"By valuing a person's potential, drive and passion, and
being prepared to invest in their development, both the employee and company
will reap the benefits - whether they have a degree or not.", says the
recruiting director of Phone4U, an independent mobile phone retailer in the UK.
How important are academic achievements? Is it nowadays, in this struggling economy with unemployment primarily affecting the young work force, indispensable for young people to have a degree (if possible from a highly recognized educational institution) in order to eventually overcome the hurdle of unemployment, successfully beat the competition and finally get a job?
Or is it something else (rather than a
degree) recruiters should pay their attention to when having to sift through a vast number
of applications to find their ideal candidate?
Is a Master's degree a guarantee for
employees being able to put their studies into practice and being more
productive? And does "academic achievement" equal "being
appropriate for the vacant position" or should there, in fact, be more to
the equation?
I personally share the opinion of
Phone4U's recruiting director on the fact that sometimes it really
pays off for companies to invest in the right development programmes in
effort to train and keep young talents, regardless of their educational
background. But what do you think - title or talent, what do employers benefit
the most from?
Recruit qualities over qualifications, says Phones4U director of recruitment
Thank you very much for very interesting article Ulrike.
AntwortenLöschenRecently in news and business magazines I found a lot of articles on this particular topic. Youth unemployment rate is very high and companies receive plenty of application though HR department cannot find what they really need because youth does not have skills for the offered jobs. Thousands of applicants have good degree with high gpa but almost no one have skills needed for the job. What companies suggest is that education should be changed in a way that students not only know theory but they also know how to use it in practice. Such a change can help decrease unemployment and increase opportunities for youth.
That is the reason why my choice was university of applied sciences from my perspective it gives higher opportunities in nowadays economy.
In conclusion I choose talent over title, talent can make a change while diploma with all As will be laying on the shelf after 10 years without any particular meaning.
This is a really interesting topic! I think a good company should encourage their employees to further educate themselvey anyway, even if they are already qualified. You can never know enough or learn enough.
AntwortenLöschenI agree with Polina that talent is more important than a title. It's just necessary that people get the opportunity to develop. Good training & development programmes help both the companies AND the employees., because the skills of employees are also the skills of the company.
When I am looking for a job, I also look at the company's attitude towards talent management for example. I would like to further learn and develop. After all this is also how we get more valuable ;)
Dear Ulrike,
AntwortenLöschenthank you very much for this article which brings up a highly disputed topic in the today’s world. I actually very much go along with Polina’s and Sonja’s opinion that at the end of the day a person’s talent is more effective for a company to achieve its goals. It is not without success that also huge global players such as Google cover many of its positions by paying more attention to talent rather than to academic degrees.
However, I would also like to bring in that I think it is for particular reasons that many companies still do pay attention to a person’s title especially when it comes to hiring someone in the top levels. Even though there may exist top level managers without any title (or good education – especially maybe in family companies), it might be out of reputation reasons that an enterprise prefers well-educated staff over less-educated employees. It is true, that this does not necessarily mean that those well-educated personnel accomplishes work more effectively and better, nevertheless, it might bring more confidence on the side of clients. To put it in other words, even though it may not be an indicator of more performance or qualification for a position, presenting a director or top level employee with a title and/or academic achievement sells better and might create more confidence. In addition to that, both facts might apply – that the employee is well-educated and has talent, too.
I do not say that this attitude of putting more confidence into a university graduate applies for all people (especially for the young ones – their attitude towards academic agree is shifting as you have already pointed out), however, for some it is still an important factor and might be decisive when it comes to their positions as customers.
Dear Anita,
Löschenthank you for your comment.
Yes, I suppose you are right in pointing out that some companies might rather seek for perfectly educated rather than highly gifted (but without a degree) people due to reputation reasons. However, companies could easily introduce a new approach with which nobody would ever care about a title or academic degree any longer.
The institution in which I completed my PTS for instance, even though having employeed extremely well educated people with one, two, or even three degrees, simply does not use those academic titles in any of its company documentation. Neither in the organisational chart, nor on the employees business cards.
It works so well for most other countries, why can't we also make a step forward and get off from our high horse?
Title or Talent. I think a combination of both should be applied in many companies. For example in Austria it is really important to have a degree and it is becoming even more important - for example 30 years ago you could climb up the career ladder even if you "just" had a "Lehrabschluss" now this is only possible anymore with a Masters degree. I do believe that on the one hand a degree is important, since a certain degree of theoretic knowledge is essential for working on specific topics (e.g. in the financing field) however, talent is in my opinion the more important factor. How does it help you if you have a degree but you have no idea on how to handle the problems at work? A Masters degree is no certificate for being highly talented and performing good at work. Thus I think talent should be valued much more. Previous work experience and the drive to learn new things, someone being ambitious and knows how to handle problems in practice should in my opinion be selected over someone with "just" a Masters degree.
AntwortenLöschenIf I had to choose, I'd pick talent over title, eventhough I am also planning to do a Masters degree. In Austria a degree is necessary just to be able to show that you're talented.
I agree with Lisa ... after my BA (which I'll hopefully get) I'm going to apply for a company which values a degree as much as experience. Well, for young people like us, this is nearly impossible. Therefore a company should give you the chance to prove, that you honestly "earned" your title as well as to give you the opportunity to enhance your experience.
AntwortenLöschenUnfortunately titles are valued more and more, at least in Austria, so a simple secretary job already requires a Higher School Certificate from a commercial college (HAK-Matura) and don't even dream about getting into the sales department (or other) of a middle sized company without showing at least your BA title. So there arises the very simple problem that everyone will be forced to study and no one will be able to gain experiences.
In my opinion that simply means, the study process has to change a bit. Meaning more practical semesters - where people actually REALLY work (which in most PTS companies is not possible) and probably more integration of real-world problems/experts. In this case people would be able to use their knowledge gained during studies and show a certain amount of experience when applying for a company which has the "very subtle" requirement of having titles and experience.
In my opinion, the talent is more important for the outcome of the work and how successful you will be in your future job, but the titel is what will give you the job in the end. The company sees your CV and your degree and is going to ask you questions in the interview, that are "study related". They can not tell, if you are going to be a highly talented worker afterwards.
AntwortenLöschenHaving a masters degree nowadays, gives you way more possibilities and provides you a much better position in negotiating your salary and position for your future job.
Furthermore I think, for many companies and especially team forces in the companies, that are looking for new employees, there are two important factors besides talent and the title, and that is your social competence (because for many companies a good working climate is more important than a study degree) and (even though many people do not like hearing it) a great network that provides you great opportunities.
To a certain degree I agree with all your comments. Especially what Julia pointed out above is very important. Nowadays, since competition has become enormous, young people simply need at least a Bachelor's degree to get a decent job whre they are entitled at least a little responsibility. What was possible for HAK graduates a couple of years ago (e.g. starting in a bank right after the A levels) is today not really possible any longer since you would have to start as a trainee rather than a normal employee as would somebody with an academic title.
AntwortenLöschenHowever, I feel that most of the time people distinguish between higher academic education (e.g. currently completing a Bachelor's or Master's degree) and really (already) having an academic title. Even though the main distinguishing aspect is in many cases solely a final paper that has not been submitted yet, those people, simply because not yet in possession of the degree, find it more troublesome to get a job than the ones with the degree already in their hands.
Last Wednesday I attended a so-called "Careere lounge" workshop organized by the IMC in which we were told how to correctly set up our CV and how to be successfull with job applications. What the recruiters told as there was that, as soon as they receive an application with a student not yet finished with his/her studies, the CV lands on a huge separate pile which, in the end, is not going to be considered at all when finally hiring a new employee. I mean, where is the big difference if I already hold my degree or if I will be finished in a couple of months but am already planning on my future professional career (and therefore applying early)?
Companies persuing such an approach are definitely missing out lots of talented yound academics, simply because they have not yet the proof of "officially being an academic".
To come back to Julia's point: yes, I also think that companies should offer more valuable internship opportunities!
A couple of days ago Steffie St raised the discussion of whether PUMA's approach to hire former interns as regular employees is a good idea and we came to the conclusion that it is, since companies can benefit from working closely with someone they already know and trust.
Offering high-end internship opportunities would give organisations the possibility to figure out talented young students beforehand. And if those companies are really so keen on a degree, they could get back to their former interns - probably having graduated by now - and offer them a real position. So they can have it all: young people who have work experience AND an academic title.
What you mentioned, Felix, is sad but true. Sometimes both, talent and perfect education are totally useless if you do not know the right people..
Thanks Ulrike for this interesting topic.
AntwortenLöschenThere is only one statement I want to add, I fully agree with Felix respond, especially to the last part. Sad or not, thats the reality!
I also completely agree that it should be about talent and not about title, but title simply shows your level of education, which is the first filter for HR. And as Lisa said, nowadays it is hard or even impossible to get a high position and a higher salary if you do not have a degree. However, there are also jobs where a degree is not (necessarily) necessary. There are lots of talented young people out there who prefer practical work over studying books and theories. Only because they prefer going directly into practice doesn’t mean they are less talented. Our society also depends on skilled workers, not only high educated students. If everybody would go studying, who would do the jobs which involve physical skills? Students with a degree probably won’t, or only if they have no other choice. Maybe our society forgot to value these jobs and the people who do them. People who get work-education straight after school is more or less what many HR departments nowadays intent to do with the talented young people they hire, which is to further educate them and invest in their development right at the workplace, within the company.
AntwortenLöschenHi again, and wow, a really good thread here, sorry for not getting onto this one earlier. There is not really much I can add, all's been said already! Just regarding Felix's comment about networks, yes, absolutely right! But I really don't see it as something completely bad (at least in our part of the world we do not have to bribe people to get a job), I van only recommend to get onto LinkedIn and Xing and get connected!
AntwortenLöschenI made an interesting experience in Sweden concerning this topic; I worked in an Austrian company during my PTS. When i started working there, the company had just employed a new person being responsible for Marketing. The headquarters from Vienna demanded my new colleague (she is Swedish) to send all her academic records (diplomas, etc.) to Vienna, since they needed them for the database and so on and I guess also because they wanted to check her qualifications. She was very surprised by this because she said in Sweden no one ever asked her for her diplomas after she already had working experience. She said that in Sweden, her qualifications and knowledge from prior jobs is more valuable and interesting for future employers than her old university diploma. I found this very interesting and think that someone's qualifications should be more valuable to a company than a piece of paper.
AntwortenLöschenBirgit, that's a very good point. I've never seen it from that perspective. However, to a certain degree, I suppose, it is more or less clear that jobs such as a hairdresser, plumber or car mechanic require talent and not qualifications (or even a title ;) ). I guess, the qualifications (educational) of a worker (physical work) are equal to his/her special talents. I mean, we go to university and study theory; they attend a vocational school to acquire both the know-how (theory) it needs along with the practical training necessary to perform their jobs well and to excel with their talent.
AntwortenLöschenLaura, that's a great example. I can understand that your Swedish colleague was quite surprised when she was asked to submit all her certificates and diplomas. Here in Austria it's rather the other way around. If you apply for a job or an internship and the recruiter doesn't want to see your transcript of records, diplomas or certificates of additional extracurricular qualifications, you'd probably get a little suspicious.