Should young blood be hired for senior positions?

young and well qualified shuold be encouraged

Your point is true Ramesh. Due to skills and new technology getting into life always there is chance for youngsters to prove and move up the chain.

Young blood should be given preference, because company requires aggressive people for decision making activities,BUT, experience people should play passive role in that. Young ones can make quick decision, but experience person shows whether that decision is healthy for company or not!!!!

I support Mr. Ramesh on this ....

LET US GIVE THE DEVIL ITS DUE SHARE.IF A PERSON IS QUALIFIED AND COMPETENT ENOUGH TO TAKE UP A POSITION, LET HIM BE PROVIDED THAT OPPORTUNITY WITHOUT FOCUSING MORE ON HIS AGE.

This depends more on the attitude of the HR, as famously stated "A listed HR appoints A-listed candidates" and this does not only depends on academic qualifications. Choosing the right candidate for a vacant post is a very challenging responsibility and the challenge is tougher if the vacant spot is of a senior position. Appointing experienced professional is a safe way to ensure solidarity but good HR's appoints the right candidate. Evaluating the right candidate weather young or old depends largely on the ability of the HR. As far as my view is concerned it is the right candidate that matters rather than young or old.

YES & NO.  I wish there exist a 'NUTRAL' side also in all such arguments. May be Toostep's organizers have a look into this.

Like I mentioned in Mr. Nitin Aras posting: It shall be combination of both; Wisdom of elders and Vigor of youngsters. Basically this is being adopted in almost every organization. Youngsters placed in government  with IAS, IPS, IFS, IRS, ITS selection and training process and the MBAs from management institutions placed in private establishments are exactly with this idea.

In that respect this topic is out of place. If the author's suggestion is that everyone in senior management position should be replaced with youngsters, it does not appear tenable neither to any logic nor sense. Does it mean that youngsters will remain always young and not become old.

A so called 'youngster' who acquires commensurate qualification and experience for a senior managerial position will be at least in his late 30's or early 40s. Naturally he is expected to worke another 15 to 20 years while the 'youngster' status changes to 'Elder' as he grows in his position till eventually he quits.

Fact being so, as visibly seen in such topics, that late generation youngsters want to grab the jobs in senior management positions without going through the pain of growing and gaining experience. This is evident from another posting I saw in Toostep suggesting that retirement age should be reduced to    45.   

Yes, there is a more serious side to these arguments. In many public institutions and establishments, people enter in lower grades reach  management  position though regular time bound promotions. The system as it is may not be as effective as the direct recruits though there are many exceptions too. However, such considerations are based more of a social obligation with certain known but affordable perils.

The worst of all is that the ones who decide the country's current management and its future are mostly of the older lot and here we need a quick change.   Perhaps, this is an area where we need to raise our voice more.     

Having young blood at higher position does inculcate a new culture and a fresh inflow of ideas but also ensuring the fact that the person has the relevant experience to head that position.

Senior position assignment get dictate by ability and not age. Young blood in my understanding does not reflect a age wise younger person. For a decision makers position it needs to imply Agility, Accuracy, Innovation and updated knowledge bank.

If a company can find this combination in any individual they should be promoted/appointed to the top posts, irrespective of their age.

there is no probelm in hiring young ones for senior positions. only care should be taken that the person should have requisite knowledge and experience of that field, otherwise it may not work.

WHY NOT? THEY ARE MORE CAPABLE, ENERGETIC, CREATIVE AND LOTS OF GOOD QUALITY.

ther is no problem in hiring young blood for senior positions if and only if young guys have potential and zeal to deal with any situation. 

We are not talking about the exceptional individuals considered on merit basis. Only , discussing in general,  of appointing younsters in the senior positions. Its a welcome in the industry but on , not restricted to the following:-

1. Individual's zeal to deliver goods

2. Acceptance to the top management on policy

3. Individual possess good caliber & KNACK

4. For tech position, fully qualified & acceptable

5. Amiable, problem solver not  a creator

6. Good leadership traits (OQ qualities)

7. Ability of the corporate to assimilate youngester on top.

YOUNG BLOOD WITH HIGH ACADAMIC / TECHNICAL  QUALIFICATION SHUOLD BE GIVEN

Thanks for ur invitation Mr.Anand.

young blood is creative,confident, enthusiastic, not serious but very sincere!! experience to me is nothin but tolerance out f which u make a decision.. until & unless given a chance the freshers( maximum of the young category) will remain the same.. and if there is always a demand for experienced candidates.. what will remainin majority of freshers do? its all upto seniors to let way to the youngsters..

Yes new blood should be hired on the basis how they perform in critical situation and how they are capable to take wise decisions.

Yes coz we are more energetic and enthusiastic with new ideas and ideology to change the scene.

Thanks for invite Anand.

Support Mr Kandadai's views and suggest companies could hire experienced advisory mentors as well for continual course correction..... or alternatively devise means to calculate missed opportunities.

There is surely no substitute to being first time right and it is towards this goal that experience counts.

I am in total agreement with Anand on the subject. Yes the young bloodshould be appointed for the top position provided they meet the requirements.

The position for which an individual is hired has certain basic pre-requisites. If a person meets these pre-requisites, then he is suitable for the position irrespective of the position being senior. However, experience also plays a major role as with experience, an individual is better prepared to handle risks and contingencies if they arise as he would have been exposed to similar issues earlier. Thus, the design of the job profile along with the pre-requisites should take these factors into account....

I agree with Mr. Ramesh's thoughts. While it may sound beneficial to hire young talent for their risk taking ability, aggression, energy and skills, they do not fair well when it comes to handling situations which require experience. People related issues, long term perspectives, knowledge are some areas where I have personally seen youth failing and seniors chipping in to manage the damage. My thougths...

Yes Anand, If a person having capability to handle critical situation then he/she is eligible for any post. Experienced youths are more preferable now a days because they are able to take innovative decisions & their experience provide them to tackle any unforeseen circumstances. 

Yes, companies should hire young blood for their top positions. The trend is changing and it is seen that many companies are hiring young people with 20yrs of experience for the top positions of the company.

The reason for this are that young people have characteristics like aggression, achievement focus, goal orientation and tech savvy, especially critical in the dynamic and competitive environment of the IT/ ITes and telecom sectors.