When you say you work as an engineer, are you a professor of engineering or doing engineering stuff for the university as a staff employee?
If you are staff how does that differ from any other non-big-tech company? Is there something (besides location in a LCOL area) that makes it more appealing than working as an engineer for any other small firm?
If you are on the academic side was that job particularly easy to get? I don't have any friends who are academic engineers, but my friends who got Ph.D's in humanities and hard sciences found building an academic career very difficult, is academic engineering an easier career to make and keep?
I work as a staff employee at the university library. I expect there are a lot of similarities to working at a smaller company or for the government.
Here are some specifics, some good, some bad:
- Schools have a certain vibe. The campus where I work is absolutely beautiful. Being around students can be invigorating to some extent.
- I can take classes for free. I took a MS in CS course last semester.
- Compared to small companies, the university I work at is very well-known. I considered the name recognization on resume a minor plus.
- Compared from Silicon Valley, it feels like being a big fish in a small pond. I'm given something close to carte blanche as far as most technical decisions.
- There is a weird dynamic between "faculty" (needs degree) and "staff". Lacking a Masters in Library Science is a REAL limitation if you'd like to do any sort of work in an official capacity that's not purely technical. Even our UX people need MLS degrees.
- The pace is astoundingly slow. For example, there is a vended software solution the library wants to subscribe to, and the process of choosing a vendor is expected to take 5 years. Almost nothing is considered a matter of urgent importance.
- It seems exceptionally hard to get fired here, partly I assume because deliverables are so lax.
- The interview process was super weird. There was no coding. There were hours and hours of "Describe a time when..." type questions. I think this is meant to reduce bias in the hiring process or something, but I hate it honestly. I can't imagine trying to hire another engineer and not being able to see their code. If another role on my team opens up, I plan to fight like hell to get at least a basic coding task on our interview protocol.
Comments
When you say you work as an engineer, are you a professor of engineering or doing engineering stuff for the university as a staff employee?
If you are staff how does that differ from any other non-big-tech company? Is there something (besides location in a LCOL area) that makes it more appealing than working as an engineer for any other small firm?
If you are on the academic side was that job particularly easy to get? I don't have any friends who are academic engineers, but my friends who got Ph.D's in humanities and hard sciences found building an academic career very difficult, is academic engineering an easier career to make and keep?
I work as a staff employee at the university library. I expect there are a lot of similarities to working at a smaller company or for the government.
Here are some specifics, some good, some bad:
- Schools have a certain vibe. The campus where I work is absolutely beautiful. Being around students can be invigorating to some extent.
- I can take classes for free. I took a MS in CS course last semester.
- Compared to small companies, the university I work at is very well-known. I considered the name recognization on resume a minor plus.
- Compared from Silicon Valley, it feels like being a big fish in a small pond. I'm given something close to carte blanche as far as most technical decisions.
- There is a weird dynamic between "faculty" (needs degree) and "staff". Lacking a Masters in Library Science is a REAL limitation if you'd like to do any sort of work in an official capacity that's not purely technical. Even our UX people need MLS degrees.
- The pace is astoundingly slow. For example, there is a vended software solution the library wants to subscribe to, and the process of choosing a vendor is expected to take 5 years. Almost nothing is considered a matter of urgent importance.
- It seems exceptionally hard to get fired here, partly I assume because deliverables are so lax.
- The interview process was super weird. There was no coding. There were hours and hours of "Describe a time when..." type questions. I think this is meant to reduce bias in the hiring process or something, but I hate it honestly. I can't imagine trying to hire another engineer and not being able to see their code. If another role on my team opens up, I plan to fight like hell to get at least a basic coding task on our interview protocol.