Timeline for Is it ethical to omit the PhD credential from my resume?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2018 at 8:04 | comment | added | Tim B II | This is a very good point, and highlights the need for research and understanding of your field and how it is recruited in the private sector. This is a perennial question of education v. experience and it won't be solved on Stack Exchange as the answer is often subjective. My humble view is that like everyone else, PhD graduates need a critical mass of work experience in (or understanding of) the private sector to be successful. It's important to note that Industry, Government and Academia ALL have very different cultures, practices and priorities; knowledge of one isn't mastery of all. | |
| Mar 18, 2018 at 7:51 | comment | added | Joren Vaes | PhDs and their added value depends on the field. In my field (electronics/IC design) some people say PhDs have large added value, because during their PhD they have gone through every step in the process of IC design mutliple times. This gives them a understanding in what goes into every step of the design process that is lacking from people who have been working in industry, since they tend to only work on their "part" of the design process. | |
| Mar 18, 2018 at 0:29 | comment | added | Tim B II | @Kimball not in the professional fields of industry; not even close. PhDs in industry are fine because they have that work experience and know what's expected. Career academics (in my experience) often lack the organisational skills to 'get things done' in the manner we're talking about. Sure, when they get something done it's done well, but when someone at my day job says they'll do a thing, I'm 95% sure it'll get done. When organising my teaching at the Uni, I have around a 20% chance that what's been promised by academics will get delivered. Topic of its own as to why but respectfully, no. | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 13:24 | comment | added | Kimball | he suggests that PhD graduates are certainly smart, but not always able to 'get things done' - I suspect that the proportion of non-PhD graduates who are not able to 'get things done' is much higher. | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 3:18 | comment | added | nengel | @emory: No, that does not follow at all. All the things you list are in some way protected in many jurisdictions, and an employer that "reacted" to these would open themselves to a lawsuit. In fact, it is policy at many companies to go out of their way not to learn these things just as a preemptive defense ("we couldn't have discriminated on the basis of something we didn't even know!"). PhD holders are very much not a protected class, and a PhD is among the things that, in general, belong on a CV. | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 2:30 | comment | added | Tim B II | @emory I don't disagree with that from the perspective you describe, but I think the concern that's being addressed is whether or not the employer will think that a deception has taken place. In my humble view, NOT including a qualification is not deception; including one that you DON'T have most definitely is. Sexual preference and voting history should never be relevant to a job description. | |
| Mar 17, 2018 at 2:18 | comment | added | emory | I disagree with the question "What will your employer do if they find out later?" being a valid concern. By that logic, should you not include your sexual preferences, voting history, etc on your resume. | |
| Mar 16, 2018 at 3:47 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 16, 2018 at 4:24 | |||||
| Mar 16, 2018 at 3:43 | history | answered | Tim B II | CC BY-SA 3.0 |