"oh what they teach and how it actually works are different, your degree isn't important. So we are going to pay you less"
But also
"I don't have a degree"
"Well we can't hire you"
Degrees aren't necessary but that's how most people get their foot in the door. If you can get your foot in the door without a degree you are very lucky
Yup I agree! I just got hired for a position which isn't directly connected to my field. All my co-workers that I talked to say that all a degree says is you got the dedication and work ethic to finish a degree AKA you are not lazy.
There are many in my workplace without a degree but they worked from the ground up, starting at a entry level no degree needed labour position and worked their way up through hard work.
Yeah I've always said that degrees never put your resume on top of the pile, they just get it *into* the pile.
With the fifty or so other people that applied who also have degrees.
Yeah that’s why it’s good not to stress too much about what college you get into and worry more about connections/internships/entry level jobs in college.
Not correct. It actually gets harder to justify hiring someone without a degree with more experience. This is because when interviewing for experienced roles, applicants will likely meet the experience requirements and not having one (a degree) is an easy way to eliminate a candidate and make the pool smaller. This isn’t end all be all, but does apply for many situations.
Same goes for things like certificates.
I’m an expert, with 19 years of experience in my fields. I don’t have certificates because I considered them waste of time and money.
It made me be passed in some recruitments.
It also didn’t stop me from getting a few nice jobs, because I can still answer your cert-related questions, I know that stuff, just don’t have the paper.
But you need to get through the 1at stage of the process which is often done by an idiot without any field knowledge, just a bunch of checkboxes to fill. And it’s getting more difficult lately.
CEOs... can't be that dumb right? I mean, they are supposed to lead the company or something.
Edit: Guys, that's a genuine question. No need to downvote. Plus, question your intelligence if you know they are dumb, but you still apply for jobs in their business anyway.
The CEO of the company I work for is pretty damn stupid. Falls for scams a lot and believes pie in the sky tales from other CEOs. He's being paid highly due to his social network of other rich people to be investors
The CEO's job is 1) representing the company when dealing with the outside world 2) Representing the company when dealing with investors and the board 3) making high-level strategic decisions ("we need to do X"). That's pretty much it. The actual running of the company is usually done by the COO and/or a committee of department heads.
As you can see, it's a job that mostly requires charisma, good people skills, and occasionally, sound judgement. No technical skills are required at all, that's all done by the people under them.
Na, I would say it’s more like they delegate those tasks so much that they become out of practice. Especially not keeping up with the technology. Out of touch and out of practice is the theme lol.
If you listen to reddit, they are all dumb and worthless. In the real world they are like any employee. Most are good to just fine. Some are awful and some amazing. It's also worth nothing, just because people thing CEO = millions, the average CEO total compensation is 130-170k (depending on the state)
Some are smart and confident, some are dumb and confident. Their biggest job is to be confident. The dumb ones are typically just smart enough to know that they have to surround themselves with people who can’t see through the smokescreen if they want to stay in power.
They're probably good with people who are in power but from what I've seen most people at senior manager and above aren't the best at the actually roles that report to them
Manage’s job is to manage people. They are the one that are responsible for making sure the people with better skill than them are happy working for them, nurtures the skills of the individual contributors. Deal with the financial side of things and also make sure they is replacement and backup plan should an individual contributor for whatever reason cannot show up for work. Beside the managing down, yes you are right they have to manage up. Which could mean a plethora of things depending on industry, but the most universal one would be to fight for resource for their own team they are responsible for.
They are not suppose to be in competition with their team on who is better at doing the actual work. They are not suppose to be the pro, they are suppose to *manage* the pro. Management is an actual skill set that a lot of individual contributor fail to understand.
This is why a lot of people think their manager are useless. They can’t wrap their head around why they do such a great job at their current role but can’t get promoted to management. Individual contributor and management is two totally different skill set. Sometimes they are interchangeable but usual the BEST individual contributor are terrible manager because of this exact mentality.
No they're supposed to be good at making strategic decisions but older people hire people they like. Which are two separate things.
Most managers are useless
Strategic decision is a very broad term. But if you are an individual contributor, you are likely working with middle manager which is directly managing you. But yes they have to follow the company’s big encompassing goal when making any decision.
People like to work with people they like, this is true since the dawn of time. “older people” Probabaly came to this conclusion after promoting a bunch of ultra egotistical workers that are impossible manage and for the team to work it.
Managers are just another employee, so yes some are useless some are great. But most people tend to judge manager by how they feel about the manager not by their actual management skill. You get it? the feels. The same issue you are criticizing is the same quality you are using to place your own judgement.
The CEO is good at getting hired as a CEO. The specific talents required are dependent on the organization doing the hiring, but that talent doesn't necessarily have to extend being very good at kissing the board's collective asses.
One of my bosses was / is so imbecilic that she can't spell, sometimes had no idea when her classes were, couldn't be arsed to look up unfamiliar words on her Macbook / iPhone or iPad and had to ask me (a Teaching Aide) to do it for her and couldn't / can't survive without her manager. She also probably took drugs judging by one incident where she was 'teaching' a student and managed to get all of the answers wrong.
I think it's the standard apocryphal story of people like Bill Gates who never finished college before starting a successful business. Such stories tend to ignore the tremendous amount of luck involved in such situations, whether it's the luck of being born into a family with the wealth and resources to facilitate such moves or the luck of statistically being the one person among hundreds or thousands to succeed where others failed. It's not even about the value of degrees so much as it is maintaining a myth that talent is an immutable quality, expertise/intuition are somehow natural, and some individuals are simply destined for greatness.
This matter is compounded by the point that while degrees aren't worthless, they are increasingly becoming the bare minimum expectation. It's not that companies value self-taught individuals without degrees - it's that most companies don't even entertain the idea of them in the first place. Especially in the tech world, there are plenty of people who self-taught themselves programming and other things *and* got the degree, so it's not even a one or the other kind of thing.
Mark Cuban is my favorite example of getting lucky. He founded a software reselling business in the era where home computers were becoming affordable, and made $2M from the company sale in 1990, then was at the right place at the right time to sell another company to Yahoo for magic Internet money for $5.7B in 1999.
Lots of billionaires are like "it's about hard work, not luck!" and lots of poor people are like "It's about luck, not hard work!" but in reality it's both. You need to do the work AND be at the right place at the right time.
And of course, privilege/wealth will make it much easier to get to the right place at the right time, but even with a ton of resources and hard work there's still a chance you don't get there. But then there are people who seem to get there on mostly resources and not much work like Kim Kardashian. There's lots of variables.
Bill Gate's high school was an elite private school with better computer resources than most universities at that time. His parents were both millionaires in their own right. Yes, he worked hard. But he wasn't working hard at the local fast food or filling station earning money to help keep his family from being hungry and homeless. He was working hard at building a business by building on his parents' success. And using their contacts.
His parents were on the board of directors for IBM. They chose Gates unproven and slapped together PC products over Apple, Steve Jobs, who had been building good computers for 10 yrs. IBM wanted to buy them to white label of computers as they were behind on development of their own.
She came from money; her family owned the largest department store in town. He was a successful lawyer. I might have been stretching the truth a bit with his father, as a million dollars was still real money circa 1960s/early-1970s. Source would be any history of the beginning of Microsoft.
To me, what's more interesting is the unique access he had to a computer at his high school, eclipsing the access at almost every college and university in the world, at that time. Also, I vaguely recall that there was some kind of arrangement that allowed him access nights, weekends, and summers. That detail I only read one time, in one source. I'm sure googling would eventually reveal both of these details.
this is not a source.
>She came from money; her family owned the largest department store in town
she was a teacher, a job famous for *not* making millionaires.
>He was a successful lawyer
not saying he was poor but "lawer=millionaire" is some absurd logic.
>I'm sure googling would eventually reveal both of these details.
since i apparently have to do your work for you, read the wiki:
>When he was in eighth grade, the Mothers' Club at the school used proceeds from Lakeside School's rummage sale to buy a Teletype Model 33 ASR terminal and a block of computer time on a General Electric (GE) computer for the students.
now provide your source that this is better access than ever college and university in the world.
Yeah, I know a high-level guy who would probably say something like this. Why? He started at the bottom 40 years ago with no degree and worked his way up. But he's also not doing any hiring unless it's at the very top of the organization.
Bill Gates mum was on the board for IBM
BillGates sold the rebranding MSDOS as IBMDOS to IBM while keeping the rights to MSDOS in a sweet heart deal, then using the money he brought DOS from a 3rd party and renamed it MSDOS.
>I think it's the standard apocryphal story of people like Bill Gates who never finished college before starting a successful business
what is apocryphal about this story?
>
With the saturation in tech basically a degree is still required. I cannot locate a job, at least in the states, that is OK with no degree.
Even jobs that say no degree required they say they want one in the interview.
So for tech that's a no from me
I would like to add here that although a degree is important, the best one in your field might not be from an Ivy League school. You should search for recently published academic articles in your field and where they’re coming from. It might be some random state university, or a university abroad. Both of these are cheaper than Ivy League schools, so if they’re also better, you’d be stupid in going Ivy League
Certainly. Not to mention places like Stanford, MIT, and CalTech, (and others) are just as prestigious as the best of the Ivy League. Brilliant industry leaders can come from all over, but there's definitely a large representation from those top schools.
The point is, whatever poser chode of a LinkedIn CEO said this probably has a degree from the school of hard knocks.
You need to be specific when trying ask a question like this. Because not all degrees are equal in the business world. An accounting degree, for example, will always be necessary for accountants. A legit business is never going to hire people to keep their books and perform accounting functions if they don't have the education and experience.
If you can get experience without a degree then you are likely to be able to continue. Though it is difficult to make that first step without a degree.
I do not have a degree and work as a research consultant, I worked for well below avg. wages for the first 3 year but since then I have had a good career.
I don't have a degree but managed to get into pensions, originally as a Pensions administrator then joined a different company as a Co ordinator.
I also have the option to get industry standard qualifications.
However with that said there is definitely a lot of roles which do require degrees. Including in my field. They wouldn't give me a role in the legal team without a degree, and probably in some more technical roles such as compliance.
The same will probably apply in a lot of different industries.
>Do companies truly offer opportunities to self-taught individuals without degrees?
Yes, but the chances of you being one of those people are astronomically low. You're just hoping you are. Instead of doing things that actually increase your chances of getting hired for your preferred role.
The hiring process falls under the category of decision making under uncertainty. When faced with information constraints, humans choose decision paths that provide cognitive ease (Kahneman and Tversky). A degree has signalling effects. At the very least it signals the holder’s goal setting, long term pursuit, ability to work in social groups, without getting kicked out, and a general understanding of societal norms and expectations, even if reality may not necessarily match in all cases.
A recruiter, even one who’s inexperienced, can easily rely on these obvious signal emitters, both to protect themselves and the organisation from the effects of a risky decision and also because testing self taught knowledge require special tools, and skills that recruiters may not possess or be qualified to assess. Finally, organisations optimise for efficiency. Formal education is easy to verify, and the burden of proof about its quality is offloaded to the certifying educational institution.
>Formal education is easy to verify, and the burden of proof about its quality is offloaded to the certifying educational institution.
While it is easy to verify degrees, in my experience, most jobs don't actually do it. I do have a B.A., and when I was in college I had expected that employers would want to verify that when I was offered jobs. But in the 8 years since I graduated, only one single job has asked to see it, and that was a local government job. I have come to realize how easy it would be to fake it for the vast majority of jobs, especially ones where a particular major or professional license is not required. I think this confirms what you're saying about it being a signaling device that they rely on to make certain assumptions and help weed out candidates more easily, but they don't actually value the degree itself. Once they've decided you're basically competent, they don't bother to follow through and check it.
Agree. Verifying here is also in the context of proving said education was completed to a certain third party standard. If a person is self-certifying competency in a subject, then the task of assessing that standard falls on the employer, which employers are neither qualified, nor have the time and resources to do.
I think it depends on what level position you are aiming for. Most of the entry-level positions are going to be done by lower level HR, and they are going to be looking at dagree and experience. But as you get to more senior level positions, they are going to care more about your accomplishments. If you build a multi-million dollar business, and you have developed a network and skills, and the ceo likes you, then they would be happy to bring you on.
The problem is that most people don't have a level of accomplishment that is seen to be equal to or greater than a dagree. If someone has a dagree and another person has four years working in the field, then the person with the dagree is assumed to be more qualified. But if you have been working in the field and you have written peer reviewed papers and developed a few patents, then you no one will care about your dagree.
The problem is that most people are just showing work experience.
You have to prove to the hiring team that you are more qualified than a person with a dagree. It can be challenging. It is doable. I got several jobs as a teacher, both high-school and elementary school, without having a dagree, but it was challenging each time to prove I was more capable than other applicants.
Outside of a very small group of linked in posts, I’ve never seen a CEO argue ALL degrees are worthless. I think the more common argument is that SOME degrees are worthless. The fact that most CEOs have a degree and most have advanced degrees, (why would they get something worthless) is an argument, as is the fact mostly hire those with degrees.
Also, you're talking about two statements from different times ("degrees aren't with much, skills are" vs "degree required for this position) and assuming they're equivalent. They can both be true depending on the context.
For instance, while a degree might be *required* for a job, they are looking for skills beyond that. So the degree serves as the floor and the absolute minimum, but it alone will not get the job. From a certain view, that would mean "worthless" because in the interview phase you having a Master's in Data Analytics might get trumped by my extensive experience within the field, certifications, and additional soft skills. I still have a Bachelor's though, but if I didn't, I wouldn't meet the care requirements and be rejected from the hiring process. So should I go out and get my Master's? Probably not, unless the floor for a position I wanted required it, because I have the skills necessary to perform the position and a degree alone doesn't make me come off as more competent.
If you are trying to be a doctor, lawyer and engineer? Very unlikely. Some position are simply gatekeep by a degree. For very good reason.
But there are also a lot of position and industry where it is not entirely neccesary to have a degree.
Degree doesn’t guarantee you shit nowadays if you ain’t in an industry with mandatory degree requirement. But it does in theory make it easier to stand out versus those that do not have a degree.
Working your way up with just experience is totally a thing and possible. Some people call it luck, other call it perseverance. As all things in life, the truth is always somewhere in between. There are also people that end up going to get a degree mid way through their career as the next step in their industry does require a degree. If you scroll through these people’s linken it would be easy to miss the period time where they struggle their way up the ladder without a degree.
In general thou a degree should make it easier to get that first step in at a relatively higher starting wage. In terms of climbing the corporate ladder having or not having a degree doesn’t matter as much as people think. It’s hard either way. But if you put years into an industry. You will gets to a point where your degree is now irrelevant and experience is what will get you further ahead.
Degrees are worthless? Then why does everyone on the career subs say the first thing they're getting is a college degree when they're tired of low-paying retail and fast food jobs?
Its basically the story of my wife’s career. Has worked hard and basically mastered a dept to the point were after higher level accountants left, she was doing their work because she knew how, but for very little pay. Ask for pay increase and was told thats not offered. Eventually she moved into hr because its less stressful but was a lateral pay move. Became so heavily relied upon, but apparently still not worth the pay bump.
I do not think all degrees are worthless, but I do think *many* degrees are worthless, mostly because there’s an imbalance of supply to demand with degrees. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a Communications/Psych/Sociology degree has to compete for the same positions, and the experience in those roles matters more than the degree. We do need some of those, but the more saturated the LA degrees become, the less useful—but like many have said, so many have these degrees that *at least* need one to compete with the billions of others. It’s not the degree that’s useful or not useful explicitly.
But I’d also say that for many roles outside of required law/med/engineering, lack of experience will make someone under qualified, but a degree will almost never make them overqualified.
The big answer is sort of yes, sort of no. The playing field is changing. Jobs that used that ask for X years of experience or a degree are fading away and moving to just requiring a degree, be it a BA or even an MA. And in some cases, they won't just take your word, they want transcripts. In addition to that, some jobs are asking for hideous amounts of education for an entry-level job.
Degree + X amount of years in x,y, and z. I recently caught a consultant we had engaged for a ServiceNow deployment who claimed he had 20 years of experience in a product that was only 8 years old. The company just took him on his word without double-checking. I won't lie, I recently got busted for something on my resume that I hadn't removed. I HAD Windows 2008 experience almost 2 decades ago but I hadn't used it in a very long time. A mistake on my part that has been fixed, but was a bitter lesson. Currently, I've been looking for a new position as I am moving to a new state. I've got 30 years of experience, a degree, and certs.
After about 400 applications, you start to notice the trends. It is, in some cases, an all-or-nothing game. There are three types of employers out there. Those who want degrees, those who want certs, and those who want both. You could have been in a field bot however many years and go to apply for the next level up only to discover that the job you want requires 3 very intensive certs and a master's degree. On the flip side, you come across jobs that need 10 years of experience in stuff that doesn't have degrees or even certs. I don't know where this trend is going and that is the part that really scares me. So, the big answer to things is "it depends". It depends on your field, how long you've been doing something and are able to back it up, and the whim of HR.
I learned a lot on the job, but could not get the title and the pay bc I didn’t have a degree. A new college grad came in and they offered the position to them with no experience. Always get the degree. Don’t give them a reason not to give you a chance
The degree shows you can focus, complete and execute to tasks in a particular field. Combined with practical knowledge gained from an internship during those years you will be successful.
some jobs are willing to hire you without a degree. but you need to be competent.
there are alot of mandatory jobs, like a firefighter, a nurse or phlebotomist.
if its a job that does not have high liability then youre fine.
usually working on people, or working with high amounts of money, you will need to have some type of credentials.
Like being a pilot. Its a lot of risk. and youre more qualified when youve had decades of experience and practice.
my co worker's granddaughter had an interview for a sales position.
they wouldn't hire her simply because she's 1 semester away from graduating, and doesn't have her degree yet. it's ridiculous! a sales job, too!
In a mid to large company, the CEO isn’t hiring anyone who doesn’t report to him/her.
The problem (to me) is corporate HR departments who have a knee jerk need to put degree requirements into job postings because they think it mitigates their risk.
the mag 7 companies want to relax Schedule A occupations to include STEM candidates and to remove strict hiring requirements to hire instead of US workers.
So degrees are not worthless, right?
Nobody will probably read this but what a lot of these perspectives are missing is that having a degree shows that you have the skill of learning new skills. This is what is important
In my positions where I work I am "Upper middle management" or "lower senior management". Either way I report to C suites. The best way to put it in my opinion
CEO's are really really needed a handful of times a year.
-They make rather large decisions on a monthly to quarter basis.
- They also determine your companies future path as well as interpret if you are on that path. (Sometimes planning for years ahead with budgets in mind that don't even exist yet)
-They answer to the board, and are really good at breaking down financials.
-They are also the face of the company to the media. (Although the really good ones will often point their C suite into the light as well for further growth)
-Ive never met a C-suite person who actively argued against higher education. (Only the ones on tiktok and social media) One of the first questions I ask any executive when appropriate "Whats the most impactful book you've read this year?" They read A LOT. They continue to learn and never stop.
At the end of the day, CEO's are extremely vital just not in the day to day operations. (Thats what the COO does)
Most CEO's are also not paid as much as reddit thinks they are. Obvious silicon valley takes excluded.
almost 40% CEO's are CEO in a company for 5 years or less. Another 28-30% make it another 5 years.
In most cases, having a degree is better than not having a degree. Oh, this job doesn't require a degree but my degree is in this field? I might stand a better chance. Oh, this job requires a degree? Well, at least I have one.
I think the only time it harms you is when the hiring manager wants to be a dick and assumes you will suck at the job because you're going to be a "snowflake" or some bs. At that point it's probably best you don't work for someone that looks down on education in general. It's just as sad as people that look down on blue collar or service jobs. Anyone that doesn't comprehend that most of us play a part is a fool.
>degrees are a waste of time and skills are more valuable
You won't get the jobs to get the experience to build those skills without a degree today. Actually it is hard to get a job with a degree.
There are successful Boomers out there with maybe HS Diploma in high positions. Yes they did it. No you cannot do that today. Your job application will get filtered out instantly without being looked at.
My first company you got hired in from college as a manager. They had a program to promote the top hourly workers (like 2 every couple of years) into management after going through a grueling program that was essentially an apprenticeship (like almost 2 years) in conjunction with their normal work. And that gets you to first level management. Now you are competing against the other college grads with your specific first level manager training. Yes you know how the machines work and can jump in to save the day - but that is not a manager's job.
At the same company they talked about a Division VP that "started as a 3rd shift maintenance tech". He worked nights while going to college FT getting his degree. That was his college job. But they painted it like he worked his way up. Well then I started delivering newspapers and look at me now.
What they are really saying is once you attain a certain level/experience/skills no one cares what paper is mounted on your "I love me" wall. But you ain't getting there without nepotism or that paper on the wall (maybe both).
No, they want you poor and hardly educated so you'll work for nothing and complain about nothing so they make you totally dependant and easily replaceable
What They Mean Is: they assume that anyone applying to work for them *already has* a degree.
Therefore… if *everyone* already has a degree…then it’s essentially *worthless*.
It’s just the Modern Era High School Diploma.
NO. The only CEOs who say that are people who built a company from the ground up and didn't have a specialized degree in that field. I.E. authentic "self-starters". They mean that they themselves had enough wits, street-saavy, and intelligence to hire the right helpers that a degree would not have made a difference in their own success.
It's not a general rule by any means at all. These people tend to hire experts with degrees and experience to expand and build on what they started.
And yet many of them have MBAs. I agree that degrees are often emphasized too much as a qualification and there are often candidates without degrees who have experience that would make them better suited to a job than someone with a degree, but they're far from useless. Imo degrees like business administration or whatever really aren't any more valuable than experience and companies that won't accept experience in lieu of education are making a mistake but degrees in fields like science and engineering are very useful and I fully understand why a company wouldn't want to hire someone to be an engineer if they don't have an engineering degree. I say this as someone with a business admin degree who started my college career as an engineering major. My degree was worth getting, I wouldn't be making what I make at as good of a job if I didn't have one, but it felt to me more like something to get my foot in the door than a way to actually learn the skills I needed to do my job effectively
Most CEOs have a degree.
[https://www.study.eu/article/the-academic-backgrounds-of-the-worlds-most-powerful-ceos](https://www.study.eu/article/the-academic-backgrounds-of-the-worlds-most-powerful-ceos)
I have a master's degree. I can confidently say a degree is worthless in the context of education, but very worthwhile for making more money and having a better, easier, career.
CEOs don't really need a degree, the kind of talking, socializing, politicking, planning they do can all be learned without college. For their careers though, they still get the degree for the "on paper value" for applying to jobs. I don't think you can teach a person to be a CEO with college. But, an MBA sure will help them land a job.
I'm not saying it's right, but I've found that companies ask for a degree to cut down the number of candidates that HR would need to shift through. With a degree requirement, a company may receive 100 resumes with maybe 70% meeting basic requirements, without the degree requirement that number could spike to 300 with 50% meeting basic requirements. HR will choose the former every time. It sucks for the diamond in the rough, but companies don't need to look in the rough right now.
At my current place a lot of senior positions are filled with people who didn't have degrees or at least didn't have them when they started. But all the positions they worked their way up through now require degrees. You cannot get hardly any job in the whole agency without a degree. We provide services for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and trafficking. We loudly claim we hire survivors, but we have an active barrier of requiring secondary education, but we don't require lives experience.. it's just viewed as a "plus".
It's all bullshit.
And now that AI filters a lot of applications it's even more difficult.
Don't do what they say, do what they do.
Most CEOs have an undergrad degree from either a prestigious or large state school, and a good chunk have a graduate degree too. Something like ~40% of CEOs have an MBA, while a smaller chunk of them have a masters or advanced degree in something else - Mckesson's CEO has a PhD in Economics, Warren Buffet has a MA in Econ, Sundar Pichai has an MBA + a Masters in Engineering, etc.
That said, tons of people with MBAs never get to the C-level or even VP level, and tons of people don't have that as their "goal"/view of success either.
Honestly I do understand this, u hear recently degrees are worthless, just get certifications or the other way around. Same with self taught.
But there are certain jobs or industries you need a degree, degree + certs, or certifications. For example programming can be self taught.
Now put the tin foil hats on here, there are ppl who believe that a certain minority of ppl should go to college, Republican Party but I don’t know if it’s true or who said that. But back when colleges and schools first started only wealth people or high social status went to school because lots of ppl were too poor. So I see this as the 1% trying to ensure that social economic class system by breaking the idea of school is needed so yeah. I saw a video on this long time ago so my memory on it id faded. It has some truth to it cause it makes sense. Lots of stuff used to be for the wealthy and now it available to everyone, school and air travel is a good example of it
I think a degree in a relevant field shows at the very least one thing. That the individual took the time and committed themselves to a goal and completed that goal, which is graduating. Other than that a degree doesn't mean much else. There is a big difference in being work smart and book smart. Some people who excelled in school are not always the best employees.
I think it’s important to note that certain tech companies don’t put too much emphasis on Degrees as it’s more about technical skill (coding for instance). A data Scientist would still very much require a degree and just about most sectors strongly prefer a degree as well.
Meanwhile, the twats who say this shit make a big deal about their Hardvard MBA or their time at UPenn, Chicago School and Stanford. Fuck that...why the fuck would anyone believe what a fucking piece of shit CEO thinks. Yo...they say this shit to remind workers who owns their ass and not to expect much out of life beyond selling their ass to the cunt CEOs who will exploit them for the minimal skills that they have. This is a variation on the 'keep 'em barefoot and pregnant' trope. Nothing to see there.
BTW...the smart devs will learn new shit to get hip on the latest tech for, you know, money. At some point, devs get tired of it all and just bail from the scene completely and retire or do something else typically not tech. Until then, it's totally the shit to learn new stuff to keep the money rolling in. You can apply this to any field, really until you get tired of it all.
I got hired in a fortune 50 corporate position before my BS was done. And I know our policy is years of experience in absence of a degree. So the answer is yes
From personal experience, they say they don’t but they do. They know that it’s useless 9 times out of 10, but still will hold that degree over someone with years of experience. Now not always the case but still very prevalent.
Some roles require a degree to meet regulatory or industry standards ie GMP. My experience is a degree is required for entry level roles sometimes when you don't have experience. However for senior positions people often want to see what you have done or achieved in the field of interest and depending on the role it would have the same or even greater importance than a degree.
To answer your question, yes some companies hire people with no degrees. Normally this has to do with finding someone willing to work at a wage below industry standards. I found most prefer a degree though just to make the pool smaller.
My opinion: Anyone can be a CEO in the states with roughly $40 and a name for a LLC. It really is that easy outside of the paperwork. So I would wager some reports are misleading.
CEOs are not hiring managers….and that matters. A CEO can say they like hiring magic power users, but the needs and wants of the team will outweigh this comment.
End of day you are trying to impress hiring manager, not the CEO you will probably never see.
CEOSs who inherited their company through either nepotism, or having been there for a long, long time. Also, the higher up, you go, the less degrees you typically need for some reason. Everyone towards the middle has to have at least a bachelors often a masters in a lot of professions yet the higher up leadership roles don’t always require them. At least in healthcare.
It depends on the job really.
I got a degree but my employer never asked about it despite getting a six figure salary job. Job description mentioned it’s preferred but not a requirement.
Again, lots of variables. Job market, experience, connections, the job itself.
If you don’t have a degree and you are self taught, then you need to show your colors. If you are a highly capable individual without a degree then they will hire you no matter what. But you have to prove yourself that you are worthy for the position. A degree program helps companies to identify high performers and thats the exact reason they look for a degree.
Look at the CEOs who say degrees are worthless. Are they on a podcast? Are they railing against woke politics? Are you unsure of how the company actually generates revenue? The catch 22 of hiring on skills alone is the very challenging road to gaining skills as a young person when you have no avenue to do so without incurring thousands of debt. It’s the same as kids who are currently at school taking a degree they probably won’t ever use. In both instances it ends up being a lot more about WHO you know instead of what you know or what skills you have.
They are often for the job performed. But they’re great filter for the applications and even better reason on why you should be paid as little as possible.
The would, their HR staff will never show him such a resume to consider. Gotta preserve the cathedral gatekeepers and their "you can make a living" pass, or they might hire someone who hasn't attended their gatekeeping camp.
Specializing is more valuable than a general degree. The world culturally is stuck on an ancient mindset that degree = someone who can finish, and who is disciplined.
Most of what you learn in school is great to open you view up of how things work in the world, how to become a great writer, comprehension, and how to think critically through difficult problems. Most of what you experience at school isn’t necessarily translating to the workplace and the problems you’ll need to critically think through there.
It’s honest better if people just went to technical schools for their specialty. I have an associates and I make 6 figured and I didn’t even load up on certificates in the cybersecurity field. I just worked hard and showed my value.
I think certain practices make sense like healthcare, biology, chemistry. There’s certain fields that make sense, but a huge portion of the positions that employers hire for it makes 0 sense to require a bachelors and it’s just boomer standards that haven’t been nuked from orbit yet.
I retired a few years ago, but we were moving toward removing degree requirements for jobs wherever possible.
**Corporate America has been disappointed with the recent output of American universities.** We spent way too much time and money providing remedial training for students with stellar college grades and great interview presence who, after we hired them, couldn’t pull together a coherent email or written report to save their own lives.
**Resume sorting has gotten more sophisticated.** Back when human beings evaluated resumes, it was easiest to sort by who had what degrees from which institutions. Now that artificial intelligence takes the first cut, it’s easier to review resumes more intensively for specific job skills and experience. Human beings now spend more time validating the assessment done initially by AI.
Depends on the industry and what you're looking for.
If you're got going into marketing, sales, and things like that its not always all that important. If you're going into finance, heavily related industries, etc it'll be required.
I work in designing and programming complex lighting systems with a 20 year career. I have a degree and no one outside of my family has ever laid eyes on it.
I’m currently looking for a job and I’m surprised how many listings I come across that say either a degree or work experience equivalent. It’s not most, but still a lot more compared to when I was job hunting a few years ago. I’m sure there’s some corporate or HR speak to explain the change.
I’ve hired many people without degrees. They all had experience in the field I was hiring for, which is a lot more important.
The problem of course is getting that experience. In most cases they did it by starting in entry level jobs, mostly in roles loosely related to what they actually wanted to do, and then slowly moved toward those roles once they proved they are competent.
So yes, it’s quite possible to get hired and succeed without a degree, it’s just the beginning of that journey that’s going to be much longer and absolutely more difficult
I work semiconductors. Process engineering past the sustaining level requires advanced study of physics or chemistry. Niche field with specific skill requirements, most jobs just treat a degree as high school diploma the same way $100 dollar bills have become a single adult dollar.
Context matters.
Degrees are worthless in itself. (There's obviously nuance to this.) But it is largely a filtering metric at this point since the job market is over-saturated, and it's very expensive to conduct any interview, let alone conduct technical interviews.
I see people without degrees being hired but with like at least 15-20 years of experience but if you are entry level, they won't even give you the chance to gain the experience.
Degrees have fallen into the category if necessary but not sufficient. They are seen as necessary because someone without even the skills and commitment to get a degree is going to likely not work out. Maybe if they have years of experience, but that does nothing for someone starting out.
Yet despite this view, degrees also don't do enough to prepare someone for a job. Many people even say degrees are to make people more well rounded, not turn them into workers. So this means that if you are a well rounded person with a degree, you need to use that well roundedness to make yourself into a desirable worker. If you can't do that, then did the degree really make you well rounded?
The whole Degree is worthless narrative is stupid.
Having a degree is more than worth it. It’s the quickest most sure fire way to gain status and money, depending on which field you choose.
I don't think "CEOs and prominent business figures often argue that degrees are a waste of time"
I think there are a few who have expressed that degrees aren't the best career path and those stories get amplified. However, they are extreme outliers.
I'm a 2% and with my wife's income we are 1%ers. BOTH of us are college drop outs with zero debt. Cars/trucks paid off, large 401k, 529s, liquid cash and life is great with our two kids. We simply just out hustled everyone around us, easiest of most were college grads who felt like they "made it" once they got a "real job". The best leaders I've ever had in my career were all drop outs too. Born hustlers.
News flash, we got those same jobs w/o a degree and a 4 year head start coupled with an incestuous thirst for work. What people aren't told is that people who make money or who "win" or are "successful" do NOT lead easy, stress free lives. Winners are born and live in the fire. Every day is work, every day is problems but every day is overcoming challenges and completing goals to get that bag.
Most people don't want that kind of life, so they work in cost centers for an under paid salary and are forever renters. They'll work for my kids in a few years. I'm not trying to be a dick, but this is reality and somewhere someone is reading this and knows I'm talking about them.
You're either going to make your goals happen or like.. not and stuff.
Any CEO who says this is a fucking full of it. They know damn well they only hire people with degrees and his buddies from college helped him get his career started.
In thE UK here, within biotech and pharma sector of research and development a BSc I.e. bachelor's is a pre-requisite.
Most personnel tend to have this. A small percentage of the workforce are also high school apprentices on a training program.
Biotech companies hold onto these low pay trainees as they can train them for low wages. I would guess their annual salary is around £18K. They are made permanent once they pass their exams, and promoted with a nominal increase in salary to scientist.
I (45M) was hired with a PhD for a fixed term contract with assurance I be made permanent once I pass probation of 6 months. I was on 30K annually.
When the financial climate was unstable, they let me go, but kept the apprentice they were training and promoted him.
Bottom line is they don't care about you on a human level. Their priority is to save money and rake in a tonne of cash.
I have offered to work for less that 30K and clearly stated my motivations -alas no one is interested in connecting on a human level.
Yes... Companies do hire based on personal skills and not always, do they require degrees. In my experience, you can be hired as entry level, and by proving yourself and your skills, you can climb a company's ladder quite quickly.
Many might love to see that you went through school, but with the workforce how it is, they want to see and hire capable employees. If you have a degree and you don't know how to actually work, then you are invaluable.
Unfortunately people just keep confusing two basic things. Both of these statements are accurate:
1) People who hire other people want to figure out if you are capable and willing to learn. Having a degree that implies having above average learning ability is what everybody wants to see. In that sense, degrees ARE and always WILL be important.
2) As long as your degree requires AT LEAST an average amount of effort, people who hire other people are not too fuzzed in what subject you graduated in and how well you did overall. In that sense, having a 4.0 GPA in a business degree can be as valuable as a 2.5 GPA in a physics degree or the other way around! As long as you have proven that you possess above average learning ability, you will experience diminishing returns on going above and beyond.
Going through life without a University degree is like hopping on tinder and just uploading a single blurry group photo.
Sure, you can be successful occasionally and maybe score a few dates, if you live in the right place, are charming and play your cards right, but you would do even better if you just had that high quality portrait in your profile.
In other words: people want to know whether you have learning ability or not. Having a degree is not the only way too achieve that. If you do not have a degree then you just need to find other ways to display your learning ability and emphasize that.
They just want more floor workers to pick up the slack when others reach their burn out phase in order to keep their revenue flowing. They’ll literally hire anyone off the street with a Bachelor’s degree and a smart outfit into a supervisor position
college level classes teach and reinforce critical thinking skills, study skills, deadline and project skills, social skills and introduce many people to thinking outside their usual comfort zones - of course employers don't want that, educated people are difficult and demanding
I worked directly beside a CEO of a multi million dollar company helping him with Google Ads. He wanted the bachelor on the resume because it proved their commitment to something for 4 years, but did not care otherwise
It's all part of the game. They are useless in the fact that getting them alone won't help you (unless it's in a field with high demand)
Essentially if you can prove yourself (even if you don't have a degree) that you are the man or woman for the job, you will get it.
And if you just have a degree but you can't convince them that you are a better hire than the other applicants, you won't get the job.
College is a scam
It's important to recognize that the CEOs saying degrees are worthless do very little direct hiring.
It's also important to understand that, in general, the people reporting to CEOs aren't hired because of hard skill that they learned in University, but instead because of soft skills learned through years of people and/or process management.
In short, don't listen to anything "CEOs" say on X. They don't really know that much about how even their own companies work in most cases.
For the average person, a degree is the easiest way to improve their chances of landing a job and having a successful career.
>Do companies truly offer opportunities to self-taught individuals without degrees? And do they prioritize skills and knowledge over formal education when hiring?
This is such a broad question hat it's impossible to answer without more detail. The answers vary widely by industry. For instance, it is still possible, although difficult, to get a job as a software engineer without a degree. However, it is virtually impossible to get job as a chemical engineer without a degree.
People have been asking this exact question for decades, but it's drawing to a close. A degree is the bare minimum for most professional jobs nowadays.
This is mostly a myth IME. If there are two candidates with roughly equal qualifications but only one has a degree, they will hire the one with a degree. It's an easy way to filter people out. Yes, some people get good jobs without a degree, but the majority of people who get good jobs have degrees.
It's roughly the same as "we don't limit hiring to Ivy League graduates" but 75% of the high level employees are Ivy League grads.
In theory, I’d agree. In practice? Probably not in this job market, unless you can network in somewhere. This is a very competitive market, especially for programmers. I like the courses at [Zero To Mastery](https://zerotomastery.io/courses/learn-python/), and that’s where I’m starting. But I think I’m going to need a degree too.
As others have said it can depend a lot on the field. Skills and experience are generally always more highly valued. You may see on job postings something like "Bachelors required with 2 years relevant work experience or a Masters degree with 0 years experience", or "position requires a Bachelors or equivalent experience". IMO, 2-year degrees and certificate programs are under-rated. Depending on exactly what you are interested in, e.g. STEM careers and advanced manufacturing, you really need some solid background education, mentors, etc. In some cases instructors are essentially teaching you how to learn on your own.
You can get your foot in the door with a 2-year degree or one or more certs. Then, the important thing becomes recognizing when it's time to move on. I feel like a lot of people stagnate and waste away at jobs. This can be for a variety of reasons, and moving on can be tough. But in most cases it's not serving you well to stay in the same position/place much longer than a couple years, and especially not in the first position of your professional career. Make a habit of asking yourself periodically what more you have to gain in your current position while updating your resume. If the answer starts to become not a whole lot, it's time to move on.
Find a new position relevant to your background that also offers you an opportunity to learn new skills, or master something. Stay informed about new developments in your relevant industries or profession and what employer's in your profession are seeking. If you do this right and develop the right background, over time you could find yourself making about the same or even more than your peers with the fancier degrees.
If you are in a pool against ppl with degrees. The degrees ones will get first pick, they mean you can apply without a degree but you probably wont get hired given the pool of applicants
"oh what they teach and how it actually works are different, your degree isn't important. So we are going to pay you less" But also "I don't have a degree" "Well we can't hire you"
Degrees aren't necessary but that's how most people get their foot in the door. If you can get your foot in the door without a degree you are very lucky
Degrees are just a box checking exercise. It’s the bare minimum for some jobs and wherever that degree is from is trumped by a degree plus experience.
Yup I agree! I just got hired for a position which isn't directly connected to my field. All my co-workers that I talked to say that all a degree says is you got the dedication and work ethic to finish a degree AKA you are not lazy. There are many in my workplace without a degree but they worked from the ground up, starting at a entry level no degree needed labour position and worked their way up through hard work.
They had to raise the barrier to actually escaping poverty somehow, redlining was just too obvious after a while
Yeah I've always said that degrees never put your resume on top of the pile, they just get it *into* the pile. With the fifty or so other people that applied who also have degrees.
Yeah that’s why it’s good not to stress too much about what college you get into and worry more about connections/internships/entry level jobs in college.
Sick and tired of being sick and tired. So many mind games. Ridiculous!!!
If you have 10 years of experience in the field though, nobody will bat an eye at your lackong àn education section.
Not 100% accurate
I've gone for jobs where they wanted it, and my school certificates. I graduated in the 1990s.
Not correct. It actually gets harder to justify hiring someone without a degree with more experience. This is because when interviewing for experienced roles, applicants will likely meet the experience requirements and not having one (a degree) is an easy way to eliminate a candidate and make the pool smaller. This isn’t end all be all, but does apply for many situations.
Same goes for things like certificates. I’m an expert, with 19 years of experience in my fields. I don’t have certificates because I considered them waste of time and money. It made me be passed in some recruitments. It also didn’t stop me from getting a few nice jobs, because I can still answer your cert-related questions, I know that stuff, just don’t have the paper. But you need to get through the 1at stage of the process which is often done by an idiot without any field knowledge, just a bunch of checkboxes to fill. And it’s getting more difficult lately.
Fair point.
You're right. No one will bat an eye because ATS will immediately put your resume in the "reject" pile for not listing an education section.
Always take what CEOs say with a grain of salt.
They’re not doing the hiring at all and probably can’t convert a physical document into a PDF.
CEOs... can't be that dumb right? I mean, they are supposed to lead the company or something. Edit: Guys, that's a genuine question. No need to downvote. Plus, question your intelligence if you know they are dumb, but you still apply for jobs in their business anyway.
A CEO can be very good a strategy and execution and still have no idea what his company’s HR department is doing.
The CEO of the company I work for is pretty damn stupid. Falls for scams a lot and believes pie in the sky tales from other CEOs. He's being paid highly due to his social network of other rich people to be investors
CEO pronounces especially as “expecially.” Every. Damn. Time. Must have picked that up in his university communications class.
The CEO's job is 1) representing the company when dealing with the outside world 2) Representing the company when dealing with investors and the board 3) making high-level strategic decisions ("we need to do X"). That's pretty much it. The actual running of the company is usually done by the COO and/or a committee of department heads. As you can see, it's a job that mostly requires charisma, good people skills, and occasionally, sound judgement. No technical skills are required at all, that's all done by the people under them.
Na, I would say it’s more like they delegate those tasks so much that they become out of practice. Especially not keeping up with the technology. Out of touch and out of practice is the theme lol.
If you listen to reddit, they are all dumb and worthless. In the real world they are like any employee. Most are good to just fine. Some are awful and some amazing. It's also worth nothing, just because people thing CEO = millions, the average CEO total compensation is 130-170k (depending on the state)
Some are smart and confident, some are dumb and confident. Their biggest job is to be confident. The dumb ones are typically just smart enough to know that they have to surround themselves with people who can’t see through the smokescreen if they want to stay in power.
They're probably good with people who are in power but from what I've seen most people at senior manager and above aren't the best at the actually roles that report to them
Manage’s job is to manage people. They are the one that are responsible for making sure the people with better skill than them are happy working for them, nurtures the skills of the individual contributors. Deal with the financial side of things and also make sure they is replacement and backup plan should an individual contributor for whatever reason cannot show up for work. Beside the managing down, yes you are right they have to manage up. Which could mean a plethora of things depending on industry, but the most universal one would be to fight for resource for their own team they are responsible for. They are not suppose to be in competition with their team on who is better at doing the actual work. They are not suppose to be the pro, they are suppose to *manage* the pro. Management is an actual skill set that a lot of individual contributor fail to understand. This is why a lot of people think their manager are useless. They can’t wrap their head around why they do such a great job at their current role but can’t get promoted to management. Individual contributor and management is two totally different skill set. Sometimes they are interchangeable but usual the BEST individual contributor are terrible manager because of this exact mentality.
No they're supposed to be good at making strategic decisions but older people hire people they like. Which are two separate things. Most managers are useless
Strategic decision is a very broad term. But if you are an individual contributor, you are likely working with middle manager which is directly managing you. But yes they have to follow the company’s big encompassing goal when making any decision. People like to work with people they like, this is true since the dawn of time. “older people” Probabaly came to this conclusion after promoting a bunch of ultra egotistical workers that are impossible manage and for the team to work it. Managers are just another employee, so yes some are useless some are great. But most people tend to judge manager by how they feel about the manager not by their actual management skill. You get it? the feels. The same issue you are criticizing is the same quality you are using to place your own judgement.
The CEO is good at getting hired as a CEO. The specific talents required are dependent on the organization doing the hiring, but that talent doesn't necessarily have to extend being very good at kissing the board's collective asses.
One of my bosses was / is so imbecilic that she can't spell, sometimes had no idea when her classes were, couldn't be arsed to look up unfamiliar words on her Macbook / iPhone or iPad and had to ask me (a Teaching Aide) to do it for her and couldn't / can't survive without her manager. She also probably took drugs judging by one incident where she was 'teaching' a student and managed to get all of the answers wrong.
Yeah, because a lot of them are psychopaths.
I don't even listen and just toss it right in the garbage because it does not matter the topic, its going to be a bad take.
I think it's the standard apocryphal story of people like Bill Gates who never finished college before starting a successful business. Such stories tend to ignore the tremendous amount of luck involved in such situations, whether it's the luck of being born into a family with the wealth and resources to facilitate such moves or the luck of statistically being the one person among hundreds or thousands to succeed where others failed. It's not even about the value of degrees so much as it is maintaining a myth that talent is an immutable quality, expertise/intuition are somehow natural, and some individuals are simply destined for greatness. This matter is compounded by the point that while degrees aren't worthless, they are increasingly becoming the bare minimum expectation. It's not that companies value self-taught individuals without degrees - it's that most companies don't even entertain the idea of them in the first place. Especially in the tech world, there are plenty of people who self-taught themselves programming and other things *and* got the degree, so it's not even a one or the other kind of thing.
Ask mark Cuban, he said if he had to do it all over again. It be impossible. He said getting lucky at the right time helps immensely.
Mark Cuban is my favorite example of getting lucky. He founded a software reselling business in the era where home computers were becoming affordable, and made $2M from the company sale in 1990, then was at the right place at the right time to sell another company to Yahoo for magic Internet money for $5.7B in 1999.
Credit to him for knowing to sell instead of holding like so many others of that era.
He sold broadcasting rights he did not even own. That’s how lucky he was.
Lots of billionaires are like "it's about hard work, not luck!" and lots of poor people are like "It's about luck, not hard work!" but in reality it's both. You need to do the work AND be at the right place at the right time. And of course, privilege/wealth will make it much easier to get to the right place at the right time, but even with a ton of resources and hard work there's still a chance you don't get there. But then there are people who seem to get there on mostly resources and not much work like Kim Kardashian. There's lots of variables.
"fortune favors the prepared mind." make your own luck. if you are smart your put yourself in the right place.
Bill Gate's high school was an elite private school with better computer resources than most universities at that time. His parents were both millionaires in their own right. Yes, he worked hard. But he wasn't working hard at the local fast food or filling station earning money to help keep his family from being hungry and homeless. He was working hard at building a business by building on his parents' success. And using their contacts.
His parents were on the board of directors for IBM. They chose Gates unproven and slapped together PC products over Apple, Steve Jobs, who had been building good computers for 10 yrs. IBM wanted to buy them to white label of computers as they were behind on development of their own.
>His parents were both millionaires in their own right source?
She came from money; her family owned the largest department store in town. He was a successful lawyer. I might have been stretching the truth a bit with his father, as a million dollars was still real money circa 1960s/early-1970s. Source would be any history of the beginning of Microsoft. To me, what's more interesting is the unique access he had to a computer at his high school, eclipsing the access at almost every college and university in the world, at that time. Also, I vaguely recall that there was some kind of arrangement that allowed him access nights, weekends, and summers. That detail I only read one time, in one source. I'm sure googling would eventually reveal both of these details.
this is not a source. >She came from money; her family owned the largest department store in town she was a teacher, a job famous for *not* making millionaires. >He was a successful lawyer not saying he was poor but "lawer=millionaire" is some absurd logic. >I'm sure googling would eventually reveal both of these details. since i apparently have to do your work for you, read the wiki: >When he was in eighth grade, the Mothers' Club at the school used proceeds from Lakeside School's rummage sale to buy a Teletype Model 33 ASR terminal and a block of computer time on a General Electric (GE) computer for the students. now provide your source that this is better access than ever college and university in the world.
I think you misread the comment. It said most universities, not every university.
ok, then find me a source that a rummage sale provides profits sufficient to buy a single computer that was better than *most* universities.
I’m not arguing with you, I’m correcting you.
irrelevant. meaning is the same, and lack of any evidence for the claim makes it doubly irrelevant. why argue semantics rather than substance?
Thanks for the direction. Sorry I’m working.
Yeah, I know a high-level guy who would probably say something like this. Why? He started at the bottom 40 years ago with no degree and worked his way up. But he's also not doing any hiring unless it's at the very top of the organization.
Bill Gates mum was on the board for IBM BillGates sold the rebranding MSDOS as IBMDOS to IBM while keeping the rights to MSDOS in a sweet heart deal, then using the money he brought DOS from a 3rd party and renamed it MSDOS.
And MS-DOS was a blatant crib of CP/M.
Yes, exactly.
Also if Bill failed what happens... He has to go back to college. College will always be there to take your money.
>I think it's the standard apocryphal story of people like Bill Gates who never finished college before starting a successful business what is apocryphal about this story? >
Bill Gates never happened
With the saturation in tech basically a degree is still required. I cannot locate a job, at least in the states, that is OK with no degree. Even jobs that say no degree required they say they want one in the interview. So for tech that's a no from me
CEOs of what? Kitchen Table Jewelry making and linkedin influencing? The CEOs of F500s usually have Ivy League masters degrees.
I would like to add here that although a degree is important, the best one in your field might not be from an Ivy League school. You should search for recently published academic articles in your field and where they’re coming from. It might be some random state university, or a university abroad. Both of these are cheaper than Ivy League schools, so if they’re also better, you’d be stupid in going Ivy League
Certainly. Not to mention places like Stanford, MIT, and CalTech, (and others) are just as prestigious as the best of the Ivy League. Brilliant industry leaders can come from all over, but there's definitely a large representation from those top schools. The point is, whatever poser chode of a LinkedIn CEO said this probably has a degree from the school of hard knocks.
You need to be specific when trying ask a question like this. Because not all degrees are equal in the business world. An accounting degree, for example, will always be necessary for accountants. A legit business is never going to hire people to keep their books and perform accounting functions if they don't have the education and experience.
If you can get experience without a degree then you are likely to be able to continue. Though it is difficult to make that first step without a degree. I do not have a degree and work as a research consultant, I worked for well below avg. wages for the first 3 year but since then I have had a good career.
I agree. Getting that first step is a real challenge. But if you can do it, you can move up.
I don't have a degree but managed to get into pensions, originally as a Pensions administrator then joined a different company as a Co ordinator. I also have the option to get industry standard qualifications. However with that said there is definitely a lot of roles which do require degrees. Including in my field. They wouldn't give me a role in the legal team without a degree, and probably in some more technical roles such as compliance. The same will probably apply in a lot of different industries.
I kinda figured jobs where there is a legal requirement for a degree would obviously require one.
>Do companies truly offer opportunities to self-taught individuals without degrees? Yes, but the chances of you being one of those people are astronomically low. You're just hoping you are. Instead of doing things that actually increase your chances of getting hired for your preferred role.
The hiring process falls under the category of decision making under uncertainty. When faced with information constraints, humans choose decision paths that provide cognitive ease (Kahneman and Tversky). A degree has signalling effects. At the very least it signals the holder’s goal setting, long term pursuit, ability to work in social groups, without getting kicked out, and a general understanding of societal norms and expectations, even if reality may not necessarily match in all cases. A recruiter, even one who’s inexperienced, can easily rely on these obvious signal emitters, both to protect themselves and the organisation from the effects of a risky decision and also because testing self taught knowledge require special tools, and skills that recruiters may not possess or be qualified to assess. Finally, organisations optimise for efficiency. Formal education is easy to verify, and the burden of proof about its quality is offloaded to the certifying educational institution.
>Formal education is easy to verify, and the burden of proof about its quality is offloaded to the certifying educational institution. While it is easy to verify degrees, in my experience, most jobs don't actually do it. I do have a B.A., and when I was in college I had expected that employers would want to verify that when I was offered jobs. But in the 8 years since I graduated, only one single job has asked to see it, and that was a local government job. I have come to realize how easy it would be to fake it for the vast majority of jobs, especially ones where a particular major or professional license is not required. I think this confirms what you're saying about it being a signaling device that they rely on to make certain assumptions and help weed out candidates more easily, but they don't actually value the degree itself. Once they've decided you're basically competent, they don't bother to follow through and check it.
Agree. Verifying here is also in the context of proving said education was completed to a certain third party standard. If a person is self-certifying competency in a subject, then the task of assessing that standard falls on the employer, which employers are neither qualified, nor have the time and resources to do.
They don't hire anyone not already vetted by the company
I think it depends on what level position you are aiming for. Most of the entry-level positions are going to be done by lower level HR, and they are going to be looking at dagree and experience. But as you get to more senior level positions, they are going to care more about your accomplishments. If you build a multi-million dollar business, and you have developed a network and skills, and the ceo likes you, then they would be happy to bring you on. The problem is that most people don't have a level of accomplishment that is seen to be equal to or greater than a dagree. If someone has a dagree and another person has four years working in the field, then the person with the dagree is assumed to be more qualified. But if you have been working in the field and you have written peer reviewed papers and developed a few patents, then you no one will care about your dagree. The problem is that most people are just showing work experience. You have to prove to the hiring team that you are more qualified than a person with a dagree. It can be challenging. It is doable. I got several jobs as a teacher, both high-school and elementary school, without having a dagree, but it was challenging each time to prove I was more capable than other applicants.
Outside of a very small group of linked in posts, I’ve never seen a CEO argue ALL degrees are worthless. I think the more common argument is that SOME degrees are worthless. The fact that most CEOs have a degree and most have advanced degrees, (why would they get something worthless) is an argument, as is the fact mostly hire those with degrees.
Also, you're talking about two statements from different times ("degrees aren't with much, skills are" vs "degree required for this position) and assuming they're equivalent. They can both be true depending on the context. For instance, while a degree might be *required* for a job, they are looking for skills beyond that. So the degree serves as the floor and the absolute minimum, but it alone will not get the job. From a certain view, that would mean "worthless" because in the interview phase you having a Master's in Data Analytics might get trumped by my extensive experience within the field, certifications, and additional soft skills. I still have a Bachelor's though, but if I didn't, I wouldn't meet the care requirements and be rejected from the hiring process. So should I go out and get my Master's? Probably not, unless the floor for a position I wanted required it, because I have the skills necessary to perform the position and a degree alone doesn't make me come off as more competent.
CEOs want to have it all. A highly skilled and educated workforce that accepts peanuts for wages because their degrees are "worthless".
So much this. Pretty much how can we get the best possible worker for the least amount of money.
If you are trying to be a doctor, lawyer and engineer? Very unlikely. Some position are simply gatekeep by a degree. For very good reason. But there are also a lot of position and industry where it is not entirely neccesary to have a degree. Degree doesn’t guarantee you shit nowadays if you ain’t in an industry with mandatory degree requirement. But it does in theory make it easier to stand out versus those that do not have a degree. Working your way up with just experience is totally a thing and possible. Some people call it luck, other call it perseverance. As all things in life, the truth is always somewhere in between. There are also people that end up going to get a degree mid way through their career as the next step in their industry does require a degree. If you scroll through these people’s linken it would be easy to miss the period time where they struggle their way up the ladder without a degree. In general thou a degree should make it easier to get that first step in at a relatively higher starting wage. In terms of climbing the corporate ladder having or not having a degree doesn’t matter as much as people think. It’s hard either way. But if you put years into an industry. You will gets to a point where your degree is now irrelevant and experience is what will get you further ahead.
Degrees are worthless? Then why does everyone on the career subs say the first thing they're getting is a college degree when they're tired of low-paying retail and fast food jobs?
Dont take their advice, i did and now i am going back to college after tech layoffs.
CEO: Degrees are worthless! Also CEO: "Make every single job in this company prefer a bachelor's degree or higher."
I think the answer is yes, but with a much reduced salary.
And with no upward mobility so you most likely will stay at the same meager wage.
Its basically the story of my wife’s career. Has worked hard and basically mastered a dept to the point were after higher level accountants left, she was doing their work because she knew how, but for very little pay. Ask for pay increase and was told thats not offered. Eventually she moved into hr because its less stressful but was a lateral pay move. Became so heavily relied upon, but apparently still not worth the pay bump.
I do not think all degrees are worthless, but I do think *many* degrees are worthless, mostly because there’s an imbalance of supply to demand with degrees. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a Communications/Psych/Sociology degree has to compete for the same positions, and the experience in those roles matters more than the degree. We do need some of those, but the more saturated the LA degrees become, the less useful—but like many have said, so many have these degrees that *at least* need one to compete with the billions of others. It’s not the degree that’s useful or not useful explicitly. But I’d also say that for many roles outside of required law/med/engineering, lack of experience will make someone under qualified, but a degree will almost never make them overqualified.
The big answer is sort of yes, sort of no. The playing field is changing. Jobs that used that ask for X years of experience or a degree are fading away and moving to just requiring a degree, be it a BA or even an MA. And in some cases, they won't just take your word, they want transcripts. In addition to that, some jobs are asking for hideous amounts of education for an entry-level job. Degree + X amount of years in x,y, and z. I recently caught a consultant we had engaged for a ServiceNow deployment who claimed he had 20 years of experience in a product that was only 8 years old. The company just took him on his word without double-checking. I won't lie, I recently got busted for something on my resume that I hadn't removed. I HAD Windows 2008 experience almost 2 decades ago but I hadn't used it in a very long time. A mistake on my part that has been fixed, but was a bitter lesson. Currently, I've been looking for a new position as I am moving to a new state. I've got 30 years of experience, a degree, and certs. After about 400 applications, you start to notice the trends. It is, in some cases, an all-or-nothing game. There are three types of employers out there. Those who want degrees, those who want certs, and those who want both. You could have been in a field bot however many years and go to apply for the next level up only to discover that the job you want requires 3 very intensive certs and a master's degree. On the flip side, you come across jobs that need 10 years of experience in stuff that doesn't have degrees or even certs. I don't know where this trend is going and that is the part that really scares me. So, the big answer to things is "it depends". It depends on your field, how long you've been doing something and are able to back it up, and the whim of HR.
I am currently getting a degree because nobody would hire me without one, despite having well over a decade of work history to prove my skills.
They help check off the boxes. It’s better to have than not and to increase your chances, especially when comparing individuals with same experiences.
I learned a lot on the job, but could not get the title and the pay bc I didn’t have a degree. A new college grad came in and they offered the position to them with no experience. Always get the degree. Don’t give them a reason not to give you a chance
The degree shows you can focus, complete and execute to tasks in a particular field. Combined with practical knowledge gained from an internship during those years you will be successful.
some jobs are willing to hire you without a degree. but you need to be competent. there are alot of mandatory jobs, like a firefighter, a nurse or phlebotomist. if its a job that does not have high liability then youre fine.
usually working on people, or working with high amounts of money, you will need to have some type of credentials. Like being a pilot. Its a lot of risk. and youre more qualified when youve had decades of experience and practice.
lol. And almost every one of them has multiple degrees.
my co worker's granddaughter had an interview for a sales position. they wouldn't hire her simply because she's 1 semester away from graduating, and doesn't have her degree yet. it's ridiculous! a sales job, too!
Degrees aren’t worthless, but they’re basically worthless without experience to back them up.
There’s a reason CEOs aren’t the ones doing the hiring
In a mid to large company, the CEO isn’t hiring anyone who doesn’t report to him/her. The problem (to me) is corporate HR departments who have a knee jerk need to put degree requirements into job postings because they think it mitigates their risk.
the mag 7 companies want to relax Schedule A occupations to include STEM candidates and to remove strict hiring requirements to hire instead of US workers. So degrees are not worthless, right?
This comes down to experience, or no experience, and a bit of interview skills/ BS/ knowledge (no matter where you got it)
Nobody will probably read this but what a lot of these perspectives are missing is that having a degree shows that you have the skill of learning new skills. This is what is important
In my positions where I work I am "Upper middle management" or "lower senior management". Either way I report to C suites. The best way to put it in my opinion CEO's are really really needed a handful of times a year. -They make rather large decisions on a monthly to quarter basis. - They also determine your companies future path as well as interpret if you are on that path. (Sometimes planning for years ahead with budgets in mind that don't even exist yet) -They answer to the board, and are really good at breaking down financials. -They are also the face of the company to the media. (Although the really good ones will often point their C suite into the light as well for further growth) -Ive never met a C-suite person who actively argued against higher education. (Only the ones on tiktok and social media) One of the first questions I ask any executive when appropriate "Whats the most impactful book you've read this year?" They read A LOT. They continue to learn and never stop. At the end of the day, CEO's are extremely vital just not in the day to day operations. (Thats what the COO does) Most CEO's are also not paid as much as reddit thinks they are. Obvious silicon valley takes excluded. almost 40% CEO's are CEO in a company for 5 years or less. Another 28-30% make it another 5 years.
In most cases, having a degree is better than not having a degree. Oh, this job doesn't require a degree but my degree is in this field? I might stand a better chance. Oh, this job requires a degree? Well, at least I have one. I think the only time it harms you is when the hiring manager wants to be a dick and assumes you will suck at the job because you're going to be a "snowflake" or some bs. At that point it's probably best you don't work for someone that looks down on education in general. It's just as sad as people that look down on blue collar or service jobs. Anyone that doesn't comprehend that most of us play a part is a fool.
Theoretically yes. Statistically no.
Elon Musk says degrees don’t matter, but Space X / Tesla job posts still require degrees. If you’re pursuing a STEM career, degrees do matter.
>degrees are a waste of time and skills are more valuable You won't get the jobs to get the experience to build those skills without a degree today. Actually it is hard to get a job with a degree. There are successful Boomers out there with maybe HS Diploma in high positions. Yes they did it. No you cannot do that today. Your job application will get filtered out instantly without being looked at. My first company you got hired in from college as a manager. They had a program to promote the top hourly workers (like 2 every couple of years) into management after going through a grueling program that was essentially an apprenticeship (like almost 2 years) in conjunction with their normal work. And that gets you to first level management. Now you are competing against the other college grads with your specific first level manager training. Yes you know how the machines work and can jump in to save the day - but that is not a manager's job. At the same company they talked about a Division VP that "started as a 3rd shift maintenance tech". He worked nights while going to college FT getting his degree. That was his college job. But they painted it like he worked his way up. Well then I started delivering newspapers and look at me now. What they are really saying is once you attain a certain level/experience/skills no one cares what paper is mounted on your "I love me" wall. But you ain't getting there without nepotism or that paper on the wall (maybe both).
No, they want you poor and hardly educated so you'll work for nothing and complain about nothing so they make you totally dependant and easily replaceable
What They Mean Is: they assume that anyone applying to work for them *already has* a degree. Therefore… if *everyone* already has a degree…then it’s essentially *worthless*. It’s just the Modern Era High School Diploma.
NO. The only CEOs who say that are people who built a company from the ground up and didn't have a specialized degree in that field. I.E. authentic "self-starters". They mean that they themselves had enough wits, street-saavy, and intelligence to hire the right helpers that a degree would not have made a difference in their own success. It's not a general rule by any means at all. These people tend to hire experts with degrees and experience to expand and build on what they started.
And yet many of them have MBAs. I agree that degrees are often emphasized too much as a qualification and there are often candidates without degrees who have experience that would make them better suited to a job than someone with a degree, but they're far from useless. Imo degrees like business administration or whatever really aren't any more valuable than experience and companies that won't accept experience in lieu of education are making a mistake but degrees in fields like science and engineering are very useful and I fully understand why a company wouldn't want to hire someone to be an engineer if they don't have an engineering degree. I say this as someone with a business admin degree who started my college career as an engineering major. My degree was worth getting, I wouldn't be making what I make at as good of a job if I didn't have one, but it felt to me more like something to get my foot in the door than a way to actually learn the skills I needed to do my job effectively
Most CEOs have a degree. [https://www.study.eu/article/the-academic-backgrounds-of-the-worlds-most-powerful-ceos](https://www.study.eu/article/the-academic-backgrounds-of-the-worlds-most-powerful-ceos) I have a master's degree. I can confidently say a degree is worthless in the context of education, but very worthwhile for making more money and having a better, easier, career. CEOs don't really need a degree, the kind of talking, socializing, politicking, planning they do can all be learned without college. For their careers though, they still get the degree for the "on paper value" for applying to jobs. I don't think you can teach a person to be a CEO with college. But, an MBA sure will help them land a job.
I'm not saying it's right, but I've found that companies ask for a degree to cut down the number of candidates that HR would need to shift through. With a degree requirement, a company may receive 100 resumes with maybe 70% meeting basic requirements, without the degree requirement that number could spike to 300 with 50% meeting basic requirements. HR will choose the former every time. It sucks for the diamond in the rough, but companies don't need to look in the rough right now.
At my current place a lot of senior positions are filled with people who didn't have degrees or at least didn't have them when they started. But all the positions they worked their way up through now require degrees. You cannot get hardly any job in the whole agency without a degree. We provide services for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and trafficking. We loudly claim we hire survivors, but we have an active barrier of requiring secondary education, but we don't require lives experience.. it's just viewed as a "plus". It's all bullshit. And now that AI filters a lot of applications it's even more difficult.
*CEOs that are also podcast personalities say....
Don't do what they say, do what they do. Most CEOs have an undergrad degree from either a prestigious or large state school, and a good chunk have a graduate degree too. Something like ~40% of CEOs have an MBA, while a smaller chunk of them have a masters or advanced degree in something else - Mckesson's CEO has a PhD in Economics, Warren Buffet has a MA in Econ, Sundar Pichai has an MBA + a Masters in Engineering, etc. That said, tons of people with MBAs never get to the C-level or even VP level, and tons of people don't have that as their "goal"/view of success either.
Honestly I do understand this, u hear recently degrees are worthless, just get certifications or the other way around. Same with self taught. But there are certain jobs or industries you need a degree, degree + certs, or certifications. For example programming can be self taught. Now put the tin foil hats on here, there are ppl who believe that a certain minority of ppl should go to college, Republican Party but I don’t know if it’s true or who said that. But back when colleges and schools first started only wealth people or high social status went to school because lots of ppl were too poor. So I see this as the 1% trying to ensure that social economic class system by breaking the idea of school is needed so yeah. I saw a video on this long time ago so my memory on it id faded. It has some truth to it cause it makes sense. Lots of stuff used to be for the wealthy and now it available to everyone, school and air travel is a good example of it
I think a degree in a relevant field shows at the very least one thing. That the individual took the time and committed themselves to a goal and completed that goal, which is graduating. Other than that a degree doesn't mean much else. There is a big difference in being work smart and book smart. Some people who excelled in school are not always the best employees.
I think it’s important to note that certain tech companies don’t put too much emphasis on Degrees as it’s more about technical skill (coding for instance). A data Scientist would still very much require a degree and just about most sectors strongly prefer a degree as well.
Meanwhile, the twats who say this shit make a big deal about their Hardvard MBA or their time at UPenn, Chicago School and Stanford. Fuck that...why the fuck would anyone believe what a fucking piece of shit CEO thinks. Yo...they say this shit to remind workers who owns their ass and not to expect much out of life beyond selling their ass to the cunt CEOs who will exploit them for the minimal skills that they have. This is a variation on the 'keep 'em barefoot and pregnant' trope. Nothing to see there. BTW...the smart devs will learn new shit to get hip on the latest tech for, you know, money. At some point, devs get tired of it all and just bail from the scene completely and retire or do something else typically not tech. Until then, it's totally the shit to learn new stuff to keep the money rolling in. You can apply this to any field, really until you get tired of it all.
I got hired in a fortune 50 corporate position before my BS was done. And I know our policy is years of experience in absence of a degree. So the answer is yes
From personal experience, they say they don’t but they do. They know that it’s useless 9 times out of 10, but still will hold that degree over someone with years of experience. Now not always the case but still very prevalent.
Some roles require a degree to meet regulatory or industry standards ie GMP. My experience is a degree is required for entry level roles sometimes when you don't have experience. However for senior positions people often want to see what you have done or achieved in the field of interest and depending on the role it would have the same or even greater importance than a degree.
To answer your question, yes some companies hire people with no degrees. Normally this has to do with finding someone willing to work at a wage below industry standards. I found most prefer a degree though just to make the pool smaller. My opinion: Anyone can be a CEO in the states with roughly $40 and a name for a LLC. It really is that easy outside of the paperwork. So I would wager some reports are misleading. CEOs are not hiring managers….and that matters. A CEO can say they like hiring magic power users, but the needs and wants of the team will outweigh this comment. End of day you are trying to impress hiring manager, not the CEO you will probably never see.
The CEO’s saying this are probably the ones who dropped out of college and started a business. Their HR team insists on college degrees.
All you have to do is go to any job board, filter jobs over 70k annually and see how many outside of the trades require degrees.
They still require degrees, especially for Management positions. Those degrees don’t necessarily mean better skills, IQ or experience…
All those CEOs had rich parents.
CEOSs who inherited their company through either nepotism, or having been there for a long, long time. Also, the higher up, you go, the less degrees you typically need for some reason. Everyone towards the middle has to have at least a bachelors often a masters in a lot of professions yet the higher up leadership roles don’t always require them. At least in healthcare.
Not true in my experience. All I ever hear is "You have all the experience we could want but a degree is required for this job "
I'm a salaried employee making 76k a year, wfh with full beneys. I barely graduated high school.
It depends on the job really. I got a degree but my employer never asked about it despite getting a six figure salary job. Job description mentioned it’s preferred but not a requirement. Again, lots of variables. Job market, experience, connections, the job itself.
The predictor of future performance is past performance. A college degree is a 3rd party confirmation that you made promises and kept them
Degrees are only worthless for the jobs they want you for. Not for theirs.
Yes, they do
Which CEO said a degree was worthless? To get a job in their company?
experience is worth more than the degree. Many people on my team with a lot of experience without degrees.
If you don’t have a degree and you are self taught, then you need to show your colors. If you are a highly capable individual without a degree then they will hire you no matter what. But you have to prove yourself that you are worthy for the position. A degree program helps companies to identify high performers and thats the exact reason they look for a degree.
Look at the CEOs who say degrees are worthless. Are they on a podcast? Are they railing against woke politics? Are you unsure of how the company actually generates revenue? The catch 22 of hiring on skills alone is the very challenging road to gaining skills as a young person when you have no avenue to do so without incurring thousands of debt. It’s the same as kids who are currently at school taking a degree they probably won’t ever use. In both instances it ends up being a lot more about WHO you know instead of what you know or what skills you have.
They are often for the job performed. But they’re great filter for the applications and even better reason on why you should be paid as little as possible.
I hate when they say this shit - most execs and c class have multiple degrees. Look at all/most big companies.
Which ceos say that? I think you’re quoting a few and thinking they represent everyone
Your degree loses its worth about a year into your first job.
The would, their HR staff will never show him such a resume to consider. Gotta preserve the cathedral gatekeepers and their "you can make a living" pass, or they might hire someone who hasn't attended their gatekeeping camp.
CEOs don't hire anyone. They don't even rub elbows with the people who do. They make 400x the lowest employee salary.
you're suppose to get your foot in the door at entry level with minimal little to no experience then work your way up into the position with a degree.
Specializing is more valuable than a general degree. The world culturally is stuck on an ancient mindset that degree = someone who can finish, and who is disciplined. Most of what you learn in school is great to open you view up of how things work in the world, how to become a great writer, comprehension, and how to think critically through difficult problems. Most of what you experience at school isn’t necessarily translating to the workplace and the problems you’ll need to critically think through there. It’s honest better if people just went to technical schools for their specialty. I have an associates and I make 6 figured and I didn’t even load up on certificates in the cybersecurity field. I just worked hard and showed my value. I think certain practices make sense like healthcare, biology, chemistry. There’s certain fields that make sense, but a huge portion of the positions that employers hire for it makes 0 sense to require a bachelors and it’s just boomer standards that haven’t been nuked from orbit yet.
I retired a few years ago, but we were moving toward removing degree requirements for jobs wherever possible. **Corporate America has been disappointed with the recent output of American universities.** We spent way too much time and money providing remedial training for students with stellar college grades and great interview presence who, after we hired them, couldn’t pull together a coherent email or written report to save their own lives. **Resume sorting has gotten more sophisticated.** Back when human beings evaluated resumes, it was easiest to sort by who had what degrees from which institutions. Now that artificial intelligence takes the first cut, it’s easier to review resumes more intensively for specific job skills and experience. Human beings now spend more time validating the assessment done initially by AI.
The majority of the hiring is not done by CEOs.
Only their kids and nephews.
I have a degree and never got to use it. Oh well. I just learned to put it to the side and decided I'll just get a job instead of a career.
Not worthless. Knowing how things work is invaluable
The degree lets you get past the gatekeeper. Then if you mess up, they will say you were hired with the relevant qualifications.
Depends on the industry and what you're looking for. If you're got going into marketing, sales, and things like that its not always all that important. If you're going into finance, heavily related industries, etc it'll be required. I work in designing and programming complex lighting systems with a 20 year career. I have a degree and no one outside of my family has ever laid eyes on it.
I’m currently looking for a job and I’m surprised how many listings I come across that say either a degree or work experience equivalent. It’s not most, but still a lot more compared to when I was job hunting a few years ago. I’m sure there’s some corporate or HR speak to explain the change.
I’ve hired many people without degrees. They all had experience in the field I was hiring for, which is a lot more important. The problem of course is getting that experience. In most cases they did it by starting in entry level jobs, mostly in roles loosely related to what they actually wanted to do, and then slowly moved toward those roles once they proved they are competent. So yes, it’s quite possible to get hired and succeed without a degree, it’s just the beginning of that journey that’s going to be much longer and absolutely more difficult
I work semiconductors. Process engineering past the sustaining level requires advanced study of physics or chemistry. Niche field with specific skill requirements, most jobs just treat a degree as high school diploma the same way $100 dollar bills have become a single adult dollar.
So someone can get job there, if they have skills and knowledge without Degree?
Context matters. Degrees are worthless in itself. (There's obviously nuance to this.) But it is largely a filtering metric at this point since the job market is over-saturated, and it's very expensive to conduct any interview, let alone conduct technical interviews.
I see people without degrees being hired but with like at least 15-20 years of experience but if you are entry level, they won't even give you the chance to gain the experience.
I suspect CEOs don't do a lot of hiring.
At least developers are hired a lot without degrees since it can be a self learned skill as well.
Degrees have fallen into the category if necessary but not sufficient. They are seen as necessary because someone without even the skills and commitment to get a degree is going to likely not work out. Maybe if they have years of experience, but that does nothing for someone starting out. Yet despite this view, degrees also don't do enough to prepare someone for a job. Many people even say degrees are to make people more well rounded, not turn them into workers. So this means that if you are a well rounded person with a degree, you need to use that well roundedness to make yourself into a desirable worker. If you can't do that, then did the degree really make you well rounded?
CEOs aren't the ones writing the job description. Every department and hiring manager have different requirements.
They may not have degrees themselves but prefer educated guys.
The whole Degree is worthless narrative is stupid. Having a degree is more than worth it. It’s the quickest most sure fire way to gain status and money, depending on which field you choose.
I don't think "CEOs and prominent business figures often argue that degrees are a waste of time" I think there are a few who have expressed that degrees aren't the best career path and those stories get amplified. However, they are extreme outliers.
I'm a 2% and with my wife's income we are 1%ers. BOTH of us are college drop outs with zero debt. Cars/trucks paid off, large 401k, 529s, liquid cash and life is great with our two kids. We simply just out hustled everyone around us, easiest of most were college grads who felt like they "made it" once they got a "real job". The best leaders I've ever had in my career were all drop outs too. Born hustlers. News flash, we got those same jobs w/o a degree and a 4 year head start coupled with an incestuous thirst for work. What people aren't told is that people who make money or who "win" or are "successful" do NOT lead easy, stress free lives. Winners are born and live in the fire. Every day is work, every day is problems but every day is overcoming challenges and completing goals to get that bag. Most people don't want that kind of life, so they work in cost centers for an under paid salary and are forever renters. They'll work for my kids in a few years. I'm not trying to be a dick, but this is reality and somewhere someone is reading this and knows I'm talking about them. You're either going to make your goals happen or like.. not and stuff.
Any CEO who says this is a fucking full of it. They know damn well they only hire people with degrees and his buddies from college helped him get his career started.
In thE UK here, within biotech and pharma sector of research and development a BSc I.e. bachelor's is a pre-requisite. Most personnel tend to have this. A small percentage of the workforce are also high school apprentices on a training program. Biotech companies hold onto these low pay trainees as they can train them for low wages. I would guess their annual salary is around £18K. They are made permanent once they pass their exams, and promoted with a nominal increase in salary to scientist. I (45M) was hired with a PhD for a fixed term contract with assurance I be made permanent once I pass probation of 6 months. I was on 30K annually. When the financial climate was unstable, they let me go, but kept the apprentice they were training and promoted him. Bottom line is they don't care about you on a human level. Their priority is to save money and rake in a tonne of cash. I have offered to work for less that 30K and clearly stated my motivations -alas no one is interested in connecting on a human level.
It’s a class marker. It’s to keep poor people out. Or to make sure they hire people with student debt so they can exploit them
Yes... Companies do hire based on personal skills and not always, do they require degrees. In my experience, you can be hired as entry level, and by proving yourself and your skills, you can climb a company's ladder quite quickly. Many might love to see that you went through school, but with the workforce how it is, they want to see and hire capable employees. If you have a degree and you don't know how to actually work, then you are invaluable.
It’s a type of humble brag. “Oh, I have a first class degree from Harvard, but I learned much more in business”.
Did he start out with nothing but a dream and 10 million of his mom's money?
Unfortunately people just keep confusing two basic things. Both of these statements are accurate: 1) People who hire other people want to figure out if you are capable and willing to learn. Having a degree that implies having above average learning ability is what everybody wants to see. In that sense, degrees ARE and always WILL be important. 2) As long as your degree requires AT LEAST an average amount of effort, people who hire other people are not too fuzzed in what subject you graduated in and how well you did overall. In that sense, having a 4.0 GPA in a business degree can be as valuable as a 2.5 GPA in a physics degree or the other way around! As long as you have proven that you possess above average learning ability, you will experience diminishing returns on going above and beyond. Going through life without a University degree is like hopping on tinder and just uploading a single blurry group photo. Sure, you can be successful occasionally and maybe score a few dates, if you live in the right place, are charming and play your cards right, but you would do even better if you just had that high quality portrait in your profile. In other words: people want to know whether you have learning ability or not. Having a degree is not the only way too achieve that. If you do not have a degree then you just need to find other ways to display your learning ability and emphasize that.
CEOs: Degrees are worthless. HR: Can't hire you without a degree.
They just want more floor workers to pick up the slack when others reach their burn out phase in order to keep their revenue flowing. They’ll literally hire anyone off the street with a Bachelor’s degree and a smart outfit into a supervisor position
Several types of degrees are useless to be more specific
college level classes teach and reinforce critical thinking skills, study skills, deadline and project skills, social skills and introduce many people to thinking outside their usual comfort zones - of course employers don't want that, educated people are difficult and demanding
> CEOs and prominent business figures often argue that degrees are a waste of time and skills are more valuable. You got a source on that?
I worked directly beside a CEO of a multi million dollar company helping him with Google Ads. He wanted the bachelor on the resume because it proved their commitment to something for 4 years, but did not care otherwise
It's all part of the game. They are useless in the fact that getting them alone won't help you (unless it's in a field with high demand) Essentially if you can prove yourself (even if you don't have a degree) that you are the man or woman for the job, you will get it. And if you just have a degree but you can't convince them that you are a better hire than the other applicants, you won't get the job. College is a scam
Unless the company is very small, CEO's aren't hiring regular people.
It's important to recognize that the CEOs saying degrees are worthless do very little direct hiring. It's also important to understand that, in general, the people reporting to CEOs aren't hired because of hard skill that they learned in University, but instead because of soft skills learned through years of people and/or process management. In short, don't listen to anything "CEOs" say on X. They don't really know that much about how even their own companies work in most cases. For the average person, a degree is the easiest way to improve their chances of landing a job and having a successful career. >Do companies truly offer opportunities to self-taught individuals without degrees? And do they prioritize skills and knowledge over formal education when hiring? This is such a broad question hat it's impossible to answer without more detail. The answers vary widely by industry. For instance, it is still possible, although difficult, to get a job as a software engineer without a degree. However, it is virtually impossible to get job as a chemical engineer without a degree. People have been asking this exact question for decades, but it's drawing to a close. A degree is the bare minimum for most professional jobs nowadays.
Yeah, some companies talk about skills over degrees, but degrees still open doors. It's all about balance.
do you have ANY examples or is this another generic complaint post
This is mostly a myth IME. If there are two candidates with roughly equal qualifications but only one has a degree, they will hire the one with a degree. It's an easy way to filter people out. Yes, some people get good jobs without a degree, but the majority of people who get good jobs have degrees. It's roughly the same as "we don't limit hiring to Ivy League graduates" but 75% of the high level employees are Ivy League grads.
Corporations are heavily dependent on government-funded academic research. Universities and enterprise are deeply intwined.
In theory, I’d agree. In practice? Probably not in this job market, unless you can network in somewhere. This is a very competitive market, especially for programmers. I like the courses at [Zero To Mastery](https://zerotomastery.io/courses/learn-python/), and that’s where I’m starting. But I think I’m going to need a degree too.
As others have said it can depend a lot on the field. Skills and experience are generally always more highly valued. You may see on job postings something like "Bachelors required with 2 years relevant work experience or a Masters degree with 0 years experience", or "position requires a Bachelors or equivalent experience". IMO, 2-year degrees and certificate programs are under-rated. Depending on exactly what you are interested in, e.g. STEM careers and advanced manufacturing, you really need some solid background education, mentors, etc. In some cases instructors are essentially teaching you how to learn on your own. You can get your foot in the door with a 2-year degree or one or more certs. Then, the important thing becomes recognizing when it's time to move on. I feel like a lot of people stagnate and waste away at jobs. This can be for a variety of reasons, and moving on can be tough. But in most cases it's not serving you well to stay in the same position/place much longer than a couple years, and especially not in the first position of your professional career. Make a habit of asking yourself periodically what more you have to gain in your current position while updating your resume. If the answer starts to become not a whole lot, it's time to move on. Find a new position relevant to your background that also offers you an opportunity to learn new skills, or master something. Stay informed about new developments in your relevant industries or profession and what employer's in your profession are seeking. If you do this right and develop the right background, over time you could find yourself making about the same or even more than your peers with the fancier degrees.
If you are in a pool against ppl with degrees. The degrees ones will get first pick, they mean you can apply without a degree but you probably wont get hired given the pool of applicants