"Net movie mogul" (Voices of Innovation, Mar. 20) illustrated a disturbing and widespread problem with corporate hiring practices: Mika Salmi possesses proven drive, ambition, persistence, and the ability to recognize opportunity. Yet 125 companies rejected him outright. Many companies today use software to screen résumés based on keywords and rely mostly on human resources clerks with little or no true business experience to review selected résumés. How can they recognize the traits shown by Mika and people like him? Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Mark Cuban would have been rejected by HR departments at many companies. Career ads for these companies need to carry the disclaimer: "Achievers and mavericks need not apply."
I guess this article really underlines the point that our increasing focus on systems is leaving out the fact that there are really talented people out there who don't fit into our nice little paradigms of the qualified.
Our societies are becoming increasingly competitive in a number of ways: degree(s), first college, then university, then professional, now Ph.D.s, this certification, that association…. In general this leads to improvement in standards for society. But for individuals, this can lead to hardship as increasingly the payday for such investments in career becomes more and more removed from the equation. Students now are leaving university after their master degree with $1000s of debt.
And yet, there lies the conundrum: the paying positions don't always allow students to pay off their debts. Teachers need masters degrees now. But can they afford to pay off their debts on a teacher's salary?
So we are lead to ask: is ever increasing (now Masters, and Doctorates) education financially wise or financial folly?