Campus Recruiting Lead

The problem.

Firms in this business compete for the same narrow pool of graduates. Ones with a decade of campus presence start every conversation ahead. We start from nothing: no brand recognition, no alumni. The advantage available to us is the work itself. Getting it in front of the right students is a build rather than a calendar.

What you would do.

• Design the internship and graduate programme: what an intern actually does, who supervises them, and what a good one is offered at the end.
• Choose the small number of departments and societies worth a real relationship. Build those rather than attending everything.
• Build the assessment: problems that measure how somebody thinks, that cannot be prepared for from a question bank, and that a student finds interesting.
• Run the calendar. Hold the firm to its side of it. A slow decision loses a graduate to a faster firm.
• Track outcomes for years, so the programme is judged on who is still here rather than on how many joined.

What we would want evidence of.

• You have built a campus programme rather than inherited one, and can say what you dropped.
• You can hold a technical conversation with a final-year student well enough to earn their attention.
• You have designed an assessment that told you something a transcript did not.
• You have worked to an academic calendar and know what slips.
• You measure the programme on retention rather than on volume.

What would make this a bad fit.

This role is a poor fit if the plan is careers fairs and a stand. That is not the plan.

This role is a poor fit if you need an established name to open the conversation. Ours will not for some years.