@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @lain @JSDorn
I can explain that one.
Immagine you're working for Blackrock. Are on your way to having a yacht, 4th house etc. All you need to do is hire an accountant who won't fuck up.
And you see a resume with 2 degrees in religion, as well as one in accounting. Add to that a picture with pink hair, and..... do you seriously want to hire her?
You do, in fact, seriously consider hiring them based on how many exams they've passed.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @lain @JSDorn
Ok..............
Here is my view on the topic.
Tim Pool talked about this too, and it is an importand concept when it comes to any cooperation. (I will try finding the video)
There are some educated people, who are brainless. Tim Had hired these people, and they weren't able to do even the simplest of tasks, without checking back. But, then he found an uneducated guy, who understood what the goal of his position was, and he "just did his job". This person can be educated. But the brainlet cannot be told to do their job.
So, if I want to hire a person, who I can trust can do a good decision, then a person saying "I am in debt and lost 8 years of my life to study religion" would be at the bottom of my list.
Financial Tech is a *perfect* example of a field where "follow the rules always or die" is the optimal employee behavior. Accountants who break rules are likely to lose money - and their employer can sometimes end up paying the price, which may be "millions of dollars." God help them if they break a law - that is a career-ending move.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @lain @JSDorn
Ok. Then, that's the point, where our world views are simply going to stop the conversation entierly.
Because I believe, that the moment you let the first braindead employee in is the moment your company starts dying.
But yes, I do on the other hand see, how accounting would be the one of extremely few areas, where you might want your employees to be as close to robots as immaginable.
I do agree that such people are absolutely useless in any situation which requires problem solving - which is most positions - but given that this particular individual is well-positioned for one of those types of jobs, it is worth bringing up the exception.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @lain @JSDorn
> Law Enforcement
Horrible example, but I will replace it with McDonalds cook, and pretend, that both examples were perfect.
> but given that this particular individual is well-positioned for one of those types of jobs, it is worth bringing up the exception.
The particular idividual didn't get the job. And I do have reasons to believe, that lack of foresight and decisionmaking skills was the main cause.
I imagine there's also a point where creativity gets in the way of organization. For really massive companies specifically, if one branch is doing things a different way than all the others, that could cause logistical headaches if their better way needs an extra type of material. Even if it's cheaper to buy the extra material and do tings the better way, it might not be worth it to only set up the supply for just one branch. so you either have to make all the branches change or none of them. The retraining and possibly even retooling costs could easily make it not worth it if it's only a slightly better way.
@ceo_of_monoeye_dating @lain @JSDorn
My view can be a bit weird, but I did study economics, and I saw both the "natural killers" and the "braindead readers".
And almost all of braindead readers got the degree. That is their talent. And the talent ends exactly there.