When I hired people, the school didn’t matter to me.

UMD
UVA
Rutgers
An Ivy

I looked for what they had accomplished and how well they could communicate.

Anonymous wrote:Georgetown, according to the Georgetown admissions office at least.

lol!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

Is there any concrete proof of this? We've seen that majors matter, but we've known that for a while. Is there any study showing a lack of differentiation between similar majors and kids coming from ivies and lower ranked schools? All of the salary data still favors the ivy grads unless you have other data

PP said that’s “where we’re going.”
So how can there be proof?

how can PP know where we're going without data?

I work in international affairs, previously for the federal government and currently for a large, international affairs-related organization. I’ve been involved in hiring at both and school was not an important consideration.

That said, I would say two things as caveats. First, a lot of jobs in the space you mentioned require master’s degrees at a minimum, and so those degrees take precedence over undergrad. This never seems to get enough attention on this forum. Second, where you did grad school still doesn’t necessarily matter, but there is more familiarity with some programs than others which matters for signaling that the candidate has relevant knowledge. For example, in international affairs you get a lot of kids from DC schools (SAIS, Georgetown, GWU, American, etc.) and hiring managers are familiar with the curriculum and what kids learn or don’t learn there. But it’s more of “I know you learned this” versus “I’m more impressed with your school than candidate X.”

Anonymous wrote:I do a lot of hiring for entry level policy and media relations jobs at a prominent NGO in DC. Being able to write very well is the coin of the realm.

We hire from a range of schools, but if i were sorting solely by colleges, I'd definitely go with graduates of good SLACs over almost anyone else (although I'd probably also add at least some of the Ivies). People have to write-- and they get feedback on their writing--- at most SLACs. Over the past several years, our five best entry level hires were from Carleton, Smith, Oberlin, Swarthmore, and Bates. We've had a lot of other good people, but SLACs are doing well for us.

Interesting. That makes sense

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

Is there any concrete proof of this? We've seen that majors matter, but we've known that for a while. Is there any study showing a lack of differentiation between similar majors and kids coming from ivies and lower ranked schools? All of the salary data still favors the ivy grads unless you have other data

PP said that’s “where we’re going.”
So how can there be proof?

Anonymous wrote:People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

I think most people would consider this a welcome relief and long overdue.

I do a lot of hiring for entry level policy and media relations jobs at a prominent NGO in DC. Being able to write very well is the coin of the realm.

We hire from a range of schools, but if i were sorting solely by colleges, I'd definitely go with graduates of good SLACs over almost anyone else (although I'd probably also add at least some of the Ivies). People have to write-- and they get feedback on their writing--- at most SLACs. Over the past several years, our five best entry level hires were from Carleton, Smith, Oberlin, Swarthmore, and Bates. We've had a lot of other good people, but SLACs are doing well for us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

Is there any concrete proof of this? We've seen that majors matter, but we've known that for a while. Is there any study showing a lack of differentiation between similar majors and kids coming from ivies and lower ranked schools? All of the salary data still favors the ivy grads unless you have other data

That may be due to connections and alumni network rather than quality of candidates.

But, if you look at F500 CEOs, many did not go to Ivies.

Anonymous wrote:People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

Is there any concrete proof of this? We've seen that majors matter, but we've known that for a while. Is there any study showing a lack of differentiation between similar majors and kids coming from ivies and lower ranked schools? All of the salary data still favors the ivy grads unless you have other data

People don’t want to accept this but increasingly there will be less and less differentiation between graduating from Yale or Princeton and graduating from UMiami or Penn State.

Some people may not like this but this is where we are going. So it really doesn’t matter where you go for undergrad.

I’ve been on hiring panels and I think the most successful job candidates are the ones who express themselves well and who seem able to work with people from various backgrounds. Sometimes candidates from the most prestigious schools give off a subtle condescending, know-it-all vibe that’s offensive. I want employees who are smart, but can also work well with others and take direction. Students from lower ranked schools often shine brighter during interviews and are the better fit. School name recognition might help get you an interview, but personality will get you the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hiring manager in private sector. School doesn’t matter like it used to. At all. People need to understand that when they are thinking of spending 400k on undergrad

Flat false. And I run hiring in the private sector.

Also who says flat false? So douchey sounding. If you alone ‘run hiring’ then you likely work at some small shop.

+1 This is an outdated approach and the newer generation of hiring managers doesn’t think like boomers.

It's too bad. I think that's why things are so much worse today.

Flagships and regional universities have a lot of bright students. It would be foolish to not consider them equally. Top private colleges usually just confer wealth and access.

+ legacy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hiring manager in private sector. School doesn’t matter like it used to. At all. People need to understand that when they are thinking of spending 400k on undergrad

Flat false. And I run hiring in the private sector.

Also who says flat false? So douchey sounding. If you alone ‘run hiring’ then you likely work at some small shop.

+1 This is an outdated approach and the newer generation of hiring managers doesn’t think like boomers.

It's too bad. I think that's why things are so much worse today.

The schools have done it to themselves with all the admission games and test optional. Not merit-based and it shows.

I agree with you there, but so many colleges are TO these days. Even top 20 ones. Kids aren’t submitting 1420s because they are below 25.%

Right. So you need to look beyond the school when hiring. Before a Columbia applicant would be instantly desirable in that basis. Not anymore. The school brand is worth much less.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hiring manager in private sector. School doesn’t matter like it used to. At all. People need to understand that when they are thinking of spending 400k on undergrad

Flat false. And I run hiring in the private sector.

Also who says flat false? So douchey sounding. If you alone ‘run hiring’ then you likely work at some small shop.

+1 This is an outdated approach and the newer generation of hiring managers doesn’t think like boomers.

It's too bad. I think that's why things are so much worse today.

The schools have done it to themselves with all the admission games and test optional. Not merit-based and it shows.

The first year of test optional were high school 2021s , they are not out yet. Can’t blame TO for anything related to jobs and hiring yet