To think more well educated people are there to think and not do?

[Watdidusay]

In my professional experience I've noticed people who have degrees from certain unnamed better universities tend to be more hands off in work eg documentation, documenting planning, being proactive with reaching out to people for clarification or input.
I thought maybe I was just imagining it but this week I had a discussion with a colleague who has two degrees from top tier universities. We are in the same role in adjacent teams, at the same level so do the same job effectively.

This person does not contribute to documentation or reach outs or research at all - they say it's their job to think and they have to keep their mind free to be imaginative.
I know their team has complained a lot between themselves about this person not supporting them but I'm amazed by this attitude. That's not what the job is at all, certainly not how anyone I know does it.

This person also hasn't really had any intelligent ideas that I'm aware of.

Am I missing a trick here? Am I the stupid class and if I went to top tier instead of just Russell group id be getting other people to do the work while I daydream?

I have two degrees and this person sounds like a layabout. I do lots of grunt work - we all do. It's not the difference between education and not, it's the difference between being a lazy twat and not!

What a long-winded and disingenuous way of saying you think your colleague's a twat.

Seriously, it's not that deep. You have a colleague you don't like and think they're lazy. That's literally it.

Agree with a pp. Your colleague is a workshy layabout.

What I struggle with is that the person has three degrees from global top 5 universities so they can't actually be lazy, doesn't add up to me

Odd post. Most prestigious universities work their students pretty relentlessly. So I don’t think there is any connection between this layabout and the Uni they went to. Perhaps it could be more a privilege thing?

Nail on the head. I've worked with dozens of other accountants, some came straight in from school to qualify training alongside working, some from various different Unis including converted Polys and some from Oxbridge, some via Polys and colleges back in the 80s and 90s, some from RG Unis. It didn't matter what route they took, some were lazy idle twats, some were hard workers, some did "grunt" work, some did "planning/thinking" work. Their "route" wasn't a determinant factor at all.

Totally depends on the job and structure of the team.

I had a colleague straight out of Cambridge who thought she was so high and mighty... she was insufferable. There was another colleague who had a few degrees on her (diff uni) and vastly more experience who just got on with it and was very hands-on.
Some let it go to their heads, some don't. A lot do though, I have to say. Unis teach stuff aimed for a career in academia, not anything else. You don't need most of the stuff taught in a normal day job, but you do need a can-do, do-anything attitude, and, should I say - a bit of humility - which a lot of unis don't teach.

I think what you have there is a dickhead. I have two degrees, I get to use my brain and be creative and I enjoy the 'grunt' work, getting my hands into the actual stuff. You can't do the creativity well if you don't understand the meat and potatoes.

This. I mean, I went to Oxford and can confirm wankers attend it, just as they attend other universities.

It's quite possible that they were just people who found studying etc "easy", i.e. not having to put as much work in as others who'd find it harder. Some people have really good memories and barely have to revise to remember things, some are the opposite. Some can rattle off essays and reports in their sleep, others take weeks to do it. Also lots of people have the ability to do "just enough" to get the work done, i.e. no more and no less than the minimum effort required, but still get the First or whatever other degree/qualification they're working toward because they cut out the waffle/crap and just concentrate on what really matters. All depends on the work/course/degree etc of course. Hours spent and effort expended doesn't always relate to the end result - lots of people can work like a dog and still not get a good degree grading, others can get a First almost in their sleep just having gone through the course and done the bare minimum they needed to.

I have an undergrad from a RG university and a PhD from Oxbridge and I assure you this is not what all of us are like. I know I work hard, pull my weight at work, do boring stuff including photocopying and taking stuff around to offices if it's quicker, I am not above this. I don't take minutes at meetings, I think that's probably about the only thing I'm too highly qualified (aka have no clue) to do.

My boss though not perfect as our none of us would roll up her sleeves and do anything. On one occasion estates had still not set up a room, it needed lockers building, flat pack metal ones a bit like school lockers. So there we go two desk bound women with her tool set from home and we build a long row of lockers so the room can be used at last. I always admired her. Your colleague sounds like a lazy bullshitter.

Honestly, it sounds like this person is confusing “thinking” with actually doing the work. Most jobs need both, ideas and the follow-through, like documenting, reaching out, and researching. Just having degrees from top universities doesn’t automatically make someone smarter or more creative. sometimes it just makes them feel they can get away with slacking. You’re not missing anything. You’re just noticing someone who’s all talk, no action.

They are more confident with their delegation skills. Thats a key thing many top tier universities seem to passively teach!
Just stop doing their donkey work.

I'm not lazy about things I enjoy, such as learning and hobbies. I'm very lazy things about things I don't really care about, such as the more boring parts of my job, and housework.

I suspect your colleague is the same. Fixating on their education weird.

I don’t understand where their education comes into this. Do you have a chip on your shoulder about educated people and are one of those walking around saying university grads don’t have common sense?

So you are making a sweeping generalisation based on the actions of one individual. Mm not very bright op!

Some people are good at academia. They can soak up and regurgitate facts, and dress them up nicely into essays etc., and get good results. But actually DOING any proactive with that knowledge? Not a hope in hell.

Then you do have people that are better at planning and management and seeing the overall picture, that fit your general description. Nothing wrong with that, it's an important skill and it's not being lazy. Some have degrees and some don't.

Your colleague would seem to fit into the first category.

As the years have gone on i seem to notice a lot of people becoming more stupid.

I have several degrees but not global top 5

They're not on my team so I don't do their work thankfully

No I have several RG degrees myself

I agree, but I think it's a shift in expectations really. I'm in my 60s, and back in the day, we didn't have the same expectations of other "normal" people we came across. Most of the people I knew where in manual/semi skilled work, so we wouldn't have expected them to be particularly "academically bright" - if they said something stupid or didn't know where, say, Crete was located, we wouldn't think anything about it or ridicule them. Nowadays, we seem to have morphed into an expectation that everyone else is academically inclined, not helped by the stupid expectation of 50% of people going to Uni and the downgrading by society of "manual" and trades jobs, so we basically expect anyone in work to be pretty well educated and intelligent, which isn't really practical. We also "see" everyone out and about, ie large groups of people in supermarkets, on roads, etc., so we have a greater "experience" of stupid people as they're out and about more and visible. Again, back in the day, we kept to ourselves more, didn't travel as far, worked close to home, etc., so our "pool" of people we knew and saw regularly was a lot smaller and more concentrated, so less chance of noticing people doing stupid things. Of course, fewer people drove, so you'd see less stupidity on the roads - car driving was mostly for those with more money, i.e. higher earners, i.e. more educated/trained etc in better jobs etc.

They don't seem to know the facts either, which I think is due to not getting involved in the processes. They make a lot of wrong decisions and it's because they didn't attend meetings or read documentation they were supposed to. Again, thankfully not on my team but I have seen the impact frequently in larger company wide meetings.