Every year, new graduates enter the workplace with great expectations for their careers. For many, the transition from school to work is challenging as they learn to fit into their new roles and organizational settings. Often, they find this experience to be not what they expected and experience feelings of frustration, uncertainty, or disappointment in their new jobs. This article reports on the socialization experiences of 41 newly hired engineers and 15 of their managers in three different organizations. Using an inductive, qualitative approach to collecting and analyzing in‐depth interviews, the findings indicated that socialization processes, designed to help newcomers learn about and integrate into new jobs, are more ambiguous and difficult than many newcomers and managers expected. We found that the best intentions of some managers and newcomers were misinterpreted and thus fell short of expectations. The findings indicate how the misinterpretations of newcomers and managers negatively affected the quality of learning, performance, and satisfaction during socialization. The implications of these misinterpretations point to crucial gaps in the educational preparation of graduates for the workplace and shortcomings in the socialization or onboarding of new hires in organizations.

No abstract

The Problem. Recently there has been a growing interest to increase the number of people entering science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers. One of the major problems with this "supply-side" model is that it sees STEM workforce development narrowly as one of inputs (recruitment) and ignores the practice of STEM work, which affects the retention of professionals in STEM careers. The Solution. Informed by recent research and theory on career development, we studied the work experiences of newly hired engineers in one organization. A key finding is that a major part of their experiences involved organizational work and social dynamics outside of what many considered to be "real" engineering work. We propose that these experiences provide important insights for the education and retention of STEM workers. The Stakeholders. Faculty in higher education that prepare STEM workers, managers in organizations that hire new STEM workers, and aspiring STEM workers.

Increasingly, American engineers contend with challenges at work including rapid technological innovation and the needs of changing workplaces (Duderstadt 2008; National Academy of Engineering 2008b; National Research Council 2007). In response, industry, government, and professional societies have called on educators to better prepare engineering students by emphasizing not only technical but professional competencies (Jamieson and Lohmann 2009; Sheppard et al. 2008; Shuman, Besterfield-Sacre, and McGourty 2005). There is a consensus in the engineering community that those competencies include communication skills, business skills, teamwork skills, creativity, lifelong-learning skills, and problem-solving skills (ABET 2011; American Society of Civil Engineers 2008; McMasters and Matsch 1996; National Academy of Engineering 2004). Yet, despite calls for reform, engineering programs are often based on an outdated image of engineering practice that is misaligned with reality

No abstract

In recent years, the preparation of engineering students for professional practice has featured prominently in the engineering education literature. Organizations such as ABET and the National Academy of Engineering have even published lists of skills and characteristics required by graduates to succeed 1-2. What many studies fail to address, however, are the varying experiences of early career engineering graduates employed in different engineering suboccupations. While many engineering graduates go on to become engineering practitioners, others pursue careers in engineering consulting, management, research, and teaching, among other options. This paper aims to better understand differences across engineering suboccupations by comparing them on various personal, experiential, and affective outcomes. Participants for this study come from a survey of engineering bachelor's graduates who earned their degrees from four U.S. institutions in 2007. Funded by the National Science Foundation and deployed in autumn of 2011, the survey received 484 complete responses which were weighted by gender, major, and institutional size to better approximate aggregate responses. Occupational lists on the survey were constructed based on categories in the NSF Science and Engineering Statistical Data System (SESTAT) 3 which itself is adapted from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2000 Standard Occupational Classification 4. We examined three engineering sub-occupations for this paper: engineering practitioners, consultants, and managers. Four years after graduation, 48 percent of survey respondents were employed in one of these three groups. Respondents were compared on survey measures related to their demographics, career experiences, work characteristics, and self-perceptions. Results showed several differences, specifically in graduates' perceptions of their work, current positions, and identities. Engineering managers were more likely to rely on competencies such as business knowledge and leadership in their work and less likely to rely on engineering techniques and tools. Additionally, smaller proportions of engineering managers saw their current positions and identities as being engineering-related. The findings suggest that different engineering suboccupations require different skill sets, which may in turn affect how employees view their jobs and themselves. Determination of these differences can enable new thinking about which skills to emphasize in undergraduate engineering programs, through core courses, electives, and/or extracurricular activities.

The focus of Mark's research can broadly be described as "pivot thinking," the cognitive aptitudes and abilities that encourage innovation, and the tension between design engineering and business management cognitive styles. To encourage these thinking patterns in young engineers, Mark has developed a Scenario Based Learning curriculum that attempts to blend core engineering concepts with selected business ideas. Mark is also researches empathy and mindfulness and its impact on gender participation in engineering education. He is a Lecturer in the School of Engineering at Stanford University and teaches the course ME310x Product Management and ME305 Statistics for Design Researchers.Mark has extensive background in consumer products management, having managed more than 50 consumer driven businesses over a 25-year career with The Procter & Gamble Company. In 2005, he joined Intuit, Inc. as Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer and initiated a number of consumer package goods marketing best practices, introduced the use of competitive response modeling and "onthe-fly" A|B testing program to qualify software improvements.Mark is the Co-Founder and Managing Director of One Page Solutions, a consulting firm that uses the OGSP R process to help technology and branded product clients develop better strategic plans. Mark is a member of The Band of Angels, Silicon Valley's oldest organization dedicated exclusively to funding seed stage start-ups. In addition, he serves on the board of several technology start-up companies. in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She also has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University. Dr. Brunhaver's research examines the career decision-making and professional identity formation of engineering students, alumni, and practicing engineers. In addition, she conducts studies of new engineering pedagogy that help to improve student engagement and understanding. in Psychology from Stanford University. Her current research interests include: 1) engineering and entrepreneurship education; 2) the pedagogy of ePortfolios and reflective practice in higher education; and 3) redesigning the traditional academic transcript. Dr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford UniversitySheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research on engineering education and work-practices, and applied finite element analysis. The Making of an Innovative Engineer: Academic and Life Experiences that Shape Engineering Task and Innovation Self-Efficacy Abstract This research paper presents the results of a study that uses multivariate models to explore the relationships between participation in learning experiences, innovation self-efficacy, and engineering task self-efficacy. Findings show that many engineering students participated in learning experiences that are typically associated with engineering education, such as tak...

the identity development of engineering students, the role of emotion in student learning, and improving the culture for engineering students and faculty, especially those from underrepresented groups. She has methodological expertise in qualitative research methods with a focus on narrative research methods. She is interested in curricular design and has developed design spines for environmental and mechanical engineering programs, and recently helped design the engineering education systems and design PhD program at ASU. She teaches design courses, engineering science courses, and graduate courses focused on qualitative research methods.