Many laboratories have very expansive equipment the same is employers.

I remember a new engineer from a highly ranked university who in his first week at our customer burned a one million USD $ system.

The accreditation and certification bodies are there to provide formal peer review or by other assessments that the professional is competent. 

While there is no 100% guaranty yet at least a competent body accredits the professional is up to an established standard. 


When I was in the military the new technicians fresh out of training used to initially cause more damage than productivity. So we started in our base a training lab,

the new technicians will have to get additional certification by the resident experts before allowing them into the lab or field. The program proved to save a lot fo $$$$$.   


For scientist's formation in addition to education, there is a lot of research and scientist assisting lab work with their classes so by the time they are matriculating they are ready for independent work or to be hired by organizations/Institutes/labs, etc.


If someone achieved CSci designation it provides that extra assurance etc.

Some would say this provides the minimum but well-established standard for top science professionals.

As to exceptional individuals, they are more of an exception than the norm. 

Good afternoon Mr. Moshe, 

the engineer you know and did a million dollar damage is not a good enough example in this forum that you have not researched or tested in depth. I also know qualified engineers who built a bridge and breakdown so they are not engineers. In any case, posting to this forum is not acceptable to me. To receive CEng assessment, an engineer must have physical and creative values ​​and of course experience in a specific field (I invite you to look for answers I answered including an attachment to help the community and forum cope and make it easy), a physical head engineer using formulas and calculations certainly deserves CEng appreciation.

Mr Benyamin Davod,

I think I will expand on this issue as I think we see things differently about examples in this forum. I think also you clearly misunderstood my comment. 

Hiring managers have a genuine concern when hiring professionals. More than that there is a good reason why multiple people interview candidates and the consensus is sought when hiring decisions are made.

Be it damage to equipment or demage to a valuable customer whos contract canbe lost or public safety concerns for buildings, bridges due to the actions of a professional so there are a high responsibility and accountability and risk at stake.

This is a very serious issue and why in some countries a Licensure is required in order to increase the safety of the public. 

A manager who hired the engineer who caused the damage was for a very long time in trouble, this was my manager as well and I know how our team was affected. 

As result hiring procedures were modified as well.

 "To receive CEng assessment, an engineer must have physical and creative values ​​and of course experience in a specific field", I agree I would add it needs to be assessed as matching UK SPEC.

So going back to the topic the chartered professional while not immune from mistakes comes with additional accreditation and peer-reviewed designation that shows that a level of the standard was achieved.

Dear CEng Moshe,

Not in all Countries Licensure or similar restrictions give a guarantee of a immediate sound PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE. For example here in Italy, where the term "Ingegnere" ( Engineer) is restricted only to the ones that have either a three-year or a five-year  or both) University degree in Engineering Science and they are called here " Dottori in Ingegneria" (Doctors of Engineering) and they become " Ingegneri" (Professional Engineers) only after sitting and successfully passing the prescribed PURELY THEORETICAL STATE EXAMINATION in their own branch of specialization-no additional requirement of a period of practical training and experience  is called for them!

On the other hand for lower professional qualifications such as " Geometra" (Surveyor) and Perito Industriale ( industrial Expert) a two year-period of practical training is also required!

In synthesis: For the State granting title of Dottore Ingegnere (Dott Ing), that is, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER (!...) a University degree + State Theoretical Examination-practical training and experience no needed!... In other words these last counts nothing!

And not to neglect, Italian engineers consider themselves, perhaps presumtuously, the best of the world!,,,

Benyamin Davodian:

Good evening Simon Barker, 

why do you think so ?  

There are universities or colleges that teach the engineering professions and have some recognition from a qualified body, so the student attending a university or college must demonstrate some engineering ability and work experience.  

I believe that anyone with an engineering degree can demonstrate one ability or another and I believe it (of course you must have the same student background in some way to demonstrate ability).

1. Because I don't like a protectionist attitude that allows only the members of a particular club to do something.  It's often done in the name of public safety, but is really to increase the pay and job security of those who are already in that club.

• Because it gives the idea that only a few people are allowed to do science.  We wouldn't tolerate the idea that nobody is allowed to do art unless they are a Certified Artist.  Why allow it for other fields?  Anyone who is interested in science can become a scientist, just by doing it.

Good evening Dear Simon, 

I am now talking about myself because there is no one in the world who does not know himself the best that can be from others. 

I will explain: My knowledge and my field is on a scientific basis (mainly physical research). 

I give professional opinion on faulty engine I use physical formulas and that is my strength, so I will not elaborate and explain in brief. Many engineers find it difficult to demonstrate "physical" engineering ability against my ability. I practice almost every day in the industry or other body for strengthening and coping with the opponent. Unfortunately a lot of engineers deal with similar research and flooding on paper, I think any mechanical failure (in the mechanical field I deal with) is an in-house study and unmatched. Don't you think like me?

Thank you so much my dear friend Luciao, 

I agree with you on every word and it just reinforces me that I was right in my writing earlier in the forum.  

An engineer who does not know how to decode mathematical formulas or interpret physical science even with his doctorate is worth nothing, because he will meet an engineer who has completed a bachelor's degree and will do research that, based on scientific or mathematical science knowledge, will not understand anything so you and I are on the same line. Well done you are a true frid.