How seriously do you take league tables?

Really? Could you explain the recruitment practices of the company I work for? They recently hired several ex-poly business studies graduates on their competitive graduate training scheme, clearly these people beat people from universities much higher up the league tables to these positions. In fact, having spoken to our graduate recruitment specialist recently she says there is a trend now of reducing requirements for schemes and increasing investment in extended selection procedures instead. An increase in graduates has actually cause companies to invest more money in selecting prospective employees rather than relying on the old brand names. Most companies realise that its a better business resilience strategy to actively find the best employees in tough times than it is to just rely on academic selection procedures that are 3 or 4 years out of date when the person comes out with a degree.

“Diverse groups of problem solvers—groups of people with diverse tools—consistently outperformed groups of the best and the brightest. If I formed two groups, one random (and therefore diverse) and one consisting of the best individual performers, the first group almost always did better. … Diversity trumped ability.” Scott Page, The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies

Interesting, the HR people at work were talking about that book on our induction, although in a slightly different context.

I believe that the effect of league tables on your decision making regarding universities is very different depending on what course you want to study but it can be split into two rough categories.

People studying less traditional and more specific courses, such as Film Production Technology, tend to rely on league tables less and research universities more thoroughly themselves.

People studying more traditional courses, such as languages, maths, economics etc, take league tables into account far more when they are deciding where to begin their research. Typically it is difficult to distinguish the strengths of departments at different universities as these courses are often taught quite similarly. As most people will want to go to the best uni they can they will want to find out which unis are strongest for their course and league tables are a good starting point for finding this out.

well said

So based on your logic, what is Reading?
Some courses require BCC I think it is, and I think history is now AAA or AAB

You're unlikely to get a job outside of this little island if your uni isn't known in other countries.

So that's Oxford and perhaps LSE and Imperial in selected fields of work abroad. Hardly any Americans have heard of Cambridge, UCL and Warwick. You say Warwick to an American and he'll think of Rhode Island.

I take them very seriously however I dont believe in GOOD UNIVS overall as Warwick has an real good maths and econ dept but some depts arent that good.
Obv prestige is prime importance (as in India people still dont about warwick they just know cam,ox and lse!) as employers prefer famous unis...!
Once you have reached a benchmark it would be foolish to let your standard fall...
Say a person from cam wouldn't want to go a third div uni!

Can I ask you then...
Imagine you have the opportunity to go to Cambridge, which'll give you the prestige. However, you know that if you go to a 'lower' university you'll get a better education, and have an overall better experience. Would you still choose Cambridge, or would you opt to go to the lower university knowing that you can prove yourself in other ways?

I know this isn't directed at me, but how can Cambridge have a worse education and experience compared to a lower uni ?

Can I ask you then...
Imagine you have the opportunity to go to Cambridge, which'll give you the prestige. However, you know that if you go to a 'lower' university you'll get a better education, and have an overall better experience. Would you still choose Cambridge, or would you opt to go to the lower university knowing that you can prove yourself in other ways?

I know this isn't directed at me, but how can Cambridge have a worse education and experience compared to a lower uni ?

This is a very rare case but this would depend on my immediate goal...If I want to get employed quickly thats what I want I would go to cambridge that means I can get good grades as the course is easier than lower rank uni and most of the employers dont even care if your course was hard or easy they would rather prefer a guy with 1st in english to a guy with 2.2 or 3rd in maths for Asset mgt etc!

Thats the case in UK. I bet firms in India would laugh at an English grad (if anyone doesn't know - they only respect engineering grads) and not even consider employing them.