Why do big companies obsess over your "first degree"?

Buddy, first, remember this painfully honest truth: in their eyes, your first degree checks your "IQ and bloodline," while subsequent degrees only assess your "effort and attitude." I know this sounds disgusting and politically incorrect, but keep reading, and you'll understand how these sharp-minded folks think.
First, the college entrance exam (Gaokao) is their only trusted "IQ verification report." Do you think Gaokao tests knowledge? Wrong! For big companies, Gaokao tests the "top-tier performance" of you as a product when you leave the factory. It’s a nationally endorsed, standardized, nearly cheat-proof, three-year "extreme pressure test report."
Getting into a top-tier university’s undergraduate program indicates that your "product" at age 18 meets at least three hard indicators:
Hard currency of IQ: No matter how severe your subject bias is, you can still master a bunch of unrelated subjects like math, physics, chemistry, language, history, geography within the allotted time, and even score better than hundreds of thousands of others. This shows your "CPU" has a high clock speed, large memory, and good compatibility.
Absolute "ruthlessness": Who are you ruthless to? Yourself! During the most rebellious and energetic years from 15 to 18, you manage to keep yourself tightly controlled, obsessively tackling thousands of knowledge points. This anti-human self-discipline is a fundamental quality for achieving big things.
Stable "mental resilience": The more "life-defining" the one-shot exam, the greater the pressure. Being able to stay calm and perform normally amid your family’s expectations, teachers’ pressure, and classmates’ competition demonstrates this resilience. It will come in handy when you’re later handling KPIs or office politics.
Aren’t these three qualities golden qualities? And most importantly, this "verification report" is free! HR doesn’t need to bother with personality tests or IQ tests; just glance at your diploma, and it’s all set.
Second, graduate school entrance exams? That’s "post-education remediation," with a different level of value.
I’m not saying that graduate exams aren’t impressive; those who get into prestigious graduate programs are all tough. But in the eyes of seasoned HR professionals, it’s a different calculation:
The track is different: Gaokao is a narrow bridge for millions, but graduate exams allow you to choose your track. You can pick a relatively easier school, switch to a less competitive major, or even retake exams two or three times. Its "chance" and "uniqueness" are less pronounced.
The purpose is different: Many people take graduate exams just to "wash away" the "stain" of their first degree. HR is well aware of this motivation. It’s like a piece of clothing with a defect out of the factory, later patched up nicely. HR appreciates your patching skills but always remembers the original flaw.
The circle is different: This is the most critical point. The most crucial four years of forming your worldview, values, and social circle are spent where? Your undergraduate classmates likely define your "social starting point" and "way of thinking." HR assumes that someone who spent four years in a top-tier circle and someone in an ordinary circle have different horizons, resources, and problem-solving approaches.
Here’s a more unflattering analogy: Your first degree is like the foundation of a house. If your foundation is built to village standards, then you get a master's degree later, and the exterior is decorated like a five-star hotel. Looks luxurious, but a seasoned engineer (HR veteran) will immediately see that your load-bearing and earthquake resistance are built to the standards of a mass-market building, not a skyscraper.
Third, this is the most real "office politics": find your kind, reduce risks.
In big companies, when department managers hire, besides getting the work done, there’s a hidden requirement: hiring "their own people." A manager from Tsinghua University, hiring a Tsinghua graduate, naturally has lower communication costs. They share common references, similar thinking patterns, and even know the same teachers. This "trust among colleagues" is something no resume can provide. It’s a subtle "circle culture" and "bloodline certification."
Moreover, if you hire someone with an impressive first degree, even if they don’t perform well later, the manager can justify to the boss: "I hired someone from XX University, so it should be fine!" They bear no responsibility. But if they go against the consensus and hire an ordinary first-degree person who causes trouble, what will the boss say? "You insisted on hiring him, and now something’s wrong, huh? Your judgment is flawed!" This boss will hold the manager accountable for life.
Tell me, if you were the manager, would you gamble?
So, at the end of the day, it’s not that your abilities aren’t important. It’s that your "first degree" has already served as a comprehensive assessment of your "learning ability, self-discipline, and stress resistance" for big companies, and provides a form of "circle recognition" and "hiring risk" assurance.
The world is straightforward and dull like this. It doesn’t play by reason; it only considers probabilities. Before you use your ten or twenty years of achievements to cover this label, it remains the brightest badge on you, or rather, the heaviest imprint.