Quote:
Originally Posted by DerAlte Nurturing is an investment without first looking at immediate RoI. The Public Sector companies who have managed to keep their heads above water even after 50 years - they do that. Nurturing would necessarily tolerate failure on the job. |
This the process I follow. I only hire freshies, I expect nothing in the first year, and little in the second year. By then they would have developed the ability to research as well as be productive. Doesn't always turn out that way, and with those we part ways gently. Those who leave are quite happy about the stress-free training they got. Those who stay become very good. The first two years of the company, the strain was too much for me since I was the only productive one in the company.
It got better after that as I could start delegating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan Unfortunately in R&D lab we need people who have some expertise and that comes with post-graduate level training. |
Well, I don't hire at Ph.D level. When I say research skill, I mean the ability to solve problem by searching every possible avenue, often learning new things and apply them. It is more about discovering what's out there than invent new things. Generally takes 1-3 years for a typical B.E to pick up on this skill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan You are forgetting the Innova/Fortuner riding, Adarsh Palm Meadows residents who get paid in USD or Euros and hardship allowance !! We have something in common, Acura TSX to hatchback (Toyota Liva) for me. |
Oh, no. I don't consider them one of us. They live in a bubble isolated from all the risk and hardship of coming back to India and rebooting the life here all over again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan But Ph.D level research teaches you how to find an answer when you don't know and people are expected to lead research. |
Don't know about Ph.D level research, but I think this is true for product development too. Lot of unknowns at the beginning of every product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan Please note that all the people whom we have rejected so far are good researchers but lacked that special talent of creative thinking. It does not come with experience. |
I have a slightly different thought. The talent of creative thinking is often buried under the cob web of years of rote learning. I have often uncovered raw creativity after couple years of dusting & polishing. Then they are hungry for more and more complex work and get easily bored with routine work.
I often ask my engineers to get good at things other than work. I ask them to learn whatever they always wanted to learn, like music, dancing, sports, yoga, fitness, photography, etc. Whatever that can really engage them and where they can excel. Someone once told me back in 1992 that confidence you gain/earn in one activity where you are good, can flow into other activities you do. That is so true. If your work is all you are good at, bad time at work can really undermine your confidence. But if you can tap the confidence coming from achievements in other areas, you can survive and then get back on the horse. That kind of confidence can often unleash the hidden creativity within a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan It is very hard to explain the creative thinking and I guess Samurai in a post highlighted it quite nicely. |
Thanks. Um, you are referring to which post of mine?
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan I know a person who scored 60% in board exams because he didn't perfect rote learning. |
Hey, I am like that.
BTW, I hired guy in 2010 who had taken 6 years to do his BE. I saw something, a hunger to claw his way back to excellence. So I gave him a chance. Now he is one of my best researchers, working on a very tough research assignment that he demanded from me. He is yet to complete 2 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acurafan One of my friend who is an astronomer and was responsible for recent discovery of extra-solar super earths joined an Investment bank. As he explained that for him these are all very large data sets and he has to fit a model. He does not care whether it is exotic derivatives or astronomical objects. |
Sounds like Peter Sullivan from the movie Margin Call.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apachelongbow Yes the technical graduate requirement (minimum 4 years in engineering if not more) was a myth created by code shops (aka Infosys) to sell bodies to the US for onsite billing. Well now as the onsite/offshore ratio has decreased drastically and we have more and more Global delivery centers in India, we see that more and more Bsc and other graduates are getting employed. |
No, that is not correct. It was not a myth created by Infosys, which was a nobody when this started. It started with H1-B program in 1990 that stipulated a 4 year technical degree as the qualifier, to match the 4 year US degree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apachelongbow The funny thing is the Bsc graduates are employed at a lower payscale, although I personally find a Bsc from Mumbai university is a far better/employable employee than a BE IT from say Jharasguda/Kakinada/Jallandar or Amravati institute of Engineering. |
I think you are actually referring to English speaking ability, and you are probably right.