Gi Group Report Finds Skills-First Hiring Growing Alongside Persistent Degree Filters

New Delhi, September 24, 2026: Gi Group Holding has released a report describing a shift towards demonstrated skills in India’s entry-level hiring market, alongside continued reliance on degrees as an initial filter. The study, titled From Degrees to Capability: Redefining India’s Entry-Level Talent Landscape, draws on responses from 750 employers and 579 candidates and early-career professionals across 12 sectors and eight major Indian cities.

The report calls this tension a credential paradox: an academic qualification may no longer persuade an employer that a candidate can perform a job, yet the absence of a degree may still prevent a candidate from being considered. Its findings are survey responses within the study, rather than a census of employers or a measure of every graduate’s capability.

Initial assessments remain a barrier

According to the report, 64% of employers said fewer than 40% of entry-level candidates clear their initial domain and skill assessments. That share of employers rose to 70% among large enterprises and 74% among organisations hiring more than 2,000 freshers annually. These percentages describe employers reporting a particular assessment experience; they should not be presented as a directly measured national pass rate for all candidates.

Candidate responses also pointed to differences in perceived readiness. Within the Tier-2/3 graduate group, 49% said they felt completely unprepared on entering their first job and 19% felt fully prepared. In the Tier-1 comparison group, 67% reported feeling fully ready and 6% unprepared. These are self-assessments, distinct from the employers’ assessment results.

The supplied release does not give the size of every subgroup, the selection method or the weighting applied to the results. Consequently, comparisons between institution groups should remain attributed to the report. They do not justify judging an individual applicant’s ability solely by the category of institution attended.

Practical evidence influences shortlisting

For Tier-2/3 graduates, 76% of employers said their primary shortlisting decisions were driven by practical proof or workplace exposure. The report includes certifications, software fluency, internships and workplace experience within that description. Pure academic merit accounted for 6% of primary shortlisting decisions in the reported responses.

The finding concerns what respondents prioritise at a particular stage of recruitment. It does not say that academic knowledge has no value or that every employer has removed degree requirements. In fact, the report’s central argument is that evidence of capability and formal credentials continue to coexist, sometimes in ways that create obstacles for people who can demonstrate skills through other routes.

Learning agility and trainability were identified as priorities by 59% of employers, followed by functional communication at 52% and domain readiness at 29%. These measures describe the capabilities respondents valued. The release does not establish that the categories were mutually exclusive or that the percentages should add to 100%.

Degrees continue to act as gatekeepers

The report says nine in ten employers no longer treat a Tier-2/3 degree as proof of capability. At the same time, 35% still prefer traditional degree holders over independently certified candidates for routine entry-level work. The combination illustrates the difference between a qualification used to open a hiring process and the evidence used to judge performance within it.

Among certified candidates without degrees who clear assessments, 46% were evaluated equally to degree holders and 12% were valued higher, according to the survey. Another 31% were treated as fallback candidates, while 11% were automatically rejected. These responses indicate that passing an assessment does not always remove the credential filter.

The release does not identify which occupations, employers or regulatory requirements account for those decisions. It therefore cannot establish that a particular qualification is unnecessary for every role. Its contribution is to describe the reported tension between skills-based evaluation and credential-based access across the surveyed organisations.

Applying knowledge in the workplace

Both sides of the survey identified practical application as a challenge. Inability to apply practical skills was cited as a reason interviews fail by 42% of employers and 38% of candidates. Academic knowledge was cited by 4% of employers, compared with 16% of candidates. Gi Group interprets that difference as a sign that candidates may place more emphasis on academic learning than employers do when judging readiness.

The report also describes variation within the Tier-2/3 group across engineering, polytechnic or vocational, and arts or general science backgrounds. It argues against assuming that one employability model can address every educational pathway. The announcement does not provide the full subgroup tables, so it does not support a detailed ranking of those pathways in this coverage.

Sonal Arora, Country Manager at Gi Group Holding, said practical experience, internships, certifications, apprenticeships and demonstrable competencies were increasingly influencing hiring. She also highlighted continuous learning and the importance of industry-academia collaboration. Her comments frame the report as a discussion of how preparation and hiring can respond to changing work requirements.

An employability bridge rather than one final credential

Gi Group proposes a stronger connection between education and employment, with workplace exposure and practical application forming part of preparation. It identifies roles for institutions, employers, policymakers and candidates, rather than presenting the completion of a degree as the end of learning. The release does not announce a new training programme, placement guarantee or employer commitment tied to the report.

For readers assessing the research, the next step is to examine its detailed methods and question wording. Employer opinions, candidate perceptions and actual assessment outcomes are different forms of evidence. Keeping them separate allows the findings to inform a discussion of hiring without turning a survey into a judgement about the capability of every graduate.

Gi Group Holding provides staffing, recruitment and talent-management services. Its India operation describes a presence spanning two decades and work with corporate customers through a network of offices. The report is part of its labour-market research; the announcement does not disclose a commercial result arising from the study itself.

The 1,329 total participants include two different respondent groups, not 1,329 employers. Likewise, the 750-employer sample is the relevant starting point for employer findings, subject to any subgroup filters in individual questions. Preserving those denominators is important when editing the headline or summarising the results, particularly where the release focuses specifically on Tier-2/3 graduates.