The Big Lie of “100% Placements” in B-Schools

What the Numbers Really Say

The table helps track and analyse student intake, graduation, and placement results across institutes by considering their ranking and how it affects employability. The intake Vs placed difference shows the increasing gap between admission and actual placement, especially if we look at colleges that do not fall in the top-ranked colleges category.

The table displays the placement data of approximately 680 institutes, revealing a significant gap between the sanctioned intake and actual placements. There were over 1.21 lakh students who were admitted in 2022-23, out of which only about 64 per cent were eventually ‘shown’ as placed. More than one-third of students who were admitted disappeared from the placement statistics, not because they found a job somewhere else, but because the system quietly removed them from the count.

Even the top-ranked colleges have not been spared, as the difference between intake and placement figures is from 17 per cent to 21 per cent. When it comes to non-ranked institutions, the gap is even more is 43 per cent.

This raises a serious question about how “100 per cent placements” are fabricated.

There are multiple ways and means through which this is done; we are going to highlight the most prominent ones.

Disqualifying Students Before Placements Begin

One of the most routine ways to disqualify students even before the placements begin is by reducing the number of students who sit for placements. Students with backlogs, low attendance, or low internal scores are not allowed to register for placements. Once they are out of the system, they are omitted from the official narrative. The college claims near-total placement success, but only after filtering out such students.

Forcing Students to “Opt Out”

Another means to reduce the number of actual placements is by asking the unplaced students to formally ‘Opt Out’ when the placement cycle is about to come to finish. This is like an administrative formality, which convinces students that it would not hurt their job prospects.

The ‘Opt Out’ move allows the institutes to formally close the placement cycle. If a student goes for the ‘Opt Out” option, it also shifts the placement responsibility from the institution onto students who fail to secure a job. In short, the institute does not have any accountability after the students opt for this option.

Higher Studies and Dropouts Used as Statistical Cover

Institutions often claim that several students opt for higher education or entrepreneurship. However, the data shows that when both sets of students are combined, they form nearly 38 per cent of the overall graduates; this percentage increases further in the non-ranked colleges.

Colleges often argue that many students choose higher education or entrepreneurship. But data shows that when higher studies and dropouts are combined, they account for nearly 38 per cent of graduates overall, and almost 45 per cent in non-ranked colleges. These two sets of students are seldom counted as ‘unplaced’, even though higher studies are not a choice, but an imposed alternative to unemployment.

In-House Placements via Subsidiaries

Some institutions absorb students into their own subsidiaries and divisions, or associated startups. Most of the roles in such companies are temporary, unpaid, and in certain cases entirely unrelated to the student’s degree. This is a classic example where the placement statistics for this particular activity are inflated without creating any employment value. In most cases, the majority of students are let go once the next batch of students is about to graduate.

Fake Offer Letters and Dummy Recruiters

The most disturbing admission comes from the placement officers themselves. As per certain testimonies, colleges have increasingly started issuing fake offer letters. In some cases, names of legitimate recruiters have been misused by paying shell firms to “hire” students on paper.

“These jobs are often only on paper,” admits a senior placement officer, adding that the number of colleges using such tactics has risen sharply in the past two years as hiring slowed.

Forced Internships Masquerading as Jobs

There are also instances where students are driven into internships with promises of conversion. Although these so-called internships do not really assure employment, they are treated as placements during audits and ranking. For students, this means delayed income and extended uncertainty, whereas for colleges, it is a convenient checkbox!

Family Businesses Counted as Placements

In certain colleges, there have been cases where a student joining the family business is considered a ‘placed’ student, even though no campus recruitment took place. Although self-employment is a valid option, treating and presenting it as a campus placement is misleading.

Why the System Allows This

There is an immense amount of pressure to displace high placement numbers as it is used as a key marketing tool as well as in ranking, admissions, accreditation requirement and justification for fees. As auditing for placement is negligible, colleges and institutes make the most of these grey areas without worrying about the consequences.

Conclusion

Guaranteed 100 per cent placement is a myth, especially in the current times, where the job market is volatile due to various factors. Unless you are in the top 10 institutes, never believe the 100 per cent placement guarantee that other colleges claim. When colleges claim to have 100 per cent placement, they are not offering certainty; they are offering comfort, which in the current system comes at the cost of truth.