In China, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) generally prefer campus recruitment to social recruitment when it comes to talent recruitment. There are many reasons behind this phenomenon, including differences within and outside the system, power relations and social responsibility.
School recruitment in state-owned enterprises makes it easier to control talent** and recruitment standards. Compared with social recruitment, campus recruitment can ensure that the recruitment standards are relatively uniform to a certain extent, and avoid the problem of non-standardization in social recruitment by screening the requirements of academic qualifications, majors, grades, etc. Within state-owned enterprises, this kind of control has certain advantages in the selection of talents, making it easier for enterprises to screen out talents who meet specific requirements and reducing employment risks.
Campus recruitment is more conducive to state-owned enterprises to control the proportion of "related households". Through school recruitment, SOEs can set recruitment criteria more strictly, such as setting specific schools and academic backgrounds as rigid thresholds for recruitment. This approach relatively reduces the possibility of "related households" encroaching on recruitment opportunities through social relations or other channels, thus ensuring a fairer recruitment mechanism.
To a certain extent, state-owned enterprises bear the responsibility of solving the problem of social employment. Through campus recruitment, state-owned enterprises can provide more employment opportunities for fresh graduates, implement the national employment policy, and also provide preferential policies and development opportunities for young students to meet the knowledge and skills they have accumulated in school, reflecting the responsibility and contribution of state-owned enterprises to society.
However, state-owned enterprise recruitment is relatively unfavorable for individuals from non-prestigious schools or who do not have more social resources. To a certain extent, social recruitment can give all qualified people opportunities, while campus recruitment is easy to cause preference for students from prestigious schools, which increases the employment pressure of other students.
In general, campus recruitment in state-owned enterprises is more standardized and effective than social recruitment, and the process and standards of campus recruitment are easier to control and manage for state-owned enterprises. However, for job seekers who fail to enter state-owned enterprises through school recruitment channels, this may also create certain employment pressure. Therefore, whether state-owned enterprises should increase their efforts in social recruitment needs to weigh the interests of all parties, take into account fairness and efficiency, and strive to provide more employment opportunities for the society.