Quest for learning vs Overqualified

As a person who has cleared the final exams of ICSI/ICMA(Institute of Company Secretaries of India; Institute of Cost & Management Accountants of India) along with Chartered Accountancy, and also PGDM(from IIM Ahmedabad), I sometimes run into this query from others whether I still feel all these qualifications as relevant. Coming from a Tam-Bram household where all learning is valued, my core philosophy is that no investment in learning goes waste. And then, I do see many folks doing CA+CFA, CS+LLB, as also the new kids on the block such as CFP/FRM etc. But does learning need a credential, or is learning for the sake of it also good?

Udemy/Coursera initially started their courses with a free for all approach, before they realized that employers seek verifiable evidence of course completion. They therefore introduced the certification track and in some cases, supervised exams at Pearson centres. That gave employers and stakeholders greater confidence in the academic integrity, and inspired some universities to offer part/full courses on the online model. So even for self driven learning, some employers may seek evidence of completion and hence a credential is born.

But why pursue higher learning in the first place, assuming its not directly related to job? Some people do this to prepare for a step-up, yet others for career change, and others just for accumulating knowledge and a possible Guiness book of records. The last category who do not directly apply their knowledge in work or projects, could be considered overqualified, but others  merely as quest for learning. Here I rest my case

Why online executive MBA like ePGP from IIM may not be worth it

Below is a comparison table I prepared for various PGP programs of IIM Ahmedabad

	IIM Ahmedabad Courses
Particulars	PGP	PGPx	ePGP
Duration(Mths)	21	9	12
Base Fee(Lakhs)	21	24.5	17.45
Admission:
Min age	NA	27	NA
Min Workexp	0	4 years	3 years
Test Scores	NA	GMAT	NA
Placement	Yes	Yes	No

The recently introduced ePGP is an online MBA program aimed at working professionals. It confers alumni status, but without the placement support. So for those seeking the brand, they can get it if they otherwise qualify for admission and manage to complete the program. As per the training partner Hughes Education https://www.hugheseducation.com/iim-ahmedabad/epgp 

1. pedagogy followed for the program will be on blend of lectures, case studies, online lectures, projects, peer to peer learning, self- learning and simulations. Mentoring by faculty and access to learning resources of IIMA will also be made available. 
2. Campus modules (three or four) of one week or more each conducted at the IIMA Campus.
3. Thursday 06.45 pm - 09.55 pm; Friday 06.45 pm – 09.55 pm; Saturday 06.45 pm - 09.55 pm
   Sunday 12.10 noon – 03.20 pm
4.  two-year post-graduate diploma programme (with added flexibility of completion within maximum 3 years) offered on Interactive Onsite Learning (IOL) platform

While the education quality and peer group interaction will doubtless be good, the question is whether it is worth the investment or not. In my view

1. the admission criteria is nowhere as rigourous as the mainstream MBA. So the signalling effect is lost. 
2. Can a working professional really spare these many days this often? Needs real discipline
3. Lack of placement support will encourage companies to sponsor this(considering even a MDP costs 0.5-1lakh, this is way more value for money), but lower value to the candidate

What else is an option

1. Focussed courses with Certification Track in Udemy/Coursera/HBS/Wharton-Approx Cost between $10-$100 excluding certification cost
2. Networking Groups
3. In person training of hard skills like financial modelling

Of recruiters/executive search firms and kickbacks

This week, I read the article about India's leading ride-sharing firm Ola investigating its HR head for alleged bribes taken during the employee recruitment process
https://factordaily.com/ola-hr-head-fraud-investigation/ This reminds me of some other incidents that I have seen/heard about from friends

1. Talent Acquisition(TA) leads working only with certain empanelled firms(usually this is needed for quality reasons in procurement but less reason here) who agree to pay them 1/3rd-1/2 of the recruitment fee-which is usually 8%-15% of candidate's annual CTC
2. If the candidate is sourced through another new firm, this firm is usually forced to subcontract to the empanelled vendor, who then gives its share in cash
3. If candidates are referred internally or though other sources, the TA lead usually ignores it. In a recessionary job environment, they anyways get enough leads otherwise
4. New firms are not given consideration if they are not willing to bribe

Hopefully, the Ola adverse publicity(I really hope it is false) will deter others from this