Who would you rather hire

thetravelman123

Who would you rather hire, someone who goes to uni, gets a first but does nothing else or someone who goes to uni, gets a 2:1 (lower) and volunteers, gets involved and is working part time?

shortcrust

thetravelman123 wrote: »

Who would you rather hire, someone who goes to uni, gets a first but does nothing else or someone who goes to uni, gets a 2:1 (lower) and volunteers, gets involved and is working part time?

I obviously wouldn’t make a decision based on that info alone. However I think most employers don’t care too much about the difference between a 1st and a 2:1. I personally don’t warm towards CVs and application forms that are heavy on details of volunteering etc unless it’s directly relevant to the role. It’s the same with the part time work - if it’s not relevant to the job it wouldn’t sway me one way or another.

I’ve done a lot of recruitment and I can’t remember ever having two candidates who were close enough for us to have to consider their ‘extra curricular’ stuff.

thetravelman123

thank you for the messages guys. was having a discussion today about it so was interested what people on here thought too

Murphybear

I used to be on University panels for recruiting non academic staff. A degree was required for one post but it didn’t matter what it was or the grade. Unless the degree is very relevant for the job it doesn’t matter.

I have been to interviews where we ended up with 2 candidates and it was difficult to choose between them. We stayed until evening and covered a white board with pros and cons of each one. One of them edged slightly ahead and we appointed her. No regrets, she was excellent.

Sometimes you have to go with your gut feelings. I used to find that you get a mental image of a person from the application form and they often turn out to completely different.

Floop

I would choose the person who did volunteer work because I think it shows a more rounded person who takes initiative. I don’t place sufficient value on a 1st for it to trump the person who has gone out, got involved in things and has more hands on experience on their CV, whether the experience is relevant to the role or not.

Tigsteroonie

I'd take the person who eschewed university and did an apprenticeship instead, demonstrating experience at the role and a willingness to work to an employer's rules.

74jax

thetravelman123 wrote: »

Who would you rather hire, someone who goes to uni, gets a first but does nothing else or someone who goes to uni, gets a 2:1 (lower) and volunteers, gets involved and is working part time?

I wouldn't make the decision on this information only.

shortcrust

Floop wrote: »

I would choose the person who did volunteer work because I think it shows a more rounded person who takes initiative. I don’t place sufficient value on a 1st for it to trump the person who has gone out, got involved in things and has more hands on experience on their CV, whether the experience is relevant to the role or not.

Great in theory but a load of lovely stuff on a CV is often an indicator of social and economic advantage as much as anything else. You might end up choosing the person who has the time to volunteer - for example a single person with no commitments over someone whose free time is spent caring for kids and/or elderly relatives. Relevant volunteer work isn’t alway easy to come by, so you might also end up choosing someone with family connections over someone without.

One of the advantages that private schools kids often have is a CV packed full of relevant extra curricular activities and volunteer work, often arranged for them.

NBLondon

It depends on the role. For a highly technical role, a first in a STEM subject beats anything extra-curricular. But for a more people-focused role, other activities might indicate valuable soft skills. You'd then confirm this at interview.

Pennywise

Obviously depends on the job itself.

If it was for a technical/specialist role with minimal contact with the general public etc., I'd probably go for the first degree.

If it was for a more creative, collaborative, public facing role, then I think the one who'd done volunteering etc would be more likely to be a "people person" so that would probably edge it for me.

But it also depends on the existing staff & management as to who'd fit in best.

But the far more important issue for me would be the subject in which the degree was achieved. For my industry, accountancy, I'd rather a 2:1 in a STEM ahead of a first in a humanities or creative subject.

fewgroats

I think the posters above might be sugar coating it. The one at uni is more likely to get a job (but it would depend on how long they stay unemployed). The one who volunteers gets the stress from volunteering and stress from Job Centre Plus that they haven't got a real job.