In this world, we have set some rules for ourselves. We break them as we wish, and we fear to break some of them. Education and employment has one such rule. It is called ‘qualification’.

How does one know if a person is qualified? Grant them a piece of paper. That piece of paper, in civilized language, is called a ‘degree’. This degree tells the outside world that this person is ‘qualified’ to do the job listed in the degree details. That the degree holder has had NOT a minute of practical real world experience is another matter.

There is a person who has been doing his job, say, getting sales, for about 7 years, say. He has been doing his job well, that is why he is still holding it, right? In comes a young fellow, with a paper stating that he is ‘qualified’ for the job – that he has had ‘specific education’ for the job. You, the employer, would immediately begin favoring the scales towards the paper holder than the bloke who was working with you for 7 years and providing you continuous business – without the paper in his hand.

Think about it, how do you propose to justify the preposition that a person who is *living* the situation ranks lower than the person who has merely *studied for* the situation? The paper holder claims that he has *studied about* the situation, and he is *ready* to tackle it when the situation comes. The present employee without the degree says that he is not only *ready* for the situation, he actually *goes through* the situation every day! Which one do you think is a better prospect for your job? Would you go with practical experience or theory suppositions?

The time to choose begins with your next applicant.

Shubhanyu Jain