The Most Qualified Person

I know how you feel. I experienced similar. With me, it seemed some people get it (learn it) easier.

But what I have found is that it's not so much the qualifications you gain, it what you do with them.

At the risk of being crude: Qualifications on paper are only good for wiping your ass. It is experience that gets the job done.

Whether it was more blessing or curse I'm not sure, but I always had a kind of "test savvy" that gave me better test scores and good grades, but not always great depth of knowledge. Not that I'm too bad on that, but I'm more of a generalist than specialist.

Many who "get it" easily in a classroom cannot extrapolate the classroom into real life. Some cannot fully grasp the meanings in a classroom until they see it in action in the real world. Often these latter people now quickly understand nuances of the topic that were not taught in the classroom, too.

Which of these types of individuals are better qualified for what? Sometimes column A will be better than column B to get a job done. Others column B, J or Q will be better suited.

Qualifications don't impress me much...

They got the brains, but have they got the touch?

Del

Classy ... touch by touch

The magic man with the magic hands....

yeah, hit it baby!

Agree, it's all about touch...after all, you are only as old as the women you touch!

Any good troubleshooter will tell you it takes years of experience to be any good at it....Now it gives you a jump start if you have somebody explaining it as you go along, but after some time the field levels out and it's the most dedicated and hard working and smartest individual with the most talent that tops the field....Finding your talent is key to success, but pursuing it with unrelenting zeal day after day shows your character, discipline, competitive nature and will to succeed...If having credential's is necessary to move to the next step, the motivated individual will find a way...The unmotivated individual will sit around thinking up reasons why they cannot succeed...

"A string of them after their name" could be a syntax error. Nothing useful really with that string attached other than a liability. But its always an advantage knowing the theory internally, troubleshooting will be made easy.

We have a mix of people at work, 9 of them have doctorates & 1 is a professor (we have about 52 staff) but we also have some very skilled people doing the practical stuff. I wouldn't trust some of the Dr.s to open a paper bag unaided but a lot of our work comes from these people theorising about how our devices work so that we can propose improvements or new ways of detecting stuff that we would never come up with through experience.

I guess the point is that you need the right people in the right job.

"I wouldn't trust some of the Dr.s to open a paper bag unaided"
RAOFPMSL
Yeah, that's just what I meant.
Del

I can ride a bicycle.The kid across the street can ride a unicycle. And he's considered handicapped.

I see nothing wrong with a piece of paper from a university, guild or tech school. However, all the paper should say is that you are now qualified to go forth and learn your profession, with a statement of what that profession is. It is only after you leave the class room that any understanding of your line of work takes hold. Well it seemed to work for me over the years.

I always felt is that going to school only teaches you tools. It's still up to you to apply the tools.

I agree but just having the tools is not enough either! The necessity to effectively use and apply them tools is the hardest part and the real qualifier in my perspective!

Education without work experienceas well as experience without theoretical knowledge are incomplete. Apprentices who follow part-time or evening classes or studying sandwich course is ideal

As is academic expertise becoming practical. It's all about balance.

in 1967, I.E.E(UK) exempted graduates in physics/maths from parts 1 & 2 of their examination & in practicals in lab too, to become engineers.They sat for final part 3 exam,joined utility as "engineer" without any training or practical work in lab. One guy went to a substation saw a transformer and asked "what is that huge thing"?.

Appointing anybody as engineer,doctor,lawyer,accountant etc without training to be banned. Who can do???

Pnaban - 20 Interesting that!

It was a couple of years before 1967 when I was heading for IEE pt 3, but was unable to because local colleges (Bristol, UK) stopped running evening classes in the subject. Day release and block release was preferred as local engineering companies needed better qualified apprentices. But I did not work for them and I was well past apprentice age by then.

Bath University could have cobbled together an evening course of lectures, but in reality I did not have the money to pay for petrol for four round trips a week: and believe it or not, according to my employer, my ability supervise outside contracts properly could jeopardise my career if I had to leave site early to travel in the firm's time in order to get back to Bristol in time for evening classes. I took the threat seriously and I was unable to take the course and pt3.

All this effort because I believed my career was dependent on becoming a Chartered Engineer with letters after my name. In the end I settled for Incorporated status as a member of the Institution of Engineering and Technology. And proud of it!

And for anybody wondering - I can recognise a transformer - and from quite a long way off.

I had to fire an employee that had a BS in computer science, a masters in math and was working on a PHD in computer science...he was a "negative contributor" ...didn't know his azz from a hole in the ground when it came to computers or software engineering...which is what he was hired for (not by me).

We've employed several post grad students through the UK KTP scheme. They come to us on a 2 year contract but are paid by their university. The idea is that they research type work towards their doctorate but in something that is beneficial to the company. At the end of the contract they can either leave or be offered a job, over the years 5 of these KTP students have become permanent employees. We have another 3 starting later this month working on projects which we hope will become new products.

Great post

Like you say, the real experts seldom blow their own trumpet. They just quietly get the job done.

Del

I agree, the ones who has an average iq do not appreciate much of the talking. But, they lost they're cool soemtimes when talk is cheap, lenghty repeated and the speaker was conceated.

Some even put it on their grave, which i think is dumb.

In my little part of the world the emphasis for hiring is definitely on paper qualifications which is causing severe operational, production, and safety issues.

To me the following is true:

Experience is a very large part of qualifications.

Desire + Personal Motivation + Education + Good Attitude + Experience = Success

Education is not limited to a classroom with or without an instructor.

In many cases field assignments (OJT) designed to make the student apply the theory learned from reading a book, participation in classroom discussion, and/or experiments in the lab are the most productive training.

I have met many technical personnel in the field that do not have any "formal" college education however they hold a Master's degree in experience that often yields efficient, tangible results which solve complex issues.

Agreed with two caveats. First, employers have to respect the paradox that occupational experience only comes from employment. Requiring occupational experience to grant employment never lets a new person into the game. Discerning which new to a field individual will work well in a company is a tricky game. Seeing if a former student understands how to use the fundamentals instead of just regurgitating for a test is one approach but this doesn't reveal everything.

Second, is what I call "Why are you here?" That golden candidate with twenty years of experience at your competition's R&D department, claiming six patents to their name can be a disaster waiting to happen.

Yes, I agree.

The problem we are having is that the company does not recruit the new employee far enough in advance to get them mentored by the person they are replacing.

I know this is dollar driven per budgetary constraints however, the cost of having a non-mentored, green employee in a critical position is far more than the labor cost incurred by having at least a one year indoctrination period or preferably a two year internship.

In my opinion we (management & others) expect too much too soon from our younger recruits resulting in too much turnover especially in our engineering group.

I am confident our replacements are capable of excelling in their respective field if given the proper training and enough time to master their field.

You got it right.

Those with a true desire to understand and be good at something, will understand and be better at it than those who don't.

One problem with paper qualifications is that the young person who must choose a vocation in order to attend university often does not have a clue, and just as often, the parents cannot help either, except to say something inane like "doctors make good money" which is more damaging than helpful anyway...

Or, as Bill Staines said, "All God's critters have a place in the choir".

Just like the old saying "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder":

Those letters that comes after the names are just like that! They signify one's academic achievement(s). Nothing more and nothing less! To be of any use to the carrier, he/she must also be able to effectively demonstrate and apply the true meaning of those letters in everyday applications.

Many of those I have had interviewed, hired /or rejected as engineers or technicians. After a year or two, most stayed while some were also terminated for inability to perform effectively. A few had moved on after being trained and now are either PE's, Eng. Director's, or even finance executives!

In summary, not everybody that have extended letters after their names are really capable ... most and are just label collectors or wall ornaments! In fact I know an individual who just hangs around Bowery St.

Life is not easy even with extra attach letters ....

I would suspect that many with extra letters after their name, never applied themselves. They only used those letters to impress management and to go up the ladder more quickly. If asked what they know, they might be at a loss. I still think it's who you know and not what you know that gets you places in this world.

Ronseto - 26. Yes I think you are right. It is who you know and not what you know. But coupled to 'it what you are and not who you are'.

In my small world, I don't know anybody important (professionally that it) and I don't know much, but I do not feel naked or inferior.

Apropos of not too much, I hope that that Deprag girl doesn't get her ponytail caught in some machine, but instead in my fingers.

With many people, all those letters alter the name could be summarized with only one, BS, and it doesn't mean Bachelor of Science. The letters only allow you to "get your foot in the door"! Once your are in you must produce in a way that is acceptable to them or your feet are pushed out the door.

I never excelled in class room tests but always did the best in labs (hands on guy). Had to take the GRE's (Graduate Record Exams) to be allowed to graduate. I was accused of cheating on them, (one girl and I were the only ones in the room and we were at least 20' apart), because I scored the highest in that major than anyone in the history of the school had ever scored. One prof stood up for me so I graduated. I didn't do that well on regular tests because of learning habits but I got it when it was needed. Also did much better on multiple choice tests by using the process of elimination. All this means that in the long run you produce or get left behind. Only sons and daughters can be non-producers and still be kept in the company.

I hired in as a plant engineer so I could be more of a practical type of engineer than a theoretical. Never regretted it! Loved it and the theoretical ones always complained about their jobs.

For some people IQ means Intelligence Quotient, for many it means Ignoramus Qualities

God Luck, Old Salt

Do they do a job or occupy a position?

I resemble you unappreciative philistines.
--Percival W. Dingbat, BMOC, BS, KCB, FWIW, FOS, BFD, LOL, &c&c.

My basic philosophy is :

The more you know the more you know that you know nothing!

Thus it is normal for people who "know" to be modest since they really recognize their limits.

As for the fight between theory and practice my father who was also an engineer (as my son is by the way) had a word:

" Theory is condensed and simplified practice".

A theoretical knowledge has the advantage to reduce the time laps to the best solution on the practical side and I noticed during my career that development is an helix turning between theory and practice.

I noticed in many comments a kind of reluctance against theory because many do engineering in a qualitative form, I was once even attacked because I gave a theoretical answer.

I sincerely do not see any difference both converge if the person in charge is able to do this converging effort.

Without "theory + practice" no actual technique could have been developed in the time they were. The more complex the problem to solve is the more important is the usage of theory.

To Nick name - 34

I think theory is absolutely essential, and I guess, so does academia, because that is the way they pass on knowledge, and to show that knowledge has been assimilated by the student, an exam is set. If you are successful, you collect certificates as you climb the learning curve. Hopefully you apply the knowledge in a practical way to make things that compounds the knowledge - I suppose that is experience. Thus you qualify for entry into a learned institution where your theory and experience are proof of basic ability - that in the form of a certificate and letters after your name - is accepted by others outside the profession. It is the basis of your status in society.

My OP was prompted by an observation that some people have a string of letters after their name that seem far in excess of those needed for the job - and I just wondered who might be the most 'lettered' person known.

So, in a contest between an Australian Aborigine and Aeronautics Engineering graduate, who would you bet on making the best hunting boomerang?

Del

Aborigines invented without using computer or attending University but modern Engineers,Doctors,Architects etc have many facilities.

As a human resource director, Who would you hire for hunting with a boomerang.

When I was leaving a company, I was the engineering manager. before I left, I was to hire my replacement. (that was interesting)

I didn't have an , as the owner of the company said, 'an advanced degree'. I asked him two questions for me to select my replacement.

1.) Do you want one with a Graduate Degree?

or

2.) Do you want one that can preform the job?

He selected the Graduate Degree. It may have sounded like a trick question, and maybe it was. The company was a large family run company, And the owners sister-in-law, (she handled the finances). I told her that that was a mistake and she agreed that not right, but I'll do the best I can.

I found one that just complete his graduate degree, and was getting his P.E. He was the best that was available with the advanced degree, but was really a knob. I'm sure he did well on tests, but in a chaotic situation, which it can get especially at the customer location during start-up. He'd freeze up.

I thought it was so odd, that even though he thought he needed an advanced degree, yet he like me select my replacement.

And under the circumstances, I was starting my own business, and it literally took me 6 months to find that. (it turned out that I ended up giving him 6 months notice that I was leaving, that I could find a replacement that would phuq things up?)

There is a story behind that, I was fortunate that I could do that. but this guy still was a over educated knob.

How many centuries were needed to make by "cut and try" the first efficient boomerang?If you ask today an engineer specialized in aerodynamics with a PC and a compressive flow simulation program how long will be the time to make with a 3D printer the first prototype?May be he can find a new geometry with a longer range ? Who knows?This is the difference.I do not know if you ever saw the "flying snakes" , if yes you noticed that they have a form as a boomerang! It could be possible they were the inspiration for it.From an other point of view of course for some jobs the problem of over qualification can be real. The fact that one has a degree which ever the level means NOT that he is able to solve ALL problems he can be confronted with.I shall give you an example: the design of a hydraulic ram with a stroke of 4" or 100 mm with a mechanical commuting system and with commuting time of 1ms (max 5ms) is required. Who will you "hire" for that ? Pressure 3 Ksi (210 bar or 21 MPa). Same commuting system should be possible to use with a shorter stroke up to 50 Hz.

Exactly!

If you know the answer (or have a theory) then maths physics CAD etc can help you refine and improve it!

They are TOOLS...

They do not replace originality, or create ideas.

Del

BTW. Many of the Aeronautical engineering graduates would have fallen at the first hurdle by not understanding that a hunting boomerang isn't designed to return, it is designed to fly surprisingly long distances in a straight line with great force.

That's a hit. ;). With exception on theoretical physics.

I never said or though that tools compensate for creativity! I am myself criticizing the fact that people have the trend to believe in what a "tool" spits out without thinking if the result is logical or not. I had more than a few opportunities to see how young engineers made BIG errors because of this trend.

What I wanted to say is only that those tools used the right way by people who do not believe in the results blindly can reduce development time in a unbelievable way.

However the AI evolution could change the level of expertise required to day for a correct use of tools. This will bring a negative evolution of "experts" who will base all their knowledge on the web.

I notice already this trend and if you read carefully the answers in CR4 you will see the ration = number of links/number of own answers is growing up very fast.

It is much more easy to ask Google than to form an answer based on own know-how!

I have a buddy who typically buys the highest end tools possible yet everything he makes with them is crap simply because he never bothered to learn the details of how do the actual work.

He did not understand that a tool makes ONLY what the operator tells to do.

The result is always as poor or as good as the operator was in his programming.

However I have -as an intensive user of special soft packs especially for simulations - to say that most of the user's manuals are very poor in the way they explain how to use the program. They have a lot of explanations about the physical and mathematical basis but only spare indications how to use it as a "black box" which for an input (your programming) gives an output (the result). It takes many tests till all functions can be understood and used the right way. this becomes difficult when you use several types since the ergonomics are different and GUI makes usage of definitions which are as word almost the same but as meaning very different.

The argument is irrelevant. Only one of them knows how to throw one regardless of whom made it.

The bushman may not make the most aesthetically pleasing but given his skills of knowing how to make one by hand he would also be pretty good at the throwing and having it come back to him part.

The aero engineer not so much. Odds are his first few dozen attempts to toss his own creation it would be poorer than the Bushmans attempts to toss the Aero engineers laptop.

I made a boomerang when I was a kid. I threw it hard and it flew over the fence and went next door. But it did come back! -

Unfortunately it was brought by our irate neighbour who found it in his greenhouse.

It cost me 2 shillings out of my pocket money for a new pane of glass.

To Horace -

IMHO those letters won't mean much if the carrier(s) will just sit on them behind and not carry them on their shoulders! Even one's own given name will be useless if he/she will not and can't stand up to be recognized!

One the most intelligent person I ever knew was an electrical engineer who taught me many worthwhile things about EE and many others. He also taught many of my friends and associates many valuable subjects. He was also the guy that many newer engineers asked to teach them. He did it pro-bono.

His most profound statement was "Think for five minutes, work for ten and get the task done instead of not thinking and having it take 30 minutes of work". The only initials he would ever accept after his name were about his favorite hobby, B.B. (Boat Builder) or R.B. (Recreational Sailor).

Good Luck, Old Salt

To Old Salt - 46.

I like the advice of your mentor and it is very good and the sort of approach I take, but for some reason I end up taking twice as long to think about it, taking ages to devise some gadget or technique to supplement my craft skills, thus to make the job easier faster and better.

It never seems to be quicker than jumping in without thinking, but at least it is a job done properly that I am happy with. I tell myself that the next time the job crops up it can be done in quick time.

Horace40,

It is seldom a race,and the quality imbued into the job by due diligence and forethought is sometimes not always seen by others. Similarly, only a few of those others would appreciate the effort, even if they were aware. As long as you know what you have delivered , and are satisfied (oreven inordinately pleased), then full steam ahead and damn the torpedoes!

I have an aquaintaince in my industry who I have known for 25 years.

I asked 10 years ago (for the first time), what the QBE on his business card stood for.

I have also had to to with legal practitioners with UK qualification/ status of QC, which is most complimentary ie Queen's Counsel...anyway, wait for it.....

QBE = Qualified by Experience...could have knocked me over with a feather, as he always held up his end of any technical discourse/ debate that I was privy to.

I have been contemplating adding new letters after my name and abandoning any others I would have considered. R.J.V Retired Jovial Vagabond.

I had considered, in the past, using R.J.Ms. Retired Jovial Misspeller but that might seem like boasting to some others!

Good Luck, Old Salt, RJV

I started off like Horace40 and then added all the usual letters after my name.

Of course good experience is very important and valuable.

But what do you do if you need someone for a job that has not been done in the past. There is no experience for it. In my career I had 26 jobs in 5 different countries. They were all jobs that had never been done. Some times I tried to convince the hiring company that I was not the right man. They brushed this aside and said if you can't do it nobody can, tell us what you need and we will get it for you. I got some jobs without an interview and some times when I first tried to report to the manager for the job I was told "you are the manager and this is your office".

Qualification were a help.

NOTHING SUCCEEDS LIKE EXCESS

I would always include luck and the opportunity into the equation.... in which name extensions may or may not be relevant or needed, can be taken out!

Had the opportunity, luck and the chance working with highly trained staffs, gained varied experiences in different technical fields, including the medical field. Applications and industry standards observed and practiced in several places and countries..

One can be an accomplished and successful person, as I had experienced in 30 years of diligent and conscientious work. I can also claim of "been there done that" kind of thing without having any added letters to extend my name as given by my parents!

Goliath #58 "... NOTHING SUCCEEDS LIKE EXCESS..."

Well nearly. but it can back-fire. I had to do compulsory National Service and after basic training (square bashing) I was sent to the RAF trade training school to learn about electrical and mechanical ground equipment. I concentrated on studying (evenings and week-ends whilst fellow flight members were boozing and living it up down the NAAFI. All this to qualify for promotion at the end of the course - it meant more money! I succeeded to he extent I was awarded a distinction on passing out - so with six months of solid training behind me - and a stepping stone to a great career. Or so I thought.

The problem was, I was selected and posted to the air reconnaissance centre to work on photographic processing equipment - non of which was covered by trade training (this is where the 'distinction' bit kicked in).

That was basically my downfall. There was absolutely no promotion within the station, so applications were made to seek promotion at another station (the rank was not the issue - to me it was all about earning more money) which (unknown to me) was blocked by the CO because of the hassle of having to retrain someone else for the job in the time scale of my remaining service..

That was it. Three years stuck in the same routine job - all because I tried hard - and of course you could not leave for Civvy Street. Duty was mandatory. Had I not bothered I would have been posted to a routine job at a flying station - where promotion was more or less automatic and fairly rapid (especially if you signed on for regular service).

On demob I returned to my electrical contracting career. My contract was to serve a probationary period then transfer to the staff at a salary to be agreed, where my new boss dismissed four years of RAF experience as irrelevant. I pressed for a transfer to the staff (better pay, a car, pension & a month's notice) but after eighteen months ' and still on probation' I pointed out the terms of my contract, only to find I got fired - "...we can see you're not happy here....perhaps it would be better all round if you left us to work for someone else...by the end of the month let's say!".

I am not complaining. I point things out as a matter of fact. All this experience led me to set up my own company (with my wife acting as unpaid secretary for years) to provide a special service and products. Obviously there have been problems - but we have overcome them and survived.

But working for yourself introduces a whole new mentality in work ethics. Friends and family seem to think you can start and stop work at any time and have holiday when you like, and for some reason I do not seem to have a real job. My wife usually deals incoming callers and I can hear her half of the conversation "..he's chatting on the phone (not discussing important work matters) - he playing on the computer (not designing new products) - he's messing about in the workshop (not building prototypes) - he's making the tea (at least that's true) -and so on.

I've retired now, but for my sins I look after legislation and matters of technical standards relating to our products. I have 'people' problems here and I might come back for help in a new blog.

Hi Horace40

I started off, like you in the RAF. I had bad health as a child and collapsed during basic training. I recovered and carries on but I had dropped out of the plan they had for me so I was put on a flying training camp became a sort of odd job man. Any time they wanted some one for an awful difficult job they sent for me. After the RAF I got a job testing electronic equipment. I soon realised that it was for Britain's independent nuclear deterrent. I found that the equipment I was testing was badly designed and could not work. I was asked " can you do anything about it" I said yes of course and set about redesign. I did many other projects and after 4 years the company sent me to college and paid all college and living expenses. I also got trained as a pilot.

I ended up with an MSc and was invited to join an engineering institution as a fellow and made a Chartered Engineer. After that I was always in demand.

In 1990 I was made redundant but my company said "start your own company and we will get you work". I did it for 10 years and was never short of work.

A lot of it luck.

I have been retired since 2001.

Best wishes

Goliath #78

Interesting to read about parallel lives. Sorry about your bad health. I hope it was a passing phase. Complements on your MSc and Chartered Fellowship.

An extra detail. I was 18 when called up for two years National Service, but deferred until I was 21 to complete my 6 year electrician's apprenticeship. I was married and every penny counted when I joined up. The extra money and promotion and a career promised by the RAF was the driving force that lured me to sign on for four years.

I kept my side of the bargain, but as I have already said, the promotion didn't happen. I made the most of a stagnant posting to continue academic studies - one day and evening a week - a 50 mile round trip to college on a motor bike for 3 years all through the winter months. Those were the days.

Re your comment on your nuclear deterrent work - one of my aborted postings was for servicing ICBMs.

But back to the topic. As a thought exercise; your MSc is likely to be an adequate academic entry qualification for many engineering institutions, and from your years of experience you could probably extract enough evidence to present a case to justify Fellowship status. Therefore, if you really wanted to (time money hassle) you could collect a string of letters after your name.

That was the theme of my OP. There are probably people out there who do that - just to impress maybe - who has the most!.

Would any one of you go to an unqualified doctor or lawyer?

Of course some doctors or lawyers are not so good.

I know it is a play on words, but they would not be doctors or lawyers if they were unqualified. They are not allowed to practice without qualifications.

problem is, they may be good at classroom assignments. They are still human, that makes mistakes.

There are good and bad doctors and attorneys.

I had encountered and knew quite a few of those that belong to what you called as "are not so good MDs", yet sporting extended letters after their name!
I had during my 20+ years working in a clinical setting, had known, dealt, reported, etc., for corrective /disciplinary actions. At times even acted as expert witness in various malpractice lawsuits and sentinel event litigations...

We've had a string of comments (including my own) about the merits of post nominal letters but nobody has answered the last question in the original post.

Who is the person with the most qualifications - a string of them after their name?

Is there a record holder? I've asked Mr. Google without finding a satisfactory answer.

Thanks for the reminder about the OP. Although I must admit I am as guilty as any for drifting into interesting discussions that deviate from the main question.

There is not one real acceptable answer to the question posted, as posted earlier, it is a word game being played!

IMHO, it is a question with varying acceptable answers.. Answers based only on anyone's perception, knowledge and level of understanding the subject matter. Acceptable answers that are measured only by a preset conditions or qualifiers which in itself is also very subjective in nature.. applicable whether on a national, institutional or personal level....

Boundary conditions, akin to setting limits in mathematics problems is a must....

Even so, you would think we could find a few contenders.

You want some word play answers, OK.

The job seeker you wished you had hired. They were a more qualified person and they knew it.

The job seeker that embarrassed you so badly in the interview in front of your boss they got your job. The production flow doubled in the next year from their ideas. They were a more qualified person and they proved it.

Then there is the word play point that qualified requires official recognition. Presuming that all degree titles have equal standing (a very wrong assumption but one must start somewhere) the number of relevant titles does define greater qualification.

The crux of this debate is that qualification only implies competence in the future. It doesn't guarantee it. Competence can only be assessed by accomplishments.

I agree with your last statement & that more degree qualifications equates to greater knowledge although not necessarily the application of that knowledge. In talking about 'letters' one also has to consider institution memberships. Some people seem to like collecting those.

Vsar #69 All interpretations and all replies are acceptable - it has been an interesting exchange of views.

But I did ask "Who is the person with the most qualifications - a string of them after their name?"

I was not looking for someone most qualified as such, I was just curious that there is someone out there with a long string of letters after their name.

I met a young lad years ago at a trade show, nothing formal, just a casual chat sat at the bar at lunch time. He had an impressive string of serious academic qualifications (DSc, MSc, BSc etc) but no corporate membership of a professional institution because he was too young to produce evidence of time served experience in management positions.

He was not complaining as such, but he did feel aggrieved that he was being turn down for (better paid jobs) that he applied for. Many of these I gather were for Civil Service posts where 'letters' after your name seem essential.

In one case he said (he found out later) that his application had been turned down simply because he had 'defaced' the application form. Apparently the Govt. had so many applicants for the job they devised a screening process to cut down the numbers to interview - where a 'defaced' form was one of them.

I asked why? and he said the 'boxes' provided for qualifications were too small so he wrote the overspill in the margins and blank spaces with arrows and footnotes pointing to them. Zero points for initiative.

You can't win can you!

In that kids case it does make sense that he was automatically disqualified. Being creative in civil service position will create far more problems than fix problems.

Such kind of rejection just demonstrated the lack of knowledge on how to properly fill up an application or his resume. I myself will automatically disregard it! Not because of lack of credentials but maybe due to the nature of how the form was filled with respect to what the job requires....

It takes all sorts. Box tickers unite!

I often wonder why jobs that demand fluency in a foreign language are advertised in English. Why not use the foreign language for the ad.