Why do companies still see academic achievement as a proxy for competence at work?

[BeAlertBrickFinch]

Genuine question. Why are so many employers still obsessed with academic grades when the actual job involves completely different skills?
You don't need to write a perfect essay under timed conditions in the real world. You need to deal with difficult managers and clients, office politics, sudden changes, poor communication, tight deadlines, and sometimes just figuring things out on your own. None of that is taught at uni. Yet employers still act like a 2:1 or 1st magically means you're good at this stuff.
I’ve met plenty of “high achievers” who crumble the moment things get ambiguous or stressful. Meanwhile, some of the most competent, reliable colleagues I’ve worked with didn’t have fancy degrees—they just knew how to get things done and keep people calm.
So why is the system still set up this way? Laziness? Snobbery? Some outdated belief that doing well in school means you’re smart and therefore “better”?
Curious what others think—especially hiring managers or people who've been on both sides of the desk.

There is the idea that doing well at university doesn't necessarily prove you're smart or good at the job, but it sends a signal about certain traits, like discipline, work ethic, the ability to follow rules, and sometimes just the willingness to jump through hoops. Employers often assume that if you can survive the academic system, you'll be able to survive, and comply with, the corporate one too.

Hiring is expensive. Companies don’t want to get it wrong. So they fall back on what seems "safe": people who’ve already succeeded in a system.

It is very hard to know during the hiring process who is actually any good in practice.

As above. You’ve got to base it on something, and the reality is you have to try people before you know how competent they really are. Academics are at least a relatively fair and comparable measuring method, rather than one off interviews, because the grades are achieved over longer periods of time

I work in accountancy and we prefer to take on apprentices at 18 after A levels rather than employ graduates. So I don't think that attitude is universal.

I graduated in 1988 and it was the opposite then so I am pleased that it had changed. It was such a waste of time going to university.

It's about having made a commitment and then seen it through.

Yes, its more and more meaningless over time. We have all been fed a lie about university attainment, whether its necessary, what it means, what it signifies and whether its worth it. In certain circumstances, yes, but not in all.

There are a lot of jobs that require experience before you can even get an interview. Also there are usually probationary periods, so if a company accidentally hires a well qualified but unsuitable person then they can get out of the situation. I feel for those who are, qualified or not, locked out of the system that requires them to have experience that they just can't get because they need experience to get any position at all. Then they work entry level unrelated jobs which look out of place on their CV.

I’ve learned that good gcse grades in English and maths are essential. I employ graduate level but someone with alevels and work experience would make my shortlist as that shows true interest. Degree wise, I think it fires demonstrate someone can critically evaluate information, which is an important skill.

There is the idea that doing well at university doesn't necessarily prove you're smart or good at the job, but it sends a signal about certain traits, like discipline, work ethic, the ability to follow rules, and sometimes just the willingness to jump through hoops. Employers often assume that if you can survive the academic system, you'll be able to survive, and comply with, the corporate one too

All it means is you handed a few bits of work and you weren’t doing anything too diabolical that you had to be kicked out and your lecturers passed you because they wanted to hold on to their job.

I work with graduates and university students and most of them haven’t the first clue about anything and have to be told the simplest things. Quite frankly I wonder how they survived living on their own because some of the things they do could be lethal

There are a few who look at their peers with astonishment at the things they say/believe/do and wonder how they got to the age of 21 not knowing basic stuff.

I would not be putting them in charge of anything. They are likely to bankrupt the company.

Degree wise, I think it fires demonstrate someone can critically evaluate information, which is an important skill

🤣🤣🤣

Like the critical thinking that a jar of coffee in 10litres of water is going to give you coffee.

Hint, 1st step… open the jar of coffee.

My work is all against a deadline, so timed pressure is constant. Today it involved...

Writing five blogs (short essays) as part of setting up a new web page.
Selecting accurate imagery for those web pages
Writing a report based on analysing a set of monthly statistics
Designing & creating a set of seating plans for coach-built vehicles.

All of them required critical thinking - how to assimilate information and present it in the most appealing light to a prospective customer, given a variety of customer profiles.

By 5pm I felt drained and stiff, exactly as if I had been in an exam. On reflection, conditions are very similar. More freedom to go to the loo and use reference material but otherwise, much the same.

It also requires the resilience to get up and work another 8 hours under the same conditions tomorrow.

Having a degree is a good indicator of resilience. The ability to stick at something for three years, to understand that every element of every day has an impact on the end result and the self-confidence to build a strategy (thesis) based on testing and proving, and stick with it.

I have colleagues who have all of those characteristics who are not graduates, but having a 1st in engineering or business helps us choose a shortlist of candidates.

A few years ago I came across a couple of apprentice hires who had joined an extended graduate scheme aimed at 18/19 year-olds with A levels and I’m sorry to say, they were noticeably less competent than the actual graduates. The company actually scaled back apprentice hiring because attrition was shocking - they either dropped out, got fired for repeatedly failing professional exams or managed out for poor performance. The scheme started around 15 years ago and it’s interesting to see that it hasn’t been rolled out further but rather there are fewer apprentice hires.

I know this is anecdata but it shows university must give you some skills over and above finishing school.

Where I work we have apprentices who joined straight from school after A levels. They are now in their last couple of years but are noticeably less competent than the graduates at the same stage.

Degree apprenticeships are super competitive, so I would have thought in most cases apprentices are really bright and up to the job. Ours joined during covid so that might have affected their training.

I would hire a graduate every time, but - only a graduate who had a good class of degree and who had also worked as a teen and all through university, even (or perhaps especially) somewhere like McDonalds.

For my masters, one module I had to critically evaluate 5 scientific papers to assess the cost effectiveness of asthma management apps in improving outcomes for children. No clue what point you’re trying to make, but I need to make decisions in my job that are evidence based. I regularly have to think on my feet and work to tight/moving deadlines in high pressure situations. We have a couple of junior employees in the team without degrees and they work at a very different level.

I used to think like you. Hired a few, ‘experience over education’ people. All terrible. Now we insist on a certain set of degrees. Poeple are more likely to work out.

I wish it wasn’t so.

ou need to deal with difficult managers and clients, office politics, sudden changes, poor communication, tight deadlines, and sometimes just figuring things out on your own. None of that is taught at uni.
You never did a group project at uni then?

Academic competence doesn’t gaurantee you people skills, no.

academic incompetence doesn’t give you people skills either.

in general young people develop people skills through experience. That’s why lots of recruiters prefer graduates who have had part time jobs.

Are you saying you can’t see how the soft skills or qualifications earned whilst committing to and completing a 3 year degree, would be useful for an employer?