Does Oxbridge still have a big impact on graduate career prospects?

[epin]

I’ll start off with my line of work. Admittedly very sector and area specific. We take around ten graduates per year for our grad scheme. Over the past few years, somewhere between 50 and 90% were recruited from Oxbridge. Super competitive field, City Law.

in city law and the bar, yes
in other areas of work, not so much

those numbers are actually quite small.

people from other universities do still manage to get good jobs

But if you are taking 10 grads a year you aren’t really @city law”. You might be small law firm in the city. In which case - do better. There are many better grads available with wider experiences if you raise your eyes out of oxbridge.

Yes

My career (an "elite" profession that's also actually terribly paid, partly because everyone else in it seems to have other sources of income/wealth) has actively suffered from being from a non-Oxbridge background.

Yuko I’m guessing journalism?

So you're saying it does in your field?

Hopefully it doesn't in every sector.

Good for students who get into Oxford or Cambridge I say - it takes a lot of hard work and a particular focus. I hope they all enjoy their time enormously at University, just as I hope every student at every level of further education enjoys their 3, 4, however many years.

The thought that an Oxbridge degree gives any sort of leg-up into popular professions makes me sick though tbh. I just can't help thinking of Boris, Cameron, Sunak - and all the public school boys in popular entertainment. Fuck off now! Please let us grow out of it.

I have been working for 30 years and my status as a Cambridge graduate is still beneficial.

I think that Oxbridge helps get your CV read.

It doesn't necessarily help you in an interview, especially as the interviewer might have higher expectations of you.

But it helps in getting an interview on the first place.

Just came across this thread and thought it was interesting. I’ve worked in both banking and consulting and I’d say Oxford or Cambridge definitely no longer a specific benefit in either. The grad processes tend to prefer a ‘pull yourself up by your bootstraps’ type, grads who have had to work 2 jobs through uni etc rather than those who enjoyed a college lifestyle and a bit of casual extra curricular on top of their essays. The rationale for this is pretty straightforward, that these jobs can be pretty brutal with long hours and loads of travel. They look for functioning adults who can get themselves sorted, be proactive, add value. Not that oxbridge prevents those things, just you tend to see that resourcefulness a bit less with people who have been looked after in college the whole way through their degree.

In hedge funds personal network is still really important as many of the firms are smaller and don’t have formal grad schemes. So you can look at some of the firms, the likes of the recently shut down Odey firm for example and see they all went to Eton.

I saw this title on the board and thought interesting, there's a lot of Oxbridge specific threads today. Then I see it's from a few months ago.

To answer, I think it is still beneficial somewhat. Gross generalisation, but it's a quality assurance mark of a certain academic standard. Doesn't necessarily follow the graduate will make a great employee though.

@Tohoku but it's a quality assurance mark of a certain academic standard

As is a degree from Russell Group+ universities for most mainstream corporations running graduate recruitment schemes.

Having partaken in a number of graduate recruitment activities, across multiple firms (banking, consulting, fintech) over the last 20+ years, none of them favoured Oxbridge candidates in any way.

Generally, as other PP have said, evidence of work experience, part time work, internships etc. is more sought after

@lastdayatschool I agree as is a degree from Russell Group+ universities. I wasn't suggesting Oxbridge was a mark of higher quality, only of a certain quality academically. Note I specifically only said academically. It has international recognition, which may be relevant. So for those reasons it may have an impact on graduate prospects, which is what the OP asked. Doesn't mean degrees from other universities aren't going to be recognised too.

Also, whilst it may not hold extra cache in banking, I can confirm that the OP is right that it does in law in some places.

Not in my line of work. Professional with science type career. But then Oxbridge don't offer the subjects we recruit from.

Disagree here. I currently work in finance and have worked for 5+ years at an IB in trading with many peers going into hedge funds and uni does go a long way. Recruitment efforts were concentrated at the top unis.

There's a reason that the concept of target unis still exists at IBs. In my intern and grad class, the vast majority of grads were from a select few unis from the UK plus top European schools (HEC, Bocconi etc). It certainly helps to have connections for hedge fund jobs but Odey Asset Management is really not representative of the hedge funds space. Non-old money and non-UK firms like Citadel, DRW, BlueCrest, Millennium etc don't operate like this (knowing people helps you get your foot in but you still have to go through the interview process).

Maybe at 1 or 2 old fashioned law firms such as Slaughter & May who are very Oxbridge focused but outside of that, I wouldn't say it does. I am a partner in city firm and went to a Russell group uni, although many Moons ago now. We recruit from RG group unis ånd increasingly from less traditional backgrounds and routes in. Oxbridge would not give you a leg up. One of the worse trainees I ever had went to Cambridge. Must've been academically bright I suppose but she was clueless in the office.

We can pick anecdotes of an Oxbridge grad who bombed and an RG graduate who was fab. But we should look at what the overall data says

What does the overall data say? I doubt there is any data that says that overall Oxbridge grads are more successful than others?

I am an academic and being an Oxbridge graduate (either UG or PhD) is no longer the advantage it once was.

My City law firm, which takes 3 times as many grads each year than OP’s firm, recruits university blind. HR know where they went but do not use it as a triage criterion. Interviewers are not allowed to ask. When the trainees arrive at their desks their bios do not include details of their universities and it’s not a question that tends to be asked in social conversation any more.

My understanding is that we are not unusual amongst our peer firms.

The graduate recruitment team do attend law fairs at universities, they do go to Cambridge I think but I don’t think they go to Oxford.

It’s a far cry from my day when I was recruited by the Magic Circle out of Cambridge and actually did my entire interview process without leaving town- a bunch of partners came to a Cambridge hotel and interviewed everyone there. Definitely a change for the better.

@winterrabbit have a look at the Institute for Fiscal Studies work in this area.

HR know where they went but do not use it as a triage criterion. Interviewers are not allowed to ask.

Whatapity that’s interesting. What sort of questions do they ask - or do applicants have to sit a written test?

There is an assessment centre that includes a solo written test and a group exercise. Interviews involve all sorts of questions about interest in law, interest in our particular client base, commercial scenarios, ethics questions, chat about hobbies etc, the old chestnuts about how to prioritise things and deal with difficult people, examples of when they have had negative feedback and how they dealt with it. A lot have worked as interns or paralegals so they are asked about what they did in those firms.

If a mention of the university is slipped in as part of an answer (eg I played Hockey for the Bristol university A team”) then it’s OK but the interviewer would not move the conversation on to “oh tell me more about Bristol, I hear that X teaches there etc etc”.

Firm (consulting) I used to work for did similar to @WhatapityWapiti describes. Removes the university bit from the CV and indeed most of the first stage screening is done by HR teams offshore anyway so they don't care about uni chat anyway followed by testing. So by the time the candidate speaks to someone senior in the UK they have generally passed a fair bit of screening and uni background not an interview question that's allowed.

A friend of mine. She was saying how that her son went to the same uni as the interviewer (non Oxbridge but still on the same level as prestige). Both had the same career interest and took the same modules. Interviewer smiled and said "I also went to (uni)" who is teaching X module now?

PwC have 400,000 applicants for their 7500 graduate placement scheme.

10?

I rate Oxbridge places highly. Even though I never applied, nor my ds's. But most sensible firms have more common sense than to only hire from Oxbridge.