<p>I had a conversation with a high level finance person. He's telling me that in these bad economic times, they'd hire more good-performing business majors from target schools than the engineering and hard science major.
He told me when the economy is good, they'd rather hire the engineering and hard science major because of their proven quantitative skills and that they have plenty of money/time to slowly develop them, while when the economy's bad, they try to cut the training time/cost and put readily avalible business majors in.
He basically said engineers have higher ceiling in general because of the quantitative skills, but not as ready because they need more information about business, more training. The business major generall have a lower ceiling but high floor because they already know half the stuff, but may not be as good quantitatively. </p>
<p>Really think about what you just typed there. Does he have any reason to lie to you? You heard it from the horse’s mouth – he’s a senior guy and he told you himself that they’re hiring more business majors. You just got your information from a primary source, and now you’re going on to an internet forum to confirm? You’re a bloody idiot.</p>
<p>well you are a bloody idiot if you take what one person tells you and apply it to an entire field. </p>
<p>It could simply be a policy for his firm… I am asking about a wider scope, as in the entire field…
If you trust what everyone tells you you might as well think there’s WMD in iraq</p>
<p>That could be one guy or one firm’s strategy, but remember few of the real target schools even have business majors.</p>
<p>And frankly, at least in my large firm, we never hired engineers who were not well rounded in the first place. And what does seem to be true at firms I’ve spoken with is that “soft” targets will not be recruited much now.</p>
<p>agreed with hmom5.
no matter what the econ crisis is like, every senior recruiter may have different hiring stategies.
btw, wat does it mean of “soft” targets? thx.</p>