My Recruiter Hell Degree

Related tags: Blog

Where was I? Ah yes, the old 2:1 minimum requirement, and why I propose we should scrap it.

Much as I hate to advocate something that would create extra work for me - as throwing open our application process to students with any degree class would surely do - I can't help thinking it would be better in the long run...

As I've said several times on this blog, there is an increasing clamour amongst employers for students with the hallowed 'soft skills'. Yet how can we expect applicants to have developed soft skills if all their time at university was spent on academic pursuits? I can't help thinking that employers are asking too much.

Take the boytoy, for example. His 2:2 made him ineligible for all of the finance graduate schemes, and he had to claw his way into the industry through menial jobs, hardcore networking and a serious amount of pleading. He's now big in hedge funds, as they say, earning a considerable amount of cash for both himself and his clients. The reason he got a 2:2 was because he spent much of his time at university in the Navy cadets, playing for the football team and working for the student union - developing exactly the kind of skills, such as leadership and teamwork, that employers claim are in such short supply amongst today's graduates. Now, I'm certainly not advocating ignoring your academic work in favour of extracurricular activities. Academic achievement is clearly an important measure of a candidate's suitability; my point is that it is not the only measure.

This brings me to the next issue. It is manifestly unfair that your working life should be defined by your degree classification. I have a friend who wishes to move from software development into a managerial role. Yet the 2:2 on his CV sends him straight to the bottom of the pile, even though he has 3 years of professional experience. I've seen job ads recently that ask for 'minimum 2:1' as well as '2 years experience or more'. People's degree results are influenced by a whole variety of factors other than intelligence and motivation, ranging from illness and bereavement to exam nerves and pure luck. Some miss out on a 2:1 by only a few marks.

Of course, not every graduate with a 2:2 or lower would be suitable for our company, in much the same way that not every graduate with a 2:1 or higher is suitable. We already have a selection process in place to pick out the best candidates. Yes, it will create more work for weary recruiters such as myself; but if widening our search criteria generates more applicants with genuine ability, surely that extra time spent will be justified.

Employers aren't just depriving graduates with their 'minimum 2:1' policy - they are depriving themselves of a considerable pool of talent.

Add to