Who Would You Rather Hire?

[John_Taylor]

Me and someone else were debating how important grades are for getting a job.I'm curious on what your answer is.
Pretend you are the HR person in charge of hiring someone for a technology position that would be considered a dream job for any college graduate wanting to work in say a software/programming position or electrical engineering.
You have two candidates in front of you. Your description requires a degree but you were told to "use your good judgement". Both candidates are the same age, same everything else.
Candidate 1: has a lot newsworthy accomplishments related to the field.
Say he made impressive inventions in high school, acquired over 10 patents and sold the rights to a few startup companies.In university, he or she had published research in notable journals and won awards for achievement. His or her technical skills even "wow" professors. He/she has been invited to speak at a large number of conferences, events, universities and has even been on the news many times.
However, his or her college grades are total crap, barely passed all courses. Bottom of class student from crap college.
Candidate 2:
He/she graduated at the top of his class from a prestigious college (say MIT or Stanford).
Both have equally good interviewing skills so interviewed equally well.
Assuming you just want the better of the company (e.g. no personal agenda, you know neither of them), who would you hire?
I change the question a bit: candidate 2 has nothing notable but a 4.0 grade point average. Who would you pick now?

 

[Derek Flint]

Easy - the one with the bigger tits.

 

[svarog]

First guy didn't care about college... Obviously he is going to have same attitude at work. Also probably will have problems with authority, will be coming in late, demanding he do things his way.

Second guy sounds solid! He will come in on time and do his job.

 

[DJ_in_making]

it really depends on the job. What matters more in that job brains or effort?

 

[diplomatic_lies]

The first guy might be a whiz kid, but he has no work ethic. Life experience can be acquired over time, work ethic can't.

 

[John_Taylor]

First guy didn't care about college... Obviously he is going to have same attitude at work. Also probably will have problems with authority, will be coming in late, demanding he do things his way.

Second guy sounds solid! He will come in on time and do his job.

Good point! I never thought of it that way.
Well that wasn't my intended implication. My point was just that one had good grades good school but nothing else outstand besides that. I wasn't trying to say the first guy didn't care about college.

 

[John_Taylor]

it really depends on the job. What matters more in that job brains or effort?

Probably brain. This is a ficticious situation just to illustrate a point.

 

[John_Taylor]

The first guy might be a whiz kid, but he has no work ethic. Life experience can be acquired over time, work ethic can't.

Hehe, that actually wasn't my implication. My implication was one never really focus on school but still had impressive newsworthy, accomplishments.
Let's face it, studying takes time lol.

 

[Adone]

Hehe, that actually wasn't my implication. My implication was one never really focus on school but still had impressive newsworthy, accomplishments.
Let's face it, studying takes time lol.

I get your point, but Diplomatic's reasoning is still true: that guy hasn't got a work ethic, he seems to do things that have an immediate outcome and unable to concentrate in long-term projects, such as studying.

 

[Le Parisien]

I would also pick the second person.

I agree with what everyone has said abot the first person:
- Wants to do things his way
- Lacks of work ethics
- Wants immediate outcome, unsuitable for something called "research/development" that requires patience and perseverance on the long run

Maybe I just add that some people seem to despise diplomas/degrees/grades from big name schools, I think it's misleading. Sure not every competent person needs these degrees, but why do you think they exist? They are barely a solid guarantee for the employers so they can minimize their risks when hiring people.
Sure we should all be hired on a case by case basis, but this is not about social justice, it's about big bucks for the big companies. They will hire people who are statistically more likely to succeed.

 

[S1NN3R]

I agree with what everyone has said abot the first person:
- Wants to do things his way
- Lacks of work ethics
- Wants immediate outcome, unsuitable for something called "research/development" that requires patience and perseverance on the long run

If I was hiring an accountant, or a car designer or a doctor, then sure, I would agree with most of that. However, in the specific situation described, I guarantee that the company who hires the first guy is going to come out ahead. Tech fields don't need patience and perseverance, they need the best new ideas and they need them yesterday. In a market where you sometimes have literally DAYS to beat the other guy to the stores with a product, then all of the things you listed become strengths, not weaknesses. Space exploration, that requires "research/development", where sometimes you might have to test something for ten years before you can implement it. Tech requires a good idea, nothing more, and a good enough idea can make millions in the span of a week.

Plus, I don't think that lacking work ethics is really involved with guy 1, I've known quite a few guys like what he described, and I was even a bit like that myself during highschool/college. I would skip my highschool classes to sneak into college classes, and squeaked by in highschool. Then in college, I skipped my classes to work on things that actually taught me more than college could have. Matter of fact, in my day job, I was the first person in the history of the agency to be hired without a four-year degree in my field, and I got hired because I was able to demonstrate superior knowledge in that field, enough to compensate for the lack of a degree. And it had nothing to do with me lacking work ethics, I had unbelievable work ethics because I was doing things that were much more important, and much harder work than whatI would have been doing sitting in a classroom.

 

[Le Parisien]

S1NN3R:

I don't know what you do for a living, but my bet is that you do not work directly in the tech fields.
Your analysis was quite sensible, yet quite disconnected from the reality.

I was an engineering smart guy myself, I have great creative sense. And I was seeing the whole R&D world exactly the way you do right now, until I went/came to the US for a MS in computer science at Penn State.
When I finally did research myself, I realized that the flamboyant tech genius reinventing the whole world thing, you only see that in movies.

Sure it's a huge advantage if you are smart (like I was, I was skipping 30% of my classes, going out 3 times a week, yet got 3.5 GPA at my graduation, I basically wrote my thesis from scratch within 4 months ), but I also realized that true success only comes from long, persistant hard work provided you are a reasonably smart guy.
This doesn't sound "glamorous", but it's the truth. This is also why I eventually took up marketing for a career change, it suits my character better.

Contrary to popular beliefs, Einsten didn't invent relativity theories all by himself. He put the final bricks on a building that was being built by a number of great scientists through out decades. He was a great scientist, but he wasn't the "great genius" many people believe he was.

Another example is the CPU that are coming out of factories at Intel and AMD. Sure the market is very competitive and evolves very quickly. But the products they are selling now are based on the R&D they've been doing for the past 4 years. So talking about patience and persistence...

 

[RedPill]

I only read the first two sentences of your post, but I am going to go ahead blindly and answer your question by asking you a question, as the interviewer.

What do you bring to the table?

Give me a no-BS answer that demonstrates that you A) have your head screwed on straight, and B) actually bring something to the table, and you're hired. Good or bad, if your grades are all you bring to the table, I don't want you working here.

 

[Deep Dish]

It was Aristotle who said that, given a choice between someone with knowledge but no experience and someone with no knowledge but experience, people will prefer the guy with experience; because while the guy with knowledge knows why he doesn't know how. Knowing how is better than knowing why. But, Aristotle went on to explain, people will prefer a guy with knowledge and experience over the guy with only experience; because knowledge and experience, why and how, is mastery. When you take a fresh Harvard graduate with no relevant work experience, he will always lose out to people with albeit less or less prestigous education but who possess years of grounded work experience.

The second guy in the hypothetical situation clearly wins.

 

[dannowillbookem]

if its an office space style job (sitting at a computer typing in numbers all day; stiff, suit bullshiit like that) then the second. but if its a job that needs some thought put into it and some creativity and resourcefulness, i'd go witht he first. you cant teach creativity.

 

[Le Parisien]

if its an office space style job (sitting at a computer typing in numbers all day; stiff, suit bullshiit like that) then the second. but if its a job that needs some thought put into it and some creativity and resourcefulness, i'd go witht he first. you cant teach creativity.

So you are implying that if the person has a good degree, he/she must be dumb/uncreative...What kind of logic is that???!!!

It's like saying ugly guys with game will always win over good looking guys girls wise. Because well... it's notorious that good looking guys have no game... :crazy: :crackup: We get to see this kind of comments too often here...

It's basically wishful thinking, people who have clear disadvantages in a certain field try to rationalize things for reassurance.

Having creativity/game is extremely important, but coupled with good college degrees/good looks, it will make it even better! Who said people can't have both? Most likely those who don't have something...

 

[PowertripII]

In my experience, I'd go with person #1 because experience is much more valuable than knowledge. He sounds like he was a pretty busy guy in college, I can understand how his mind was focused on other things.

To be perfectly truthful, I AM guy #1. Skipped out on finishing school to take positions that built experience in a variety of fields- I just looked around the room one day and decided that this place was grooming me for a 9-5 mentality that honestly scared the crap out of me.

I recently got hired on as an art director for a large design firm and it's quite shocking how much of a difference there is between the college haves and have nots. A lot of people with degrees seem to just 'stop' at a certain point whereas guys like myself keep digging- I don't let anything stand in my way and if there is a problem I find a solution. Additionally, I'm constantly working on ideas to keep the company moving forward and volunteering for new projects. I'm the go-to guy that makes things happen and I'm no stranger to being up at 1am working on a project from home.

The owner of the company doesn't have a degree (his two associates do however) and I think the thing that impressed him the most was that I had started my own company and been able to explain exactly what I had learned from it's failure. That sort of knowledge can't be bought.

Do I have my flaws? Sure. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course. But don't assume that someone is lazy because they didn't get the same piece of paper that you did.

C.

 

[John_Taylor]

In my experience, I'd go with person #1 because experience is much more valuable than knowledge. He sounds like he was a pretty busy guy in college, I can understand how his mind was focused on other things.

To be perfectly truthful, I AM guy #1. Skipped out on finishing school to take positions that built experience in a variety of fields- I just looked around the room one day and decided that this place was grooming me for a 9-5 mentality that honestly scared the crap out of me.

I recently got hired on as an art director for a large design firm and it's quite shocking how much of a difference there is between the college haves and have nots. A lot of people with degrees seem to just 'stop' at a certain point whereas guys like myself keep digging- I don't let anything stand in my way and if there is a problem I find a solution. Additionally, I'm constantly working on ideas to keep the company moving forward and volunteering for new projects. I'm the go-to guy that makes things happen and I'm no stranger to being up at 1am working on a project from home.

The owner of the company doesn't have a degree (his two associates do however) and I think the thing that impressed him the most was that I had started my own company and been able to explain exactly what I had learned from it's failure. That sort of knowledge can't be bought.

Do I have my flaws? Sure. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course. But don't assume that someone is lazy because they didn't get the same piece of paper that you did.

C.

I agree with you. My answer would be #1 rather than 2. I would think both would eventually be successful. But #1 has something newsworthy.

 

[S1NN3R]

So you are implying that if the person has a good degree, he/she must be dumb/uncreative...What kind of logic is that???!!!

All a degree does is show that you are capable of regurgitating information a few days after it's told to you. It doesn't say anything about your abilities in the real world. but guy one in the real world has already proven himself in the realy world, and as such, he is the guy who I would put my faith in.

 

[John_Taylor]

All a degree does is show that you are capable of regurgitating information a few days after it's told to you. It doesn't say anything about your abilities in the real world. but guy one in the real world has already proven himself in the realy world, and as such, he is the guy who I would put my faith in.

I tend to agree. I don't work in the technical fields so I'm not sure about all the 'insider information" others may be.
I've had a 4.0 and I've been at the bottom of the class. The only difference is whether I studied or not. Regurgitate info from the book is MOST of what it is, doesn't show too much else. It's hard to get under 80% if you study.
There may be those who are not book smart (I won't use the word dumb, many of these people I know became millionaires) enough to get a A+, but most people can if they put their head to it.