My state school in middle of nowhere USA pays PHD students 40k a year.
Accounting 2020-21 Job Market
-
Potential Signals of Research Potential
1. PhD from top school
2. Pubs/R&Rs at top 3 journals
3. Pubs/R&Rs at top 5 journals
4. Letters from successful researchers describing candidates research potential
For us almost nothing else matters in selecting for round 1 interviews. I believe that we interviewed everyone who submitted an application to us that has either 1, 2, or 3.
Perhaps other schools use different signals, or order them differently in trying to guess who will be successful.What is number one and why does that matter and which science has established that coming from a "top", as you call it, would be the most important thing? How do ypu value the hard job of someone coming from a mid-tier university who has done same as those from top schools? This is just crazy and I an really convinced it is also illegal.
The legal equal employment opportunity law responsibilities are (pay attention to 1 and 3)
1.Make fair employment decisions.
2.Grant reasonable accommodations.
3.Craft unbiased policies.
4.Stop workplace harassment.
5.Provide equal pay.
6.Respond to discrimination complaints.
7.Display discrimination laws.
8.Keep employment records......I am unclear why you think it is illegal for employers to prioritize hiring from Harvard over Suffolk University. Do you think the same employers hire from both of these Boston schools or that the law mandates that they do?
I am curious what signals you would use instead of these four to screen the 150 applications that we receive. Typically in Miami we can only interview about 20 people. If you have a better screening approach pleas share. Although, I also attended a mid-tier school and worked my way up, my casual observation is that top school candidates have more success on average.
-
Thanks for being clear d9d4. I can see with you can focus on 2,3 or 4, but I am not sure about the lemons coming from 1. If you can combine 2,3 or 4 with 1 though, then it makes perfect sense to bring them in. Choosing based on 1 alone is a serious mistake based on the cases I know from Chicago, Wharton, MIT and Stanford.
Potential Signals of Research Potential
1. PhD from top school
2. Pubs/R&Rs at top 3 journals
3. Pubs/R&Rs at top 5 journals
4. Letters from successful researchers describing candidates research potential
For us almost nothing else matters in selecting for round 1 interviews. I believe that we interviewed everyone who submitted an application to us that has either 1, 2, or 3.
Perhaps other schools use different signals, or order them differently in trying to guess who will be successful.What is number one and why does that matter and which science has established that coming from a "top", as you call it, would be the most important thing? How do ypu value the hard job of someone coming from a mid-tier university who has done same as those from top schools? This is just crazy and I an really convinced it is also illegal.
The legal equal employment opportunity law responsibilities are (pay attention to 1 and 3)
1.Make fair employment decisions.
2.Grant reasonable accommodations.
3.Craft unbiased policies.
4.Stop workplace harassment.
5.Provide equal pay.
6.Respond to discrimination complaints.
7.Display discrimination laws.
8.Keep employment records...... -
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
This is true. No one is hiring red hats.
If you voted for Trùmp you won’t get hired. Expect people to not trust your judgment
-
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
This is true. No one is hiring red hats.
If you voted for Trùmp you won’t get hired. Expect people to not trust your judgment
Domain expertise != Smart
-
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
This is true. No one is hiring red hats.
If you voted for Trùmp you won’t get hired. Expect people to not trust your judgment
SPK is a transaction power broker just like Trumpenstein.
-
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
This is true. No one is hiring red hats.
If you voted for Trùmp you won’t get hired. Expect people to not trust your judgment
The statement above (an imbxxxxe like SPK being journal editor and MIT) shows how shallw is accounting, not the person who made the comment.
-
SPK is both a Trump supporter and a brilliant accounting researcher.
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
This is true. No one is hiring red hats.
If you voted for Trùmp you won’t get hired. Expect people to not trust your judgment
The statement above (an imbxxxxe like SPK being journal editor and MIT) shows how shallw is accounting, not the person who made the comment.
-
LOL.
SPK is both a Trump supporter and a brilliant accounting researcher.
That just shows how shallow you are. SPK, a former JAE editor and a MIT professor, is a Trump supporter, yet how many people can claim to be a better accounting researcher than him?
SPK is a joke. Read his 2001 JAE. He clearly does not have a clue of what efficiency means (nor knows the difference between economic efficiency and market efficiency). His narrative is as fallacious as a OANN news.
Oh, but he is well published... It tells you how terrible accounting research is.