To be upset about ‘university blind’ recruitment

[Newname576]

DS has overcome so many challenges and has an unconditional offer from Cambridge after achieving 4 A star last year. He has worked so hard and we are so proud of him! But I was upset to learn that so many companies are recruiting “university blind”now - what the hell is the point of going to a top Uni if no one will know about it! My younger child says she will apply to Manchester Met and have a ball even though she too is predicted stellar grades as there is no point going to a top Uni

AIBU to be sad that companies are recruiting blind?

I trained at a big 4, and it was almost always the Oxbridge students who failed the first round of exams. I think the firm wanted to take Oxbridge graduates so overlooked whether they were totally suitable.

Surely the employers will still be looking at the A level grades though?

Also @twinklybumface don't get me wrong - I do agree that degree requirements can be ridiculous.
But it's a vicious cycle - we want loads of people to go to university - so to filter them down jobs start having higher and higher requirements, and it continues.
I've seen receptionist roles requiring a degree.

In my field (tech) it's a bit easier because I'd expect to see a technical portfolio. You don't need a degree for common sense roles like project management etc but people can come to this with other experience. They just can't get onto our 'graduate scheme', which is for graduates.

No I don’t think you are. I agree that’s a bloody good uni and surely they should take that into consideration

A degree does not guarantee you a good job

You also need good soft skills too

Good communication

Depending on what job you are applying for

I have interviewed students who were remarkably sniffy about students who aimed lower than a first. They struggled working with less than brilliant people - which of course they said they wouldn't find at our organisation so it wouldn't be a problem. That was true, our team are brilliant - but we have to work with clients who come in all shapes and sizes and working with people who are less than brilliant is one of the reasons we have a job. Arrogance is a trait no one wants to work with!

I see what you are saying and I understand your worry, but the point of uni isn't to get a job, is it? It's to develop and to be a more rounded person and to gain new skills. Especially as your son is going to do a degree in history, unless he becomes an historian, in which case they will definitely be looking at his uni, then other skills will come into play that will be apparent on his application. Have confidence in your child that he will not need the boost.

I'm guessing you have never been to university, people who have been to Cambridge, Oxford etc, tend to wear it lightly, you will come to learn this.

You deserve all the flak you are getting for being so unpleasant though.

I work in recruitment and the thing that stands graduates apart from the rest are a) their attitude and motivation and b) their work experiences

The type of university or grade you get might get you an interview; but if you haven’t got anything interesting to talk about at interview, it’ll be a no.

To relate this to real life, my DH got a first from
Oxford and really struggled to get a job, because he had nothing to talk about at interview apart from his university experience. How does this stand him out from the crowd? It doesn’t. In fact, anyone that shares an example about how they worked well in a group at uni to demonstrate their team work usually scores low, because EVERYONE has had that experience.

As a parent, I am going to encourage my children to get lots of life experience. This will include working from the age of 15 and doing tons of volunteering. This will stand them in good stead, regardless of what uni they go to.

The true mark of brilliance is not whether 'you' understand something, it's whether you can make 'others' understand 😇

Even the highest performer can only work so many hours a day.

But someone who can enable others, and get the best out of them has no limits, and a much higher multiplier.

That's why, even in my famously introverted profession lone geniuses are eschewed in favour of people who are capable 'enough', but with excellent softer skills.

Yeah, I've interviewed quite a few like that. Never hired any.

Quite frankly though having attended an elite university, most people know that the degree itself isn't enough. I thought that myself at the start, but my more clued up peers quickly disabused me of that notion.

The ones that keep their head down seem to be in one of two categories - those that couldn't keep up (and so would really have been better off at a 'lower tier' university).
And those that didn't know, usually because of their backgrounds. They thought a good degree would be enough. For them even getting to university is an achievement and they didn't realise that loads of people have degrees these days. Also maybe they felt a bit left out, so didn't socialise much with the 'high achieving all rounder' crowd.

OP's son is in great danger of falling into the second category with his mother's attitude.

I think you probably could do with a bit more introspection really. I get what you are saying but the "we're all intellectual titans but our customers are thickos" isn't a great look if that is what you are telling prospective candidates.

Surely the employers will still be looking at the A level grades though?

Again, why? What relevance do you think A level grades have to a graduate? Genuinely interested as most universities do not think they have any relevance at all…

Well it depends on your field but in technology (where I am) there's a surprisingly large number of people paid £££ to make decisions costing millions of dollars... on things that they have zero understanding of.
I wouldn't say that they are 'thick', promoting big talkers who have no idea of how to do the actual work is endemic across many industries but it does get irritating seeing people make short-term decisions.

However, the higher up you go, the more you realise that very few people actually care about doing a good job. Something that cuts costs etc in the short terms gets a pat on the back, promotions etc and by the time the chickens come home to roost the exec has taken their rewards and gone, leaving the mess for another poor bugger to clean.

When I was in IT consulting I wasn't complaining, kept me in business returning to fix successive messes but as an internal employee now it's really annoying. So much waste.

That's another reason btw why solely 'academic and logical' people have such a hard time. They can't quite deal with the hidden agendas and politics, don't know which strings to pull. To them the right decision is blatantly obvious and anybody doing otherwise is just dumb. No further investigation required...

If an Oxbridge graduate doesn't show up as better on blind testing then surely they aren't better?

How do you know?

Actually degree courses are not always better at Oxbridge. My DH did history at Oxford but he often says he would have enjoyed his insurance course at Southampton more. He enjoyed the Oxford experience, but the actual degree was meh.

Yes you’re being unreasonable. A 2.II from a polytechnic is the same as a 2.II from Oxford. You can still brag, don’t worry 🙄

And those of us who got a 2.1 in a subject not taught at red bricks? Like art and design? Are we less worthy?

Why do you think that a companies decisions about hiring has anything to do with fairness? They're just looking to find someone suitable for the role, they don't care whether it's fair to the candidates or not.

Most interview processes aren't even about finding the best person, they're about finding someone good enough, quick enough and with the minimum amount of effort. If a company decides to do university blind hiring, then it's because they don't think that that information is important to them. It's just noise.

I've worked for companies that specifically don't want to hire the very best candidates. If they need someone in a not particularly prestigious role that they've struggled to fill, then they don't want some rising star who's going to look to rise up the career ladder and bugger off if that doesn't happen, they want someone who's grateful for the job and is likely stick around.

No. I’m saying a university grade is a grade regardless. A first at Oxford isn’t better than a first at UWE.

Universities do not make you a fundamentally different person. If you were intelligent and/or conscientious enough to get into a top university, you will still have those traits in 3 years, regardless of where you studied.
I went to Imperial and I can't really point to any magic the institution performed.

They filter for highly academic A-level students and spit highly academic degree-holders out at the other end. I imagine they are a bit less generous with grading to maintain a decent distribution of degree grades.

I probably would have studied elsewhere, if I had known better, on cost alone.

Additionally, I don't think blind recruitment is a bad idea (even as someone who would be relatively disadvantaged by it).

I ended up starting off in Big 4 accountancy and the difference made by level of academic achievement (or whatever they use it as a proxy for) is negligible. The work really doesn't require much in regards to independent thought so I don't think you'd see much difference in output from two people with the same skillset, but one with an IQ of 90 and another with 120.

It's almost more of a prestige marker for the company for them to be seen as a sought-after recruiter of grads from certain institutions.

University changed me, I entered it from small town life. I learned to live independently, and whilst there I took opportunities, lived and studied abroad for a year - I was incredibly homesick but I saw it through - makes you feel you can tolerate anything. I met a huge variety of people - from all walks of life with a wide variety of interests and political persuasions, we debated and laughed to the wee hours in the morning - I learned so much more than just the subject I studied, I learned who I was away from the influence of home - it's an experience I am so glad I had the opportunity to have and I wanted the same for my kids and from what they have told me they have felt the same way. I emerged a much more worldly person, more resilient, more independent - yes I think I was fundamentally different.

Its cute that you actually believe this.

Some of you seem to not understamd much about how the world actually works, or how much tougher courses are at more elite schools.

Grade inflation is rampant right now in the UK for tertiary education, and many of the older polytechnics are driving this. A "1st" has become almost meaningless now (vs 20 years ago), so hiring companies focus on the school and how rigorous it actually is.

In this situation, Oxbridge is far superior.

Full stop.

Oh shut up. A first isn’t harder to achieve at Oxbridge than it is anywhere else. But it’s “cute” you’re this deluded.

Big 4 audit is the go to career when other avenues fail if you go to an elite school.

Lots of hours, repetition, and Taylor-esque work.

Keep telling yourself that. You don't have a clue about the UKs tertiary institutions.

My siblings and I went to four of them.

Comparing a "1st" from Manchester Met (for example) to a "1st" from Oxbridge is absolutely ludicrous.

Your peers at Oxbridge are the best from all over the world, and that materially raises the bar.

Are you seriously implying that the polytechnic folks are as smart as them?