One of the most common and least discussed reasons engineers fail the Migration Skills Assessment is not weak English or incorrect formatting. It is something far more fundamental. Most rejected applicants submit job descriptions, not competency narratives.
In 2026, this gap has become even more critical. Engineers Australia assessors are no longer persuaded by lists of duties, responsibilities, or tools. They are looking for evidence of engineering competence, demonstrated through personal decision-making, problem-solving, and accountable outcomes.
This article explains how to re-engineer your Career Episodes so they move beyond role descriptions and become assessable competency evidence that aligns with Engineers Australia expectations.
Why Job Description Style Career Episodes Fail
Many engineers assume that describing their role accurately is enough. As a result, Career Episodes often include statements such as:
“My responsibilities included system design, supervision, testing, and reporting.”
“I was involved in project planning and execution.”
“I ensured compliance with relevant standards.”
While these statements may be factually correct, they do not demonstrate competence.
Engineers Australia is explicit on this point:
“Career Episodes must describe specific engineering activities in which the applicant personally participated.”
Assessors are not interested in what your job title requires. They are interested in what you personally did as an engineer, how you thought, and what technical responsibilities you carried.
The Hidden Difference Between Roles and Competence
A role describes what you are expected to do. Competence demonstrates what you are capable of doing.
For example:
- A role might require design work
- Competence is demonstrated by explaining how you analysed constraints, evaluated alternatives, selected a solution, and validated performance
This distinction is the core reason many Career Episodes fail in 2026. Engineers describe tasks, but assessors are looking for engineering judgement.
Applicants who struggle to make this shift often require structured guidance through a professional Career Episode writing service.
The Narrative Engineering Framework
To move from job description to competency evidence, Career Episodes must be structured using a narrative engineering framework.
Every strong paragraph should contain four elements:
- Engineering problem or objective
- Constraints and considerations
- Personal engineering action and decision making
- Outcome and technical impact
This framework transforms routine tasks into assessable evidence.
Turning Routine Tasks into Competency Evidence
Most engineers believe their daily work is too routine to demonstrate competence. In reality, routine tasks contain hidden engineering value when described correctly.
Example, Weak Job Description Style
“I was responsible for maintaining the electrical system and ensuring minimal downtime.”
This tells the assessor nothing about engineering competence.
Improved Competency Narrative
“I analysed recurring electrical failures by reviewing fault logs and load data, identified overheating in distribution panels due to load imbalance, and redesigned the load allocation to reduce peak current by approximately 18 percent, resulting in a measurable reduction in unplanned downtime.”
The task did not change. The engineering evidence did.
Before and After Micro-Examples
Example 1, Design Task
Before – Job Description Style
“I designed a water supply system for a residential project.”
After – Competency Evidence Style
“I calculated peak water demand based on occupancy projections, evaluated multiple pipe sizing options against pressure loss constraints, selected a cost efficient configuration compliant with local standards, and verified system performance through hydraulic calculations.”
Example 2, Supervision Task
Before – Job Description Style
“I supervised contractors during installation.”
After – Competency Evidence Style
“I reviewed contractor installation methods against approved drawings, identified deviations affecting structural tolerance, issued corrective instructions, and validated compliance through on-site inspections and documented quality checks.”
Example 3, Testing Task
Before – Job Description Style
“I conducted system testing and commissioning.”
After – Competency Evidence Style
“I developed test procedures to verify system performance under operational loads, analysed test data to identify deviations from design parameters, and implemented calibration adjustments to achieve compliance.”
Engineers seeking similar structured examples often review Career Episode samples aligned with Engineers Australia standards.
Why Engineers Australia Prioritises Narrative Over Lists
Assessors must determine whether an applicant can operate as an independent professional engineer in Australia.
For this reason, Engineers Australia states:
“The emphasis should be on the applicant’s personal engineering activity and the application of engineering knowledge and skills.”
The list of duties does not show application. Narratives do.
In 2026, assessors increasingly reject Career Episodes that read like resumes, position descriptions, or performance appraisals.
The Problem with Tool and Software Lists
Another symptom of job description writing is excessive listing of tools and software.
Statements such as:
“I used AutoCAD, MATLAB, and relevant standards”
do not demonstrate competence.
Assessors expect explanations showing how tools were applied and what engineering judgement guided their use. Engineers unsure how to restructure such content often require a CDR rewrite rather than basic editing.
How Job Description Writing Breaks Summary Statements
When Career Episodes are written as role descriptions, the Summary Statement inevitably fails.
This happens because:
- Descriptive paragraphs cannot support analytical competency elements
- The same paragraph is forced to cover multiple competencies
- Mapping appears mechanical rather than logical
Engineers Australia defines the Summary Statement as:
“A summary of how the elements of competency are addressed in the Career Episodes.”
Applicants frequently need professional assistance to correct this disconnect.
Re-Engineering Your Career Episodes Step by Step
To convert job description content into competency evidence, engineers should:
- Identify paragraphs that only describe duties
- Ask what engineering decision was involved
- Add context explaining why decisions were required
- Describe the analysis, evaluation, or judgment applied
- Include measurable or observable outcomes
Many applicants benefit from an independent CDR review before submission to identify job description patterns early.
Competence Is Demonstrated, Not Claimed
In 2026, Engineers Australia assessors are not persuaded by job titles, duty lists, or generic role descriptions.
They approve applications that clearly demonstrate engineering competence through narrative evidence.
If your Career Episodes read like a position description, they are unlikely to succeed, regardless of experience level or writing quality.
At cdrsample.com, we specialise in transforming job description-style Career Episodes into strong competency narratives aligned with current Engineers Australia assessment expectations.
If your draft focuses on duties instead of decisions, or tasks instead of outcomes, our expert team can help restructure your Career Episodes for maximum assessment impact.
Visit cdrsample.com to request a professional Career Episode assessment today.
