Which do you hire? degree or experience

gags89

A job applicant comes into you, Lets say their of entry level grade (20somethings)

1 has a 4 year hon. degree in the area your business is in (say a degree from a college here in Ireland, nothing too fancy like harvard etc but still reputable in its own right)

The other guy has 3+ years experience working in that line of business for one of the world leaders in that industry....

Before you look any lower on the c.v (past-times, interests) and take into account how the interviews go, who would you rather side with...education or experience?

TheCostumeShop.ie: Ronan

Completely depends on the Job spec. If it's for accounting or law, then they need the college qualifications. If it's sales then experience all the way. But just because someone has been to college doesn't excuse them from not having experience in the form of part time jobs, summer internships and demonstrating their ability to manage projects etc.

gags89

O.K for arguments sakes, lets put it down as a non- 'must have' qualifications job like accountancy positions pretend like a marketing co-ordinator position or something,

Graduate has minimal work experience where they've never been given responsibility and worked for companies nowhere as reputable as mr. experiences one.

Canonfan

Just wait for a few days, the third guy might have both qualification and experience.

gags89

smart ass,

the reason Im asking this is because I have ...or will have within a few months both...but Ive always questioned the validity of a piece of paper and the ability to sit exams and write long papers and reference correctly over day to day business experience with a 'eager to learn' mindset....

Tabnabs

In the real world you do read down the rest of the page and take a balanced and informed view on the candidates. Any answer to your question would probably stray into After Hours territory.

gags89

noooooooooo!

im merely just trying to gauge an opinion, in business in a role like a marketing one, or one that doesnt 'legally' require you to have a qualification in it,

which do employers prefer, education or experience?

Bandara

Experience over education massively for me.

DubTony

Hammertime wrote: »

Experience over education massively for me.

That's always been the same for me, but it was pointed out to me in a pretty clear way why many employers may go the other way. This, in my opinion, applies mainly to larger businesses.

And here it is :

A candidate who has 4 or 5 years of college under his belt and has finished up with a half decent degree has already proven that he has the ability to work under pressure.

Why?

Simple.

Most students spend most of their time on the piss. They only really ever get their heads down when it's time to cram. Most large companies need people who can work under pressure almost all of the time. So proving that you can do that can be difficult, unless you've got it on paper. So really that degree isn't actually worth a sh*te but it shows Joe HR Manager that a graduate has already done some work under tremendous pressure, and he knows that they'll be capable of performing (in some way) when it's needed. Unfortunately for the newly "degreed" graduate this means that he can expect massive amounts of stress and grief in his career, especially if the job he applied for was Aldi or Lidl like "... if you have a 2.2 or better, we've got a career for you..." (for career see eventual heart-attack)

So there it is.
The opinion expressed above is not the opinion of the poster but that of the fellah what told me

helimachoptor

Again it varies, for example i'm a PM and i have 2 degrees. Yes they help me but could i do my job without them? Yes probably.

gags89

Thanks for the feedback, keep em coming!

rolion

experience,doubled by education.
working and doing parttime or in-house or professional related training,self-study and exams...
i reckon that is the best path !!

also,don't ignore,absolutely do not ignore...contacts,guinness and...golf !
i think the last one beats all before...

these days,interviews are a HR game to cover an already filled position.

Kinetic^

If someone had the experience but not the specific qualifications I'd hire the person on condition that they would start on the path to obtaining them.

If it was a position with 1 year experience required then I'd consider taking them on after a practical assessment of their knowledge.

BnB

For me Experience wins hands down over qualifications every single time.

I will give a quick look at qualifications, but it will be well down the line.

Or to put it another way, if someone has the relevant experience, I will hardly look at their qaulifications at all.

If they don't have the experience, I will start looking at the qualifications a bit more to see what their potential might be.

longhalloween

omen80 wrote: »

I would just pick the hottest female candidate......

Following the PWC method of recruitment eh....

Experience over education. Although that experience needs to be backed up with evidence and good references.

No point hiring someone who worked in a role for 3 years and was crap at it.

mneylon

The CV and covering email.

A LOT of the CVs and covering emails that land on my desk are totally uninspiring or riddled with spelling / grammatical errors.

The layout of a lot of the CVs makes them unreadable.

And a lot of them include information that is completely irrelevant (if you've got 3rd level degree and 5 years experience why are you still including ALL your junior cert and leaving cert results??)

If both candidates' CVs were well presented etc., then it would probably come down to the individual's presentation at an interview. (And by presentation I don't mean their ability to wear a suit and tie!)

If someone has qualifications coming out their ears they may not be suited to a job and oodles of experience doesn't automatically mean anything. We've hired both types in the past and have had mixed experiences with both.

That probably doesn't answer the OP's actual question directly

For me the attitude of the person is the most important and how willing and ready they are to work hard. I've hired experienced people who turned out to be rubbish, people with degrees who have no practical experience and also turn out to be rubbish. At least if the person has the right attitude you can train them to get the knowledge they need. Much harder to train attitude.

kincsem

I would agree with the above post. Time spent talking to the candidate will give you a good idea of the person's qualities. You don't want someone with great abilities who will not do the job you want but instead goes off at tangents. You don't want someone with little ability that will never train up.

I was on a finance project. The team of one I inherited did not seem to know much about accounts. He was a recent recruit by HR. After a few questions he admitted that his previous job was as a dishwasher. He had no finance experience.

I said "but you are intelligent". He said he was. He learned quickly and went on to a job in treasury. He studied and got a finance degree.

calahans

There are no hard and fast rules. I used to think it was experience and gut feeling but that has let me down with hires in the past. The best hire we did was through an agency, and he had good academic qualification.