Difference between a tech and an engineer

config t · February 08, 2015, 02:51:55 PM

Just a gee-whiz and open ended question..

What do you feel separates a tech from an engineer? Experience? Depth of knowledge on a particular topic/technology?

I see and hear quite a few people calling themselves engineers these days (and they obviously are not). I've even been told to never put anything other than "network engineer" on my resume. I refuse to do it. I'm a net admin, I'm not an engineer yet. Although I am working very hard to get there I recognize and acknowledge that I'm not on that level.

deanwebb · February 08, 2015, 07:03:27 PM

I think it goes tech-admin-engineer-architect in terms of progression. We use technician to describe the guys we use for rack and stack operations. For them, networking is a bunch of boxes, rails for racks, and specific instructions on which wires to plug in where. Admins can read Orion and other monitoring devices and alert the engineers when stuff breaks. Engineers fix the breaks and argue with the architects about implementations. Architects play with cool new toys and insist to the engineers that they could still support operations if they had to.

killabee · February 08, 2015, 07:04:20 PM

Depth of knowledge and skill on various topics. The tech mainly fixes basic technical stuff while the engineer designs, builds, and fixes advanced stuff, and acts as an escalation for the tech. Some organizations also have architects, who do the designing, scoping, and forward thinking/planning of the network. They in turn hand over the design to the engineer to implement. Of course, these are all titles whose job descriptions vary by job.

Otanx · February 09, 2015, 09:54:55 AM

I would agree with Dean and Killabee. However, I have found that there is no good dividing line between the titles. It is whatever the company wants to call you. Where I work now the network side goes Tech then Engineer, and the systems side is Admin then Engineer. The Architect position is the technical lead of both sides.

As for your resume; the main rule is don't lie. If your company called you a network admin, then that is what goes on the resume. Saying you were a network engineer would be considered lying on the resume, and get you banned from working for my company. We have had two recently that lied about certifications. They did fine on the interviews, and then we found they lied. The funny thing is the certs they lied about were not listed on the job description. If they had left them off then maybe one of them would have had a job.

-Otanx

Nerm · February 09, 2015, 11:59:11 AM

I work in the SP/Consulting segment of the industry and at least in my segment the only difference is which title sounds better to clients. We have some competitors that call all their IT staff "Engineer" even sales and entry level helpdesk "tech's" have some variation of "Engineer" in their title. Quite offensive to actual engineer's everywhere IMO. I personally at one point in time held each title and for me personally the boundary is knowledge/experience as well as job duties. If you just run cables, hookup equipment, etc then you are a tech. If you design and/or deploy solutions then you are an engineer. If you just maintain equipment/environments that others have built then you are an admin. I work for a small company so I may have to wear any of those hats on any given day.

config t · February 10, 2015, 09:19:53 AM

Honestly, with the way the title of engineer is thrown around so much I was confused where the lines between tech/admin/engineer even began. I've got a much better idea of where I stand now.. I'm definitely wearing the admin hat. We are pretty much on our own out here though and expected to fix/troubleshoot anything that breaks and expand/contract the campus network without getting tier 3 involved. Unless it's the router, firewall, call manager, or blue coat.. that's their responsibility.

Does education play a part? I've heard it both ways where an engineer should have at least a bachelor's degree in some sort of computer science and that there are those out there with no formal education at all. I have made the assumption that the latter is the exception.

Did any of you ever have to take on a management type role in your progression towards engineer? I'm trying to avoid managerial responsibilities like the plague. If I never have to take on the role of lead admin I will be happy as well.

Otanx · February 10, 2015, 09:54:23 AM

Education really depends on the company. My brother worked for a company that to be an Engineer (capital E) you had to have a bachelor's degree, and it was limited to specific schools that they deemed good enough. Otherwise you were a tech even if you had a masters degree, but from a non-approved school. The company I work for now does not care as long as you can do the work. We have a senior guy here who has no certifications or degrees. He knows how to get stuff done, and that is good enough. As for the management roles, I don't think it is a requirement to be a manager, but you should know how to lead projects including managing the people assigned to the project.

-Otanx

icecream-guy · February 10, 2015, 10:26:55 AM

Typically an Engineer is state certified at some level via some sort of test, thinking along the lines of an HVAC engineer or a Electrical engineer, in our field there is no such state sanctified certification test we could pass to be certified as an "engineer"
to call us engineers is somewhat of a misnomer, and in some worlds considered an insult to those who have passed a test to become an engineer......lost my train of thought, been up for 9 hours, since 2am doing Network maintenance, getting punchy.
I dunno, there was a drive some years ago for network engineers to have some sort of sanctified test that would certify them as "engineers".

LynK · February 13, 2015, 12:40:10 PM

Quote from: ristau5741 on February 10, 2015, 10:26:55 AM
Typically an Engineer is state certified at some level via some sort of test

My brother is in school to be an engineer, and he says I am not deemed to be classified as an engineer because I do not have the proper testing (mandated by the state) to become one.

However, I do only have my CCNA, but I definitely consider myself an engineer. When I look at my job responsibilities, and what I have accomplished I can say with certainty that I am definitely Qualifed.

When I hear someone say they are a network admin I think of someone who is in the 1-4 year mark in their career. They are not qualified yet to touch core or data-center infrastructure. They monitor/fix/support end users for access issues, little deployment exposure... but could deploy branch sites if need be.

deanwebb · February 13, 2015, 01:10:18 PM

My great-grandfather became a civil engineer back in the late 1800s because he blew up a mountain without getting himself killed. He blasted the way open for the Copper Canyon railroad in Mexico.

Since his day, engineering qualifications have grown to be more formal in the fields of civil, electrical, chemical, and mechanical engineering. In the IT field, however, we're still blowing up mountains. No time for formal schooling when we've got a failed sup on a 4500 chassis that needs an emergency RMA. Did you keep up with the lingo? Great, you're hired. We need another network engineer around here, because as soon as that first problem's taken care of, we got to do a VLAN harmonization and get a CUCM installed.

When we run out of emergencies, we can make people go to school for four years to do our jobs. But for now, it's like it was in Mexico a hundred years ago: we need that mountain gone TODAY, not after you get a BA in college somewhere.

Nerm · February 14, 2015, 09:41:42 AM

Quote from: deanwebb on February 13, 2015, 01:10:18 PM
My great-grandfather became a civil engineer back in the late 1800s because he blew up a mountain without getting himself killed. He blasted the way open for the Copper Canyon railroad in Mexico.

Since his day, engineering qualifications have grown to be more formal in the fields of civil, electrical, chemical, and mechanical engineering. In the IT field, however, we're still blowing up mountains. No time for formal schooling when we've got a failed sup on a 4500 chassis that needs an emergency RMA. Did you keep up with the lingo? Great, you're hired. We need another network engineer around here, because as soon as that first problem's taken care of, we got to do a VLAN harmonization and get a CUCM installed.

When we run out of emergencies, we can make people go to school for four years to do our jobs. But for now, it's like it was in Mexico a hundred years ago: we need that mountain gone TODAY, not after you get a BA in college somewhere.

This is a great point. In our field the non-technical bosses don't care if it is done right they only care about getting it done fast and normally as cheap as possible. Before we had properly educated structural engineers we would see structures being built quickly and cheaply until we had enough loss of life disasters to get more formal about it. So what will it take for this realization to happen to the IT field? 911 network go down due to shotty work and people die? I know it sounds dark but it is how civilization has worked/progressed since the beginning. Society normally only fixes something after it gets bad enough to become an epidemic.

deanwebb · February 14, 2015, 10:46:23 AM

Thing is, that stuff stays *up*. Win one for the hands-on, OJT crowd.

config t · February 15, 2015, 01:39:01 AM

I have to echo Nerm on that one, great point.

Maybe it's just my upbringing, but I never had any money for no fancy schoolin'.. had to learn it all on the job and through experience in the military. Granted, I'm at a point now where I can chase a piece of paper that says I'm educated, but I feel like all I'm doing now is checking a box on my resume.

I'd rather blow up mountains.