Should recruiters expect higher education to deliver graduates who meet the expectations of employers?
Wed, Mar 28th, 2007
This year marks the 40th anniversary of the Association of Graduate Careers Advisory Services. In fact, there has been advice for graduates since the end of World War II. However, progress in meeting the needs of employers has been at best patchy, argued Carl Gilleard, Chief Executive of the Association of Graduate Recruiters.
43% of young people now go on to University. 168 Higher Education Institutions now turn out 300,000 graduates. There are as many as 1 million students in higher education at any one time. However, despite the diversity of graduates, more employers are fishing in the same pool.
As part of the Government's drive for "Greater Social Cohesiveness", an annual bill of £17 bn is spent on higher education. But why this emphasis on higher education? From a graduate perspective, graduates are perceived to enjoy a better life and have better jobs. From an employer perspective, education is the key to ensuring a basic standard of employability.
What are Graduate Recruiters looking for? • Enthusiasm • Motivation • Commitment • Drive • Willing to learn from experiences
From Universities, employers are looking for a number of qualities in graduates, but regard the following contributions as key: • inspiration • willingness to aspire • encouragement of students • willingness to apply their knowledge and experiences • reflect on actions and situations • awareness - a sense of the world of work • not being afraid to fail • a high quality of teaching beyond research
Few employers expect work ready graduates. However, more and more employers are expecting good basic skills and a willingness to learn and to adapt. 56% of employers recruited graduates, but of these a staggering 46% failed to fill their vacancies. The reasons were as follows: • Lack of enough candidates with basic skills, e.g. soft skills • Lack of enough candidates with appropriate qualifications. For example there is a desperate shortage of people with scientific training. There is a current need in industry for 2.4 million scientists such as chemists and physicists. • Lack of geographic mobility. This is a new phenomenon and is mainly due to high property prices, rents and student loan schemes. 1 in 5 students are now studying at a local university. A consequence is often that graduates move overseas to competitors.
There is growing evidence that employers are becoming dissatisfied with higher education and might take action to develop the necessary skills to enable them to fill their vacancies. Lifelong Learning has arrived, with employers willing to devote resources to • applying knowledge to suit the employment situation • development of soft skills • develop leadership skills, and a willingness to "take control".
Anne-Marie Martin, of the University of London Careers Services, responded by saying the Universities had made considerable progress in providing a range of courses and options for students, in response to initiatives by Government and employers.
Estelle Morris, when a Minister with the Education portfolio, considered that the role of universities should be as follows: • Research and pursuit of knowledge at the highest levels • Pursue ever higher quality of research and teaching • Transfer their knowledge to students • Enable students to experience the social benefits of mixing and networking with peers
There is never any reference to the fact that universities should be a "training" institute. Universities are responsible for technological developments, freedom of thought and research analysis. They are not in a position to give people work experiences and to teach work based skills.
Employers have been given the opportunity to shift the higher education agenda. NVQs were introduced on the instigation of employers. However, these have been underused and undervalued. Employers have encouraged the development of a "tick box" culture which discourages graduate expectations. For universities to make a meaningful contribution and to plan effectively, employers need to make a major contribution to providing better predictive labour market information. Only in this way can an attempt be made to prevent serious shortages and surpluses.
The engagement of students in future planning is hard. It is probably harder now than it has ever been. For students, there has been a rapidly decreasing divide between work and play. They no longer have loyalties and, having seen amongst their parents redundancies during the Thatcher era, are more resourceful and discriminating. What students require from universities are: • encouragement and confidence in participation • developing maturity in a safe environment • the ability to "make the most of the moment" • development of peer networks
The new red brick universities have been starved of money for good teaching and research in favour of the pre 1992 institutions. This "prejudice" has been reinforced by employers, who prefer to recruit from the pre 1992 institutions.
Employers are not transparent about their needs. They say they need "numerate" or "high calibre" graduates. However, the fact is that commonality amongst employers just doesn't exist. Employers say they want innovative thinkers who can think outside the box. However, in many cases, they then "grind them down". Employers say that they want more graduates but the consequence has been expansion of university places with potential science students choosing to study softer options. Employers expect graduates to be able to "read and write". However, universities do not teach this.
What is required is a better understanding of what is required from employers. Only in this way can there be a better match between graduate supply and demand.
