Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The story of some LA grad working his / her way up from the mail room to become successful is now a very rare exception. Not the rule, as it once was 20-30 years ago. Employers now demand specialized degrees. And with the huge supply of college grads looking for jobs out there, they have the liberty to set very specific requirements as to what they want.
This example is about Wall Street. It doesn't have anything to do with most people's experience or career ambitions.
I have met driven, talented people from many backgrounds and walks of life, yet none has ever said to me, "I want to work on Wall Street. I would give anything to do that," or "If I had played my cards right and gone to X college and majored in Y, I could have been working on Wall Street. I would give anything to turn back the clock."
My children, both now studying the hard sciences, could have gone to nearly any university in either the U.S. or the U.K. but when they were trying to select a college, neither ever mentioned to me an ambition to work on "Wall Street" or in "The City." The first time I have heard them mention this subculture was the other day, when one of them wrote and asked me how a group of people who are "so smart academically could be so stupid at the same time, with no understand of the law of cause and effect" in reference to the disastrous effects of the reckless decisonmaking of bankers and brokers on the economy and world at large. My response to him? Corruptio Optima Pessima.
This example is about Wall Street. It doesn't have anything to do with most people's experience or career ambitions.
I have met driven, talented people from many backgrounds and walks of life, yet none has ever said to me, "I want to work on Wall Street. I would give anything to do that," or "If I had played my cards right and gone to X college and majored in Y, I could have been working on Wall Street. I would give anything to turn back the clock."
My children, both now studying the hard sciences, could have gone to nearly any university in either the U.S. or the U.K. but when they were trying to select a college, neither ever mentioned to me an ambition to work on "Wall Street" or in "The City." The first time I have heard them mention this subculture was the other day, when one of them wrote and asked me how a group of people who are "so smart academically could be so stupid at the same time, with no understand of the law of cause and effect" in reference to the disastrous effects of the reckless decisonmaking of bankers and brokers on the economy and world at large. My response to him? Corruptio Optima Pessima.
That article shows a place where you could once work your way up from the mailroom and climb the corporate ladder...20-30 years ago, but no more. It also shows why you can't do this anymore.
Too much demand in the marketplace today for all the entry-level undergrad coveted jobs - not just Wall Street, I am taking about Silicon Valley, NASA, McKinsey, etc.
It's much easier for a HR rep or a headhunter to enter keywords into the company's database or into a web search crawler / LinkedIn / whatever and filter out the ones with little to no skills than to sift through 5000 resumes. For entry-level grads, if your resume doesn't say Java, C++, Stochastic Calculus, Time-Series Analysis, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science, Physics, whatever, it's not going to be picked up by these programs. Similar keywords are Harvard, Princeton, Yale, 3.9, 4.0, MBA, you get the picture. Similarly somebody could enter the name of their Fraternity / Sorority, or even "Princeton Lacrosse", or "Yale Crew" as a keyword.
This technology was not widely used for this purpose (or didn't exist) 7, 10, 15 years ago, and / or headhunters didn't have that many applications for these low-level training programs.
That article shows a place where you could once work your way up from the mailroom and climb the corporate ladder...20-30 years ago, but no more. It also shows why you can't do this anymore.
Too much demand in the marketplace today for all the entry-level undergrad coveted jobs - not just Wall Street, I am taking about Silicon Valley, NASA, McKinsey, etc.
For entry-level grads, if your resume doesn't say Java, C++, Stochastic Calculus, Time-Series Analysis, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science, Physics, whatever, it's not going to be picked up by these programs. Similar keywords are Harvard, Princeton, Yale, 3.9, 4.0, MBA, you get the picture. Similarly somebody could enter the name of their Fraternity / Sorority, or even "Princeton Lacrosse", or "Yale Crew" as a keyword.
This technology was not widely used for this purpose (or didn't exist) 7, 10, 15 years ago, and / or headhunters didn't have that many applications for these low-level training programs.
I have three questions for you:
(1) How many entry-level jobs are filled in the US economy each year on average? Let's call this "The Universal Jobs Set."
(2) What percentage of jobs in the Universal Jobs Set are at places like Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Nasa, McKinsey, etc. Let's call this "Set A"
(3) What percentage of jobs in the Universal Jobs Set require an applicant to have a degree from Harvard, Princeton, Yale, a GPA of 3.9, or MBA? Let's call this "Set B."
(1) How many entry-level jobs are filled in the US economy each year on average? Let's call this "The Universal Jobs Set."
(2) What percentage of jobs in the Universal Jobs Set are at places like Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Nasa, McKinsey, etc. Let's call this "Set A"
(3) What percentage of jobs in the Universal Jobs Set require an applicant to have a degree from Harvard, Princeton, Yale, a GPA of 3.9, or MBA? Let's call this "Set B."
Now that depends if you consider a job at McDonalds / Starbucks / etc an entry-level job.
Things have changed since seven years ago. Hard to believe, no? The rest of your story is irrelevant.
And to quote:
With the "invention" of professional networking websites and the evolution of web crawlers, people do the hiring, but machines are the ones that screen people out.
I majored in a hard science. I get about 4-5 calls every week from recruiters (how many LA majors get this btw?) telling me about a job and blah blah blah and if I am interested or not. Every time I ask them, "how did you find my resume?". They always respond, "I have a boolean search program that searches resumes on the web matching various keywords I have put in, and your resume came up". This is not hard to program btw.
Headhunters do this. HR personnel at top companies do this. With thousands of resumes to sift through, who has time to look at them all? Enter in a few keywords, filter out the ones with little to no skills, and then take a look at the rest.
I do not "wish the the American economy to conform to your skewed Gordon Gekko vision of what it should be." This is not what I think it should be. This is the way it is. I don't make the rules. The rules have changed since 10, 15, 20 years ago. I just play by them. If LA majors refuse to acknowledge that the rules have changed, then perhaps they should be left behind.
1.The rest of your story is irrelevant. On the contrary, the story demonstrates how business is about "relationships." It also shows a Liberal Arts graduate who has thrived in the corporate world, in a senior technical position. This is the kind of information is exactly on point.
2.I majored in a hard science. The last time I checked, Computer Information Systems and Business were not "hard sciences." When did that change?
3.I get about 4-5 calls every week from recruiters. Perhaps you have "hot skills" that are in demand or are in a "niche sector." Perhaps you have also made a conscious effort to make sure your details get into a lot of recruiter databases.
4. boolean search program. This is common knowledge. Any jobseeker these days who doesn't tailor their CV for search programs is going to be left behind.
5.I do not "wish the the American economy to conform to your skewed Gordon Gekko vision of what it should be." This is not what I think it should be. This is the way it is. I don't make the rules. ...I just play by them. You remind me of the Nazi prison guards who claimed they weren't the ones who designed the chimneys to smoke and didn't even want them to, they were just doing their jobs.
6. If LA majors refuse to acknowledge that the rules have changed, then perhaps they should be left behind. Your statement makes no sense. These "LA majors who refuse to acknowledge that the rules have changed" appear to exist only in your mind. Many liberal arts majors are thriving in the business world.
1.The rest of your story is irrelevant. On the contrary, the story demonstrates how business is about "relationships." It also shows a Liberal Arts graduate who has thrived in the corporate world, in a senior technical position. This is the kind of information is exactly on point.
2.I majored in a hard science. The last time I checked, Computer Information Systems and Business were not "hard sciences." When did that change?
3.I get about 4-5 calls every week from recruiters. Perhaps you have "hot skills" that are in demand or are in a "niche sector." Perhaps you have also made a conscious effort to make sure your details get into a lot of recruiter databases.
4. boolean search program. This is common knowledge. Any jobseeker these days who doesn't tailor their CV for search programs is going to be left behind.
5.I do not "wish the the American economy to conform to your skewed Gordon Gekko vision of what it should be." This is not what I think it should be. This is the way it is. I don't make the rules. ...I just play by them. You remind me of the Nazi prison guards who claimed they weren't the ones who designed the chimneys to smoke and didn't even want them to, they were just doing their jobs.
6. If LA majors refuse to acknowledge that the rules have changed, then perhaps they should be left behind. Your statement makes no sense. These "LA majors who refuse to acknowledge that the rules have changed" appear to exist only in your mind. Many liberal arts majors are thriving in the business world.
Liberal Arts graduates can thrive in the Business world, sure! But how are they going to get in today if their resumes aren't even going to be looked at? Your story was from 7 years ago, if he was born 7 years later, he would not even have gotten an interview unless he knew someone. hmm
What will HR reps search for when looking for the best applicants to their management trainee programs? English? Gender Studies? Psychology? Starbucks? Senior Thesis? Or do you suggest they spend their 8 hours a day looking at each individual resume, until they get through all 5000?
Companies receive hundreds and hundreds of resumes for software development / server maintenance / whatever jobs they post. Why would they hire an LA major over someone who has already studied that in school?
Because good hiring managers learn from experience, and know that many excellent programmers and systems analysts come from non-Comp Sci backgrounds. Morever, they also know that some with a "degree in Comp Sci" are abysmal performers in the workplace.
Once you have seen a "Comp Sci" graduate take down an entire CM system in production because he decides to go in and change a parameter without testing it on the basis of an email he received that he didn't understand, was too dense to follow up on, and doesn't even understand the meaning of "core production system," "unit testing," "integration testing" or "change control"--DESPITE his Comp Sci degree--your rosy-colored bias toward "Comp Sci" majors will change.
Liberal Arts graduates can thrive in the Business world, sure! But how are they going to get in today if their resumes aren't even going to be looked at? Your story was from 7 years ago, if he was born 7 years later, he would not even have gotten an interview unless he knew someone. hmm
What will HR reps search for when looking for the best applicants to their management trainee programs? English? Gender Studies? Psychology? Starbucks? Senior Thesis? Or do you suggest they spend their 8 hours a day looking at each individual resume, until they get through all 5000?
You are talking in circles. Their resumes do get looked at in many companies, and for various reasons. Perhaps not on Wall Street or at NASA...which goes back to my other points, which you have still not addressed. Instead, you have continued to make the same conclusory claims, just using different words.
And when did "Computer Information Systems and Business" become hard sciences?
You are talking in circles. Their resumes do get looked at in many companies, and for various reasons. Perhaps not on Wall Street or at NASA...which goes back to my other points, which you have still not addressed. Instead, you have continued to make the same conclusory claims, just using different words.
And when did "Computer Information Systems and Business" become hard sciences?
In this recession, companies from Set A have trimmed their hiring considerably. So now what was a 100:1 applicant:acceptance ratio for various jobs has turned into say, a 500:1 ratio for these jobs. Citi came to my campus in fall of 2007, they usually hired 6-7 students for trader / IB positions, my year there was only one opening. Let's assume that half (250) of these applicants (elite schools, strong technical skills, etc) were qualified for these jobs - they didn't get them, so they start applying to regular management trainee jobs. These applications, who would normally not receive such a volume of "impressive" applications, start receiving an influx of them. Are you going to say that HR at these other places is going to gloss over these additional applications?
In 2004, over 60% of college graduates majored in something related to:
Business
Communications
Education
English / Literature
Foreign Languages
Gender Studies
Liberal Arts
Philosophy / Religion
Psychology
Public Administration / Social Services
Social Sciences / History
If you take out Visual / Performing arts from the data (because their goal is Broadway / Hollywood), that jumps to 70%. Now are you going to tell me that at least 70% of the management trainee programs don't require some sort of technical knowledge? The ratio's don't add up.
Business is not a hard science, but at Carnegie Mellon our IS majors learn more (Java, C++, PHP, SQL, etc) than many Computer Science majors at other schools. I had a friend who majored in Computer Science at St. Johns and the extent of his coding was HTML...I learned that when I was 14.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
