I have an AP degree in Computer Science (Academic Profession - it’s a 2+0.5 year degree in Denmark that serves as a basis for a BSc specialisation, basically allowing you to “top it up” to multiple full BSc’s if you want to, e.g. in my case I could’ve gone on for sysadmin, database engineering, and software engineering BSc’s, each taking a year + 4-6 months of internship), and even with a decade+ of experience working for companies of all sizes, I often get rejected because not having a full Bachelors.
And it’s often a weird leadership thing. A few years back I interviewed for a company, and hit it off with the tech lead of the team I would’ve been joining. The whole process was smooth, the team liked me, and vocally preferred me over other candidates. But the CTO - who was the last interview round - opted for a candidate with lesser skills, because he had a BSc from a university the CTO knew (or was somehow involved with, I don’t know the specifics). They ended up firing him within half a year, and to date the tech lead tells me how much better things would’ve been if the C-suite wasn’t so blinded by a flashy diploma.
Meanwhile most places don’t give a damn. If you have experience, and/or a good CV, and can prove yourself in the technical challenge part of the interview, it doesn’t matter if you have a PhD or if you walked in from the street with a high school diploma. What matters is what you can do and deliver.
The exceptions and ones that don’t care are the only reason I’ve been able to advance my career so far. It’s crazy how a fresher with 0 work experience can be preferred over a a decade and a harf of real world experience just because they took some (mostly unrelated!) classes
how a fresher with 0 work experience can be preferred
I wanted to tell you that humans peak at 25. So if experience is not needed for the job, the younger person is the better option. However, it’s a myth.
It depends on the company.
I have an AP degree in Computer Science (Academic Profession - it’s a 2+0.5 year degree in Denmark that serves as a basis for a BSc specialisation, basically allowing you to “top it up” to multiple full BSc’s if you want to, e.g. in my case I could’ve gone on for sysadmin, database engineering, and software engineering BSc’s, each taking a year + 4-6 months of internship), and even with a decade+ of experience working for companies of all sizes, I often get rejected because not having a full Bachelors.
And it’s often a weird leadership thing. A few years back I interviewed for a company, and hit it off with the tech lead of the team I would’ve been joining. The whole process was smooth, the team liked me, and vocally preferred me over other candidates. But the CTO - who was the last interview round - opted for a candidate with lesser skills, because he had a BSc from a university the CTO knew (or was somehow involved with, I don’t know the specifics). They ended up firing him within half a year, and to date the tech lead tells me how much better things would’ve been if the C-suite wasn’t so blinded by a flashy diploma.
Meanwhile most places don’t give a damn. If you have experience, and/or a good CV, and can prove yourself in the technical challenge part of the interview, it doesn’t matter if you have a PhD or if you walked in from the street with a high school diploma. What matters is what you can do and deliver.
The exceptions and ones that don’t care are the only reason I’ve been able to advance my career so far. It’s crazy how a fresher with 0 work experience can be preferred over a a decade and a harf of real world experience just because they took some (mostly unrelated!) classes
I wanted to tell you that humans peak at 25. So if experience is not needed for the job, the younger person is the better option. However, it’s a myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_matures_at_25_myth
I mean, obviously??
Yeah that’s the case here too. Almost two decades at ASX 100 companies