Employer hiring decisions: prioritizing experience over education

Educational Background vs. Experience
1. Introduction
Every time an employer makes a new hire, it is an investment—and just like any investment, there is a return expected. Due diligence is something investors are accustomed to doing in the equities market before they invest, and the same is required of employers before they hire a new employee. However, there is some debate about what sort of metrics should be used: should employers hire based on educational achievements and degrees earned? Or, is experience more important when it comes to discerning which candidate has the most potential to meet the demands of the job? This paper examines the debate of education vs. experience by looking 1) at what employers should place more importance on, 2) what they tend to associate with degrees, 3) what degree inflation means, 4) what strategies can be used to source talent, 5) how HR can eliminate outdated concepts of today’s workers and shape them via apprenticeships into who they want them to be; 6) how important soft skills are; 7) and whether U.S. military veterans lack social-emotional skills. Examining these aspects of the educational background vs. experience debate will help to bring more light and insight into the subject. 2.  a) As an employer, what should you place more importance on: educational background or experience? The reason employers look at educational background and experience is really for one reason and one reason only: to assess the knowledge and skill level of the candidate. A candidate who has a high degree in the field for which he is applying but who has no real-world working experience will be less appealing to a firm than an individual who has both an education in the field and an appropriate level of experience. Real-world know-how means less time spent training, less likelihood of failure, and less risk of turnover as the candidate already has an idea of what the job entails and clearly wants it—whereas the worker who only has education poses more risk: he may turn out to despise the field in the real-world and leave after a short time, making the company’s investment in him a wash.
Thus, if one is going to have to choose between the two, the experience should play a larger role in determining who gets the job. Experience provides, after all, its own education: there is the book-based education one obtains in school, and then there is the real-world education one obtains from working in the real world. The latter often supplies lessons, knowledge, and skills that cannot be obtained in a classroom—and these are typically the skills one needs to succeed in the real world. Thus, there is no beating experience. In the nursing industry, this has especially proven to be the case as many nurses transitioning from the classroom to the real world nursing environment have struggled to make the leap. Nurse educators have gone so far as to attempt to address the situation by implementing real-world simulation exercises in the classroom to help nursing students feel more prepared and confident about entering into the real world (Thomas & Mraz, 2017). This example shows that there is no beating experience when it comes to obtaining a great hire.
However, if employers only look for experience they will run into the problem of soon running out of candidates. This is why companies should make an effort to work with students while they are still in school, offering co-ops and apprenticeships, which complement the academic side of development with real-world learning. Kassean, Vanevenhoven, Liguori, and Winkel (2015) recommend bridging the gap between academic learning and real-world experience so that individuals can be more rounded and better prepared to meet the needs that firms have—and this means firms should be more proactive in working with universities to provide opportunities for that gap to be bridged. For, in the final analysis, both educational background and experience matter. b) A lot of employers automatically require their candidates to have a four-year degree to fill their positions. However, is it always necessary? Can someone who has a good deal of work experience, but no degree fill that role as well? The reason employers automatically require their candidates to have a four-year degree to fill their positions is that they want to make sure those applying for a position have put in some time to develop a background in the field. Employers know that four-year degrees do not necessarily mean the candidate is a worthy hire. It is rather a way of filtering out those candidates who might like to apply for the position but who have no background in it. Employers want to know that a person is going to be the right fit because they are planning on investing in the person.
With that said, an employer is always going to look at a resume that shows the candidate has the skills and experience needed for the job—even if the candidate does not have the degree. There are exceptions to the rule. Typically, an employer uses the degree requirements as a filtering mechanism. However, some individuals work their way into the real world of employment by different routes than through the academic route. Employers know that someone who has a good deal of work experience but no degree can fill a role nicely and they should and do look at those candidates. 3. a) What do most employers associate with candidates, or employees, that have a degree?  What most employers associate with candidates or employees who have a degree are responsibility, commitment, and knowledge of fundamentals associated with the field. A person must first and foremost be responsible and committed in order to obtain a degree, whether it is a 2-year, a 4-year, a graduate or a post-graduate degree. The higher level the degree, the more impressive the resume tends to be, and the higher the pay grade is likely to rise. The employer will also assume that an individual with a degree has obtained a basic fundamental knowledge of what the field is about and will not have trouble coming from the classroom into the real world.
However, some schools focus more than others on preparing students from the real-world workplace. As Foster and Yaoyuneyong (2016) point out, schools that focus on developing communication and leadership skills tend to prepare students for the workplace better than others. So generally employers will consider the school from which the candidate graduated, its reputation, the type of students they turn out, and so on.
A candidate or employee with a degree will also be one whom employers expect to be able to analyze and solve problems, learn on the job, engage in continual education, know how to be a good team worker, and be able to conduct research when needed. Each of these skills can be learned in the classroom so it is not a stretch for employers to expect this kind of work from a candidate with a degree. Employers will assume the individual is motivated and will work hard at the job, as a degree also signifies that the individual can accomplish tasks within a reasonable amount of time and achieve goals that are set out for one. A motivated worker is one of the most important qualities employers look for in candidates (Barigozzi, Burani & Raggi, 2018), and employees aside from skill level and knowledge, and a degree signifies that the worker/candidate is motivated. b) Don’t candidates that possess a great deal of work experience likely have these characteristics as well? However, a degree is not the only way to determine whether or not a candidate is motivated, is committed or has the skills that qualify one for the job. A look at the candidate’s work history can also convey some of that information. For instance, a worker who has a solid work history with one or two companies and produces a resume that shows initiative on the worker’s part in terms of climbing the ladder, assuming more responsibility, learning new skills, and so on—all of this will be useful for the employer in determining the merits and values of the worker.
Additionally, an interview with the candidate can help that information to come to the fore as well. That is one reason HR conducts phone interviews before inviting the candidate to a face to face interview—so as to better gauge the qualities, work attitudes, and potential of the candidate. Thus, it is true to some degree that a candidate who possesses a great deal of work history likely will have the characteristics that employers are looking for. Analyzing that work history is important, however; a worker who bounces from one job to another may indicate that there is a lack of commitment and loyalty, or that there are problems underlying the candidate’s character—perhaps issues that have caused him to be let go at one job after another. Even relying on references to assess the situation better can be unhelpful, especially in cases where the individual was well-liked by his employers but ultimately unsatisfactory in his job performance: the previous managers will be unlikely to give him a bad review because they will want to see him get hired on somewhere else if they harbor some guilty feelings for having had to let him go.
Still, a degree on one’s resume is unlikely to reveal these types of character traits, too. No matter whether HR is looking at the degree or at the work experience, the interview process is where the rubber will meet the road. Whoever conducts the interview will have to be trained to identify potential character issues that could translate into performance issues down the line, and should be trained in how to spot red flags that will signal a potential problem. 4. a) Describe and define Degree inflation. Is Degree inflation out of control? Degree inflation refers to the loss in value that the idea of earning a degree holds over time in terms of its appeal and meaning for employers. It is much the same as dollar inflation: the more dollars that enter into the economy, the less value each dollar holds. The same goes for degrees. Decades back when fewer people had them, a degree signaled something important and special. Today, everyone is expected to have a degree and the number and types of degrees offered have risen exponentially. There are so many degree opportunities at colleges around the nation, with various majors and minors available, that they number into the hundreds easily. Degrees are also easier in some ways to obtain than they were in the past. If one cannot afford schooling, one can easily obtain a loan to start classes. If one is unsure of what to major in, one can take two years or more of general studies classes before making a choice. And since a 4-year degree is now the norm, one is expected to get a Master’s or a Doctorate in order to stand apart from other candidates, to show that one has truly invested himself in a field. In the past, earning a Bachelor’s showed a high level of investment and commitment on the part of the individual because back then it was not so easy to get a loan to go to school and it was not something that every high school student was urged to pursue. Today, every student is told that higher education is necessary. However, the Associate’s and the Bachelor’s degrees carry less weight with employers today than they did in the past. Today, they are viewed as the bare minimum that an employer looks for in most cases. It is the equivalent of a high school degree in many ways. It does not signify the same as it used to.
Additionally, in many ways, it is more about credentialing than it is about learning or gaining experience and real-world skills. The credentials are not hard to obtain as standards have been lowered across the board to accommodate more and more students who lack the skills that used to be required at a major university. Because the standards have been lowered, employers know that a higher degree is not necessarily going to be reflective of the skills needed to do the job. Degree inflation is therefore out of control to some extent.
When is enough education enough? After all, much of what is needed to do a job is learned on the job, and higher education itself has become a kind of big business. Students have become commodities for the places of higher learning and they are squeezed for every last penny as the requirements to obtain a degree have increased along with the price of schooling. Degree inflation not only puts more barriers between young persons and workplaces but it also hampers businesses that refuse to accept candidates for a job unless they have a degree, for there are many eager and willing young workers with skills who can learn on the job and who will be committed and loyal to a firm if given the opportunity (Fuller & Raman, 2017). b) How must HR rethink their hiring strategies and challenge misperceptions of college graduates and less-educated but experienced workers? HR must utilize hiring strategies that focus on assessing the applicant’s actual skill-level, knowledge-level, motivation-level, and work drive. Just because an applicant has a degree does not mean that the candidate is the best hire for the job. There may be less formally educated applicants who have stronger skills and more experience—and they need to be given attention. As Fuller and Raman (2017) show in their Harvard Business School report, “degree inflation is undermining U.S. competitiveness and hurting America’s middle class” (p. 1). Employers do not do themselves any favors by only looking at applicants who have degrees.
One strategy that HR can utilize is to look internally and to promote from within if the job is not an entry-level position (Cappelli, 2019). This means that there are likely to be workers within the company who would appreciate the opportunity to rise up and take on a more challenging role. They should not be passed over just because they did not earn the right credentials at college. In many cases, they can be trained to learn what is needed without too much of a problem. What matters is that they are loyal to the company, they have intrinsic motivation, they want the challenge and they have the interpersonal skills, the communication skills, the drive, the passion, and the experience needed to succeed. By posting jobs internally the company can promote from within and be relatively confident of finding the right worker for the job based on performance evaluations, interviews, and level of dedication shown by the worker.
Fuller and Raman (2017) also recommend the strategy of training lower-level workers so that they can climb the ranks of management and provide the company with the kind of skills and leadership the company wants to see. If a firm is looking for a specific look, there is no better way than teaching those workers who meet certain criteria and who are already employed with the firm. This is basically the strategy of developing talent from within. Companies such as Walmart and J.P. Morgan Chase already use this strategy.
Another strategy is to partner with outreach programs to train people who are in the workforce but who are not yet employed. This creates an opportunity to bring talent under one roof to see who has the skills that can be developed more fully so that the individual can fill a role in the company. HR can work with the company’s executives and directors to develop the type of program that would allow the firm to bring candidates together for a workshop, provide training, assess responsiveness, and create a list of potential candidates who reflect the type of character and understanding that the firm could use. 5.  a) Describe strategies some companies are taking to address the problem of sourcing talented workers (Talent and Potential Factor) internal to the organization.    Mobilizing talent from within the organization should be the goal of the company. As Volini et al. (2019) note, “to fuel growth, organizations need to more effectively tap their current workforce to identify and deploy people with the required skills, capabilities, motivation, and knowledge of the organization, its infrastructure, and its culture.” The way to do this is to allow the Talent and Potential Factor to flourish within an organizational structure that facilitates upward mobility across the entire firm. The problem that companies currently face is that they tend to be hierarchically structured and do not promote the kind of culture needed for mobility. Most workers are stuck moving upward only within their own division. Workers should be able to have their talent and potential assessed from outside divisions because it is very likely that many workers have the skills, tools, and vision needed to have a positive impact at multiple levels within the company (Volini et al., 2019).
One strategy is to look at high performers within the organization as being right for any role in the company. Technical background and experience should not be considered limitations. Instead of looking at candidates in confining terms, HR should look at candidates in terms of Talent and Potential. Does the worker show a strong talent and a high level of potential? Would the worker flourish in a variety of roles if given the opportunity? In many cases, workers would learn and adapt on the go and bring their talent and potential to a new role within the company.
Upskilling is another approach that companies are taking to address the problem of sourcing talented workers from within. AT&T is engaged in upskilling by spending millions to train and educate employees through professional development programs (Volini et al., 2019). The purpose of upskilling at AT&T is to allow the company to use existing workers to fill jobs that open up elsewhere in the company. The strategy is an effective one for AT&T: half of all job openings at the firm are filled by employees who take part in upskilling.
To promote internal mobility, companies need to focus on creating the right culture, offering the right incentives, and providing a competitive advantage (Volini et al., 2019). This means promoting a new vision for workers and showing them that if they demonstrate a talent for working hard, acquiring new information, and show the potential to succeed, they will be considered for positions at higher levels in any division, regardless of their background or experience. The idea behind this vision is that the core skills needed for success are hard work and determination and that beyond those two qualities it is simply a matter of learning the ropes and applying the fundamentals, which can be picked up on the go. b) How do organizations know if employees have a growth mindset? Determining whether employees have a growth mindset is the main challenge, of course. Workers who have a growth mindset, however, will demonstrate specific faculties:

They will show that they want to develop their intelligence by demonstrating an interest in continuing education. They will not shy away from challenges in the workplace but will rather embrace them and seek them out. They will not be easily set back by obstacles but will preserve and find ways to overcome them. They will demonstrate that effort and hard work are the pathways to success and mastery. They will accept criticism gladly and learn from it rather than take it personally and hold resentment and grudges. They will look to others who have succeeded as a source of inspiration and lessons to be learned. They will see failure as an opportunity to learn and grow. Identifying growth may be easier said than done, though, if there is not a method in place specifically for this purpose. The best way to gauge whether an employee is growth-minded is to conduct person-to-person interviews using the following five questions, as demonstrated by Boss (2015):

How have you become better? How aware are you of your department’s goals? What process improvement area are you working on? When did you last receive coaching or guidance? Who is your greatest competition? The first question focuses on gauging the worker’s self-awareness and the keywords he uses to describe himself. What the manager should look for in the answer is specific ways the worker has improved and assertive expressions, such as “I believe” and “I’ve learned,” rather than less confident expressions, such as “I think” or “supposed to” (Boss, 2015).
The second question is meant to determine whether the worker is aware of the macro-environment in which he works if he is stuck in a silo mentality. The more aware of the macro environment, the more likely the worker is to have a big picture concept of the workplace and be willing to grow in multi-dimensional ways with the possibility of rising out of his department.
The third question is meant to show whether the worker has a sense of growth in terms of improvement in key areas of knowledge and skill that will allow him to fulfill a greater integrative role in the company at some point. If the worker shows no sense of alignment between areas of improvement and goals of the company, he is unlikely to have a growth mindset.
The fourth question focuses on revealing whether the worker has a mentor or what he would look for in a mentor. One sign of a growth mindset is having an individual in mind who serves as an inspiration or model for the worker. If the worker can identify a coach or mentor and explain his importance, he is more likely to have a growth mindset.
The fifth question is aimed at seeing whether the worker identifies a competitor as a company outside the firm or as a department inside the firm. If the former, the worker is more likely to have a shared sense of purpose with others in the company. If the latter, the worker is more likely to see competitors where he should see colleagues, which means he will not be a good candidate for growth. 6. How must HR (organizations) eliminate outdated concepts of today’s workers and match them with training programs, via apprenticeships (blue & white collar) or career technical education (pathways), to ensure they have the competencies for the changing workforce? HR must eliminate outdated concepts of today’s workers and match them with training programs by starting first and foremost with the culture of the organization. The culture is the key foundation for growth, and if it does not promote programs, apprenticeships and pathways for the purpose of creating competencies in workers, then outdated concepts will never be eliminated. The culture is what sets the tone and creates the environment for mindsets to be formed. To promote the right kind of culture, HR must first conduct a systematic review or audit of the existing culture.
Once the audit is conducted, the organization can see where it is culture-wise and where it needs to be. This will show where the gaps are and allow HR to develop methods for closing those gaps. For instance, if there is a silo mentality among workers, HR can provide mandatory training for employees that will teach them about the macro vision and what perspective workers should be adopting in order to fit in better with the company and its plans for workers who demonstrate talent and potential.
Talent and potential should be rewarded with promotions, not just within a single division or department, but throughout the entire organization. This will help to reduce the risk of silo formation and promote the kind of upward mobility the company needs to ensure competencies are being developed. Training programs, apprenticeships, and pathways all afford opportunities for developing workers’ competencies—but they have to be promoted as such and they have to be received and accepted by the workers as such. Leaders play a pivotal role in getting that vision across to workers and helping them to understand it and why it is vital both for their best interests and for the interests of the company. 7. a) How important are soft skills?  For that reason, soft skills are very important. Soft skills include leadership, teamwork, communication, problem-solving, and interpersonal skills. They also include work ethic and flexibility or adaptability. Each of these skills is a core part of what it means to be a worker with the potential for upward mobility within the organization. Leadership skills include the ability to communicate effectively with colleagues using social and emotional intelligence, awareness of the company’s vision, values and mission, and a sense of what the worker is looking for with respect to the relationship between the leader and the worker. Workers want to be respected and valued by managers; they want to feel that their input into the company is important. Thus, it is important that managers and leaders allow workers to have their say, to exercise their voice and to attend to what is important.
Teamwork is another vital soft skill as it serves as the grease that keeps the heavy machinery of the company humming along. Teamwork is needed for reaching objectives that require input from more than one individual. A worker who has poor teamwork skills will fail to facilitate the company’s pursuit of its objectives and therefore will not be seen as a prime candidate for growth.
Communication skills are needed as these keep stakeholders on the same page, aware of what processes are currently being engaged, where workers are in their plans, and who should be fulfilling what role. Breakdowns in communication load to blocks in production, which causes performance inefficiencies. Communication is thus a vital skill in the company at all levels.
Problem-solving is a skill that empowers the worker to find innovative solutions to challenges and obstacles that arise throughout the course of one’s work. An employee who lacks problem-solving skills will not make a successful manager or leader but will rather act as an impediment in the company’s aims. Problem-solving is crucial to a company’s future as problems will always arise and always need answers from talented individuals who can provide them.
Interpersonal skills, too, are needed as these allow for goodwill and morale to increase wherever the worker goes. A leader is one who has good rapport with followers thanks to strong interpersonal skills. Such skills commonly include emotional and social intelligence, which allow a person to understand others, read their needs, and respond accordingly. A worker with interpersonal skills will be a strong candidate for upward mobility.
Work ethic is important as it shows the extent to which an employee will be willing to work hard for the company and invest himself in it. Work ethic shows character and tenacity and the willingness to buckle down when push comes to shove. Flexibility and adaptability are equally important, especially if the company is looking for an individual it can move around the company to fill holes when needed. b) Has a reliance on technology robbed young adults and college graduates of soft skills?  Too much technology may be having a negative impact on the soft skills development of young adults and college graduates in today’s Digital Age, according to the findings of Greenwood (2019). First off, technology is highly addictive and can lead individuals to check out from reality, from their surroundings, their environment, their neighbors and even their work. It can cause them to be more stationary and sedentary, less interactive with others, and less willing to get up and have face to face contact with real human beings. It can also lead to social media obsessions, to the point where individuals are spending more time on social media connecting with friends and followers in the virtual world than they are in the real world. This can, in turn, harm their mental health and prevent them from developing appropriate communication skills that are needed in real-world environments.
Too much screen time reduces the ability of individuals to develop social intelligence and emotional intelligence. It can prevent relationships from being effectively established and prevent them from knowing how to engage in direct, face to face contact. Having access to instant information via technology and the Internet also means that individuals end up becoming less self-sufficient. A worker who is not addicted to technology and does not spend all his time on it is one who will likely make a better leader than those workers who are on their laptops, personal computers, cell phones, and tablets all day every day. To connect with real human beings it is often necessary to disconnect from the virtual world.
The only way to develop soft skills is through practice. Thus, one must actively lead others, communicate with others, practice being in teams, learn to adapt in new environments and take part in interpersonal exchanges. By being part of a social environment in the real world one will be able to grow in a way that companies can benefit from. Too much technology or reliance on digital tech can prevent an individual from obtaining the qualities and characteristics needed to excel in the workplace. 8. a) Do US Military veterans lack social-emotional skills?  Or is this another misconception by employers and HR?