Some companies must recruit students who graduated from 211 colleges. Why is this?

Because of efficiency and cost.

There is a Sharpe ratio in finance, that is, Sharpe ratio = return rate/volatility

It contains such wisdom: when we analyze the return of an investment, we not only You need to look at the total return, but also at how much risk you put in to get that return.

? Pursue the maximum return under a fixed risk that can be tolerated;

? Or pursue the minimum risk under a fixed expected return.

In some cases, even if your total return looks high, if you take a lot of risk for it, your decision may not be that wise. You just had better luck and won the bet.

A good academic qualification is a "risk stabilizer". Although it may not necessarily bring you high returns, it can greatly reduce your life risks.

The purpose of the company's recruitment is not to find missing people - we have no such obligation. There are also wimps in Peking University and Tsinghua University. Maybe you are a person with low education and high ability, but to select you from the crowd - this is not our purpose, the conditions do not allow it, and the price is too high.

The purpose of company recruitment is to find the staff we need with optimized cost and efficiency. There is obviously a higher ratio standard, why should I choose a very low ratio to recruit at the expense of the easy thing? It increases my cost and the chance of getting talents is lower. It is not advisable to judge a person based on just one piece of paper. However, based on just one piece of paper, he at least proves that the subject learning ability of highly educated people is at least better than yours.

Do all large/small companies now only value academic qualifications?

No, many companies value ability and overall quality more.

Only people with high academic qualifications but no ability will be proud of their diplomas and compete with those with low academic qualifications; those who are truly educated and capable feel that academic qualifications are just the icing on the cake.

If you have to figure it out, is academic qualifications a stepping stone? Nothing is guaranteed, and I don't want to discuss such a small probability event.

As an HR perspective, I want to tell you:

The purpose of recruitment is to predict your future "performance". Unfortunately, it is difficult to evaluate a person's so-called ability in a short period of time. Recruitment only requires a few hours of mutual understanding, while it takes at least several months or even 1-2 years to evaluate a person's ability.

So, for newcomers with little experience and no 3-4 years of work performance as endorsement, your academic qualifications will be your strongest evidence, allowing the recruiter to predict your future performance.