DEAR EMPLOYER

Dear Employer,

Yes, they are resourceful, knowledgeable, quick thinking and thorough; yet they sometimes could be narrow minded, excessively detailed and without initiative, as they their love for instructions might turn them into robots, incapable of making decisions without the “boss”.

Who knows? They are probably just bookworms without any high level intelligence.  They score high grades because of their prowess in storing book information in their heads and pouring it out in correct details for an examiner. Faced with real life situations in which critical thinking, analysis or smart decisions are required, their weaknesses become clear.

Perhaps, they are really smart and creative with high level mental productivity, even under pressure.

Dear employer of university graduates, I am sorry for starting off so abruptly without even a line of introduction. I guess my hands responded quickly to the pressure in my head. This writing is a response to a recent debate “Should people be employed based on their academic performance or based on their participation in extra-curricular activities”.

I guess, Mr. Employer that you are confused already because mere weighting the pros and cons should serve to throw you into indecision. I promise to confuse you more (I am confused myself and I cannot give what I don’t have…just read).

I am aware that every employer of labour, skilled or unskilled, scientific or artistic, desires the best. This is understandable, with profit making at the base. The question is “How do you know the best?” A quick glance at the human face would have served well but looks have proved highly deceptive.  Rarely any worthwhile employer hires a person that “looks like the best”.

With a pack of university graduates to choose from, employers have resorted to the wisdom of the good old certificate. This approach assures high graders employment and proclaims the doom of lower graders. University students have long caught this light so an air of pride and depression is noticeable amongst high grade and low grade final year students respectively.

Just when everyone thinks things are running smoothly and pressure should be exerted on students to work harder, employers sound the alarm.  It turns out not all high graders make productive members of staff, thus the dilemma.

In the first part of this writing, I examined some scenarios as regards high graders. I will now consider the lower graders.

If the certificate tells the complete truth, then they are lazy folks, apt at procrastinating and making excuses. They are never do wells with little knowledge. The smallest task would seem like an insurmountable mountain to them.

From another stance, they could be hot blooded breeds, too intelligent to be confined to classrooms and examinations. They prefer practical learning and experiences to long lecture hours. They make good decision makers because of their wealth of experience.

It could also be that they are smart people in the wrong course of study. They probably make teachable employees.

Just before I move on, I want to bring to the surface the fact that low graders are so because they don’t do what high graders do or at least not as well. This implies that they must have been doing other things but studying. Let’s call those things extracurricular activities. Any ideas? Engaged in sports, loafing around, pursuing a passion, working part time jobs, frankly the list is a long one.  But just a thought: while loafing around town, could they have made some contacts that would serve well if you employed them as marketers? Or could they have acquired knowledge about some crucial needs of people, considering such knowledge would pay off if you employed them in your product design department?

Thus the debate: “Should employers hire a graduate for good academic standing or should they throw that to the wind and seek to know how much knowledge the graduate has outside the classroom?”

I promised to confuse you and I hope I have.