Is it time to ditch the 2:1?
Removing academic requirements from the Graduate recruitment process is something we are talking to our clients about more and more. It’s not a new subject of course, the likes of Nestle, EY and Grant Thornton being prominent in the press talking about how it’s helping them to recruit better quality candidates, yet many organisations are still reluctant to let go of that 2:1 benchmark, believing it to be the best indicator of top talent, whilst airing concerns about quality and high volumes of applications.
So is having a 2:1 and above the best indicator of a ‘good’ Graduate?
Well, the honest answer is that most companies simply don’t know because they are not allowing anyone who doesn’t meet that criteria to apply, and therefore it’s not being measured. More worryingly, having a minimum academic criteria in place, inadvertently disadvantages those candidates from lower socio-economic backgrounds (as they are more likely to fall below expected attainment levels than their counterparts).
With those more forward-thinking organisations reporting that large percentages of their most recent hires, obtained below the 2:1 cut off, it will hopefully make it easier for companies to understand the benefits of implementing a fairer and more contextualised recruitment process, where decisions are made on an individual level.
Measuring social mobility
Social mobility is a hot-topic at the moment, so we’d recommend that you start measuring the demographic of your applicants through your applicant tracking system, giving you valuable insight into your candidate pool (and subsequently allowing you to measure how well they do in your business).