Two ways to answer different questions
A degree requirement asks whether a candidate has completed a particular course of study. Skills-based hiring asks whether they can demonstrate abilities relevant to a job. Those questions overlap, but they are not interchangeable. A degree may indicate sustained study across a broad subject; a practical assessment may show how someone handles a specific task today.
Imagine a team hiring a project coordinator. A degree in a related field could suggest familiarity with planning, research and written communication. A short exercise asking candidates to organize a sample project schedule could reveal how they prioritize competing deadlines. Neither piece of evidence, on its own, establishes how the person will work with colleagues, respond to feedback or grow into the role.
What a degree can and cannot show
Formal education often provides structured time to develop foundational knowledge, consider different perspectives and complete extended assignments. For some jobs, a particular qualification is also essential to meet professional or regulatory requirements. In those cases, removing the requirement would not be a sensible way to widen access.
For other roles, a degree is a less precise signal. People with the same qualification may have studied different topics or gained different levels of hands-on experience. People without a degree may have learned through work, apprenticeships, community projects or independent study. Requiring a degree when the job does not depend on one can exclude capable applicants before an employer has looked at what they can do.
The useful question is not whether degrees have value. It is whether a specific degree is necessary for a specific responsibility. If a job description says a qualification is required, the hiring team should be able to explain which duties call for it. If a degree is merely one possible route to the needed knowledge, saying so gives applicants a clearer picture.
What skills-based evidence reveals
Skills-based hiring starts by identifying the work a person will actually do. An employer might review relevant past projects, ask structured questions about decisions the candidate made, or use a brief task resembling part of the role. For a communications position, that might mean editing a short draft for clarity. For a support role, it might mean explaining how to respond to a fictional customer request.
These methods can make less conventional experience easier to recognize. A candidate who has coordinated a neighborhood event, for example, may be able to show planning and communication skills even without a matching job title. A well-designed assessment also helps the interviewer focus on observable work rather than relying only on impressions.
Demonstrations have limits, too. A short exercise cannot recreate the pace, resources or relationships of a real job. Candidates may be unfamiliar with a particular tool despite knowing the underlying skill. Assessments should therefore reflect essential tasks, provide clear instructions and allow appropriate ways for candidates to demonstrate their abilities.
Fairness depends on how the process is designed
Dropping a degree requirement does not automatically make hiring fairer. An unclear take-home assignment can favor applicants with more spare time, while an improvised interview can reward confidence over competence. Employers can reduce these problems by deciding in advance which skills matter, asking comparable questions and using the same criteria to evaluate each response.
A practical assessment should be proportionate to the opportunity. It can use a fictional scenario, explain what a good response needs to address and avoid asking candidates to produce work the organization could use. Giving a reasonable time frame and a clear contact for accessibility requests helps more candidates participate on equal terms. Interviewers can also distinguish skills needed on day one from those a new employee could learn with support.
Use the evidence that fits the role
A thoughtful hiring process does not have to choose between education and demonstrated skill. It can treat a degree as relevant evidence where it genuinely supports the work, recognize equivalent learning routes where appropriate, and test a small number of essential abilities directly. The balance will differ between a regulated profession and a role where experience can come from many settings.
For employers, the starting point is a simple audit of the job description: Which requirements are essential, which are preferences, and how will each be assessed? For applicants, it helps to translate experience into concrete examples of tasks completed, decisions made and results understood without overstating what one example proves. Hiring works best when both sides can see the connection between the evidence requested and the work ahead.
