Minimum 2:1 required
Discussion
Morning everyone!
I'm looking at a load of graduate schemes (mainly marketing) to apply to and a lot of them state a minimum of a 2:1. Now, I got a 2:2...
firstly, if I applied for some of these jobs, e.g Nissan Marketing Scheme. Would they turn me down instantly or would they still consider me, especially if I attached a cover letter as well? My CV does not state the level of degree I have, however it does still state 'BA Hons Business with Marketing'
Secondly, what's so special about a 2:1?! A lot of these descriptions state that they don't care what subject the degree is in... Surely for a marketing graduate scheme a 2:2 in Business with Marketing from Northumbria is better than a 1st in Drama from somewhere scabby like London Met?
All help appreciated!
I'm looking at a load of graduate schemes (mainly marketing) to apply to and a lot of them state a minimum of a 2:1. Now, I got a 2:2...
firstly, if I applied for some of these jobs, e.g Nissan Marketing Scheme. Would they turn me down instantly or would they still consider me, especially if I attached a cover letter as well? My CV does not state the level of degree I have, however it does still state 'BA Hons Business with Marketing'
Secondly, what's so special about a 2:1?! A lot of these descriptions state that they don't care what subject the degree is in... Surely for a marketing graduate scheme a 2:2 in Business with Marketing from Northumbria is better than a 1st in Drama from somewhere scabby like London Met?
All help appreciated!
davepoth said:
The difference between a pass and fail is only 1%. If they didn't differentiate, how would they know who the thickos are? (I got a 2:2)
I see where you are coming from however surely personal interviews are a much better judge than a number?You might find someone can get a 1st during uni by doing all assigned tasks etc however they might be completely dull, socially inactive and not at all creative.
Honestly, the 2.2 pretty much excludes you from the majority of graduate schemes which are worth considering. I know people with 2.2s who are infinitely 'better bets' than others with 2.1s, but they still won't get past the auto-filter. At the moment, there are so many excellent Oxbridge and Russell Group candidates with a 2.1 or 1st who can't get jobs that companies really don't need to consider 2.2 candidates. It's annoying and frankly short sighted, but it's the reality. You could do a masters if you still want to get into a graduate scheme?
Unfortunately, now the world and his wife seem to go to university whether they need to or not, companies need a way to differentiate and reduce the numbers of people they have to look at in detail. In the past, merely having a degree might have got your CV considered, but no longer. In a better job market they might not be so strict, but while there are so many candidates for every job they can afford to be picky.
As above, it's a simple way of easily sorting through the applicants, for example-
Job wants- 2:1 minimum, 1 year experience, preferably in a relevant field.
They get 100 applicants, 50 with a 2:2. So remove those, only 25 of the remaining 50 have any experience, and only 10 of those have experience in a relevant field. So they now have to sift through those 10 to decide who they would like to interview.
You'll see this at senior jobs too with the whole range of essential and desirable requirements.
Job wants- 2:1 minimum, 1 year experience, preferably in a relevant field.
They get 100 applicants, 50 with a 2:2. So remove those, only 25 of the remaining 50 have any experience, and only 10 of those have experience in a relevant field. So they now have to sift through those 10 to decide who they would like to interview.
You'll see this at senior jobs too with the whole range of essential and desirable requirements.
I know plenty of consultancies who will only take candidiates with 1st class degrees. It's the easiest way to filter 200 candidtaes down to 10.
I hired a graduate a few months back and asked the agencies for 1st class hons. Got about 20 CV's, only 4 with 1st. I read all of the CV's though, interviewed a couple of guys with 2:1 but with some relevant experience.
I gave the job to a guy with a 1st AND experience. If we didn't have any 1st class grads with experience I might well have given the job to a 2:1 guy with experience.
So..in short...yes it's probably worth sending your CV in if you can demonstrate you have other qualities (big tits/loose morals?).
Mind you, it's not unheard of for people to lie about qualifications and I bet not many caught.
I hired a graduate a few months back and asked the agencies for 1st class hons. Got about 20 CV's, only 4 with 1st. I read all of the CV's though, interviewed a couple of guys with 2:1 but with some relevant experience.
I gave the job to a guy with a 1st AND experience. If we didn't have any 1st class grads with experience I might well have given the job to a 2:1 guy with experience.
So..in short...yes it's probably worth sending your CV in if you can demonstrate you have other qualities (big tits/loose morals?).
Mind you, it's not unheard of for people to lie about qualifications and I bet not many caught.
My wife used to work in graduate recruitment for a big blue chip company. They typically received 30,000+ applications to join their graduate scheme.
Whilst you are doubtless right to say that many people with a 2:2 might be a better bet than other candidates who did 1% better and got a 2:1, the harsh reality is that with the best will in the world, they simply cannot interview 30,000 people, so they have to narrow it down somehow, and something binary such as the degree result allows them to narrow the field very quickly.
I've also seen a girl with a first get rejected because she'd filled the form in with green ink! When my wife was pre-screening CVs, those were the first two things she looked at - had the applicant used black ink as stipulated in the instructions, and did they have a 2:1 or better. It might seem petty to reject a candidate out of hand for using blue ink (more understandable for those who used green or pink), but they still had far more decent candidates than they would ever hire, so why would they take a risk on interviewing someone who couldn't be bothered to accurately follow simple instructions?
If it makes you feel better, it's only going to hold you back for your first job or two, as after that, experience and achievement counts for far more than your degree grade. I've also noticed in places I've worked which have graduate recruitment schemes that the graduate recruits never catch up to experienced hires on pay grades, and by the time they realise this and leave for a pay rise to what they should be on, everything has usually balanced out.
Whilst you are doubtless right to say that many people with a 2:2 might be a better bet than other candidates who did 1% better and got a 2:1, the harsh reality is that with the best will in the world, they simply cannot interview 30,000 people, so they have to narrow it down somehow, and something binary such as the degree result allows them to narrow the field very quickly.
I've also seen a girl with a first get rejected because she'd filled the form in with green ink! When my wife was pre-screening CVs, those were the first two things she looked at - had the applicant used black ink as stipulated in the instructions, and did they have a 2:1 or better. It might seem petty to reject a candidate out of hand for using blue ink (more understandable for those who used green or pink), but they still had far more decent candidates than they would ever hire, so why would they take a risk on interviewing someone who couldn't be bothered to accurately follow simple instructions?
If it makes you feel better, it's only going to hold you back for your first job or two, as after that, experience and achievement counts for far more than your degree grade. I've also noticed in places I've worked which have graduate recruitment schemes that the graduate recruits never catch up to experienced hires on pay grades, and by the time they realise this and leave for a pay rise to what they should be on, everything has usually balanced out.
I think its even better when someone says you must have a 2.1 degree when applying for some of the jobs Im looking at.
Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (f
k knows why they like that saying)...
But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (f
k knows why they like that saying)...But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
Aim for smaller companies - I graduated last summer with a 2:2 and didn't get allowed onto the graduate scheme I was accepted for (no complaints from me in that respect). This was at the end of June, and by November I was working for a small specialised technology consultancy in London.
I've been thrown in at the deep end and have learnt an absolute ton - not in the same fashion you would learn from a big blue chip (I gather it is a lot more strucutred and formal from what my mates on grad schemes say) and got involved in almost every function of the business bar finance.
A smaller company will most probably get less applicants and not have the 'tick the boxes' approach to applications.
I've been thrown in at the deep end and have learnt an absolute ton - not in the same fashion you would learn from a big blue chip (I gather it is a lot more strucutred and formal from what my mates on grad schemes say) and got involved in almost every function of the business bar finance.
A smaller company will most probably get less applicants and not have the 'tick the boxes' approach to applications.
Du1point8 said:
I think its even better when someone says you must have a 2.1 degree when applying for some of the jobs Im looking at.
Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (fk knows why they like that saying)...
But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
IT bods are ten a penny though Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (f
k knows why they like that saying)...But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
davepoth said:
Viperzs said:
Even though the difference between a 2:2 and a 2:1 could be as little as 1%?
The difference between a pass and fail is only 1%. If they didn't differentiate, how would they know who the thickos are? (I got a 2:2)sleep envy said:
Du1point8 said:
I think its even better when someone says you must have a 2.1 degree when applying for some of the jobs Im looking at.
Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (fk knows why they like that saying)...
But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
IT bods are ten a penny though Ignore the fact I have 10 years experience in the financial sector, with a work ethic that would make a workoholic blush sometimes and the systems I have developed are a great success including 2 greenfield ones (f
k knows why they like that saying)...But, if you dont have a 2.1 you aint coming in.
Do remember that I got refused an interview as a middle level programmer because of that little snippet, even better the company got in touch with the same agent who got in contact with me when the lead job came up, as they remembered my skills... difference in salary was £8k... so not like a massive step up.
Lardydah said:
Aim for smaller companies - I graduated last summer with a 2:2 and didn't get allowed onto the graduate scheme I was accepted for (no complaints from me in that respect). This was at the end of June, and by November I was working for a small specialised technology consultancy in London.
I've been thrown in at the deep end and have learnt an absolute ton - not in the same fashion you would learn from a big blue chip (I gather it is a lot more strucutred and formal from what my mates on grad schemes say) and got involved in almost every function of the business bar finance.
A smaller company will most probably get less applicants and not have the 'tick the boxes' approach to applications.
Agree with thisI've been thrown in at the deep end and have learnt an absolute ton - not in the same fashion you would learn from a big blue chip (I gather it is a lot more strucutred and formal from what my mates on grad schemes say) and got involved in almost every function of the business bar finance.
A smaller company will most probably get less applicants and not have the 'tick the boxes' approach to applications.
Also you may even get interviewed by the boss man himself if the company is small enough. The small outfit I know of would more than willingly look past the degree number, but would ask you to come in for a decent length informal chat and ask you to bring some examples of work with you to discuss.
Big companies cannot do such things because of the sheer numbers of applicants and or busy HR people who must not spend inordinate amounts of time trying to find people to hire. Its only part of their job.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff