How does a PhD make you a better worker than someone without one?

JasonLVC

Notice to StudentPhil.

Your job today is to ensure your threads, that you start, stay on topic. You control the direction of your threads, no-one else.

If threads end up talking about you/your job/your degree/your sex life - then you are merely trolling the very kind people of this forum and wasting their (and your own) time.

Please get this back on topic (as it is an interesting topic) and leave your dirty washing in the basket at home where it belongs.

I'm_With_Stupid

Hapless wrote: »

There are plenty of jobs to do, try data entry, filing, and general office work. Reception work (if you can't do that then you won't be able to work in a library)etc. There are thousands of graduates and post-grads out there doing jobs that are nothing to do with the degrees they took. Everything from working a market stall to cleaning toilets.

Yep, the worst thing anyone can do when they start a job is act as if a certain task is beneath them. If something needs doing quickly, then it needs doing, and so if you are free (or your work can wait to some degree), and a so-called lower-level worker whose job it normally is to do the task is busy, then a good manager would always muck in, because a good manager will do any task that will keep the business running.

I work in a restaurant doing the admin, computer systems, till systems, sales, payroll, loads of other crap projects (nothing to do with my degree, but something I can do). And if someone phones in sick, or the restaurant becomes really busy, I'll help out, because it needs doing (except tonight - Champions League final ). And when I'm helping out, I'll do exactly what I'm told by the restaurant staff, because I know they know their job better than I do. Similarly, if I needed one of them to help me out with a project, I'd expect them to do what I tell them, because I know my job better than they do. As soon as you stop considering one job higher than the other, you'll get along much better with your co-workers, and you'll demonstrate your ability to see further than "your job" and actually care about the direction and success of the company (or project) instead. And that's management material.

nemo183

Please. Enough is enough. Just leave the whole wretched thing to IvanOpinion to research, archive and catalogue - and then sum up - hopefully in less than 50 words. I beg you all. Dear God, this is an awful place.....Ivan, please look after our people......

bmouthboyo

I think having a degree or indeed a Phd demonstrates to a potential employer a number of positive traits:

1) It shows you are educated to a higher level than that of someone leaving school at 18, 16 etc FACT

2) It shows that you strive to further your own development and have actively persued higher education, this in turn demonstrates a person that if employed could continue this development inside the business.

3) It shows that a lot of time and money has been invested in the graduates education and this meens less time and money needed by the employer to train the candidate.

4) A graduate is on average of a higher intilect generally than say someone who has left school at 16 or 18, 3 years of high level education makes a LOT of difference. As a result the atmosphere of a company will be hugely different if having say 5 graduates in a department educated to degree level than say 5 people with a levels but 3 years experience in a industry.

5) University education is more benificial in the long run compared to work experience. University courses are designed to push the stuents thinking and encourage new ways of handling problems, 3 years work esxperience however would only cover specific problems and not encourage wider development.



I think many negative comments are on here from people that dont have degrees are slightly jelous, how can anyone argue that 3 years of such high education is not more prestigious than 3 years of work???

scheming_gypsy

quite easily bmouthboyo. Employers want people who can do the work rather than having a piece of paper that says in theory they can do it but haven't actually done it.

I work in IT, i have no IT qualifications but took my last 2 jobs over people with MCSE's. When i asked why i'd got the job when i was less qualified both employers said the same... i gave actual answers to the scenarios rather than text book answers.

IvanOpinion

nemo183 wrote: »

Please. Enough is enough. Just leave the whole wretched thing to IvanOpinion to research, archive and catalogue - and then sum up - hopefully in less than 50 words. I beg you all. Dear God, this is an awful place.....Ivan, please look after our people......

Done

Ivan

Was that less than 50 words

bmouthboyo

I too have been offered jobs over peopel with no formal qualifications or degree in "The University of Life" lol

And it soon became apparent that the employer wants thinkers, inivators with there fingers on the pulse of were technology is going tommorow.

All of this is encouraged at university, to challenge theories, research ideas, try new inovative things.

As an employer you told, instructed, it is a business you employed to do a specific role thats soley aimed at furthering there profits or company NOT at your personal development and advancment of knowledge.

Look at is this way, an employer can train you in the role in a few months, however there is no way the company has the resources or money to train you in the numerous aspects of the industry university does.

So if you turn up to a job and are already educated to a high level and eager to apply this knowledge they love it, however turn up and you have experience in a specific role they worry what your potential is and to be honest if you get the role over a candidate with a higher education you wont be employed for you thinking or your ideas, your employed to be implimented.

Poppy9

bmouthboyo wrote: »

I too have been offered jobs over peopel with no formal qualifications or degree in "The University of Life" lol

And it soon became apparent that the employer wants thinkers, inivators with there fingers on the pulse of were technology is going tommorow.

All of this is encouraged at university, to challenge theories, research ideas, try new inovative things.

As an employer you told, instructed, it is a business you employed to do a specific role thats soley aimed at furthering there profits or company NOT at your personal development and advancment of knowledge.

Look at is this way, an employer can train you in the role in a few months, however there is no way the company has the resources or money to train you in the numerous aspects of the industry university does.

So if you turn up to a job and are already educated to a high level and eager to apply this knowledge they love it, however turn up and you have experience in a specific role they worry what your potential is and to be honest if you get the role over a candidate with a higher education you wont be employed for you thinking or your ideas, your employed to be implimented.

I think having a degree or indeed a Phd demonstrates to a potential employer a number of positive traits:

1) It shows you are educated to a higher level than that of someone leaving school at 18, 16 etc FACT

2) It shows that you strive to further your own development and have actively persued higher education, this in turn demonstrates a person that if employed could continue this development inside the business.

3) It shows that a lot of time and money has been invested in the graduates education and this meens less time and money needed by the employer to train the candidate.

4) A graduate is on average of a higher intilect generally than say someone who has left school at 16 or 18, 3 years of high level education makes a LOT of difference. As a result the atmosphere of a company will be hugely different if having say 5 graduates in a department educated to degree level than say 5 people with a levels but 3 years experience in a industry.

5) University education is more benificial in the long run compared to work experience. University courses are designed to push the stuents thinking and encourage new ways of handling problems, 3 years work esxperience however would only cover specific problems and not encourage wider development.

I think many negative comments are on here from people that dont have degrees are slightly jelous, how can anyone argue that 3 years of such high education is not more prestigious than 3 years of work???

If this is after 3 years of higher education, God help us!!:rolleyes:

bmouthboyo

both common and predictable :cool:

Ill have to remember to get someone with your background to do this when im the boss of people like you thanks for that

Poppy9

bmouthboyo wrote: »

both common and predictable :cool:

Sadly it is. :rolleyes: