chrisdut said:
As a civil engineer and partner at the consulting firm where I work, I have to say that Justin hit the nail on the head regarding communication skills. The number one reason that we do not offer an engineer a position at our company is due to a lack of oral or written communication skills. Most civil engineers can crunch the numbers but you have to be able to relate to clients as well!
In addition to (or perhaps assumed as part of) communication skills is the abiliy to "read" people through their behavior and language. Foreign engineers will never be able to do this, unless communications are ultimately relegated to e-mail and other impersonal electronic means. Most companies these days still prefer face-to-face communication before spending millions of dollars, thereby requiring someone who "gets" them
The only major complaints I heard were from....you guessed it...the twenty somethings. The biggest complainer was an engineer with five years experience who made $63,000 last year. He thought that since he passed the professional engineer exam last year that he should be making about $80,000 to $100,000!
I've seen this in the legal profession (chime in here Martha), where starting salaries at the top law firms are now $135,000-$145,000 for 25 year olds fresh out of the top law schools. They are, for the most part, exceedingly book smart, can probably recite Supreme Court precedent and statutory law off the top of their heads, and know their way around Lexis/Nexis and Westlaw electronic research databases like the rest of us know the way from the bedroom to the bathroom. However, book smart does not translate into immediate or even short-term revenues/profits. The learning curve to succeed in the unforgiving environment of a large law firm is often pretty steep, and the majority of newly-minted law firm associates leave their firms within 2-3 years. Sometimes they jump to other large firms (for more money, more responsibility, less "screamers", etc...) but that doesn't detract from the fact that they still have to continue learning how the game is played, which requires: (i) time (5-7 years at a minimum), (ii) patience, (iii) respect for those above you (feigned respect is okay) and (iv) a willingness to put personal priorities (a desire for more money, fame, credit, etc...) while learning.
Of course many of these same twenty somethings do not wish to be responsible for a project's budget, attending meetings, placing their seal on the plans, etc., etc., etc.
Agreed. Many lawyers who are 2-3 years out don't understand how litigation and deal budgets work. They only understand their contribution to the case/deal (i.e. billable hours), and don't care whether the firm is ultimately able to collect on those hours. Legal bills are routinely cut by 10%, if not up to 25%, to keep a client happy and obtain more work for the firm in the future. Those same 20-somethings don't recognize that partners must also put in 10+ hours a week into managing a firm, and put their reputations/professional liability on the line every time they sign a brief or a client opinion letter.
It just seems to me that this generation wants it all, they want it now, but want to accept no responsibility. What I can't figure out is what makes this particular age group think they are entitled to anything they want when they want it? Is it the way they grew up...with the internet, cell phones, etc. ....where you do not have to wait for anything?
Good observation and question. I think the young people of every generation wants it all and wants it right now. Perhaps there is now a degree of wanting immediate gratification, since many Generation Y folks grew up seeing their parents go through tough times (e.g. being downsized, etc...) and believe that they need to get as much as they can, as fast as they can, since there might not be anything for them later on.
