Times Good University Guide 2006

Just a quick note to mention that the Times Good University Guide for 2006 is out. The top 100 universities are ranked here in a PDF document.

A cursory glance at the rankings document basically returns fairly similar ranking results for the various universities when compared to the Guardian 2005 University Ranking Guide. For a quick commentary on the Guardian university Guide and where our Malaysian private colleges twinning partners stand, read my post on "World Class Universities?"

I'd be providing a more detailed update on whether the Times guide made any significant differences to our private college twinning university rankings as compared to the Guardian guide.

However, I'd also like the readers to take note that these guides exactly what they claim to be, "guides". No one disputes that they are likely to contain elements of discrepancy as well as probably a tolerable degree of inaccuracy. However, they do provide a decent guide as to where a university stands - is it Top 10? Is it mid-table average? Or is it near the bottom of the heap. One of the anonymous comment for my earlier post, asked:

It's good that you decide to review the university ranking but frankly speaking, how important is the ranking when you are looking for a potential employee? Whether students graduates from top universitis or not, their work experience and attitude and etc would be making a bigger difference.

There's a fair bit of diverse opinions on the above questions. Some of my fellow entrepreneurs would disgree with my opinions. However, I've found my "formula" for recruitment to have served me very well, which acts as the basis for my opinion:

1. The university a potential employee attends is very important to me in my recruitment process. And just as important are his academic grades. Just as important are the other "intangibles" such as work attitude, willingness to learn (and learn fast) as well as "street-smartness". But the university and the candidate's grades will serve as the determining factor on whether I should shorlist him/her for an interview.
   
   
2. Experience is what I'll "classify" as useful in a candidate's resume. However, my general philosophy is that all things equal (e.g., attitude, hardwork etc.), I have a preference for a candidate with good academic results from a good university over someone with weaker results from a not-so-great university, even if the latter has greater experience. I believe that while in the short term, the fresher candidate will be less productive, he or she will have a better potential and is likely to outperform the more experienced candidate within a reasonably short period of time.