hinmanCEO

"I find it hard to believe a 3.3 student would have an advantage over a 3.8 student in employment. On the other hand, I also don't think the 3.8 is looked at to be significantly better than the 3.3. As long as you keep it above a 3.0, HR would probably look at your other qualifications, including previous internships and such, and interviews."

I agree with you that it seems out that someone with a 3.8 might seem "disadvantaged." THAT is not true at all. Person A with a 3.3 might have a good chance to get into an entry-level engineering position at Northrup Grumman or Lockheed Martin or a small (not well known) engineering firm. Someone with a 3.8 might get into Google, Microsoft, get in an awesome graduate school, and get into SPECIAL programs at MG and Lockheed Martin.

Higher GPA = more options. Higher GPA = better. But if both of you are applying to an entry-level job where someone with a 2.8 GPA can get in, and the focus of the thing is teamwork and listening to a superior, they would rather hire the 3.3 person (cheaper).

But if you got a high GPA, demonstrated experience in teamwork and the such, you can get any job the person with the low GPA can get. Its more like some jobs don't require "smart" people so they are afraid a smarter person might cause trouble cuz the work is boring or w/e i guess. A friend of mine from my church told me that at NG (he is a manager) that most of the ppl they hire are 3.0-3.5. Does not mean 3.5+ don't get hired, no it justs means they go for better jobs or they might not have the appropriate teamwork skills?

oh wait, mr. "i586" WHY would Ibm pay for your phd? don't most students get stipends and free tuition ANYWAY for getting their phd? im sure ibm would pay for your masters, but a phd is totally different. most big companies help pay for their worker's masters, NOT PHD!!!!