Re: Higher Apprentice
I strongly suspect I work for the same company as AC#1, because we're the only global IT company with an apprenticeship scheme of any size that's been running for more than a year or two. We've got hundreds of HAs across the UK and the scheme has been an astonishing success.
" ...still wouldn't entirely rule out employing a young non-graduate but there would have to be a convincing explanation why they have chosen not to continue their studies and an exceptional out of school achievement record."
The reason is simple. While their mates are at uni spending £9k a year for the privelege of reading Sedgewick and Knuth, they're working full time, earning a shade under £20k (and continuously climbing) on projects measured in the millions of pounds for FTSE100 companies. And, for bonus points, if they hang around after the 24 month apprenticeship we'll fund a degree for them too.
Our newest intake aren't people who missed out on uni, they're all people who have actively chosen to ignore the university offering. Not one of them in our business unit's batch doesn't have an A*. We're genuinely talking guys who've turned down Imperial and Oxbridge to come work for us. The first intake, who are now some way through their undergraduate studies, are *averaging* a first, despite them studying on their own time outside of our demanding [consultancy] work hours.
As I said, this has been an astonishing success. The business, like you, were reticent at first, and that's understandable. For decades now all we'd ever hired was new graduates or experienced hires. We wanted to.. what... hire schoolkids? It'll never work, they said.
It has, for a variety of reasons.
1) The quality of our apprentices is top notch. This is mainly down to the recruitment process being driven by old school techy/delivery types rather than a central HR process. This means the business get who they want, not who HR have determined to be the people they need. We get people with the right work ethic and the right persona to integrate into teams quickly.
2) The training is excellent [disclosure: we are a QA customer]. We put every one of them through 3 months of intensive technology training (residential+all expenses paid). They come out the other side, not only familiar with the company's culture and workings, but on average far more capable than any new graduate. Graduates tend to know the theory, but sit them down in front of, say, SQL Management Studio, and they'll be lost. The graduate scheme has since been rejigged to contain similar training, with good results, but has led the business to question the cost of employing grads, which leads us nicely to...
3) They're cheap. We've built business models around these guys that compete with our offshored models. Not as cheap of course, but competitive, and of a higher quality (and UK based). They're paid about 1/2 what a new grad is paid, and we bill them for about 2/3. Client is happy and we're even happier. They're pretty happy too, because what 18 year old doesn't want to be issued a corporate credit card and a full time wage and comprehensive training and world class work?
4) They're commited. They sign up to five year contracts, with an out after two. They're going to be 24-25 when they leave on average, we'll have made a tidy packet, they'll have stellar CVs, a professional network, a degree and no debt. Everyone is happy. Your typical graduate comes into their first job with their five year plan already in their head, and after 24 months the attrition rate skyrockets. It's hard to justify investing in good training for someone who's already thinking about their next role.
5) We don't treat them as worthless interns. Last week we sent an HA to Vegas to represent us at a conference with one of our biggest partners. We routinely put these guys in front of senior stakeholders, and invest a high level of trust in them to deliver, and they almost always do. They're allowed, if capable, to develop into leadership roles rapidly. It's not unusual for them to be taking the tech lead role within a scrum team within a year of joining. If they don't develop that quickly? Fine, they're only bloody nineteen. But they do so with a frightening frequency.
It's got to the point where our graduate community is needing close management, because when requests for junior talent come in they're invariably for higher apprentices. They're outnumbered by this close-knit, highly skilled, young pool of guys (and a surprising proportion of girls) in high demand and there's resentment. Really the grads only get a look in when it's an old school client who demands a degree from everyone they buy. They just don't deliver to the same level as their younger competition, despite being more expensive and on paper more experienced. We've recalibrated the value of a degree, and our competition are following suit, but with mixed results.
Were I to go back in time, knowing what I know now, I'd take the HA route in an instant. The top end ones should genuinely be considered alongside our best unis as career and development choices.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
