Hello colleagues,
This is a discussion which often catches fire. I remember being party to a similar discussion a year back in the alumni group of one of the top ranking B- school and the divide was quiet obvious. The result was that some of them became more convinced about the concept of "Corporate Brahminism" whereas others decided never to encourage advertisements like " from the best B- Schools only like ...., ........... only" etc
Iam not an advocate in deciding whether students from the best B- schools make an impact on interviewers but i think the "Theory of Expectancy" works out here. The interviewer(s) have a positive framework on the guys and gals from the ranked B-Schools and that the students ensures that they live up to it.
Also if you look at competency theories it talks about Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Motives & Traits to be the prerequisites of being successful in ones own role. To quote the "Iceberg Model of competency"- Lyle Spencer:
"Content Knowledge and behavioral skills are easiest to teach. Altering perceptions, self concept values and motives is harder while changing motives and traits is possible,the process is lengthy , difficult and expensive. From a cost effectiveness standpoint , the rule is "Hire for core motivation and trait characteristics and develop knowledge and skills". Most orgainsations do the the reverse: they hire on the basis of educational credentials and assume that candidates come with or can be indoctrinated with the appropriate motives and traits.Or in, the words of one personnel manager" You can teach a turkey to climb a tree , but its easier to hire a squirrel". Cheers Kash
|