If that ain’t the truth [image]Submitted by ChefGirlRD1738 t3_11evl6f in GetMotivated
wannabecpa93 t1_jaieimh wrote
Reply to comment by Titan897 in If that ain’t the truth [image] by ChefGirlRD1738
How can you possibly be overqualified for a job you’ve never done? Please explain. Experience is just a part of the qualifications just like education is for some jobs.
evilcockney t1_jaii11g wrote
If you hold a PhD, you may be seen as overqualified for many entry level positions, despite lacking the "real world" experience necessary for higher up positions.
The reason for this is possibly because employers assume that you'll demand a higher salary than typical entry level staff and that you will be at a different position in your life, because of your higher qualifications, yet you obviously haven't proven yourself in the corporate world yet, so they can't gamble on you performing well at an appropriate level.
wannabecpa93 t1_jaik8qa wrote
We are saying the same thing. Education is only one piece of the job description. You maybe have a higher degree than nescessary for the job or “over qualified” in specifically that area. But you aren’t over qualified in the other areas in the job description or the “real world” experience as you call it AKA actually doing the job. So yes it makes sense that an employer wouldn’t want to higher someone who has an education background that isn’t consistent with the job description. They want to higher someone who has actually done the things they’re asking for on the job description. And of course when highering for entry level positions you want to analyze how long that person will be in the position so you don’t have to backfill.
When I’m hiring people I always look for people that have at minimum a 2-3 year time horizon for entry level jobs. If that job description states you need a bachelors and some practical experience doing XYZ I would question why a PHD would want that job. Doesn’t exclude them from being able to be highered. But it also doesn’t mean they are over qualified to do the job either just because they have a PHD. Now if they had also done the job before and let’s say they had the required 2-3 years of experience of doing the job + a PhD I would say they are now over qualified because they have hit all of the requirements of the job and their education is higher than needed. In your example they just have a piece of paper that’s not relevant for the job being applied for and all it really shows is they can dedicate time to studying without a plan for utilizing their degree.
KaizerSmokeHaze t1_jajzrv1 wrote
- Entry level
- 2-3 years experience
Pick one
wannabecpa93 t1_jak01n4 wrote
Entry level does not always mean 0 years of experience. It just means not senior. For instance you can go work at McDonald’s for a year which typically requires 0 years of experience and then go to a bachelor level of education entry level job which might require an internship of a couple summers or what have you.
But I’ll change it to 0-3 just for you.
evilcockney t1_jalfih0 wrote
You're conflating qualifications with "being qualified" through experience
Most of the people here talking about being over qualified purely mean in terms of qualifications - actual certified documents they obtained from educational institutes.
It is unusual to hear someone use the term "qualified" to mean "has relevant experience" and that's why you're getting so much push back here, because they're not generally considered to be the same thing.
Overqualified and under experienced is real feedback that many graduates with higher degrees get - I received that myself many times shortly after completing my first masters degree. I agree that it makes no sense, but that's where we are.
Also - 2-3 years relevant experience is not entry level any more, it's still early career but it literally is not targeted at the entry point of that field. The only meaningful entry level jobs are 0 years experience, they are for people entering the field.
If you are advertising entry level jobs with 2-3 years of relevant experience required in that field, and you're in charge of recruitment, how on earth does anyone enter your field???
DuskyDay t1_jajzdl8 wrote
Qualification comes from education, not from experience.
wannabecpa93 t1_jajzosf wrote
If that were the case job descriptions would just say “x level of education needed “ and list nothing else. Education level is just one part of being qualified to do something.
DuskyDay t1_jak47f8 wrote
It's because they want both qualification and experience.
evilcockney t1_jalfp4t wrote
You're conflating two ideas.
To be qualified for the role you need actual physical qualifications obtained through education and to "be qualified" through experience.
It is absolutely possible to hold too many qualifications (and be overqualified) whilst lacking experience.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments