Something crossed me today. I have seen it happening many times, but never thought about it in detail.

(Warning: Too many generalizations coming up…)

Imagine you are in recruiter’s seat, and are interviewing candidates for a position where their education background matters almost the same as their work experience and current skill set (let us keep attitude and other factors aside for the purpose of this scene). All other things being equal, two candidates A and B have masters degrees to their credit.

Also take two universities: University X, considered top-notch in the field you’re hiring for. University Y, considered at par with University X.
What will be your first reaction to the following case?

Candidate A: Bachelor’s from University X. Master’s from University X itself.

Candidate B: Bachelor’s from University X. Master’s from University Y.

Would you consider the diversity that candidate B has seen in his/her education process?

Would you also think in terms of brand diversity? (”Candidate A had already earned the brand X. Why would he/she not try to earn another Brand (Y) if Master’s was on the charts?“)

Would your answer change if, for both A and B the Bachelor’s degree was in a different domain/specialty than Master’s?
Of course, it’s difficult to find such a scenario where “all other things being equal” constraint can be applied. Imagining it though, my first reaction would be to explore what all the Candidate B has learned from the diverse experiences. Something tells me that such a diversity gives B an advantage over A. Why do I consider it an advantage? I’m attempting to come up with a concrete answer to that.

Interesting part is - if the Bachelor’s degree was in a different domain/specialty than Master’s, the ‘advantage factor’ seems to diminish. The example I’m thinking of is Engineering (Bachelor’s) + Management (Master’s), which is most common in India.

[tags]random[/tags]

» You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.