You say obviously, and yet you continually defend them and the processes that they employ.
Agenda for this week's PSU Board of Trustees meetings:
- Thread starter PSUFTG
- Start date
You say obviously, and yet you continually defend them and the processes that they employ.
Barry, this is some great stuff and very much appreciated. It's funny that construction costs such a premium at Penn State. While the buildings are nice and solid, there is nothing premium quality-wise or unique about them.
I have a side question/concern regarding operating costs for new construction. Even if a building is fully or nearly funded via donations, it requires new and reoccurring operating costs via staffing, maintenance, and utilities. Since donations don't cover those, how does that factor into the evaluation of the feasibility or viability of a project? There is plenty of new construction where older buildings are not torn down (thus 'replacing' operating expenses when this occurs), and even if the capital portion of the project is fully funded via donations, the university still incurs those new expenses. How are they factored in when evaluating the feasibility of a project? A 'free' building is still not free.
So does this mean PSU rolls back the tuition increase?
PSU isn't prospering? It's one of the few athletics departments that operates significantly in the black.
Bob, your magnanimity is refreshing. You've finally seen the light after all that unfair criticism you heaped on Sandy. My only gripe is that she fell just a wee bit short on fundraising for the new stadium. I think that the SCASD boosters raised more for the State High Memorial Field upgrade.
State College High School laughs at PSU.
As for Sandy, absence makes the heart grow fonder.
Yep…. that was a hall of fame post he made.
You guys must have technical degrees.
No doubt. My MBA program was full of engineers who were trying to advance into management positions in their companies. They were strong in the quantitative subjects but they were horrible in any course which required essay questions answered on exams. They couldn’t put two sentences together or express themselves in writing. They were smart people, I’m not implying otherwise, but their talents did not translate into the ability to write reports or memos, and these deficiencies held them back from career advancement.
You’ve become this board’s new “Cruising Route 66 / Hugh Laurie” without trying.
There’s something really odd about you elderly (ie shelf life expired) Smeal graduates.
old farts arguing about the relative merits of their majors form 45 years ago- what's next, brandishing SAT scores?
Allow me to probe this for one more post. Initially you said employers love liberal art majors because of their analytical thinking abilities which are better than engineers and technically-focused disciplines. Then you come back and state that engineers obviously have better quantitative skills. Quantitative analysis requires analytical thinking.
If I were the employer in this case, I’d conclude you lacked logic and reasoning skills because your two statements are contradictory to one another.
Do you want one more swing?
Allow me to probe this for one more post. Initially you said employers love liberal art majors because of their analytical thinking abilities which are better than engineers and technically-focused disciplines. Then you come back and state that engineers obviously have better quantitative skills. Quantitative analysis requires analytical thinking.
If I were the employer in this case, I’d conclude you lacked logic and reasoning skills because your two statements are contradictory to one another.
Do you want one more swing?
Sure I’ll take one more swing, and for the record, I appreciate that we’re keeping this discussion civil:
My opinion is that the engineers by and large can do the math, but they can’t explain the answer well. For example, can they write a complex business plan, respond to a government RFP, or put together a strategic plan for their product? They tend to be technically oriented, not people oriented. They are often socially inept. Can they “sell their plan” internally to senior management or the the board of directors?
Liberal arts majors can be trained to do the quantitative analysis and they already know how to communicate the aforementioned issues, but not so with the technocrats. Obviously I’m engaging in gross generalizations here, but it’s based upon my personal observations over many years. There are many individuals who don’t fit these stereotypes fortunately. My brother in law was an engineer with a defense company in California and they sent him to USC to get his MBA because as they told him - “He knew how to talk.” He was capable of making a presentation.This was a rarity among his peers.
There are a lot of liberal arts majors at Penn State in many fields such as political science, economics, sociology, public policy, and psychology, who are performing complex statistical analysis on big data sets and performing regression analysis, even discontinuity regressions, and using experimental methods, who are quite capable of transferring these skills into many business, finance, or research settings and communicating their results to their peers or senior management. They aren’t all art history majors, but there’s nothing wrong with that either.
So many times if I’m hiring I’d lean towards the economist or political scientist with strong communication, analytical, strategic, and statistical skills to run my business division and let him/her hire or manage the engineers if needed as support staff. I want someone smart who is trained to think broadly.
Last edited:
Get unlimited access today.