The Match and the BCS

BigKingTut, participater in the "HR" process]

I'd like to respond to several of your points...first in reguards to reading literature about leadership and management, you can only read so much. There is something to be said about real life experiences vs what literature tells you...its one thing to read about it, and another to go out and do it, and like you said at the end of your post, you don't know about it until you go through it.

If you re-read one of my posts, I stated that a good number of employees of my former company come from co-ops and internships....these are people we have seen in action, know what they are about, and actually know how they will fit in. This is not just an engineering thing, as many programs do this such as business, c.s., lawyers etc...I think this is absolutely the best way to find a fit for your position, you don't know what one will do until they are put under fire so to speak. However, this is not an ideal world and we must find others to fill our position that we have not worked with....and an interview process is as you say marginal at best. Anyone can put on a smiling face for a day, and feed you bs (and this works both ways for both interviewer and interviewee)...now look back at the older days of residency, where an internship and residency were not connected, and you basically had your year to show your stuff as a doctor, what was so wrong with that...or even say you went through your one month or maybe even 2 months at a program, they like you, you like them sign up right there....I don't see the problem with that type of a system. I have actually heard several orthopaedist, and other specialist voice their distaste for the current process, as they feel it rewards more book smarts, and pays less attention to showing what you have in a real life situation...nowadays your basically judging your applicants off what they offer in what is a primary care education, with a small fraction dedicated to these specialties....as an outsider looking in, it doesn't make sense to me...and I know that don't judge it until you've been through it, but sometimes an outside opinion is helpful, as motivations are not the same, and there can be some bias from an inside opinion....just my 2 cents worth

One other thing I'd like to say...you state that most don't understand the match when they go through it, and then residents guide them who think they understand it but don't....what is the benefit of that? If as an applicant, you are in a system that is supposed to favor you, yet you don't truly understand it, how at the end of the day does that swing the balance of power in your direction, it just doesn't make sense to me. In theory, the match sounds like a good, maybe not great, but good idea, better suited for fellowships where the communities are smaller and outside influences from individual applicants balance each other out....but there is a big difference b/t theory and real life...

young dr. bigking tut you i don't think you are wrong, you don't understand the history ...

'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' ... George Santayana

the match is not perfect but it does deal with some problems that happened in the past. the match process does not account for the human factor. the handshake and a wink that may occur between some applicants and programs. there are some programs are very strict and play fair, like the do at Columbia (i do remember this from my interview there in the 90's). others who may bend the rules (hearsay). regardless of what process is in place, the human factor will be in place.

understand bigking tut, there are a lot of applicants to weed through, hundreds. for some programs and specialties, it is like an American Idol cattle call. it is not like your regular human resources application practice.

the process has been evaluated over and over and faired well ...

Christopher Avery, Christine Jolls, Richard A. Posner and Alvin E. Roth, The Market for Federal Judical Law Clerks, 68 Univ. of Chicago Law Review 793 (2001)

Antitrust experts such as Judge Richard Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and Joel Klein, former Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust at the Department of Justice, have extolled the virtues of the matching process and have sought to apply it in other areas. For example, Judge Posner has proposed adopting a version of the Match for the federal judicial law clerk application process, noting approvingly that the Match "is simply a way of facilitating the parties' expression and achievement of their preferences, an opportunity that is lacking in an unregulated market with timing problems."

David M. Herszenhorn, Revised Admission for High Schools, New York Times (Oct. 3, 2003)

Mr. Klein, now the Chancellor of the New York City school system, recently announced that the New York City Board of Education is implementing a matching system for the close to 100,000 eighth graders who apply each year to New York City high schools. He explained that the City is adopting a system patterned after the Match because it is "the most efficient way of matching students to high schools while distributing opportunities as fairly as possible” and "is recognized by virtually any economist as the welfare-maximizing model.”

so i beg of you young dr. bigking tut ... take a look at the history ... the match may not be the best system, but it is as fair a system as you will see ... unfortunately, it is not within a vacuum and the human factor will always be present ...

fortunately or unfortunately for you bigking tut, you will have to endure the match ... here is the algorithm that you seem to have a problem with ... take a look see if it is reasonable ....

www.nrmp.org/res_match/about_res/algorithms.html

and there are also some rules of professionalism

www.nrmp.org/res_match/policies/professionalism.html

I appreciate the efforts of BigKingTut... he is fielding his opinion and needs not to be attacked by having a different one.

The match is a less than perfect solution but it is the best one we have so far until a better solution comes along. I do, believe, however that the concept of the match should be challenged periodically, not necessarily to go back to the "old way" but perhaps to advance and/or modify it. Have we asked ourselves if we can come up with a better process today? How can we make it more fair? How can we correct for the "shady" behaviors of some programs and not simply accept it? Etc, etc.

Finally, residency is a job. Every career have a period of on-the-job training- most are obviously not as long as ours. Some might be longer- PhD post-docs for instance. Orthopaedic surgery is the career. This is my opinion. Whatever helps u get thru stuff.