Agree 100%. Not only is it not a requirement, but it's likely setting up the person and yourself for disappointment if you don't' have work requiring a PhD level of specialty.
Side Note: Our current tweeting is revealing our ultra exciting saturday nights! 
-
-
-
ha! this tweet entirely brought to you by
#datarant and Cool Parent Saturday Nights
(and 100% agreed!) - Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I mean, literally 0% of highly experienced data scientists have PhDs in data science, because it only recently became a thing.
-
This. I tell everyone data science was invented (as a title) when I was in undergrad and I feel like this is a thing more people should know

- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
right, it's like, PhD is for somebody who does research. 99% of the time, you don't want that.
-
like, i can see if you want cutting edge research on deep learning algos (or something similar), and I don't think PhDs are a bad thing necessarily, but making them a requirement is going to weed out a lot of very qualified people
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
A PhD as a requirement is definitely a bad idea. That said, there are certainly things that people who have PhDs in sciences *generally* perform better in due to years of experience and training, e.g. experiment design or rigorous analysis on messy data.
-
That is not to say that they are always dominant candidates, there are other trade-offs where non-academic training also is quite helpful, and the transition from one to the other can be a significant investment both for the employee and manager
- Još 5 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
if data scientist for you only means wrangling data around, fine. whenever statistical work is also performed then it makes sense to have a PhD
-
I disagree.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.