Edward Back, W and Sanders, S R (1998) Industry expectations for engineering graduates. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 5(2), pp. 137-143. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Engineering employers are discovering that their workforce requires certain skills which seem to be in short supply. Rapid technological change, participative management and employee empowerment, global competition, and other workplace innovations have created a demand for a higher skill level for engineering graduates. Identifying industry expectations for engineering graduates are an important step in developing university curricula which are responsive to the needs of the profession. The present study identifies specific industry expectations for new engineering graduates and provides practical recommendations for strategically aligning engineering curricula with the professional community. By identifying specific skills requisite for career success, universities can provide an improved service for their graduates and the engineering industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | education; engineering workforce; USA; professional practice |
| Index terms: | competition, employee empowerment, profession, technological change, participative management, professional practice, career |
| Subjects: | management, market analysis, professional development, innovation studies, institututions |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Organizational Design, Information Management, Human Resources, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here