"One gets hired because of Qualification!" But one gets into the position of hiring hundreds of qualified people with the right Talent!

In long term what really matters is Talent. Even is the person in just a graduate or under graduate if he/she has the aptitude to solve the matters or communicate effectively or has the ability to look at the matter in a sensible way much better than MBAs or any other professionals can achieve many things with their higher intellectual growth than mere growing financially.

It is your attitude and not your aptitude that determines your altitude

Qualification to Enter & Talent to Sustain.

I agree with Lopez.

And to add- Qualification when understood and restricted to stamped version is self limiting. The biggest danger is missing out on out of box solutions and innovation.

Talent on the other hand does not limit itself in boundaries set by others experience alone and offers new yet untested paths as well.  

Qualification is what we learn on day to day basis & education. And talent is a thing which is natural by birth. And every individual has some different talent. Need is to find out what the best you have & u can do, which other can't.

pedro d true quality man ..thumbs up bro..

sumtimes clapping occurs virtuallyy

but reliance trifurcated after dhirubhais demise .....effect of knowledge ??

Dear Mr. Makrand,

Thanks for your valuable inputs on my contribution.

But somehow, your response is not able to change my views.

This discussion has been built on the basic assumption that, qualification and talent are two different things. Whereas, i feel, it is not so.

It is basic atlent, that works towards adding qualification. And by qualification, we do not mean some certificates. Qualification is a indicator, that your are exposed to specific knowledge and mastered it. When talent acquired specific knowledge (read, qualification), it's effectiveness increases multifold. That's why, I say, they are interdependant.

A case of a person with talent but no qualification is possible (due to circumstances, financial support etc.). But I have not seen a person, with all qualification, but no talent.

Thanks for good inputs......Prakash

Qualification do merits job security but the talent is the one which provide an edge for that. Take an example of B School students of IIM, they are getting the qualification from the reputed institute because of their talent to crack the Cat exam and then they are getting the qualification from the same. So if you have the talent you are secured and then qualification provides the edge. But if u dont have then the qualification wont be able to hold you tight and will gives u Job security. Therefore talent gives the stability and the qualification gives the success.

Hi Prakash,

I do not agree with your statement that Talentand Qualification compliment each other!!

You see a talented person will always be picked purely on the basis of talent and never on qualification as he doesnt posses it. But in the reverse case, qualificatin will always be looked at before talent is merely on the basis of qualification. But would the personbe selected depends on the persons skill / talent ... You see talent is an essential ingredient for a person to seek his direction and way forward.

Also, you said the complete opposite in your last statement.. quote "if a talented man is successful, a talented man with the right qualification will be more successful".. unquote!! So if you take the tyalent away from the qualification there is very little success or no success according to you. So how do Talet and Qualification compliment each other??? It purely menasthat if you are talented you are successful.

So it maybe the practice on this forum to take two traits and pit them against each other, but it certainly gives me insights on the people and the talents / qualifications they posses when they comment here!!

Thanksa lot for your input and for being here!! :)

Have seen a growing tendancy on these forums. Selecting two traits and pitting them against each other to create a forum.

Now, talent and qualifiation are never "VERSUS" eachother. Rather, they complment each other. Talent works towards adding Qualification. And qualificaton sharpens talent. In a ways, both goes together.

If a talented man is successful, a talented man with right qualification will be more successful. 

Dear Amit,

Good you chose to give example of Music.

Just as an example: Kishore Kumar did not have any initiation or inclination in Ragas.

Well said Pedro.

Qualifications may be available in Fake form,  Talent is not.

Qualifications could be gained by cramming, Talent can not. 

Qualifications may fail to give results, Talent does not.

can we go on.......Having a mix of both may be an ideal situation.

ITS THE TALENT NEEDED FOR A JOB.THE QUALIFICATION MUST BE MERIT BASED.ANY ONE CAN SPOON FEEDED MATTERS FROM TEXTS AND MUG UP INTO EXAM PAPER, FINALLY GOT A CIRTIFICATE.BUT CAN THEY LEARN TREE CARVING,MUSIC,DANCE,PAINTING LIKE THAT ..NEVER ...THERE WE NEED TALENT,TODAY BOTH  TALENT AND QUALIFICATION MAKE EFFITIANT EMPLOYEE.....

I agree with lopez

Qualification VS Experience, I wonder which is more important in today working world? Last time approx 10 years ago, experience is more important and indeed people with strong qualification always earn lesser than those without any good qualifiaction but with solid experience.

Let's say applicant X has MCOM with only 1 year audit experience whereas applicant Y has only diploma in Accounting but with 4 yrs audit experience; imagine you are the boss, whom will you hire to become your company accountant?

People always compare at the point of graduation, but they fail to address the next 5-10 years down the road.

For example, Person A started working while person B started studying for degree. both are in the same line. 5 years down the road, B graduated and joined the same office as A.

At this point, there's a huge chance that A has higher salary than B. he'll brag to B that even without a degree, he earns more than B. fast forward 5 years. B have obtained 5 years working experience as a graduate, while A has 10 years as an unqualified worker. guess who's having the last laugh now.

I also submit that talent is a gift from above or God - gift whereas qualifications are acquired by Self-effort and man acquired ... this is a subtle difference !

Neither qualification/Education nor experience BUT Talent and Idea gives you Stature

I am glad you are still around Mr. Narayan,

Talent and Qualification are Parasitic in nature and one should ideally grow on the other. Its reverse in real life

I mean that. If people in the era 4000 years ago were able to build pyramids to store the bodies of their Kings and Queens, what is a marvel like Burj Khalifa doing after 4000 years?? Why wasnt it built ages ago?? LAck of qualified people or talented people??

We are running on parallel tracks Mr. Narayan. We may appear to meet at one point near the horizon, butwill remain parallel through out. One will always feed on the other but will never cross eachothers path. Its a brilliant mirage and that where we have conclusively reached!! Nowhere, yet there!!

Its really funny that we have to cite examples even now and Bradman is again not so wise an exampkle if I am allowed to say so. He was a genius because of his talent bot because of his qualification! Hi talent qualified him not the other way round!! Technolody advances has given birth to innovation in techniques but the talent remains the same. Talent uses these techniques to forward a better game and not qualification. Qualified experts working for RAW TALENT, now that is reverse existence!!

I thank you for your wise inputs Mr. Narayan! Thanks a lot :)

Welcome back Mr. Narayan!! Good Morning :))

I am getting addicted to this debate thanks to you!!

Lets quit the examples completely and talk on a platonic platform. I admit that not everyone is equal. I also admit that I cannot be a Shah Rukh Khan or even Einstein or a Hitler. Does that stop me from aspiring to become one or even remotely like them? It in fact eggs me on. I do not look at inequality as the dampener, in fact I draw inspiration from limited resources to grow beyond them. I also admit that you may never reach where you aim to be OR you may reach right there where you want to be in no time at all. But thats neither here nor there!! We are talking a situation nased on assumptions which leaves a lot of ambiguity.

For a majority of us education is a remote possibility. So getting qualified from a tier iii municipal school is definitely not on the cards as that will draw frowns from a lot of people. There will be question marks on the person even if he is a number one ranker albeit from a municipal school. He would have to pay through his nose to get a PG from a verified and notable institution or university. But then again we are getting into the system here which by far and large is always under the scanner for being honest itself.

I remember what you are referring to in Tamil Nadu. I was quiye proud of the boy. But the system intervened to cut the talent in its root because the boy is not 'qualified' to do something as precise as a medical operation. Why did not the system intervene to ensure that the talent does not go waste but to encourage and make sure that the talent get a qualification?? That is my question. I think that would have been applauded by the country.

Talent and Qualification are Parasitic in nature and one should ideally grow on the other. Its reverse in real life. They are indeed mutually exclusive and its the system that has been able to do it so far. In fact in Indian context, parents fear the fact that if their child does not have a good education how would he be perceived in society?? Would he marry a proper lady?? Would a respected household accept him for what he is?? So qualification in Indian context is adored and not scorned at all.

Astrology is not the brightest of examples that you have pointed out Sir. The planetary movements may be science but the 'effect' of these planets on the human race is a game of prediction. That is obviously a skill and when honed a talent.

How many of us want to be Einstein? Newton? Marie Curie?? today... I think we are digressing. The debate of qualification over talent or vice versa is definitely for understanding what is valued today. What should be the ideal focus of a candidate in a world where opportunities are abundant? Where should he focus and what path to take for a successful professional and social life? particularly when he cannot afford being highly qualified.. There is no short cut to success, but there is surely a path that can be carved, qualified or not...

This is indeed gewtting very interesting. I hope there are students who are reading this and will surely draw some meaningful comclusions.

Over to you Mr. Narayan! :) 

Mr. Narayan, welcome back :)

I have mentioned that I am not at al againxt qualified people at all and there is no prejudice here in this debate either. I must say you are researching the wrong track to understand me. I will set that right Sir. I like a strong healthy debate.

If wishes were horses, beggars would be choosers!!

I believe you know the meaning of this proverb very well. I am not assuming anything here at all. If Kumble was not a talented cricketer is something that I would have considered if he wouldnt have shown us the abundance of his talent on the cricket field at all. I wonder what would have happened at the Kotla test between India & Pakistan where he took all the ten wickets!! You would have an answer to that Mr. Nat\rayan?

You see people with vision are people who see their dream come true and what drives them to make it come true is their passion, their hunger and their ability to come to terms with what they posses and not worry about what they do not!

Take the example of Captain Nair, the celebrated Chairman of the Leela Kempinski chain of hotels. What was he? A drop out military recruit. Today the only Green award winner in India is also the proud owner of The Leela Group of Hotels in India. He is not even remotely near being a qualified Hotelier. He is talented and he is a visionary.

Lets take an example of the most celebrated singer of Akbars durbar, Mir Tansen. Even he had to admit that Baiju Bawra was indeed a talented singer albeit not qualified and hence never made it to his NAVRATNA team.

Research can be carried out if you have a clear vision of your goal and if you have an understanding of where you need to look. Its not rocket science at all. All I am seeking here is that is it really such a big deal that qualifications should be the measure of any man or is proven talent sufficient for him / her to be successful in life??

I am not assuming anything here at all Mr. Narayan. You are looking too deep unnecessarily. Its simple answers that I am seeking and I am sad to say that I have really not received any simple truths so far at all. And yes when it comes to an acid test, talent will always triumph over qualification. Strictly my view not advocated by anything or body but some practical experience :)

By the way who is your favorite actor Mr. Narayan?? :)

I think talent is more important than qualification.

Mr. Narayan, very valid indeed!!

Its easy ta talk about them because they are role models and they are the epitome of talent being and taking them where they are. Also, true is the fact that they hired highly qualified people below them to take their idea and vision forward. Fact is they are at the helm, period.

Sir, I am not at all highly qualified. I am a mere chemistry graduate but I have been firtunate enough to identify where my skills are and have applied myself in those areas where I may excel and excel well!! I have been chosen over PG candidates and I am proud of that fact too. Enough about me. To gain experience you have ample opportunities that you need to llok for even during your learning days. You can go in for market research and surveys where you are picked up purely on talent. Yellow pages encourage graduates to be on their team who have the go getting attitude and can talk and talk relevant. Talking is also a talent Mr. Narayan. If ever I have come across a situation where I had to choose between a highly qualified individual and a talent, I look for tell tale signs of a fire that burns in the eyes of talented guys because they have a point to prove.

Not all can afford the extravagance of going for higher education but they have a fire within where they will use their talent to trump the shortcoming. I would chosse talent over qualification.

Scams are something which are very individual based and they have nothing to do with either being qualified or talented. It is one's mental disposition that would make one think criminalistically at all and not the talent or qualification. You cannot in any way judge a character from a candidates qualification and talent. And if there is an counter argument that one can make out from the body language mind you Sir its because yiou have talent to read that language and not the qualification. Circumstance can make a thoef out of a sane man. Was Raju a born thief?? No way!!!

You cannot make too much out of talent but you certainly make a lot out of talent and that includes money and fame if applied correctly. Qualification can ascertain you a place in the interview, but getting that job is your skill and talent at understanding the interviewer and giving him what he wants to hear. I am a firm believer in talent and do not advocate not to be qualified at all. But I would still say that if an MBA or Electronics Engg is a better cricketer, please choose cricket as your talent lies there. Case in point Anil Kumble, Rahul Dravid and maybe some more.

Thanks for giving a new dimension here Mr. Narayan!! Hope I have been able to answer you truthfully inspite of being lesser qualified than a lot of others here :)

Thank you Mr. Bagla & Mr. Das. Thanks for being here and adding your valueable comments.

Very relevant debate.....

Talent definitely stands out of the crowd.

In my view, it is application and functional talent that is the most important and then the qualification. Qualification is just a piece of paper - it is how you apply that knowledge that differentiates you from the rest.

Both are important but talent is more important than qualification. If a person is genius, he doesn't required qualification to stand by.

Keep it rolling.

Thanks

Talent is the ultimate ... that is also proven and unless it is proven, you may slog like any other qualified colleagues of yours, but talent is individual !

No two professionals have same talent and finally only talent is remembered for long like Lata for singing, Sachin for cricket or Anand for chess although there may be many other qualified among each game or line / field /area of pursuit - of occupation

This is extract (Nichore ) of 30 + years of my experience !

Look up history ... it has remembered only talent like Sankaracharya or Vivekananda or Gandhi or other Great Achievers !

Shiuli,

lol@anticipating this.... :)

Mukesh and Anil did, but did Dhirubhai?? No. In fact he was such a cutthroat businessman that he just went on expanding his empire. He made sure that when his sons took over he would already be poised to become one of the worlds greatest conglomerate, Indian at that mind you. This came about purely thorugh his own talent, understanding and experience. Necessarily in that order!!

Take Bill Gates. What is his qualification?? What is his talent? Now that second question is what most would answer. Nut i would say that his passion became his skill and hence his talent. He studied hands on in CCC (Computer Center COrporation) and GE (General Electric) to gain his experience and knowledge about bugs and its sources. In fact he was banned during his time at CCC becuase he was caught along with three others exploiting bugs in the operation system to obtain free computer time!!

So you see two of the worlds most profilic masters were very less qualified and yet the pinnacles they reached and the heights they scaled were solely on the talent and passion that they possesed.

Over to you Shiuli :)

Well on There is no Certification or degree for Talent .. But talented take time but Outshine everybody else. Longer process But they need Opportunity too 

I would say talent is subjective , i may think X is a talented dancer , while someone thinks X is not. And when I think someone is talented , it means I am in a position to judge. In cases like film music , dance and cricket , all of us think we are "qualified" to judge talent ! What happens when you have to rate a doctor or lawyer or a rocket scientist ?

In all the above discussions it is tacitly assumed that qualifications , in most cases , are undeserved ; is that correct ? When I meet a Microsoft Certified Software Developer , do I assume that his qualification is undeserved ?

The trouble in India is that one can 'get' any kind of degree , even a PhD , which is why qualifications are looked down upon. I do not think this is the case abroad.

A qualification is a sign of recognition of one's talent. However much our film stars ( actors , directors , et al ) may decry the importance of a National award , no one can deny the talent of a director like Adoor Gopalakrishnan when he's won so many National awards.

So when one is talented in a particular field , one can judge another person's talent , or the lack of it ; but for those who are not talented enough , a qualification is a sign that the person with the qualification has passed a preset benchmark.

All combinations are possible , talent without any qualifications ( Ramanujam is a case in point ) , qualification without talent ( quite a few of our politicians ) , talent and qualification ( Linus Torvalds for instance ) , and neither talent nor qualification ( no examples for this ! )

Talent is something that you would say that you are good at. Someone could have good teamwork skills, but you see that the ability to work well as a team is not a qualification. Another example of a talent is the ability to be a good leader (leadership skills). Once again, you are not awarded a qualification just because you are a good leader.

Qualification on the other hand, is a piece of paper that shows people how your talents have been put to use in some form of work. It is something that you can show to an employer and they can tell exactly what you did and how well you did it. You can always say that qualifications have helped to develop your Talent.

Thanks for the compliment and being here Darshana!! :0

But you took the easier way out by very diplomatically grabbing a piece of both pies!! A sandwich of Q & T!!! (lol@myself)

I would really appreciate an answer without diplomacy, prejudice.. The idea is to actually guide the aspiring students here and to make them understand todays stand taken by the key people and where should they focus!! Believe me its very academic... :)

One who have talent.. he lead his life successfully.... There is no use of qualification with out talent..

Shiuli,

What I understand and believe is that experience begets talent. The more experience you gain the more it helps you to understand your skill set. The more you know your skill set the more it helps you to channel your vision in honing it. Experience helps identifying talent and hence the skill set.

Qualification like I have mentioned may get you an interview with the HR, but does not really assure you the position. Freshers whn they apply or trainees when asked to undergo internship / training for gands on experience is basically to make them understand the JOB and how to apply their qualifications to it. Its not the other way round!!

Dhirubhai Ambani is an example that everyone knows!!

Over to you Shiuli :)

UJVAL: I have sent referrals to all those who you have mentioned already!

Mr. Lopez you have easily put in one simple sentence what I tried to put in so many!! :))

Were you in China by any chance??? :)) (just kidding). After viewing the article of how chinese multiply... I hope you understand the reference Mr. Lopez. :) Thank you for being here.