Author: user user

A university degree may help a graduate secure an interview, but it does not always convince an employer that the candidate can perform the job.

Recruiters say employers are increasingly looking beyond academic qualifications to assess how graduates solve problems, communicate, respond to feedback and apply what they have learnt in practical work situations.

The challenge is distinguishing candidates who lack experience but have the potential to learn from those who may require more support than an employer can provide.

Rachel Njoroge, a senior recruiter at Bridge Talent Management, says the gap partly reflects an education system that does not always prepare graduates for the demands of the workplace.

Fresh graduates may need support not only in technical skills but also in understanding workplace expectations, including writing professional emails, meeting deadlines, following reporting structures and communicating with colleagues.

‘Employers are not just assessing whether you can do the job; they are also assessing how much work it will take to get you to the point where you can do the job independently,’ Ms Njoroge says.

She says academic qualifications remain relevant, but their value depends on the position being filled. Some employers, particularly in highly competitive graduate recruitment programmes, may prioritise strong academic results, while technical roles may require specific professional qualifications or practical competencies.

A degree alone, however, does not necessarily demonstrate whether a candidate can apply knowledge to real-world problems, communicate effectively or take ownership of a task.

‘A First Class degree is an achievement, and I’m not dismissing that. But the degree alone doesn’t automatically tell an employer whether you can apply what you’ve learnt, solve problems in a real work environment, communicate with colleagues or take ownership of a task,’ Ms Njoroge says.

Hildah Nyatichi, an HR business partner and account manager at IHR Solutions, says academic qualifications remain an important starting point because they demonstrate a foundation of technical knowledge and a commitment to learning.

However, employers also need evidence of how candidates would perform once hired. In her experience, this has increased the importance of practical assessments, competency-based interviews and other methods of evaluating candidates beyond their CVs.

Recruiters are using practical assignments, case studies, presentations, role-play exercises and work simulations to assess candidates’ ability to handle tasks related to the positions they are applying for.

These approaches can reveal strengths and gaps that academic transcripts may not capture. A candidate applying for a communications role, for instance, may be asked to complete a writing assignment, while another applying for an analytical position may be assessed on how they interpret information and solve a problem.

Ms Nyatichi says work simulations and job-related assignments are particularly useful because they give employers a more realistic view of how candidates might perform.

Ms Njoroge says employers can also combine aptitude tests, interviews and practical assignments rather than relying on a single assessment.

‘An aptitude test might tell you one thing, an interview another, and a practical assignment something else. The point is to gather enough information to make a sound hiring decision, rather than relying on one interaction or one score,’ she says.

The approach also requires employers to interpret results carefully. A candidate’s nervousness during an interview, for example, should not automatically be treated as evidence that they cannot do the job.

For some roles, employers are also looking for evidence of work beyond formal education. Portfolios, personal projects and coding repositories can help demonstrate a candidate’s ability to apply skills, particularly where formal work experience is limited.

The recruitment process is also evolving alongside the use of digital tools and artificial intelligence. Ms Njoroge says some employers are adopting technology to support screening and assessment, although the extent of adoption varies.

Hiring a graduate who needs additional training carries costs that go beyond formal courses or induction programmes.

Managers and experienced colleagues may have to spend more time explaining tasks, reviewing work and correcting mistakes. This can delay a new employee’s productivity and reduce the time available for other responsibilities.

‘If a manager or a senior employee has to spend significantly more time helping a new graduate than anticipated, that time is coming from somewhere,’ Ms Njoroge says.

Ms Nyatichi says training costs can include both direct expenses and indirect costs associated with supervision, slower productivity and the time required for a new employee to become comfortable with the role.

For employers with limited resources or teams already under pressure, the capacity to train a graduate can influence hiring decisions.

Both recruiters say employers may be willing to hire candidates with potential where they have the time, support systems and structured programmes needed to develop them. Where a role requires immediate independent performance, however, an employer may favour someone with prior experience.

This creates a tension in entry-level recruitment. Employers want candidates who can contribute, but graduates entering the labour market may have had few opportunities to acquire practical experience.

‘You cannot say you’re looking for a fresh graduate and then expect them to have three years of experience, know every system you’re using and be able to perform independently from day one,’ Ms Njoroge says.

‘At some point, you have to decide whether you’re hiring for potential or whether you need someone who is already experienced.’

For employers, the challenge is to establish which qualifications and skills genuinely predict performance in a particular role.

Ms Njoroge says employers should consider practical tests where academic grades alone do not provide enough information about a candidate’s suitability. They should also review their onboarding processes to determine whether a graduate’s difficulties arise from gaps in ability, inadequate training or unclear expectations.