How important would a Russell Group uni be to your employer?

[paygride]

I work for a well known global company, employs about 2000 in UK. I was speaking to someone from our People team about how important it is for a candidate to have attended a Russell Group unti and she said it wasn't something that was especially relevant when they were looking at CVs and a few young people have joined our team recently and only one of them attended a RG uni (she did go to Cambridge). I spoke to DH about this and he works for another global company (totally different sector) and he said it's not something he looks for when he's been recruiting either. What they both said is they were bothing looking for 'something extra' (well my People officer actually described it as a 'sprinkling of fairy dust'.)

By contrast I worked for a Consultancy firm in the city and they pretty much only recruited people from Oxbridge, much smaller firm and pretty much all their business was UK based, huhe salaries and huge bonuses (which defintely isn't across the board where I work but lots very senior of people on high salaries).

DS is going to be applying to Unis and is fixed on the idea of a RG uni even though some non RG unis (Lancaster & Leicester) seem to be offering much more interesting courses in his chosen field but he will only apply to the RG unis.

Interested to know what others think. .

Your DD will come across plenty of other employees who didn’t go to a RG or go to any Uni. Which Uni you went to isn’t something spoken about - no one is interested and not relevant when you have been offered a role.
I’ve done final round interviews and offered roles to a range of candidates. I’ve two friends who are (youngish!) Partners and neither went to Uni and one didn’t do accountancy qualifications but is still a high fee earner.

@Yolo12345 DD is a MFL grad. They definitely have extra qualities! Uk employers tend not to care though,

Just looking at High Flier research: employers target these unis in the largest numbers - Nottingham, Manchester, Leeds, Bristol and Birmingham. All RG. Next 5 are Warwick, UCL, Southampton, Durham and Exeter. All RG. These are the universities employers actually target in terms of recruitment fairs. Why would they bother if they thought all grads were identical?

Plus each grad vacancy in the 2024 report from the top firms/organizations had 39 applicants. Some considerably more as you might expect. It’s increasingly difficult in the high level sector to get a job. So young people should give themselves the best chance.

@Parker231 As you get older uni fades into the past. As a 21/22 year old it’s something to chat about. You might know the same people for example. It’s an icebreaker really.

Not relevant at all, we are looking for the best person for the job not the extension and reinforcement of the old boys network. I am looking for resourceful staff with a good dose of grit.

But we aren't just talking about the top firms/Big4/magic circle/only city jobs in London.

These threads always come back to those kind of jobs mentioned by the same handful of posters yet there is a whole world outside of this hallowed enclave. This doesn't mean that young people who don't want those kind of jobs are lacking in ambition either.

Most employers want the best candidate for the job regardless of where they went to university, and all the OP wanted to know was do most employers recruit university blind, and it appears that most do.

I also don't think that anyone thinks that a degree from a top 10 university is the same as one from the bottom 10 either.

My son went to Bath (non RG) and was offered a position by two of the big four accountancy firms. He took up one of the offers and is doing brilliantly!

Same here and I find the London creative students are far too whacky with zero commercial sense. And the smaller unis do a much better job of getting them industry ready.

TBH I am talking about hiring in a Big, as is @Parker231 but as ever on these higher education threads those of us who are actually the hiring partners in industry and posters actually working in the HE sector know nothing 🙄

Interesting - I work in the creative industry too and DH works in Financial. I did actually find out today my boss went to Harvard, although she is the smartest person I have ever met so not that surprising. One of the new young members of went to UWE and he's brilliant - absoloutly destined for much bigger things.

All I'm saying is that these threads always get taken over by the same few people who concentrate on a very small sector, albeit a very well paid one.

There are approximately 34 million people in work in the UK, of which approximately 2.5 million work in the financial and related professional services sector, equating to just 7 percent of the workforce.

Fortunately, there have been other hiring professionals and those working in the HE sector who have added balance to this thread.

She hasn't really come across any so far, and they do chat about universities etc because I think it's a bit of an ice breaker, something they all have in common at only 21/22.

She has worked alongside people doing apprenticeships, straight from just A Levels, and they work incredibly hard.

You make those from RG sound “special “ and different - believe me they’re not. I expect all to work hard regardless of their academic background.

Where I work the application process strips out what University you went to...designed to prevent discrimination.

I grew up working class, I went to a RG and now work at an post 92. They are very different institutions in terms of professionalism and student experience!

Personality I'd advice to think about what would suit your child to thrive. If he's going to a post-92 he should focus on an apprenticeship. If he's more academic, studying STEM etc, go with RG. The RG has more prestige, even if they don't have more cash (they usually do).

There's no doubt, you're seen as more capable if you come out of a RG. Also you can make more powerful connections and mix with people from international countries, not just Europe. The industry links also tend to be better and RG has more prestige. They tend to set the standard for the sector.

Personality I'd advice to think about what would suit your child to thrive. If he's going to a post-92 he should focus on an apprenticeship

Apprenticeships are like gold dust and highly competitive. There is no way employers will be offering enough apprenticeships to be able to train enough young people every year that we need. I think there is an argument for saying that we need to get rid of some of the provision ( there are some shady poor value institutions at the very bottom of the pile) and get more vocational training provision in FE at maybe HNC level but to say anyone not going to RG or doing STEM should do an apprenticeship is nonsense. Why should people doing STEM degrees not be encouraged into apprenticeships first? Many STEM degrees are pretty well suited to apprenticeships because they are vocational for a start, and would very quickly become prohibitively expensive to run as degree courses without the income from arts/social sciences degrees. Post '92 institutions used to be Polytechnics and they offered degrees too. Its also rubbish to say that non RG have fewer industry links. Many have more, because they are likely to offer more vocational level courses. They also have international students! I'm not sure where you work where they don't have industry links or International students!

I don't know about them being more special? But their academic qualifications at GCSE and A Level are presumably different to those applying to post 1992 universities?

Not something I would be aware of at interview stage - we don’t ask about qualifications .

Totally irrelevant. There is no data to support the notion that the ‘brightest’ A level students are also the brightest graduates. Top A level grades tell you something about pupils leaving 6th form; they tell you nothing about the students graduating 3-4 years later.

There are myriad reasons for this, from the style of teaching (and learning) being very different to early/late academic maturity, to more equal access to resources, to students thriving when they can concentrate on just one subject etc etc.

And interestingly, most universities do not ask students for their A results (let alone GCSE) when applying for a Masters. They deem those no longer relevant to the student’s abilities.

RG not a consideration and, maybe controversially, staying on for masters seen as a negative. Work experience > additional study. Appreciate this only applies to some fields.

Really? Are you seriously suggesting that someone who only achieved DEE at A Level would thrive at Oxford and achieve a good degree?

That's very egalitarian. So do you purely select candidates purely from their performance at your testing centres?

No, but they might get in through clearing to a good post 92 university, achieve a first and be successful at getting a good job at a company that recruits university blind.

Yes, true. Would be interesting if there was any data on that.

Yes - tried and tested system globally. We’re getting great candidates with wide ranging knowledge and backgrounds. We’re good at selecting the best employees for the business. Many large corporate firms are moving (or have already) to this approach.