In recruiting people with higher education qualifications, the employers in the sample clustered in two groups: those who drew equally from colleges and universities –
42 out of 101 – and those that recruited mainly or only from universities – 32 out of 101 (Table 6.10). A smaller number of organisations – ten – had a preference for, or only recruited, from colleges. Overall, a large majority of employers (80 out 101) recruited from both kinds of institution.
Table 6.10: Recruitment from universities or colleges or both N=101 Responses Percentage Mainly colleges 10 9.9 Only colleges 0 0.0 Mainly universities 28 27.7 Only universities 4 4.0 Both equally 42 41.6 Other 12 11.9 Don’t know 4 4.0 No response 3 1.0 Total 101 100.0
In the main, this pattern reflected the types and levels of qualifications sought by
employers. Where a higher education qualification below Bachelors’ level was required, such as a Foundation Degree or a HND or HNC, then employers generally looked to recruit from either set of providers. In some cases, this reflected long-standing
relationships between local employers and institutions. These were often institutions with a history of past involvement in day-release education and training, especially among the colleges and some of the former polytechnics.
Other examples were more recent, with the Foundation Degree commonly providing a vehicle for new partnerships between colleges, universities and employers. These were often in specialist and niche areas where there was demand for new sets of skills and knowledge or where there was a shortage of skills at the intermediate levels.
Where Bachelors’ qualifications were required (reported in 59 cases), the larger private sector organisations – in particular the engineering and technology companies – recruited almost always from among the universities, usually from a specific few institutions:
We only recruit from specific universities with expertise in teaching relevant courses. The company has classified universities (gold, silver or bronze) based on their expertise and reputation and targets recruitment accordingly.
The business takes graduates for job specific roles and graduate training schemes. It wants high quality graduates who will remain with the company in the long term. The company knows which institutions are likely to produce the calibre of recruits we want.
Outside this group, the picture was mixed, with several of the smaller firms and public sector organisations recruiting Bachelors’ students from colleges as well as universities. Sometimes, this was where a college or university offered progression to the final year of a Bachelor’s Degree following successful completion of a Foundation Degree or a Higher National qualification. In other cases, they might be free-standing Bachelors’ Degrees in specialist subjects (such as equine dentistry or osteopathy) where the colleges were the recognised or sometimes the sole providers in the public system.
Even so, Bachelors’ Degrees were a small proportion of the higher education taught in colleges and these, in turn, were a very small proportion compared to those provided in
universities. In contrast to their preference for universities in the recruitment of individuals graduating with Bachelors’ Degrees, respondents were more relaxed about whether colleges or universities were their preferred source of recruits with sub-Bachelor qualifications. Among those recruiting from both FECs and universities, the location of study usually only mattered because it was where a desired qualification was taught or most likely to be found (Table 6.11).
Table 6.11: Reasons for recruiting sub-Bachelor qualifications from both colleges and universities
Counts As long as they have the specific professional qualification
it doesn’t matter where from
10 Skills, aptitude, experience, interests, industry links are
more important
4
It just depends where the qualification is offered 1
Level 4/5 is likely to come from a job 3
Local is cheaper 1
It was mostly in the context of sub-Bachelor qualifications that employers were in a position to compare recruitment from colleges and universities; and, if they had preferences or requirements, to describe them. When asked if there were differences between the two sets of institutions or between their higher education students, most employers found it difficult to generalise their experience in these terms. As businesses, this was not how they viewed their involvement with these institutions.
Indeed, their recruitment relationships with colleges and universities for short-cycle higher- level vocational qualifications rarely involved or invited such distinctions. This was a consistent view among those recruiting from qualifications at higher technician and lower professional levels. They had no wish and saw no reason to describe their recruitment policies and practices in such ways. Their preferences and priorities were frequently to do with the nature of course, the expertise of the staff and the capabilities of the students, and less the type of provider.
In some cases, they were critical of the teaching and learning on such programmes, especially where there was a lack of current industry expertise among the teaching team. Colleges and universities were also wide of the mark in some of their assumptions about roles in the workplace. Several employers expressed disappointment with the soft skills displayed by new recruits, including their appreciation of how to behave in a business environment and their unrealistic ideas about salary and conditions. Their academic competence, by contrast, occasioned little comment.
Although organisations might be directly involved with a small number of higher education providers, there was recognition that colleges and universities were diverse in their course offerings. Employers were keen to work with providers that demonstrated commitment and flexibility in the approach to working with businesses. There was an admission by some organisations that – because of increased competition – those entering with Bachelors’ Degrees were not always employed in graduate-type jobs. Nevertheless, the bulk of employers recruiting from sub-Bachelor programmes expected to continue their links with
colleges and universities in the near future. Several expected higher standards of service and commitment in return for increased fees. In some cases, employers were looking to develop new pathways as their needs in specific or specialist areas evolved (such as in mechatronics).
A number of organisations saw the rise in fees for undergraduate education as an opportunity to recruit talented school-leavers who might be put off entering higher education because of the cost. Some were developing new schemes aimed at this
population. Others were looking to expand their existing schemes. Either way, they hoped that their own training programmes (leading to qualifications at the higher levels) would be viewed as an attractive alternative to full-time higher education.
We prefer to grow our own. We want our employees to know our business and be specialist in the skills we require. We train our apprentices on the job and use colleges to back us up with the academic stuff. This way we get what the company needs.
We’ve advertised for our new management apprenticeship programme and we’re very pleased with the applications we’ve had. The response is better than for our graduate scheme and quality of applicants is better. We could have filled the places several times over.
The impact on recruitment opportunities of these and other changes was unclear. The role of sub-Bachelor qualifications as a route to employment was likely to come under
increasing pressure in many areas. At the same time, there might be more scope for these same qualifications to serve as vehicles for continuing professional development. Some of the organisations which had featured strongly in the growth of Foundation Degrees, such as those responsible for childcare and early years education, were confronted by
reductions in government funding on the one side and increased tuition fees on the other. Much of their recruitment and workforce development was linked to provision in colleges and these relationships were probably among the most at risk.
A majority of organisations (61 reported cases) expected their future recruitment needs to remain broadly the same as at present compared to a sizeable minority (33 reported cases) who anticipated change. Among the reasons that might make them look more at colleges was the growth of apprenticeships at the higher levels and the expansion of work- focused qualifications similar to the Foundation Degree.
We have very good relationships with FE colleges and the Foundation Degree is a good course. They have all progressed from NVQ 2 and 3 and this seems to be the preferred model for our employees – we do not recruit graduates. We like to take our apprentices through the whole scheme and develop their potential. As part of the succession planning for the business there is likely to be more development with further education colleges, including for professional qualifications.
I’m a huge fan of Level 4 apprenticeships. They provide the right balance of training and education. I like the idea of broad, liberal higher education but it
isn’t necessarily right for the business I’m in. I can see higher education moving much more towards skilling people rather than just educating them.