What works for graduate recruiters?

Summary
How do employers recruit graduates?
What do graduates bring to a business?
Career development and training
Utilisation
The local aspect to graduate recruitment
Conclusions - is there a 'right way' for employers to recruit graduates?
References

Summary

Chris Woolliscroft from the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) highlights findings from the recent DfES research report entitled: 'Employer and University Engagement in the Use and Development of Graduate Level Skills' [1]. The research uses a mix of statistical analysis and case study interviews to identify ‘what works’ with regards to the recruitment, utilisation and retention of graduates and the lessons that can be learned from those who have not been so successful in the graduate labour market.

How do employers recruit graduates?

Once employers have decided that they want to recruit graduates, how do they go about it? Is there a ‘right’ way to recruit graduates? Do they devote resources into developing a specialist recruitment programme, or place an advert in the local press, just as they would for any of their vacancies? In reality, recruitment methods vary between companies and are dependent on the amount of resource the company has to devote to graduate recruitment and the reasons for recruiting in the first place.

Generally speaking, if an employer wants to be a successful graduate recruiter, it needs to have a structured recruitment process. The most successful recruitment processes were well structured and contained several stages. However, these methods were mainly used by larger companies who had the resources and need to recruit large numbers of graduates. Companies would start by contacting universities to attend careers fairs, etc. Some would target particular institutions (because they were seen to be ‘the best’); others recruited on a national or even international basis, often via the internet. Applications would then be sifted according to various criteria, including A-level results (as most jobs were offered before graduation) and work experience whilst studying. Successful applicants were invited to a first interview, then an assessment centre stage (with psychometric testing) in order to select candidates for a final interview before job offers were made.

This process was expensive, both in terms of time and money. However, for this type of recruiter, graduates were seen as the future management of the organisation and selecting the right people was crucial.

For specialist recruiters, when hiring research staff, technical knowledge was all important: employers were willing to sacrifice other skills for this. Other types of graduate trainee (often on management programmes) were expected to have a high level of technical knowledge, but they also needed ‘soft’ skills, to enable them to become the successful senior managers of the future. Many employers preferred graduates from sandwich degrees, because they have gained practical experience and have a better idea about what the world of work has in store for them.

Large companies had a head start when it comes to graduate recruitment, due to their higher profile amongst graduates and greater resources to devote to recruitment. However, this does not mean that smaller employers - who do not have the need or resources to recruit large numbers of graduates - cannot mimic their success. Some of these employers found it advantageous to develop links with one or two specific universities, whose graduates were seen to be beneficial to their business: they sought out the graduates they wanted, because they had to target their resources strategically and could not deal with the volume of applications received by larger employers.

Other employers, typically the smallest ones, did not target their recruitment activities and were more likely to report difficulties. Many SMEs felt that they did not do enough recruitment to make forging links with universities worthwhile. When they did recruit, they tended to advertise in the local press, and some recruited on a national basis via the internet. This lack of targeting did cause problems: too many or too few applications (some felt that they did not have the ‘name’ to attract and some could not cope with a high volume of applicants), or applications from graduates with the wrong attributes. Some felt that the larger companies had taken all of the good graduates, leaving them with the ‘remains’.

These employers also expressed a preference for applicants from sandwich courses: they could not afford to have long training periods, so needed graduates who could ‘hit the ground running’. One key concern for smaller employers who actively sought to recruit graduates, was retention - they did not want to lose recruits to the bright lights of London once they had got a foot on the career ladder. For example, a small civil engineering company in the east actively shied away from recruiting top tier graduates, because it had found in the past that they were unlikely to stay with the firm. Instead, it recruited graduates with lower degree classifications and trained them up, actively looking for people who would fit in with the company and stay for the longer term.

Companies that had adopted the targeting approach to graduate recruitment generally reported this as being successful. Not only were they able to fill their vacancies, but they were able to do so with the right people and did not experience retention problems as a result.

What do graduates bring to a business?

Evidence from the National Employers Skills Survey 2005 shows that the majority of employers find that their graduates are either 'very well' or 'well prepared' for their roles [2]. This is supported by evidence from the case studies in the DfES research.

Graduates provide added value to the employer and bring a distinct set of skills to a business. Some of the most commonly mentioned qualities were that graduates:

challenge how things are done / ‘questioning’;
assimilate things quicker (when compared to non-graduates);
are flexible;
come at things from a different perspective (often theoretical);
are problem solvers;
bring new ideas and energy;
use their initiative and act without waiting for instruction.

Where concerns were voiced, these were around issues like: work readiness, commercial awareness and a lack of practical skills amongst new recruits. For example, law firms were often disappointed at the ability of graduates to contextualise theoretical knowledge and apply this in the commercial world. A lack of practical skills was often seen as a problem by those in specialist industries, such as engineering companies, often saying that degrees should have a larger practical component.

Identifying gaps in the preparedness of graduate recruits is the easy part; the difficulty comes when employers try and communicate these concerns to universities. In reality, employers seem to have little influence on course content and some have reported that attempts to do this have left them at odds with professional bodies. Those worried about potential employees’ practical skills often targeted universities and courses known to have a large practical component. This, however, may leave smaller employers with a problem: those companies who have the resources to target these universities are likely to be larger firms, potentially leaving smaller employers with a shortage of appropriate graduates.

Career development and training

Most employers viewed training as imperative to career development - ranging from formal, off the job training, through to extensive training in the workplace. What’s more, many found the promise of high quality training a useful tool for attracting graduates at the recruitment stage and to aid retention once in the post.

Many smaller organisations were keen to point out that a lack of formal training programmes need not limit progression within the company: they were able to offer responsibility much sooner than larger companies, allowing graduates to progress up the career ladder more quickly.

Organisations across all sizes and sectors had noticed a definite shift towards a 'what are you going to do for me?' attitude from graduates, with respect to their career development and training. Any organisation that is serious about recruiting graduates and keeping them in the long term must think carefully about the training and development that they offer. Otherwise they may have problems with high turnover, as graduates leave to pursue their career elsewhere.

Utilisation

Employers deployed their graduates differently, depending on the size of the company and the original reasons for recruitment. Many graduates in larger companies took up places on a graduate training programme. This involved graduates taking up different jobs in the company - normally for a fixed period of time - and being assessed in each role before moving on to another.

Many smaller graduate recruiters who recruited on an ad hoc basis (often to fill a particular job) did not have a clear idea of the career path that they would like their graduates to take. As a result, many had significant recruitment and retention problems because there would often be a mismatch between the graduate’s expectations and the job on offer.

Recruiting the right graduates is only half the battle; companies still have to hang on to the graduates that they attract. The best way that they can do this is by making sure that the graduates are challenged in the way that they expect and have a structured training and career path, so that they feel that they have a future with the company. These are the main tools that successful graduate recruiters use to make today’s graduate recruits into the managers of the future.

The local aspect to graduate recruitment

Analysis of data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) shows that there is a strong preference for people to study in their region of domicile. In most cases, between one- and two-thirds of students study in their region of origin; this can be up to three quarters in some peripheral regions.

HESA data also reveals a preference amongst students to find their first job in the place at which they studied. This is good news for local employers: they seem to be getting their fair share of graduates. Plus, data from the Labour Force Survey shows that there is little difference between regions in the proportion of employment in graduate jobs (London being the exception) [3]. The key things to take away from the data analysis are that: there are suitable jobs for graduates in all regions and there are graduates willing to develop careers locally and fill these posts.

Employers will only target universities - local or otherwise - if they have something in which they are interested, i.e. suitable graduates. For those employers who required graduates to have a specific degree qualification, it was this that was most important, irrespective of locality. Thus recruiting from a local university was not important to these employers, although if they were able to get the graduates they needed locally, there were additional benefits to this (these are explored in greater detail below).

The general recruitment problems of smaller employers described above also apply at the local level. Those smaller employers with limited resources who did work with their local university found that this led to a manageable number of applications, from the right kind of people, who wanted to stay and develop careers locally.

Finding graduates with the right skills is clearly the main aim for most recruiters. But, there were several examples in the case studies where ‘localness’ was also a key factor. For example, a financial services firm based in Birmingham, but with sites all over the country, needed people to support the future of the business in the Midlands. By targeting five local universities, it was able to attract a large number of high calibre graduates for the jobs it had available. Also, because the applicants were local, there would be no problems of people finding it difficult to settle in the area and the company knew that they were willing to stay for the long term to develop their careers in Birmingham.

An additional benefit from targeting local universities was financial: developing and maintaining links locally costs less relative to doing so nationally. Even where employers have links with universities both locally and nationally, proximity helps deepen the link with the local institution. This was also the case for specialist recruiters who were very particular about the skills of their graduates.

That said, some employers who were keen on engaging with local universities reported difficulties doing so; for example, trying to get in touch with the appropriate member of staff. Those employers who were successful admit that they had to work hard to establish links. This is a general theme: most employers report being able to benefit from having developed links with local universities, but this requires the employer to make a substantial investment in the relationship.

Employers who have successfully developed relationships with local universities benefit from doing so: they get the graduates they need at a lower cost than they would from recruiting nationally. There is a clear message here to employers: if you can, go local. Smaller firms or those who are looking for graduates to be based in a particular region may find this approach particularly beneficial.

Conclusions - is there a 'right way' for employers to recruit graduates?

There are a number of ways that employers can recruit graduates and some are more successful than others. It seems that when it comes to recruiting graduates, most employers get out what they put in: structured recruitment methods, allied to post recruitment training and professional development, results in a high degree of satisfaction, both from the employer and the graduate. Graduate employment is a partnership between the two: the ‘right’ graduate can provide added value to the employer, but the employer has to be prepared to make an investment in its graduates if it is to be rewarded with the high level of commitment that will turn a graduate recruit into a senior manager in the organisation.

Overall, the picture of employer-university engagement is a positive one, but not all companies are able to offer this kind of commitment. This may be because they simply do not have the resources, or they do not think it is worth the cost considering the amount of graduate recruitment they need to do. The danger is that if nothing is done to help these employers, they will just drift away from universities and stay as just in time recruiters because they do not have any other option.

One way of helping these employers is to break down the transaction costs associated with effective engagement by using a brokering service. This way, the needs of employers may be articulated to universities and the broker may also give advice about how to utilise and develop graduates if employers are to get the best from them.

References

1. T. Hogarth et al (2007): Employer and University Engagement in the Use and Development of Graduate Level Skills. Department for Education and Skills (DfES) research, Research Report 835.

2. Learning and Skills Council, (2006): National Employers Skills Survey 2005. Publication reference: LSC-P-NAT-060304.

3. As defined by the SOC(HE) classification. See P. Elias and K. Purcell (2004): SOC (HE): A classification of occupations for studying the graduate labour market.

Members' login