Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Do You Need A Degree?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 arissa

arissa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts

Posted 07 April 2014 - 09:35 AM

We have students in school now who are taking courses for jobs that they very well might not have a shot in getting by the time their schooling is complete. How many people here have a degree? Are you using it is in your current work or are you working in a field that you did not study for? As a parent of two I am quite frustrated at our schools but I might save that venting for another time.



#2 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 07 April 2014 - 11:20 AM

I have a BA in Computer Science and an MBA in Marketing/Finance. I use them both, in fact you get them from a good school and it absurdly opens all kinds of doors: would not have all the fancy titles I've accumulated on my resume without them.

 

My daughter is majoring in Sustainability, which is basically Environmental Science without the heavy duty Biology. Given the horrible things we've done to the environment, this is probably going to be a pretty valuable area to be an expert in.

 

I've spent a lot of time hiring both marketing people and programmers, and while I've had a couple of good ones that did not have the requisite degrees because they'd worked hard to figure it out on their own, their lack of the "theory and background" that you get in school were huge holes in their experience.

 

I know it's popular these days to dis' the value of a college degree, but as one of those people who actually hires for jobs people want, I can tell you that it does indeed make a huge difference, and it's not just snobbery (although I know most people use it that way: it pays off, they just don't know why).

 

 

A college degree is not a sign that one is a finished product but an indication a person is prepared for life, :phones:

Buffy


  • LaurieAG likes this

#3 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 04:46 AM

I'm actually building a computer that puts an end to civilisation itself...

 

making me god.. so do whatever.



#4 arissa

arissa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 08:44 AM

See that is the thing I see with people that run into snags. I know some people who have a degree for almost everything but many of the jobs they are applying to don't care about the degree as much as they care about the experience. Just because you learn something from a text book does not mean you have the hands on exerience that many companies out there want. It seems to be a stalemate for some people.


  • Buffy likes this

#5 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 01:28 PM

I know some people who have a degree for almost everything but many of the jobs they are applying to don't care about the degree as much as they care about the experience. Just because you learn something from a text book does not mean you have the hands on exerience that many companies out there want. It seems to be a stalemate for some people.

 

That's why we have such high unemployment: If you have a degree and no experience, they tell you you need experience, and when you have the experience they either tell you you're "overqualified for the position" or more likely avoid calling you back at all for an interview. Then they go on Fox News and complain that "there just aren't enough qualified candidates so we have to send the jobs to Bangladesh. 

 

Follow the money.

 

For economists, this is a fascinating example of how "conventional wisdom" can perturb markets so that they don't immediately obey the laws of supply and demand. Economists call this "friction" and right now--due to the fact that we've just gone through an almost-depression--the labor market has friction that is like molasses.

 

Employers have gotten used to the fact that because of the depressed job market--which really never recovered much after the dot-com bust (which was world-wide in scope, not just Silicon Valley)--they can get increasing efficiency without hiring because they can abuse their labor more. Wages have been stagnant in real terms since 2000, and in fact are really the same as they were in the mid-70's. What this means is that there are an awful lot of open positions in corporate america that are open in name only: there's actually no actual desire to add people right now, so you'll get a brush off that's probably absurd, not because the excuse is true, but because they're just "collecting resumes."

 

The bottom line is that the Supply-Side theory that if you lower taxes, companies will start hiring has so much evidence against it that it's laughable. I can tell you as a business owner and upper-level manager that we simply don't hire until we get more demand, and while we can keep labor in pain and fear, we'll squeeze the hell out of the people we've got or ruthlessly dump those who whine for those who are desperate and won't cost much: not the most experienced, not the best educated, but the cheapest one that's "good enough for right now."

 

Not me actually: I've found treating employees well pays back in spades, but when I was in big corporations, the pressure to take that approach coming down from CEOs, Board Members and big shareholders is considered the received wisdom of the ages.

 

 

It does violate right order when capital hires workers...with a view to and under such terms that it directs business and even the whole economic system according to its own will and advantage, :phones:

Buffy 



#6 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 05:27 AM

Has nothing todo with it you either know how to suck the teet of the system or you begg from the bread line (aka google)

 

the world is finished: Protestants just don't know it yet. (Also known as "insert dirty word here" that get jobs because of parental placing)



#7 Under the Rose

Under the Rose

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 182 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:40 AM

In the region where I reside, there has been a shortage of both manual and skilled labor for quite some time. A lot of people have it in their minds that they want to earn a fat pay cheque without breaking a sweat or getting their hands dirty. Good luck with that as there is always considerable competition and few jobs in that venue.

 

I work for a corporation and I can concur with Buffy's remarks that most of them are taking the 'Henry Ford' approach; dumb down each and every job to the point that 'any monkey can do it' and then fire that expensive development team that devised the strategy for you.

 

Working as both as an employee at a unionized store and also as an administator for the Local, I get to participate in collective bargaining and it is a very interesting process. Business likes to plead penury even while it is making huge acquisitions and paying dividends and would like to pass off the cost of improvements to the employees through a reduction in wages because they 'expect a return for their investment'.

 

Well listen up business: The return will be from the efforts of better paid employees who take pride to work for a superior employer, from proper mentoring of new hires and reduced losses as a result of greater efficiencies in how your product is handled from warehouse to shelf. Most importantly, promote good customer/staff relations because the customer has the deciding vote in the matter.

 

If I had a child and was considering the best job security for the future, I would certainly consider any of the skilled trades for our aging infrastructure, elder care for our aging population, the food industry because everyone eats and poops and sustainable environment technologies related to all of the aforementioned.


  • Buffy likes this

#8 LaurieAG

LaurieAG

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1505 posts

Posted 11 April 2014 - 07:18 PM

I think the rot set in when many organisations decided that managers don't need to know anything about what they manage, they only need to know how to 'manage'.


  • Buffy likes this

#9 ErlyRisa

ErlyRisa

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 439 posts

Posted 12 April 2014 - 04:01 AM

I think the rot set in when many organisations decided that managers don't need to know anything about what they manage, they only need to know how to 'manage'.

 

 

Here here...the iPad generation!



#10 Buffy

Buffy

    Resident Slayer

  • Administrators
  • 8946 posts

Posted 12 April 2014 - 11:17 AM

I think the rot set in when many organisations decided that managers don't need to know anything about what they manage, they only need to know how to 'manage'.

 

This was one of the big reasons that most organizations eventually wiped out middle management: they found they could do it with little loss of productivity due to the effects of their boneheaded decision to hire a bunch of middle management who added no value, but were relatively cheap because they didn't actually know anything other than a bunch of management platitudes. That's what ya call a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Of course what they completely missed out on is that they now can get more productivity by hiring middle management who knows something. That's starting to happen but it's still against the Conventional Wizdumb.

 

A side note, since the 80s the top business schools all insist you have at least a few years of work experience and a degree in something *other* than business--with the exception of finance, and it's notable that most actually have dropped accounting, leaving that to the mid/lower-level b-schools.

 

 

Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status, :phones:

Buffy


  • ErlyRisa likes this