You're Overqualified

Many of us have heard this phrase. It's the excuse they use to get rid of you when there's someone with lower qualifications but greater potential. And by potential I mean influence, or a family member in the company (good read).

But what it really means, and how it became an excuse in the first place, is what I'm discussing here.

When you finally get out of high school and start studying, it's the greatest thing since your driver's licence. You're finally studying for your passion, not just subjects that "will help you later in life". If you're going away from home to study it also brings independence. You can do what you want, when you want. To some degree you can even own what you want because many bursaries and student loans include living expenses. The problem arises a few years later, when you receive your bachelor's. Now you have a decision: Go work, or study further. There are a few arguments to table:

1. "What if I'm unqualified? Is a bachelor's degree enough?" Many companies and/or lines of work require further study. The more technical it becomes, usually the more specialised your studies need to become. Maybe an honour's degree? Or how about a doctorate?
2. "I don't have to pay my loan until I start working." Especially if you're from a less privileged household your parents are unwilling to or incapable of paying your loan for you. In many cases the massive debt hanging over your head is a good enough reason to avoid the real world of the middle-class low-income young adult.
3. "But there's so much more to learn!" Many students get stuck in the academic, working their way up from undergrad to grad to doctor to professor. They then make their living from writing papers on ridiculously focussed and specific subject matters that have no real-world implications other than to advance science in an obscure direction. Many students become apprentices to a professor at their university and later replace the professor.

These are all valid arguments, but are they feasible in a modern world?

I'm a programmer so my knowledge of the work environment is limited to the IT sector, but I think my logic extends to other fields. The most important thing in work isn't theory, it's experience. You can study for years and think you've seen everything, but I guarantee the first day on the job something will happen that you never saw coming. The only way to learn the tricks of the trade is to actually be part of the trade. If your dream job requires more study, I suggest finishing your first qualification and then getting a part-time job in the specific sector to start gaining experience. You can then continue your studies in whatever direction you need.

Often you study something thinking it's your dream career, but as soon as you start working you find out that it's not as glamorous as you thought. If you start working early enough, you won't waste so much time and money studying something you're not really into.

Then there's the counter argument: If experience is so much better than theory, why study at all? Because without any theory you're the temp secretary in the high-tech laboratory. You have no idea what's going on around you. Besides, no-one will take you seriously unless you have something behind your name. If no-one will take you, you will never get your golden "two years experience" that so many of the big players require.

So, to summarise: You need to study something relevant before you start working, but once you have a qualification that can get you a proper job, start working even if it's only part-time. Continue studies if you're interested, but keep tabs on what's needed in your sector and what the big companies are looking for. It doesn't help studying something that you love if it's only going to get you unemployed.




Words:
"I don't trust Apple, I just like them. Very much like dating a supermodel."
-ZA Tech Show: Episode 20