Hi HR's, I have one query for all the HR personnel. Kindly solve this query or case study.
A person who is intelligent gets admission to a very good college and secures a placement with a package of Rs. 12,00,000 per annum. On the other hand, a person who is more intelligent than the first person but gets admission to an average college in his own home city due to location problems, health issues, or some other genuine reason.
He consistently achieves good marks in that college where placement activities are average, and he is financially weak.
In his last semester, he moves to the NCR for Java training after facing challenges. He starts searching for a job and attends interviews, ultimately securing a position. Initially, he is appointed as a trainee with a package of Rs. 5000 per month in a renowned MNC. After six months, his salary increases to Rs. 7000 per month. After completing one year, he begins his career with the same company as a permanent employee with a package of Rs. 2.15 lakh per annum. After gaining two years of experience, he transitions to another company with a package of Rs. 3.50 lakh per annum.
After two years of experience, his salary is Rs. 3.50 lakh per annum. On the other hand, the "first person" who attended a good college, and has the same level of intelligence as the second person, receives a package of Rs. 12,00,000 per annum as a fresher.
Can you explain the main idea behind why companies prefer candidates from good colleges over those who showcase hard work and intelligence? Why do companies consistently offer higher packages to candidates from reputed colleges, even as freshers?
Don't you think both individuals are eligible for good packages? How can the second person access better opportunities given his hardworking, intelligent, and deserving nature?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
38A person who is intelligent gets admission to a very good college and secures a placement with a package of Rs. 12,00,000 per annum. On the other hand, a person who is more intelligent than the first person but gets admission to an average college in his own home city due to location problems, health issues, or some other genuine reason.
He consistently achieves good marks in that college where placement activities are average, and he is financially weak.
In his last semester, he moves to the NCR for Java training after facing challenges. He starts searching for a job and attends interviews, ultimately securing a position. Initially, he is appointed as a trainee with a package of Rs. 5000 per month in a renowned MNC. After six months, his salary increases to Rs. 7000 per month. After completing one year, he begins his career with the same company as a permanent employee with a package of Rs. 2.15 lakh per annum. After gaining two years of experience, he transitions to another company with a package of Rs. 3.50 lakh per annum.
After two years of experience, his salary is Rs. 3.50 lakh per annum. On the other hand, the "first person" who attended a good college, and has the same level of intelligence as the second person, receives a package of Rs. 12,00,000 per annum as a fresher.
Can you explain the main idea behind why companies prefer candidates from good colleges over those who showcase hard work and intelligence? Why do companies consistently offer higher packages to candidates from reputed colleges, even as freshers?
Don't you think both individuals are eligible for good packages? How can the second person access better opportunities given his hardworking, intelligent, and deserving nature?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Subject: Regarding Candidates' Employment Opportunities and Compensation
Dear Ms. Shweta,
It is a well-known fact that candidates who pursue less demanded courses in reputed colleges are likely to receive very good employment offers, whereas those who opt for highly demanded courses in unpopular colleges may face challenges in securing offers. This trend is also reflected in compensation packages. Your argument may hold true, particularly when it comes to retaining candidates from unpopular colleges.
Proving one's talent and being open to job hopping are often the only viable solutions to achieve higher compensation within a shorter timeframe.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Tiruppur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ms. Shweta,
It is a well-known fact that candidates who pursue less demanded courses in reputed colleges are likely to receive very good employment offers, whereas those who opt for highly demanded courses in unpopular colleges may face challenges in securing offers. This trend is also reflected in compensation packages. Your argument may hold true, particularly when it comes to retaining candidates from unpopular colleges.
Proving one's talent and being open to job hopping are often the only viable solutions to achieve higher compensation within a shorter timeframe.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Tiruppur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for the reply, but both are with the same specialization.
The thing is, a person with 2 years of experience and, on the other hand, a person with no experience get a placement of Rs. 12,00,000/-, and both are equally intelligent. Just because there is a difference in the level of institution, the other person starts his career with Rs. 5,000 per month as a trainee. He got praised for his performance by his Project Manager and became a permanent employee with a package of 2.15 Lakh. Now, after 2 years of experience, he switches to another company with a package of 3.50 Lakh only, a package commonly offered by organizations to freshers during placement sessions.
Is experience much more considerable than knowledge, and if both... then...?
Don't you think this is biased behavior of organizations?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The thing is, a person with 2 years of experience and, on the other hand, a person with no experience get a placement of Rs. 12,00,000/-, and both are equally intelligent. Just because there is a difference in the level of institution, the other person starts his career with Rs. 5,000 per month as a trainee. He got praised for his performance by his Project Manager and became a permanent employee with a package of 2.15 Lakh. Now, after 2 years of experience, he switches to another company with a package of 3.50 Lakh only, a package commonly offered by organizations to freshers during placement sessions.
Is experience much more considerable than knowledge, and if both... then...?
Don't you think this is biased behavior of organizations?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
its called banding my dear..talent can only be shown after getting assignment but to get assignment you’ve to be a brand name/ brand associated
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am surprised that a Brand Name can create a difference of 8.50 Lac. and too when there is a difference of experience...
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
yes my dear.. brand can create difference.. at some point we all are brand conscious.. its human psyche
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
But sir, what will they do with a branded institution? I think at the end of the day, it is performance that matters and takes an organization the other way. It is a demotivating factor for a person. As an HR professional, I am not in favor of this biased behavior.
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You may consider your personal opinion, but at a professional level, everyone wants to hire the cream, and they are willing to pay for it. At the end of the day, performance certainly counts, but to be evaluated, you need to enter the system for assessment. For a simple example, someone may purchase a $35k Galaxy SIII, but they will not buy a $12,000 Micromax with the same features. Therefore, it is the brand that puts you two steps ahead in the race. Some start from zero, while others start from +10.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Ok, then why do some good organizations put job advertisements requiring relevant experience, such as 2-4 years or 4-8 years? Why don't they consider hiring freshers? What is the need for a management department when there are managers and senior managers with 5, 8, 10, or more years of experience if they are open to hiring freshers?
Remember, status is achieved through good performance and a quality workforce, not just a brand name. Samsung was not initially a strong brand when it entered the market, but after gaining experience in the mobile market, they introduced innovative ideas and surpassed Nokia by understanding customer demands. People appreciate uniqueness, and Samsung's ability to offer something different has earned them trust. On the other hand, Micromax lacks innovation, leading people to have more faith in Samsung.
However, the situation changes when another individual possesses different qualities due to their 2 years of experience. During job postings, organizations often set criteria that specify a minimum number of years of experience required. Why is this the case if they are also willing to consider freshers?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Remember, status is achieved through good performance and a quality workforce, not just a brand name. Samsung was not initially a strong brand when it entered the market, but after gaining experience in the mobile market, they introduced innovative ideas and surpassed Nokia by understanding customer demands. People appreciate uniqueness, and Samsung's ability to offer something different has earned them trust. On the other hand, Micromax lacks innovation, leading people to have more faith in Samsung.
However, the situation changes when another individual possesses different qualities due to their 2 years of experience. During job postings, organizations often set criteria that specify a minimum number of years of experience required. Why is this the case if they are also willing to consider freshers?
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Experience gives you exposure and skills for handling complex issues. It has nothing to do with money. Let me tell you a few factors for job satisfaction which I found during my MBA winter project. These are:
1. Your boss
2. Your work environment
3. Your colleagues
4. Growth/learning
5. Money
So, money is a factor, but you can't say a 12 lakh package is everything; sometimes, it's luck. It's not talent versus talent; it's talent versus attitude. A top B-school teaches you nothing superior to other schools, but they give you the right attitude. It's your attitude that makes you successful. Sachin and Kambli were equally talented, but after facing a hurdle, it was Sachin's attitude that led him. (An example from Harsha Bhogle's speech at IIT)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Your boss
2. Your work environment
3. Your colleagues
4. Growth/learning
5. Money
So, money is a factor, but you can't say a 12 lakh package is everything; sometimes, it's luck. It's not talent versus talent; it's talent versus attitude. A top B-school teaches you nothing superior to other schools, but they give you the right attitude. It's your attitude that makes you successful. Sachin and Kambli were equally talented, but after facing a hurdle, it was Sachin's attitude that led him. (An example from Harsha Bhogle's speech at IIT)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.