请教，工程师是不是最不待见的申请者？

bigjoe

对对，CMU很适合哦，宣讲会上说50%的学生是engineering background.

sportmann

我是工程师。

iamelf

为什么这帖越看越伤心啊。
有没有被录取的engineers出来给大家打打气？

-- by 会员 Zoil (2011/2/23 15:03:10)

I'm a four-year software engineer, admitted by Duke.
I think female engineers have good chance, because IT companies need diversity...

rendezvous98

I am a software engineer admitted by INSEAD with more than 4 year working experience. Cheer up! Everyone is unique and please don't try to use others as reference.

Zoil

bokchoy0925

I don't think so - take HBS for example,  35% of the class was  in the engineering field pre-MBA.

pursueMBA2010

让hbs的"中国人"自己暴背景,纯工程师的(不是指学工程,然后做咨询或者技术公司里的marketing之类的)有几个?
每年不会多过1个人的
每个学校所谓的工程背景申请者都占1/3左右,这有啥意义

我见到很多申请者,已经从纯技术转到了project management或者team/people management
那其实是学engineering还是学economics还有区别么?反正都是show management能力了

我觉得这里所谓的工程师,是指活跃在一线,需要做很多programing, 一线的技术工作或dirty work,基本或很少有项目管理机会
否则一个electronic engineering毕业的,去做P&G的Marketing MT,2年后申请top school like Wharton成功,是很多见,但这和engineer啥关系?

其实没啥可争论的,纯engineer就是非常难申,因为essay不好写,很多竞争力是在tech方面的,必须跳出这个思维写!还有一个因素就是在中国,做tech的engineer不容易出impact!
做个对比,假设写职业成就(再补充一个小点,就是达成这些成就所需要的时间)
申请者1,咨询背景,很容易找到帮助客户发现某些biz/strategy上的issue,然后展示innovation/problem solving能力convince了客户,使得他们的biz/revenue/profit增长多少多少(虽然咨询背景写职业的story很类似,但不能否认这类case的impact很大,看的很给力,感觉candidate有很大的potential) - 可能一个好的咨询师1.5~2y就能完成上述重要的成就
申请者2,engineering背景,但做sales/marketing的可以说改进xx流程,市场策略从而大幅度影响business,增长profit百分之多少 - 同理,2~3年就可以达成这些重要成就
申请者3,engineering背景,纯技术工程师(最多多一个senior,非project manager),他们的工作就比较难对biz产生直接有力的影响,总不能说因为技术强所以发明了ABC,导致biz增长吧?这不过是展示了你smart,技术sense好;通常必须从"和客户沟通","了解客户需求","通过某些personality,比如激发团队合作,发现潜在问题,或完成一些比较有压力的项目"等等角度入手,必须深度挖掘,而且可以明确对比出strategic thinking,big impact to business不容易展示出来,很容易一不留神就陷入技术jargon无数,搞得reviewer看不清楚重点的局面. - 也许2~3年刚刚从纯programming升级到senior,有点资本涉及很小一部分的biz

所以纯工程师比较难申请......必须花更多的心思;尤其是中国人,如果是美国人在硅谷工作的还好啦,录取比例倒不低
(中国现在申请浮躁情绪占大多数,恨不得工作2年就去读MBA,读完直接上IB赚10几万年薪,这样就使得同等年轻的情况下engineer更显劣势)

csbowow

Totally agree what "upstairs" just said. It's not that engineers are being discriminated. There are two MAJOR obstacles that one has to overcome:

1. There's A LOT more deep digging needed to show leadership and impact in a technical role.
2. "Stereotypically", engineers, especially Asian engineers lack soft/social skills.


If you can do an excellent job with #1 in your resume/essays and, at least, avoid or even disprove #2. Then go for it! But do keep in mind that engineers do start at a later starting line and have a lot of catching up to do in the MBA application race.


Good luck,
An engineer too

bokchoy0925

If you take everything so negatively and do not make effort to create leadership opportunities, it will be hard even if you are not an engineer. Also as long as you can show you are more than a quant person and demonstrate some leadership ( work, NGO, Personal), you should have a chance.  I am an engineer in the RF and PD field - I got in a few top 10. I have friends who were engineering background, whether stayed in the Operations or Design, or later on took on PM roles, got in HBS, Wharton and Stanford as well.  

If anything, know your strengths and work on your weaknesses. If you are lacking leadership, it is not because you are an engineer. A whiner who complains about a "late start" or "unfair disadvantage" because of current occupation probably does not deserve a spot at the TOP business schools. Stay positive and good luck.

Ambro09

同意babyif19说的。
工程师要抬头干活，敢出头。活交到手上最好弄清楚事情的全貌和前因后果，试着评估做的事情的价值和往前追溯需求，目的都是最好的利用自己的能力和给雇主创造价值，所以花些精力也是值得的。
再一个有接触商务层面，接触客户的机会要积极争取。
现在大部分工程师的活都是team work吧，和同组的人，和其他部门一起，也可以锻炼领导力和沟通能力。职位不高的时候能对项目产生影响才能更好的显示领导力，title上去了再做这些就是分内的事情了。
我朋友里面做土木，机械，软件和化学工程师的都有进top10的。工作2年到6年的都有.