>Pointless strawman. How so? Do you think for some jobs without requiring a PhD they'd find the candidate they want without having to interview more people? >

>Pointless strawman. How so? Do you think for some jobs without requiring a PhD they'd find the candidate they want without having to interview more people? >I'd take evidence of working successfully with math, regardless of degree. A PhD in math, especially from a good school, most certainly gives evidence of working successfully with math. It's easier to fake resume experience than to get a PhD, something that I've found quite common when interviewing people. And it's trivial to check someone actually got PhD - I've yet to find a candidate lie about that part. I've probably interviewed a ~100 people over the years. I've found from experience that anything to reduce the pool quickly saves time and money, and I've still ended up with excellent candidates. Before learning how to weed quickly, I spent far more time and money on people that had very little ability to solve the problems we wanted solved. Done much hiring?