As companies face the possibility of not filling their graduate vacancies, leader in workplace assessment, SHL Group releases research which shows that whilst the number of graduates is growing the ability to select the best is an inexact science based on CVs, interviews and assumptions.
Teaming up with the graduate research arm of recruiter Hobsons, SHL has surveyed 25,000 current students – ten per cent of this year’s total graduate population, and the largest survey of its kind.
The results of questions based on eight core workplace competencies provide interesting reading for HR professionals on all aspects of recruiting from how and where to advertise to what salary to offer. The competencies researched were: leading and deciding; supporting and co-operating; interacting and presenting; analysis and interpretation; creativity and conceptualising; organising and executing; adapting and coping and enterprising and performing.
One of the key findings was that whilst companies might want graduates with all-round skills, only three per cent fit this criterion – just 7,500 graduate job-seekers.
To attract all-rounders or those with specific skills, recruiters need to be sure that they can accurately interpret a CV or interview to determine how a candidate will fit the role.
The 25,000 graduates surveyed were strong on supporting and co-operating, analysing and interpreting, organising and executing and adapting and coping. They were weak however when it came to interacting and presenting, creating and conceptualising and being enterprising and performing.
Head psychologist for SHL, James Bywater, said: “The graduates could be split into three main groups. The first group, ‘the intellectuals’, had strengths in analysing and interpretation and in creating and conceptualising whilst ‘the commercials’ were good at leading and deciding, interacting and presenting and being enterprising and performing. Our third group, ‘the flexibles’, showed qualities around supporting and co-operating and adapting and coping.
Bywater adds: “Different groups will fit in different job roles. Whilst ‘intellectuals’ would perform well as scientists, programmers or analysts, ‘commercials’ would become good leaders and management consultants and ‘flexibles’ would succeed in team based sales and services.”
“The importance of this for recruiters is to realise that there are few all-rounders and if companies are looking for people to excel in team work or to lead they should not be looking for someone who sits in the ‘intellectuals’ group. They will have their own strengths but these may not be qualities demanded of the job.”
“Most employers looking to recruit the brightest graduates will look to the Russell Group of 19 universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh and London. However, our research into graduates from these top ‘academic’ universities revealed that they would be weak in any jobs requiring support and co-operation. Not surprisingly they excelled in leading and deciding, analysis and interpretation, and organising and executing,” added Bywater.
Interestingly the research showed that those students with better grades, and therefore scoring high on the UCAS points system, had enhanced academic skills but often at the expense of other important ‘soft skills’ such as supporting and co-operating.
The research also looked at the subjects taken by students and found those on business-related courses were good at leading and deciding, and organising and executing whilst students on arts based courses had greater skills in interacting and presenting, and creating and conceptualising. Science students scored highly on analysis and interpretation, and adapting and coping.
And whilst students facing loans may lament at their need to work part-time to fund their studies, the research showed that this widened their skills set. The same was true of work placements, internships and work experience.
A surprising result was that students who belonged to sports groups at universities and therefore deemed perfect for team work, showed a weakness for supporting and co-operating. Those undertaking charitable work gained many skills such as leadership and organisation but were poor on analysis and interpreting.
Equally surprising were the results for students undertaking foreign travel either before, during or after their course. “Most employers would instinctively think these people were resourceful and organised but our research showed that travel had no impact on their organisational skills and did nothing to enhance their supportive and co-operational attributes,” said Bywater.
When it comes to rewards, students who deem themselves to be good at being enterprising and performing, demand a higher salary (around £30,000) than those recognising their adapting and coping skills (£15,000). Almost as low (£20,000) were those who saw themselves as supportive and organised.
Bywater said: “This research clearly demonstrates that here is not a ‘one size fits all’ approach to recruiting graduates. It is important for recruiters to target messages in everything from their ‘milk rounds’ to adverts and salaries in order to gain the right person for the right job. There is always an element of self-selection in recruiting so if a company is describing itself as innovative it needs to know that that will appeal to some and not to others. It’s important that they use the correct language to reach the graduates they want.
“Also, recruiters need to dig deeper than the university a graduate attended, their CV and presentation at interviews to determine how fit they are for the job and never be tempted to assume that because someone is strong in sports they will make a perfect team player. Using psychometric tests businesses can tell a lot more about the person they are interviewing than a CV or interview ever could.”
“If there was one lesson for students it would be to add to their skills set by undertaking extra activities such as work experience, paid work and charitable commitments,” he concluded.