I've lost count of the number of conversations I've had with engineering managers where a strong Design Engineer has been discounted because they haven't used the "right" CAD package.
"They're a good engineer, but they've only used SolidWorks."
"We need someone with Inventor experience."
"They haven't worked with Creo."
The question is usually the same:
Should we only consider engineers who already use our software?
Like many things in engineering recruitment, the answer isn't completely straightforward.
Because while CAD software can be important, it is often only one part of what makes a Design Engineer valuable.
The bigger question is:
Are you recruiting for the software they use, or the engineering problems they can solve?
CAD software is a tool. Engineering experience is harder to replace.
A good Design Engineer isn't valuable simply because they know where every button is in a particular CAD package.
Their value comes from understanding:
- how products and equipment are designed
- how components are manufactured
- fabrication methods, materials, tolerancing, assemblies, design for manufacture
- how engineering projects move from concept through to installation
Those skills don't disappear because someone changes from one CAD system to another.
An engineer who has spent years designing bespoke machinery, conveyors, process equipment, fabricated structures or specialist products has built up knowledge that is far more difficult to teach than learning a different software package.
Most experienced engineers understand the fundamentals behind modern 3D CAD systems:
- parametric modelling
- assemblies
- drawings
- configurations
- revisions
- bills of materials
Moving between mainstream platforms such as SolidWorks and Autodesk Inventor is often much more achievable than many businesses expect.
The software may be different, but the engineering principles remain the same.
But software requirements are sometimes completely justified
This isn't to say CAD software experience doesn't matter.
There are situations where requiring a specific package is absolutely reasonable.
For example, if:
- the engineering team is already under pressure
- projects are behind schedule
- there is little capacity for training
- the new hire needs to contribute immediately
- the business has a large library of existing CAD models, templates or standards
then hiring someone who already understands the software can significantly reduce risk.
A Design Engineer who can open existing models, understand company processes and contribute from day one will naturally have an advantage.
The important thing is understanding why the software requirement exists.
Is it genuinely business-critical?
Or has it simply become a standard requirement on every job description?
The industry experience behind the CAD software often matters more
This is where I think companies can sometimes overlook excellent engineers.
Imagine two candidates.
Candidate one has five years' experience using Inventor but has spent their career designing relatively simple components.
Candidate two has eight years' experience designing complex conveyor systems, fabricated structures or bespoke machinery using SolidWorks.
Which engineer is the lower-risk hire?
The answer depends on the role.
But for many project-led engineering businesses, the second candidate may already understand:
- the type of equipment you manufacture
- the challenges your customers face
- the manufacturing processes involved
- how designs need to work in the real world
Teaching a different CAD package is often easier than teaching years of relevant engineering experience.
The role itself matters
Of course, not every engineering position should be approached in exactly the same way.
For some roles, software experience will naturally carry more weight.
A CAD Technician or Draughtsperson who spends the majority of their day producing drawings, layouts and documentation needs to be highly efficient in the software they use.
Likewise, specialist roles involving areas such as advanced simulation or analysis may require experience with specific platforms because the workflows and technical knowledge are more specialised.
But for many Mechanical Design Engineer positions, especially within manufacturing and project engineering businesses, the focus should often be broader.
The key questions become:
Can they design?
Can they solve engineering problems?
Do they understand manufacturing?
Can they deliver equipment that works?
Those skills are often what separate a good engineer from someone who simply knows a particular software package.
The risk of filtering too narrowly
The challenge in engineering recruitment is that the perfect candidate rarely exists.
A job description may ask for:
- specific CAD software
- specific industry experience
- specific products
- specific qualifications
- a certain number of years' experience
And sometimes all of those requirements are genuinely needed.
But sometimes businesses unintentionally reduce their talent pool by filtering against the easiest thing to measure.
CAD software is easy to write into a job advert.
Engineering judgement is much harder to quantify.
The best engineers are not always the people who tick every box.
They are often the people who have solved similar problems in a slightly different environment.
Finding the balance between software and engineering ability
The right approach is not ignoring software requirements.
It is understanding which requirements are essential and which are preferences.
Some searches genuinely require someone who already knows a specific CAD package.
Others benefit from looking beyond software alone and identifying engineers who have designed similar products, worked in similar environments and understand the challenges the business faces.
This is where understanding the engineering market becomes important.
The best candidates are often not actively applying for jobs. They are already working on similar projects for comparable engineering businesses.
Finding them requires looking beyond keywords and understanding the engineering capability behind the CV.
Final thoughts
My view is simple: If CAD software is genuinely critical to the role, recruit for it.
But if the real requirement is finding someone who understands your products, manufacturing processes and engineering challenges, don't overlook an excellent Design Engineer simply because they have spent the last few years using a different tool.
The best hire is not always the person who matches every requirement on the job description.
It is the person who can solve the engineering problems your business needs to overcome.
At EMT Talent, we spend time understanding that difference. Some searches require very specific software experience. Others require a deeper understanding of the engineering environment, products and projects someone has delivered.
The challenge is knowing which one matters before you start recruiting.
If you are looking to recruit Design Engineers, CAD professionals, structural detailers or other technical engineering specialists, we can help you identify the skills and experience that genuinely matter for your role - not just the keywords on a CV.
Back to Blog