The Graduation Issue

Design reference adapted from Raymond James' Investment Strategy Quarterly (Apr 2023).

Losing the Edge? International Graduates Still Outperform but for how much longer?

As global economies strain under the pressure of technological disruption, demographic shifts, and tightening job markets, one thing is becoming increasingly clear: whilst an overseas education used to almost guarantee stronger employment outcomes for international graduates returning home, that advantage is being slowly eroded. This is due in part to the lack of international graduate outcomes data available to universities, and consequently, a lack of support for international graduates to transition to the workforce back home.

New analysis from the Asia Careers Group (ACG), based on data from over 20,000 international graduates from Australian and UK universities who returned home to China, India, Malaysia, and Singapore since 2015, reveals a mixed picture. In some markets, internationally educated graduates continue to outperform their domestic peers, but the gap is narrowing. This is not because domestic education is catching up—but because international graduates are not always receiving the support they need to transition into meaningful employment at home.

This makes demonstrating the return on investment of an international degree more important than ever. For families across Asia, employability outcomes are paramount in justifying the high cost of overseas study. For universities in Australia, the UK, and other major host countries, international graduate outcomes are not just a marketing tool, they are fast becoming central to institutional sustainability. If international graduates are not securing better jobs, faster, and for longer, the whole value proposition begins to unravel. ACG's cross-referenced data with national labour market statistics provides rare insight into what really happens after graduation and where the system is falling short. 

China: A Reversal and a Resurgence

In China, ACG data shows that internationally educated graduates historically had significantly higher full-time employment outcomes than their domestically educated peers. During the 2000s and early 2010s, overseas-educated Chinese returnees were prized in urban job markets, with top employers valuing foreign credentials, English fluency, and global experience.

Yet this trend faltered just before the pandemic, at a time when outbound Chinese student numbers were at record highs and the domestic economy began to slow. As youth unemployment surged and domestic graduates flooded the market, international returnees lost some of their competitive edge. Returning "Sea Turtles" became a national talking point. The term, derived from the Chinese word "haigui" (海龟), refers to graduates who return to China after studying abroad. Once seen as prized talent with international expertise and high earning potential, their growing numbers began to saturate elite job markets, particularly in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. Employers, increasingly focused on local experience and cost efficiency, were no longer automatically prioritising overseas credentials. As more returnees entered an already strained job market, their competitive edge diminished, and "haigui" were no longer guaranteed success. In fact, some faced unemployment or underemployment on their return.  The pandemic marked a historic low point: full-time employment rates for returnees fell below 30%, dipping beneath the national average for the first time.

But the recovery since then has been striking. In 2023–24, nearly 50% of internationally educated Chinese graduates secured full-time jobs within six months, compared to just 30% of their domestically educated peers. Despite rising geopolitical tensions and slowing economic growth, degrees from the UK and Australia remain highly valued. The data confirms what many in the sector have long argued: international study remains one of the few levers Chinese families can pull to secure upward mobility, even in a difficult economic climate.

India: Policy Shocks, Post-Study Work, and a Reversal of Fortunes

In India, ACG data comparing full-time graduate employment outcomes with employability scores from the India Skills Report (ISR) reveals a dynamic picture shaped by UK immigration policy. From 2014 onwards, the employability of Indian graduates returning home declined significantly. This coincided with the revocation of post-study work rights by Prime Minister Theresa May, which denied Indian students the opportunity to gain UK work experience before returning to India. As a result, many struggled to differentiate themselves in a saturated domestic graduate market.

This trend reversed when Boris Johnson reinstated post-study work rights in 2019. By 2023, ACG data showed a clear uplift: nearly 70% of Indian returnees had secured full-time roles within six months of graduation, compared to just under 50% of graduates from Indian institutions. The gap had widened sharply in favour of internationally educated candidates, especially those with UK degrees and valuable international experience.

Yet since 2023, the data reveals another inflection point. Employability of Indian returnees has begun to decline once again. Despite the continued availability of the Graduate Route, many graduates are struggling to re-integrate into the Indian workforce—whether returning immediately or after a short period of post-study work abroad. This suggests the need for structured re-entry support, including targeted career advice, in-country employer engagement, and stronger alumni networks to bridge the transition from international education to local employment.

Malaysia: Declining Returns, Except for Those Who Study Abroad

The Malaysian picture is one of a decline in graduate outcomes, whilst very gradual for those who remain within the domestic education system. ACG data from 2010 to 2021 shows a stark drop in full-time employment rates among internationally educated Malaysian graduates, falling from nearly 80% to just over 30%. Meanwhile, Ministry of Education and Khazanah Research Institute (MOE/KRI) data suggests that domestic full-time employment outcomes have remained relatively flat, hovering between 45% and 50%. This narrowing gap is not due to improving domestic prospects—but rather the worsening trajectory for international returnees without targeted support.

However, employment rate alone does not tell the full story. When we look at starting salary data, a different picture emerges. According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia and ACG's own analysis, internationally educated Malaysians—especially those with UK and Australian degrees—continue to command significantly higher salaries than their domestically educated peers. For example, the share of returnees earning over RM6,000 grew substantially between 2010 and 2021, while domestic data from MOE/KRI shows that 65.6% of Malaysian graduates earned below RM2,000 in 2021.

This suggests that while overseas-educated returnees may find it harder to secure immediate employment without local support networks, when they do enter the workforce, they do so in better-paid, more senior, or more internationally connected roles. It reinforces the view that international education still offers upward mobility and income advantage but only if paired with reintegration support to bridge the last mile between graduation and career.

Singapore: Transparency Exposes the Divide

Singapore's data story is unique for its transparency. Ministry of Education graduate employment surveys provide annual outcome data by institution, and Singapore's SkillsFuture movement has helped align academic and employer expectations. Yet ACG data still reveals a meaningful gap between internationally and domestically educated graduates.

Between 2013 and 2023, the full-time permanent employment rate for Singaporean returnees fell from nearly 80% to just over 50%. In contrast, the government's figures for local graduates remained consistently above 75%. At face value, this suggests a disadvantage for international education. But context matters.

Many Singaporeans now study abroad at postgraduate level, often in non-traditional destinations or programmes without clear employer pipelines. They may miss out on structured public sector recruitment or graduate schemes available to local students. And crucially, some never return, skewing domestic data. When they do return, they often face a lack of targeted career support—an integration gap that international universities must urgently address. The employability of returnees in Singapore isn't inherently lower; it's structurally unsupported.

Implications for Universities and Policymakers

Across all four countries, the message is clear: international graduates are still more employable but only when the system around them works. That system includes post-study work options, but more critically, it involves the ability to transition successfully into home-country employment.

For universities, this means going beyond recruitment and retention. It means investing in international graduate outcomes data to understand what happens when students return home. It means forging strategic relationships with the leading employers of their alumni in key source markets, and using that insight to shape course content and career pathways. Crucially, it requires building appropriate, culturally informed careers support for international students planning to return home, including tailored advice, in-country employer connections, and mentoring from successful alumni. Universities must recognise that the true measure of international education is not enrolment figures, but employment outcomes and they must act accordingly.

For policymakers in receiving countries, the responsibility is equally pressing. If international graduates are to remain part of a sustainable higher education strategy, governments must ensure that visa and migration policies align with employability outcomes. That includes maintaining transparent, stable post-study work routes, ensuring compliance regulation doesn't disproportionately penalise genuine students, and incentivising universities to track and support international graduate transitions. Critically, receiving country governments should recognise that international students are not just a revenue stream, but part of a wider global talent pipeline and policy should reflect that long-term strategic value and building soft power.

And for students and families, the message is nuanced but hopeful. An overseas degree still delivers value, but the outcomes are strongest when supported by targeted employability strategies and structured transitions. Without those, the international premium is at risk.

References

1. Asia Careers Group (ACG). Proprietary international graduate outcomes tracking data, 2015–2024.
2. India Skills Report (ISR). Confederation of Indian Industry, Wheebox, and Taggd, various years.
3. Ministry of Education, Malaysia / Khazanah Research Institute (KRI). Graduate Tracer Study and labour market reports, 2010–2021.
4. Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM). Monthly and graduate salary distribution reports.
5. Ministry of Education, Singapore. Graduate Employment Survey (GES), 2013–2023.
6. UK Home Office & Migration Advisory Committee. Graduate Route Policy Review, 2024.
7. Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) and independent Chinese think tank commentary on "Sea Turtles" ("Haigui").

 

 

--CHINA-- 

Graduate Employment Outcomes: ACG vs Government Data (2019; 2005-2021)

In recent years, graduate employment in China has undergone significant shifts, shaped by changing employer practices, evolving student preferences, and macroeconomic disruptions—particularly the COVID-19 pandemic. Comparing data from the Asia Careers Group (ACG) and the Chinese Ministry of Education / KRI national survey reveals two very different post-graduation realities, especially for the class of 2019.

Contrasting Outcomes in 2019

Chinese national data (2019):

Source: China College Graduate Employment Annual Report 2019. East China Normal University (ECNU), MyCOS Research Institute.

For 2019 graduates, the national dataset shows a fairly traditional pattern of early-career placement:

• 30% of bachelor’s degree holders secured full-time jobs within six months of graduation.
• An almost equal proportion of 31.1% progressed straight into domestic postgraduate study.
• Very few graduates pursued internships, freelance work or entrepreneurship; categories that were either underreported or not captured in the survey design.
  
  

In contrast, our ACG data which based on Chinese students who studied at international universities and returned to China—shows a more fragmented early career phase. Among internationally educated Chinese graduates in 2019:

• Only 25.5% of bachelor’s graduates entered full-time roles within six months.
• 36.7% of master’s graduates secured full-time jobs in the same period.
• 58% of bachelor’s graduates and 41% of master’s graduates were engaged in internships.
• A small but growing proportion pursued freelance work or entrepreneurship, especially at postgraduate level.

 

Side-by-Side Comparison (2019 Snapshot)

These differences suggest a key difference in early employment patterns: while domestic graduates transition quickly into jobs or further study, ACG alumni (international graduates) were more likely to enter internships first—often as part of an “intern-to-hire” route or while navigating re-entry into the Chinese job market.

 

Trendlines (2005–2021): A Tale of Two Trajectories

Source: China College Graduate Employment Annual Report 2023. East China Normal University (ECNU), MyCOS Research Institute.

Looking at long-term trends from 2005 to 2021, the government data reflects a gradual decline in full-time employment immediately after graduation:

• Full-time employment post-graduation declined from 47.2% (2005) to 32.1% (2021).
• Postgraduate study became increasingly common, rising from 15% to 33% over the same period.
• Flexible employment (freelancing, start-ups, etc.) peaked at 25% in 2015, before declining to 11% by 2021.
• The overall placement rate (excluding those unemployed or inactive) reached 84% in 2017 but dropped to 76.5% by 2021.
  
  

ACG Data Highlights:

• 2005–2009: Almost all ACG graduates entered full-time roles, largely from business or engineering programs.
• 2011–2015: Full-time employment stabilised around 60–70%. Internships and start-ups began to appear as key paths.
• 2017 (pre-COVID): Internships made up nearly 20% of outcomes, suggesting a shift in employer behaviour toward internship-led hiring.
• 2019–2021: COVID shocks led to a spike in internships (up to 59%) and a drop in full-time hires (down to 24.8%).

 

Post-2021 Recovery and Outlook

More recent data shows signs of recovery. In 2023–24, nearly 50% of internationally educated Chinese graduates secured full-time roles within six months—closing much of the gap with pre-pandemic levels. Internship rates fell back to the low 20% range but remain higher than in the 2010s, suggesting that short-term work experience continues to play a key role in early career entry for this group.

Overall, the data suggests that while international graduates may not transition into full-time work as quickly as domestic graduates, especially in periods of labour market stress, they are more likely to take on internships or flexible roles as a first step. This highlights differences not just in outcomes but in career pathways—and the need for targeted support during the return-to-work transition.

-
-
-

--INDIA--

Graduate Employment in India: ACG vs National Trends (2016–2025)

India’s post-pandemic graduate employment story is shaped by two different but complementary sets of insights: the India Skills Report (ISR) that measures the employability of final-year students based on standardised testing. And the other, our ACG data that tracks real-world employment outcomes for Indian graduates who studied overseas and returned to the domestic job market.

The ISR is a supply-side measure (score) that assesses “employability” as the proportion of students who meet national aptitude and domain-skill benchmarks. ACG data, by contrast, reflects demand-side outcomes—how many graduates actually secure jobs, internships, or freelance work. Together, these perspectives help distinguish between how prepared graduates are and how the job market is responding.

Source: India Skills Report 2025: Enabling Global Talent Mobility. ETS Assessment Services, Gurugram. Wheebox & CII (2024).
For earlier data (pre-2019): available here.

Key Contrasts and Observations

• Pre-COVID: ACG graduates consistently outperformed ISR employability scores. Full-time employment rates for internationally educated graduates remained above 60%, while national employability hovered around 46%. This suggests that global exposure and international credentials were linked to stronger job conversion at home.
• COVID Disruption (2019–2021): ACG full-time hiring fell sharply to 37%. Many returnees moved into internships (up to 27%) or part-time/freelance work (15–16%), indicating a shift toward short-term or fallback options. Meanwhile, ISR scores remained relatively flat at ~46%, highlighting a disconnect between graduate skills and job market demand.
• Post-Pandemic Rebound (2022–2024): ACG’s full-time rate rebounded to a peak of 69% in 2023, well above ISR’s modest climb to 51%, which indicates that improvement in outcomes was driven more by demand-side recovery than by gains in skill-readiness.
• 2025: Both datasets converge at ~55%, suggesting a new equilibrium. Graduates may be better prepared, but job creation hasn’t kept pace. Going forward, better alignment between skills and available roles will be critical.

 

Broader National Context: The Graduate Squeeze

Source: India Employment Report 2022: Employment, Unemployment and Informality in India, Institute for Human Development (IHD), 2022.

While graduate employability and outcomes improved in some areas, the structure of India’s job market shifted in ways that made it harder for degree-holders to secure stable, salaried roles.

Between 2019 and 2022, total employment grew by 78 million, but regular formal jobs, which typically require a degree, rose by only 4.1 million (from 47.5m to 51.6m). That accounted for just 5% of all new jobs during the period. After a modest increase in 2021, formal employment actually declined by 0.8 million in 2022. By that year, formal wage jobs made up only approximately 9% of total employment (51.6m out of 544.5m), reinforcing how limited the pool of graduate-appropriate roles has become.

At the same time, job creation came overwhelmingly from self-employment, which added +63 million jobs (241m → 304m) between 2019 and 2022. The biggest contributors were own-account work (+25m) and unpaid family work (+34m)—roles that rarely require a university degree. This shift suggests that many graduates who could not secure salaried jobs were pulled into fallback or informal roles. Meanwhile, the supply of graduates continues to outpace demand. India produces roughly 1 million engineering graduates each year, far exceeding the growth in formal jobs.

Although some graduates are turning to entrepreneurship, the base remains small: the number of “employers” rose from 10.7m → 13.9m (+3.2m), representing only 2.6% of the workforce in 2022.

 

Key Takeaways

1. Employability ≠ Employment: Graduates may meet skill benchmarks, but that doesn’t guarantee a job—especially when the market isn’t hiring.
2. Demand drives outcomes: ACG’s sharp rebound in 2023 underscores how hiring cycles shape job conversions, employer behaviour can shift quickly, sometimes outpacing graduate readiness.
3. When hiring rebounds, conversions can surge: The spike to 69% full-time placement in 2023 ACG data suggests that employers valued experience or international exposure more than just passing a test.
4. Convergence signals a new normal: By 2025, both ACG and ISR hover near 55%—suggesting the post-pandemic bounce is fading, and a more competitive hiring landscape is settling in.
5. Informality still dominates: Most new jobs have come from informal sectors such as self-employment, unpaid family work, and casual labour. These roles are often concentrated in rural areas, where degree requirements are low and formal employment opportunities are limited, which is why they’re considered poor matches for graduate talent.

 

Taken together, these structural shifts help explain why graduate outcomes, both domestic and international, remain under pressure, even as skills improve. The limited growth in formal employment, combined with an oversupply of degree-holders, means that job readiness alone is no longer enough. Without stronger demand for graduate-level roles, many qualified candidates will continue to face delayed entry, underemployment, or fallback options that don't reflect their capabilities. Unless formal job creation keeps pace with the scale of degree production, improvements in skill-readiness will continue to deliver limited returns.

-
-
-

--MALAYSIA--

Graduate Employment in Malaysia: ACG vs Government Data (2010–2025)

Malaysia’s graduate employment landscape has evolved sharply in the past decade, reflecting both structural pressures and shifting post-graduation pathways. A comparison between Asia Careers Group (ACG) outcomes and national data (as reported by KRI and MOHE) reveals not only differing employment rates, but also divergent job quality, wage expectations, and definitions of career success.

Diverging Trends in Full-Time Employment (2021)

Source: Shifting Tides: Charting Career Progression of Malaysia’s Skilled Talents. Khazanah Research Institute, 2024.

In 2021, national data reported that 59.3% of Malaysian graduates were in full-time employment. In contrast, ACG data showed that only 30.05% of internationally educated Malaysian returnees had secured full-time roles. The remaining ~70% were in internships, part-time, contract, freelance, or entrepreneurial positions.

This is more than just a statistical gap. It points to a structural difference in early career trajectories. Many returnees, particularly those from creative fields or international programmes, are entering more dynamic, transitional pathways, often with delayed access to stable, long-term roles. These outcomes may reflect shifting employer expectations, different career timelines, or gaps in local market integration for returnees.

 

Longer-Term Shifts in Full-Time Employment (2010–2021)

Source: Shifting Tides: Charting Career Progression of Malaysia’s Skilled Talents. Khazanah Research Institute, 2024.

Source: Asia Careers Group

Looking beyond 2021, the broader trend from 2010 to 2021 shows that full-time employment has been declining steadily across both national and ACG datasets, though at very different rates. MOHE/KRI data shows a moderate decrease from 53.2% in 2010 to 44.1% in 2021, reflecting the gradual rise of non-standard employment across the domestic market.

The decline is much more pronounced in ACG’s data. Full-time employment among internationally educated Malaysian returnees dropped from 77.3% in 2010 to just 30.0% in 2021. This sharper drop reinforces the idea that returnees are entering the workforce through less conventional pathways such as internships, contract work, and freelance roles. These changes are likely influenced, again, by employer preferences for “intern-to-hire” models, a growing emphasis on flexibility, and market pressures that delay the transition into permanent roles. Despite the lower immediate full-time employment rate, ACG salary data suggests that these graduates still go on to secure higher-paying positions—just not through traditional entry routes.

 

Wage Growth

Source: Shifting Tides: Charting Career Progression of Malaysia’s Skilled Talents. Khazanah Research Institute, 2024.

Source: Asia Careers Group

 

Salary Comparison (2021)

One of the most striking contrasts is income:

That said, higher salary outcomes among ACG graduates likely reflect more than just educational background. They also point to urban concentration and sectoral skew. Many returnees are employed in multinational firms or high-growth industries such as tech, consulting, or finance—typically located in major urban centres. These sectors offer higher starting salaries but are not representative of the broader Malaysian graduate population, particularly those entering the civil service, manufacturing, or regional labour markets.

Wage data reveals a marked variation between national graduate outcomes and those of internationally educated Malaysian returnees. According to national statistics, a large majority of graduates remained in low-wage brackets in both 2010 and 2021. In 2021, 65.6% of Malaysian graduates earned below RM2,000, with 43.6% earning under RM1,500. Over the past decade, wage growth has remained largely stagnant for domestic graduates, despite rising levels of higher education attainment.

In contrast, ACG data shows a significantly stronger salary trajectory for returnees. By 2022, 65.2% of international graduates were earning above RM6,000, rising to over 75% in both 2023 and 2024. Very few fell into low-income brackets, with less than 3% earning below RM2,000. While some of this gap may reflect sectoral differences, qualification levels, or employer preferences, it also points to a structural shift in early career entry. ACG graduates now report lower rates of full-time employment immediately after graduation—dropping from 75–80% in 2010 to just 30% by 2021—but this doesn’t necessarily reflect weaker long-term outcomes. Many now begin with internships, contract roles, or freelance work as transitional “bridge” jobs, gaining experience and market exposure before securing permanent roles. This delay may, in fact, position them for stronger salary outcomes later, as they accumulate relevant experience, build networks and gain leverage in better salary negotiations once hired.

At the same time, some graduates may prefer flexible or project-based roles, especially in creative or digital industries, before committing to a long-term position. These dynamics help explain why ACG international graduates are still seeing strong salary outcomes, even if their path to permanent employment takes longer than it did a decade ago.

 

Entrepreneurship

Source: Shifting Tides: Charting Career Progression of Malaysia’s Skilled Talents. Khazanah Research Institute, 2024.

Source: Asia Careers Group

Entrepreneurship remains a relatively niche pathway among ACG graduates. While national figures suggest that 16% of fresh graduates were self-employed in 2023, ACG data shows a much lower figure of just 5.4% among returnees, comprising of 3.96% entrepreneurs and 1.49% freelancers. This breaks down to approximately 72% entrepreneurs and 28% freelancers, a distribution broadly consistent with national trends, though at a significantly smaller scale.

This suggests that while the composition of self-employment is similar, the overall interest in entrepreneurial or freelance paths appears lower among internationally educated graduates— possibly due to higher salary expectations, greater access to urban job markets, or a stronger preference for structured roles in established organisations.

-
-
-

--SINGAPORE--

Graduate Employment in Singapore: ACG vs National Data (2013–2024)

Singapore’s graduate job market has long been seen as structured and high-performing, but recent data points to a more nuanced landscape—particularly for graduates from Private Education Institutions (PEIs). A comparison between Asia Careers Group (ACG) data and official figures from SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) reveals shifts in employability, job stability, and wage outcomes that mirror broader regional trends.

 

Employment outcomes

Source: Table 1, Employment Outcomes, from the Private Education Institution Graduate Employment Survey 2023/2024. SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG).

 

Headline Employment Outcomes (2023–2024)

SkillsFuture Singapore’s most recent Graduate Employment Survey offers a more granular view of outcomes across different higher education pathways. It highlights results for graduates from Private Education Institutions (PEIs)—which include non-public institutions offering full-time external degree programmes, as well as graduates from Autonomous Universities (AUs) and polytechnics. While top-line employability figures are often quoted, the full breakdown tells a more nuanced story.

In 2023/24, only 46.4% of PEI graduates secured full-time permanent roles. Another 5.7% were freelancing, 17.3% were in part-time or temporary work, and 25.2% remained unemployed with most still actively job-seeking. Despite a modest rise in median salary from $3,400 to $3,500, the data suggests tightening employment conditions and slower pathways into conventional roles. Overall employability dropped from 83.2% to 74.8%, and full-time permanent employment declined even more steeply—from 58.7% to 46.4% in just one year.

 

Comparing with ACG Data (2023–2024)

According to ACG’s data, graduate employability in Singapore improved slightly from 75.5% in 2023 to 80.85% in 2024, surpassing the 74.8% reported for PEI graduates in the SkillsFuture data. However, the composition of that employment tells a deeper story.

ACG’s figures show that just over half of graduates were in full-time roles in both 2023 (52.2%) and 2024 (51.8%), which is quite comparable to the 58.7% full-time permanent employment rate reported for PEI graduates in 2022/2023. While the latest PEI figure (46.4%) has dipped, the overall trend suggests a similar distribution between standard and non-standard job types across both datasets.

Notably, ACG’s 2024 data also points to a sizeable portion of graduates in internships, contract work, or less conventional roles such as freelance (2.8%) and entrepreneurship (7.1%) — reflecting a shift in how graduates are entering the workforce. This aligns with observations from the SkillsFuture report, where non-traditional employment pathways appear to be growing. It’s also worth considering that differences in job type definitions between sources may affect how roles are categorised, adding nuance to any direct comparison.

The contrast suggests ACG graduates, many with international or private degrees, are more likely to find work overall, but often through transitional or flexible roles rather than immediate permanent placements, reinforcing a broader shift in graduate employment expectations and employer behaviour.

 

Diving deeper into degree types

Source: Table 3, Employment Outcomes by Course Clusters, from the Private Education Institution Graduate Employment Survey 2023/2024. SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG).

Another layer of insight comes from the breakdown of employment outcomes by course cluster, which reveals not all fields offer the same post-graduation prospects. Among PEI graduates, those in Business and Sciences had relatively stronger footing, with more than half securing full-time permanent jobs (50.1% and 51.8%, respectively). In contrast, Arts, Design & Media graduates had a notably lower FTP rate at just 26.7%, despite a 70% overall employment rate.

The highest median salary was reported in Information & Digital Technologies at $4,080, suggesting demand in that sector remains robust. Meanwhile, salary data for fields like Engineering and Arts wasn’t available due to small sample sizes, but the data overall highlights clear disparities across disciplines, both in job stability and pay.

And if we were to compare this with the data from Asia Careers Group:

While ACG data is grouped more broadly by degree type, some parallels can still be drawn with the SkillsFuture PEI dataset. In ACG’s 2024 data, Business graduates recorded the highest employability (84.6%), full-time employment rate (63.5%), and a median salary of $5,092. This is comparable to the PEI data, where Business also showed strong outcomes, albeit with a lower reported median salary of $3,483.

STEM graduates in ACG’s dataset had a full-time employment rate of 44% and a median salary of $4,587, while in the PEI data, the Information & Digital Technologies cluster — used as a proxy for STEM — showed a similar full-time rate (43.4%) but a slightly lower median salary ($4,080).

Graduates in the “Others” category (which includes fields like Law) in ACG data saw 82% employability, 46.2% full-time employment, and a median salary of $3,776, which aligns with the ranges reported in PEI’s Humanities or Sciences clusters (e.g., $3,500 median salary and 39.8% full-time employment for Humanities).

While classification frameworks differ slightly across both datasets, the comparison suggests broadly consistent patterns: with Business degrees generally showing stronger employment and salary outcomes, and other fields may see more variation depending on discipline and market dynamics.

 

Source: Graduate Starting Salary Tables. Ministry of Manpower, Singapore.

Source: Asia Careers Group

Median Salary Comparison

And as we look at the trend of starting salaries over the years, a clear difference begins to show between ACG data and government figures. ACG graduates have consistently reported higher median starting salaries, which likely reflects the added value of international education. However, those salaries have been on a downward trend from 2013 to 2021, with only slight improvements in 2022 and 2023. In comparison, government-reported salaries have gradually increased, especially after 2021. This suggests that while domestic graduates may start with lower pay, their salary growth has been more stable. The gap between the two trends may be explained by differences in job sectors, hiring timelines, and how quickly graduates transition into permanent roles, particularly in a changing labour market.

 

Source: Asia Careers Group

Over the past decade, employability trends among Singaporean graduates have undergone a steady shift, especially when viewed through ACG data. In 2013, the employability rate for internationally educated Singaporean graduates was above 91%, reaching a peak of 94.1% in 2014. However, this figure has gradually declined over time, dropping to 75.5% by 2023. This mirrors broader changes in the graduate labour market, where full-time employment also decreased from nearly 80% in 2013 to just over 52% a decade later. The rise in internships, part-time work, and freelance roles now makes up nearly half of graduate outcomes, suggesting that early career pathways have become more diverse and, in many cases, less linear.

This decline does not necessarily reflect weaker graduate quality. Instead, it points to a labour market that is shifting. Employers are increasingly relying on contract-based hiring or internship-to-permanent pathways, while graduates are also exploring flexible or short-term roles, particularly in sectors like technology, media, and design. Compared to national data, which has consistently shown higher overall employment rates (typically above 88%) but also a growing share of temporary or freelance work, ACG’s data highlights how international graduates are navigating a more competitive and cautious hiring environment. Taken together, these trends point to a new employment norm: one that rewards adaptability, values practical experience, and often requires a longer path to reach full-time, stable work.

 

And to sum this entire data section up,

As graduate employment pathways grow more fragmented and competitive, universities have an increasingly important role to play in helping students navigate the transition from education to work. This requires more than curriculum reform or employability training alone. It also means investing in robust graduate tracking, understanding sector-specific hiring patterns, and using data to inform both academic planning and career services. Collaborations between institutions, government agencies, and labour market researchers can bridge critical information gaps. Organisations like Asia Careers Group offer one example by providing timely, outcome-based insights into graduate trajectories. We help universities identify where support is needed most and tailor interventions that actually reflect the realities of today’s job market. Let’s all do better in supporting graduates as they transition into meaningful, sustainable careers.

 

 

Where Have All the Entry-Level Jobs Gone?

This year’s graduates are stepping into a job market unlike any that has come before. They leave university with high hopes, fresh ideas, and formidable debts, only to find that the traditional entry points into professional life are quietly vanishing. In many sectors, especially the once-booming tech industry, the bottom rungs of the career ladder are being removed altogether. It’s not just economic cycles or post-pandemic adjustments at play. Structural changes driven by automation, artificial intelligence, and corporate cost-cutting are reshaping how and where young talent enters the workforce. In short, the era of the entry-level job is fading fast and with it, the assumption that a university degree automatically opens doors [1][2].

In recent months, major tech firms like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta have laid off tens of thousands of employees. While these headlines often focus on mid-career or senior staff, the ripple effects have hit entry-level hiring just as hard, if not harder. A recent Economist piece notes that “junior roles are being hollowed out,” particularly in areas like software development and marketing [1]. At the same time, Forbes warns that AI may “erase traditional career ladders,” replacing them with fragmented, freelance-heavy alternatives [2]. The New York Federal Reserve reports that unemployment among 22–27‑year‑olds stands at 5.8%, compared to just 2.7% for older cohorts, which is a significant gap not seen since the pandemic era [3].

Husayn Kassai, CEO of Quench AI, is blunt about the trend: “These aren’t just numbers—AI is automating rote tasks in programming, legal work, and customer service. That risks stalling career ladders” [4]. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, takes it further, warning: “I don’t think this is on people’s radar: AI could wipe out half of all entry-level jobs in the next five years” [5]. Andy Jassy, Amazon’s CEO, has also acknowledged that “AI will eliminate roles, particularly at the lower end of the skills spectrum,” though he maintains it will also create new ones [6].

So what does this mean for universities and their students? First, it demands a fundamental rethink of curriculum design. Most university courses are still built around deep subject expertise and theoretical learning. But in a world where entry-level pathways are blocked, that’s no longer enough. As Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, puts it: “AI will reshape jobs, not erase them. The key is adaptation” [7]. Universities need to produce adaptable graduates, those with transferable skills, AI fluency, and real-world experience.

That starts with embedding AI literacy and digital agility into every degree programme. Students of history, biology, and law alike should leave with a working knowledge of the technologies changing their industries. This means teaching with AI—not just about it. Second, universities must strengthen their links with industry. Work placements, live business problems, startup incubators, and short-term consultancy projects should be a core part of every student’s learning experience. If formal internships are declining, simulated or collaborative real-world projects must take their place.

Modularity and flexibility are also essential. In a future defined by career change and reskilling, students should be able to build degrees like toolkits: stackable, updatable, and personalised. This is not about dumbing down the university experience, it’s about futureproofing it.

For graduates, the message is equally clear. Relying on a polished CV and good grades no longer cuts it. What matters now is proof of skills, initiative, and adaptability. That means building a portfolio, creating content, freelancing, contributing to open-source projects, or starting something small on the side. If no one will give you experience, create your own.

Graduates should also look outside the tech bubble. Sectors like healthcare, renewable energy, logistics, education, and the skilled trades all have strong demand and are less vulnerable to automation [8]. As Matthew Martin of Oxford Economics puts it, “The industries that grow may not be the ones universities have traditionally focused on” [9]. He warns of a mismatch between the supply of graduates in marketing, management, and tech and the demand for hands-on operational roles in other sectors.

Crucially, young professionals must learn to collaborate with AI. Those who treat it as a threat will be left behind; those who treat it as a partner will flourish. As Kassai puts it: “The graduates who will succeed are the ones who use AI to enhance and not replace their work” [4].

There is some good news. A growing number of employers from IBM to Unilever to the UK Civil Service are embracing skills-first hiring. Rather than prioritising degrees or previous roles, they assess candidates through task-based challenges, aptitude tests, or job simulations. For those without traditional experience but with drive and capability, this opens a door.

Universities must prepare students to walk through it. That means better career services, real-time labour market tracking, and stronger alumni mentorship. The transition from education to employment is no longer automatic—it needs to be engineered.

The decline of the entry-level job is not the end of graduate employability. But it is the end of graduate entitlement. Success will come not to those who expect to be hired, but to those who are ready to prove why they should be.

References

1. The Economist. (2024). Where did all the entry-level jobs go? [Online] Available at: economist.com [Accessed June 2025].
2. Forbes. (2024). AI May Be Erasing Entry-Level Jobs. Here’s What To Do. [Online] Available at: forbes.com [Accessed June 2025].
3. New York Federal Reserve. (2025). Labour Market Conditions for Young Graduates. [Online] Available at: newyorkfed.org [Accessed June 2025].
4. Kassai, H. (2025). Interview with Business Insider. “Founders on AI and Jobs”. [Online] Available at: businessinsider.com [Accessed June 2025].
5. Amodei, D. (2025). Quoted in IT Pro. “AI could wipe out half of entry-level jobs in five years”. [Online] Available at: itpro.com [Accessed June 2025].
6. Jassy, A. (2025). Amazon shareholder meeting, quoted in Axios. “AI is reshaping our workforce”. [Online] Available at: axios.com [Accessed June 2025].
7. Hoffman, R. (2024). AI and the Workforce: What’s Next? Reid Hoffman Podcast. [Online] Available at: linkedin.com/pulse [Accessed June 2025].
8. World Economic Forum. (2025). Future of Jobs Report. [Online] Available at: weforum.org [Accessed June 2025].
9. Martin, M. (2025). Oxford Economics. Quoted in Bloomberg Businessweek, “Mismatch in Graduate Supply”. [Online] Available at: bloomberg.com [Accessed June 2025].