designs a circuit?
graduate: not really but...
entrepreneur: Are you a civil engineer / building who designs me a house?
graduate: I do not know the economy, finance and marketing
entrepreneur: as a graduate in economics! only they have 2 or 3 years less than you. You're good too.

but management is a very precise figure that should be included between technical department and marketing department, taking advantage of the knowledge to mediate between the two. a figure present only in reality very large and still smoking since it is now difficult to understand the limits of the two departments mentioned.

I introduce you to another case the entrepreneur has two candidates,
1) management ing, graduate 27 years without work experience
2) graduated in economics at 25 years, master's in guilterra then 1 year of experience at the megagrossa company in use, Australian, or other part of the cool world, with skills similar to those sought. age 27.

What do you think has more hopes of recruitment?

 

[dexx]

but management is a very precise figure that should be included between technical department and marketing department, taking advantage of the knowledge to mediate between the two. a figure present only in reality very large and still smoking since it is now difficult to understand the limits of the two departments mentioned.

I introduce you to another case the entrepreneur has two candidates,
1) management ing, graduate 27 years without work experience
2) graduated in economics at 25 years, master's in guilterra then 1 year of experience at the megagrossa company in use, Australian, or other part of the cool world, with skills similar to those sought. age 27.

What do you think has more hopes of recruitment?

The reasoning of the hand does not make a wrinkle, but then chokes with the reality of the facts. I think that the main point is missing: why does a company look for and take over the management? What does he ask? I don't think he's bound to do what a graduate in the economy does.

 

[calacc]

the choice is very difficult as I like the training (tosta and complete) that offers mechanical engineering but I prefer the professional figure (dynamic and versatile) of the management.

as long as you are a student in my opinion it is best to focus more on the quality of training (more toast is and better you find yourself in the future) than then to become dynamic and versatile professional figures you always do in time, then depends on the demands in the working environment.

I suggest you switch to mechanics, do it until you are in time! the important thing and you're really convinced. if then in the management course they tell you (as they tried to make me believe too...) that the companies today mainly look for management because nowadays there is already everything and "There is nothing to invent" Don't believe him at all. This is what they say because if the enrolled in their course no longer arrive funding and they find themselves swept away in the attri of the university. Don't trust what they say to you, remember that those who talk to you are not Establishment but professors in engineering. of real engineers you will know then working, if you will be lucky you will learn a lot from them.

I think so:
technicians are born, management can become

Good luck anyway for what will be your choice.

 

[tecnico_plast]

the eternal struggle between engineers and management engineers will never end up astonishing.
Anyway, to avoid any controversy, I prefer not to deepen my personal considerations.
I suggest you follow your instinct, whether right or wrong you will understand it over time.
In fact, these first months of universities are perhaps a few to make you a complete picture of the situation.
If it's true what someone wrote a little above, management can always become us, just ask the rector... if you were born an engineer you should find out. . .

 

[gil]

"the eternal struggle" was not with the architects:wink:
or is it all against everyone?
I'm digging. . .

 

[Roby6145]

depends on whether you want to be a manager (to manage budgets, men, projects) or the professional (to draw, to make calculations). Consider that most of the time companies are looking for engineers who manage human plants and resources and that design is reserved to very few companies. another thing, the studies "tosti" are typical of young people to overcome which associate the word "bravura". Unfortunately this skill in rare cases is recognized while they are recognized logical thinking skills, wrinkles, ability to work in group. the advice I could give you is to think about graduating as soon as possible with good votes regardless of the address chosen.

 

[dexx]

Thank you all for the answers you give me so precisely:redface:

depends on whether you want to be a manager (to manage budgets, men, projects) or the professional (to draw, to make calculations). Consider that most of the time companies are looking for engineers who manage human plants and resources and that design is reserved to very few companies. another thing, the studies "tosti" are typical of young people to overcome which associate the word "bravura". Unfortunately this skill in rare cases is recognized while they are recognized logical thinking skills, wrinkles, ability to work in group. the advice I could give you is to think about graduating as soon as possible with good votes regardless of the address chosen.

designing and designing are probably not the most important thing I want to deepen, contrary to the plants, of the industrial process, of the "pure mechanics" :d

returning to the main topic of the discussion... Do you think that a mechanical engineer with the skills of a management (economics, logistics and so on) can be an interesting figure for companies?

 

[Fulvio Romano]

Consider that most of the time companies are looking for engineers who manage human plants and resources and that design is reserved to very few companies.

Vera.

another thing, the studies "tosti" are typical of young people to overcome which associate the word "bravura". Unfortunately this skill in rare cases is recognized while they are recognized logical thinking skills, wrinkles, ability to work in group. the advice I could give you is to think about graduating as soon as possible with good votes regardless of the address chosen.

false (imho)
passing the exams forms thought, forms character. It's not just a "study like you do two plus two and then I know how to do two plus two." This is notionism.

graduating in a short time is a must, on this it does not rain. but remember that this is the last chance of your life to study. If you don't use it, you'll regret it every day of your future life.

returning to the main topic of the discussion... Do you think that a mechanical engineer with the skills of a management (economics, logistics and so on) can be an interesting figure for companies?

Do you want to know what engineers do in companies in 80% of cases?
They fill excel sheets and edit drawings of a similar machine that works and therefore there is no need to change it. Just a little small because the shed is tight.

sin. But it is.

choosing the address of studies according to the market, especially in this period is not a smart thing. first of all in five years you do not know the market as it will be. and then my suggestion is, study what you like and you will have a chance to find a job you like. If you study what you need for companies, but that doesn't fascinate you so much, consider that at best you will find a job that doesn't fascinate you so much, and that, even in the best of assumptions, you will have to do for the rest of your days. and consider that the best of hypotheses seldom come true.

demoralized? You shouldn't.

 

[tecnico_plast]

designing and designing are probably not the most important thing I want to deepen, contrary to the plants, of the industrial process, of the "pure mechanics" :d

if you do not care so much about designing and designing, but rather managing and designing plants and processes, then you should do the management.
If you're interested in pure mechanics, maybe you should study physics and then be a scientist at the cern...

returning to the main topic of the discussion... Do you think that a mechanical engineer with the skills of a management (economics, logistics and so on) can be an interesting figure for companies?

I think you have to choose whether to be a mechanic or the management, which means "mechanical engineer with the skills of a management"?

 

[calacc]

depends on whether you want to be a manager (to manage budgets, men, projects) or the professional (to draw, to make calculations). Consider that most of the time companies are looking for engineers who manage human plants and resources and that design is reserved to very few companies.

I think they are much more companies where the figure of the manager does not exist. It is enough to keep in mind the economic fabric of our country that is made mostly of small-medie enterprises, the figure of managers more suits multinational or large companies, there so that there is need for management.
Then don't think that as soon as you start working, you'll take care of management immediately, first it's easier than you find yourself doing the technician. later working maybe you can be made the proposal to go to a managerial position.

 

[dexx]

if you do not care so much about designing and designing, but rather managing and designing plants and processes, then you should do the management.
If you're interested in pure mechanics, maybe you should study physics and then be a scientist at the cern...


I think you have to choose whether to be a mechanic or the management, which means "mechanical engineer with the skills of a management"?

Well for "pure mechanics" (the quotes wanted to emphasize it) I don't mean the physics behind it but having to deal with engines, machine tools, gadgets of various kinds. I'll probably be wrong. .
the problem is that in management you do not study mechanical plants but you do a useless examination of chemical plants to the master!

I have opened this discussion just to try to get to know better the prospects of work that an engineer is waiting for, unfortunately I still know little even if you are clarifying my ideas.

Today, I think the best choice for me is mechanical engineering.

 

[tecnico_plast]

Well for "pure mechanics" (the quotes wanted to emphasize it) I don't mean the physics behind it but having to deal with engines, machine tools, gadgets of various kinds. I'll probably be wrong. .
the problem is that in management you do not study mechanical plants but you do a useless examination of chemical plants to the master!

I have opened this discussion just to try to get to know better the prospects of work that an engineer is waiting for, unfortunately I still know little even if you are clarifying my ideas.

Today, I think the best choice for me is mechanical engineering.

then you have to go to mechanics, and at that point everything will be aimed at design, but it is not said that you will study in the specific motors, machine tools etc.

the evil of the Italian university is also in the fact that every university structure the study plans in a different way.
the fact that in the university that frequents is not expected a course of industrial plants for management engineering, is very strange.
I therefore imagine that materials such as mechanical behaviour of materials, machine design, production management and quality are not even made. . .

 

[PierArg]

...
the fact that in the university that frequents is not expected a course of industrial plants for management engineering, is very strange.
I therefore imagine that materials such as mechanical behaviour of materials, machine design, production management and quality are not even made. . .

... or construction science.