Hello,

I'd like opinions on the value of vendor provided DCS training when considering the costs. Without getting specific, I'm thinking of signing up for some training on a system I have no exposure to for purposes of resume building. Do you think potential hiring companies would have value in someone having a limited amount of time on the system they use and only in a training environment? As you probably know, these classes are not cheap, so when you are paying for them instead of your employer, it's a more significant decision.

 

RodyCho,

I'm only going to address one possible benefit. Depending on your previous experience with DCS systems and programming and application, a little training could go a long way--unless this is so different from what you've been doing that it's not applicable.

But, if you can program ("write code") in other manufacturers' DCSs, and this would be like a quick lesson in another manufacturer's DCS that would be an extension of what you're already familiar with, well then it might be a good investment.

We don't know what your background or experience is (this site doesn't have avatars where people can post some of their experience and background for others to see when posting replies or looking for knowledge and experience). Without knowing your background and experience we can't really say for sure if this investment would be worth the time or the money. If it's a completely new foray for you, then it might not be something good to get into. I would also suggest you post the vendor/training provider and ask for feedback on their offering(s). That might be just as good a question.

I would also offer the thought that many employers (not all--but maybe the better ones) would see this a sign of your motivation and desire to invest your money as well as your time in self-improvement and knowledge and training. A hiring manager (a good one to work for, maybe?) might think, "If you're that interested (even if I don't have that vendor's equipment) then maybe you'll work as hard to learn the equipment in my plant...."

Hope this helps!

 

Hello RhodyCho,

DCS vendor specific instructor led training can be a great way to start out with a system, when followed up with on-the-job training and hands on experience. Ideally in a commercial context. The formal training can also benefit those with experience in that product, to learn handy tips or fill in gaps.

Any further training is going to be of some benefit to you, whether as cross-training or in totally unrelated areas. If you have an interest in discovering DCS systems, go for it. As part of your personal or professional development. Training can also take many forms, paths, and costs.

The are many factors that impact hiring processes. In my opinion, doing a particular training course as "resume building" will typically not have the direct impact you appear to be seeking. Similarly, qualifications or industry certifications have a role. Indirectly, your ongoing career development may improve your capabilities, both now and in the future. Indirectly, that includes the intangibles of motivation expressed by CSA.

Whatever decision you make to suit your particular situation, I wish you well.

Best regards,
Flash

 

I'd say that if you have some DCS background that classroom training could be valuable. But I've seen people with no exposure to PLC's simply get overwhelmed at the volume and density of the information provided in PLC factory technical training classes.

A recent case in classroom training is worth telling, even it if isn't controls related. Two out-of-college marketing gals at my firm took a 4 day software training course 9 months ago, about a month after they were hired. That particular course offers a free 'refresher' course - the same course any time within a year after the initial course. They just came back from taking the refresher course, having by now had almost a year's exposure to how and where the software is used in their jobs. They were overwhelmed at how much more valuable the refresher course was than the original course because they now had experiences and 'categories' with which to understand and remember the concepts and particulars, which they did not have first time.

If you don't have any exposure to DCS to build on, it's likely to be a very expensive line on your resume, without any real value to you a month later (you know the exponential drop of a memory retention curve).

I have extensive experience with field instruments, PACs, PLCs, and HMI's. I was asked to sit in on a DCS webinar because my client uses that DCS and has a problem he wants me work on. But I could not follow the coded jargon used in the webinar. Dozens of acronymns used with the assumption that everyone understands what the acronymns mean. It was strictly technical, aimed at current users of that system and it left me in the dust, not surprisingly. A DCS is not PLC.

I'm not sure that if I'd paid big bucks to attend a week long DCS training course a year earlier that I would have been able to follow the presentation any better. I forget particulars on stuff that I don't do daily. I even forget particulars on stuff that I do do daily.
Jim

 

Great feedback guys, appreciate it. I do have DCS experience in, let's say one of the large US company's older versions (work with this almost daily) as well as one of the European company's smaller versions (haven't worked on this in several years) and a couple PLC vendor offerings. I don't consider myself new to the DCS or PC realm that is. That being said I'm not an expert either and there is one particular vendor product that is used at a couple of companies I'm looking at for future employment that I have no exposure to - DeltaV. So I'm reviewing some of Emerson's training options on this system, and considering the price vs. the ability to say, yes I've worked with it for one or two weeks.

 

Since you're not a newbie to the automation field you would most likely benefit from a training course by learning the new system's nomenclature, configuration and programming basics. If the new companies you are considering applying to are in different industries than you are currently in, you might ask about any particular cases/applications in the industries the instructors might be aware of.

Anyway, good on you for taking the initiative to investigate prospective employers and for taking the additional step to get yourself up-to-speed on the equipment at their plant. Again, that should be considered a distinguishing factor by a good employer/hiring manager if the choice is between yourself and some else similarly qualified.

Remember, one thing most employers are looking for these days is the ability and competency of an individual to be able to assign a project to that person and have that person execute the project, or their part in the project, while getting along with others who may also be working on the project or who will be using the product of the project. This includes the ability to change on the fly and adapt to changing requirements (not that, once determined, project requirements <i>ever</i> change....) They want people who fit in to the organization as well as people who can do technical work (in technical fields/industries). There are no shortage of technically-qualified people, but finding people who've been able to successfully complete projects with a favorable outcome and in a reasonable time with consensus is highly valued. In some cases, a person who might not have all the technical chops (skills) but who has the personality and the ability to learn and/or delegate while guiding the project to a successful completion may be the best candidate for a job.

I encourage everyone applying for jobs these days to not just list their past employers, job titles and job duties--but rather to list the projects they've been involved with and the skills used and gained as a result of working or (or directing) the project. You may be responsible for the day-to-day troubleshooting and maintenance/upkeep of a control system (or systems), but were you involved in integrating new functions into an existing system, or replacing an older system with a new one, or changing/upgrading HMIs--or adding data archival/retrieval system to an existing plant, or something similar. Were you involved in specifying equipment (researching capabilities of the equipment AND the supplier (control system integrator) for a project? What existing skills (technical and interpersonal) did you use to complete the project, and what new skills (technical and interpersonal) did you learn while completing the project?

A project may have been field device/instrument calibration during a plant outage or turn-aroud, but did that require working with different people or teams to coordinate activities so that work could be completed without interrupting others, or when access was available? Did it require putting together a schedule/plan and executing same? Did it require adjustment to the schedule/plan? Did it require ensuring all necessary equipment--including safety equipment--was available and in good repair/calibration? These are skills employers find useful and important--not just the ability to calibrate field devices/instruments, but the ability to get it done when there are multiple people working in the same area, to get it done on time and safely, and the ability to adapt to changing environments, all while maintaining a professional demeanor and not upsetting the others involved (who may not have planned or executed as well). This is what work is today--not just technical skills, and to separate ones self from other candidates means more than just listing employers, job titles and duties. What skillsets were required that you had--and what skillsets did you have to develop, and can also bring to the position?

Interview questions good employers are asking--yes, for technical positions--include, "When you're at a party, are you comfortable initiating a conversation with strangers, or do you wait for someone to start a conversation with you?" "How do you deal with change?" (Do you embrace it, or do you take time to consider all of the possible benefits and not just the challenges, perhaps discovering some potential benefits you hadn't initially considered?)

Hiring managers can look at a well-written CV/resume and determine quickly, or by asking a coupe of questions, if a candidate has the technical skills the company is looking for--but they want people who can fit in to the existing organization as well as who can be trusted with successfully executing projects. The nature of work is changing--just look at the number of contractors and subcontractors around; managers can hire the technical expertise they need for projects. If they're looking for full-time help, they still have projects and if they can hire a good full-time employee that works well with others in the organization who can also execute projects then they've scored a hiring coup.

Hope this helps!